BF3 Rent-A-Server Update

I think I'm a bit behind the times in posting on this update to the console version of Battlefield 3, but I needed to weigh in on it today due to the amount of BF3 that I played, or rather tried to play, over the weekend.

For those of you that don't know, the Rent-A-Server update basically took all of the servers that were publicly hosted and placed them on a list for private users to rent and use as they see fit.  So for x amount of Microsoft Points you can rent a server, that you customize the games on, for a day, week, or month.  This is a great deal for anyone that wants to shell out the money to play the game they already paid for, but for the rest of us it blows.

The first time that I attempted to do a quick match to get back into playing BF3, I ended up on a server with a description of, "snipes or pilots only."  When I spawned as an Engineer I was immediately booted.  To avoid this type of garbage I was able to go into the Server Browser and pick and choose what I wanted to play there, but with a controller that takes about 15 minutes and feels like a waste of my time.  I want to be able to jump into the game and play within ten minutes, not look around for a server that I'm going to be able to tolerate.

A few other issues that I've had with people and their servers are games having too many tickets and lasting too long, no variations in maps, and a lack of players.  When a game has 900 tickets the game is just unbearable.  After the first half hour, you're weeping to just have the thing finish.  You'd leave, but then you'd have wasted that much time for no points.  Even if you're dominating the match, the amount of tickets that owning all of the capture points bleeds from the other team is too minuscule to speed up the end.  Combine that with playing the same map over and over, because you don't want to leave a decent server that won't kick you for no reason, and you end up with a pile of shit. 

Finally, the lack of players on some servers is disturbing.  I started a few games where it was just me and my friend, and some where it was just me.  I think that the lack of players just sums up how awful this whole update experience has been.  Like myself, I would bet that most players are getting fed up with how this whole game has been handled.  If the servers are going to continue to be set up like this, Battlefield 3 is going to suffer a huge lack of me, not to mention other people that are pissed off at the changes.

Post 24: State of PC Gaming

Battlefield 3 looks like all kinds of awesome.

Here's an interesting article on where the developers of Battlefield 3 see PC gaming going in the near future, as well as their concerns surrounding Sony's recent hacking issues.  For those of you that are unaware, Sony's Playstation Network, their answer to Xbox Live, was hacked on a large scale.  In response, the company has been beefing up it's security measures.  Of course the main problem is that the event in itself has shown other hackers the vulnerability of such systems.

This is a loyal console gamer.

In the linked article, the General Manager of DICE states his opinions regarding the future of PC Gaming.  I have to disagree with him on a few points, but overall I understand and agree with what I read.  Karl indicates that he believes that consoles are being tapped out.  That nothing much can continue to happen with them and that PC gaming will rise to the top purely based on performance.  PCs do have more capabilities and are better from a hardware perspective, but as a console gamer I don't see that happening for two reasons: 1) console gamers are too loyal and too entrenched to stop the market from creating better and better consoles, and 2) what is a console at this point but a computer?  The line between PC and console has been blurred beyond recognition in many respects.  The crossovers and ports are great in number and my 360 has essentially all of the same components of a computer, it's just reduced for marketability.  If the 360 was priced as a gaming computer was, with all of the top-end hardware and software, there would be no way it could be labeled as affordable gaming. 

Overall, I dislike Apple as a company.

Karl also argues that Apple could be a force to be reckoned with in the near future.  I don't see why Apple hasn't already tossed their hat into the ring with both a console, and better game compatibility.  Microsoft did so at the end of the PS1 era and they are already the king of PC gaming.  Maybe Apple's too damn scared to get in there.  Hell, if I were going up against a giant like Microsoft in a field that my audience didn't really care about, I too would be pissing my pants.

Ick, it's indie.

The final comment that the article leaves us with is that Indie gaming is about to explode.  I hate Indie games.  I literally fucking hate them, but they are a necessary evil.  I am very comfortable with my corporate Halos, Fallouts, and Dead Risings, I don't want to see some random-ass kid make a game where you run around as a stick man and have it gain popularity.  Not because I'm a complete asshole, thought I am a bit of one, but because I don't want the games that I actually like to be replaced by pieces of shit like "Running Stick Man."  Indie gaming spawns creativity, there's no mistaking that, but when it replaces good games on PC or on a console, I foresee less development taking place on series like Call of Duty or Battlefield.  Creativity is necessary, but it can be evil when wielded by the inexperienced.