EA has apologised for persistent connection issues that have plagued Battlefield: Bad Company on Xbox 360 over the weekend, and says it's working on a fix.
"We are aware that some X360 players are having issues connecting to the Bad Company servers," acknowledges EA, saying in the theme of military message: "We've been monitoring stats non-stop and are working with several partners to locate any possible flashpoints and eradicate any hostiles we encounter."
We sure those of you who've experienced issues with the game won't be laughing.
There's no fix yet, but EA does have one suggestion. "Until we are ready to implement a permanent fix, a possible workaround is to turn off your console for approx. 20 minutes before turning it back on and connecting again."
It's funny - in the old days if a household appliance didn't work properly a good few thumps used to fix it, but in this digital age turning stuff off is the widely-suggested, mostly useless last resort.
I've had no probs on the PS3 version. Still wondering tho whether to mess with the port forwarding on my router like it says in the manual. Currently got NAT type 2 and it works ok but I wonder if I could get type 1. Defo can't DMZ the router as my flatmate uses it for his laptop and hence probably needs the security.
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
But Battlefield has never offered more than say two gametypes has it? As the reviews say (and I actually agree with them for once) the single gametype is deceiving in that there are actually a lot of different strategies that can be used. Sometimes I defend the base like in a game of siege and sometimes I just try and suppress the enemy so that I'm almost playing team deathmatch.
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
But Battlefield has never offered more than say two gametypes has it? As the reviews say (and I actually agree with them for once) the single gametype is deceiving in that there are actually a lot of different strategies that can be used. Sometimes I defend the base like in a game of siege and sometimes I just try and suppress the enemy so that I'm almost playing team deathmatch.
Sorry ES, but BF2 was a far superior game. The maps were far better (Backstab, anyone?) and much more fun to play. The graphics on BC seem really pixelated and dirty (360 version played) and made the game even less enjoyable. They got the bad bit right.....
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
Worse than Beijing 2008?
OOOhhhhh yes. Beijing 2008 was my exchange for BC. Had some fun with it as the game is a fair challenge with lots of online leaderboards to go for. Currently 2110 (worldwide) in the javelin. Definitely need to practice!
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
If you watch out for the scrolling text at the top of the screen in the multiplayer setup mode it says that another mode will be added in an update after launch.
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
If you watch out for the scrolling text at the top of the screen in the multiplayer setup mode it says that another mode will be added in an update after launch.
Not good enough for 40 brick. BF2 was a far better game online. Damn shame. And the tanks are rubbish too.
I was playing all Friday night and all day and evening yesterday. Gotta be honest, I didn't get one single connection problem.
Same here, ran like a dream all weekend!?
Sounds like this version of Battlefield isn't your cup of tea Mark, but I'm getting a ton of fun out of it at the moment (not even touched the single player yet). For me the multiplayer game offers bags of choice and freedom, as well as providing a well balanced, focused team game with ACTUAL TEAMWORK! I'm loving it so far and will probably keep returning to it until Left4dead emerges.
All that said, I'm new to the Battlefield series (played COD4 without relenting though) and I'm more than a little annoyed that there is game content you can't access without jumping through EA's retarded little hoops... http://badcompany.ea.com/page/dynpid/8616/
I'm the same, haven't touched a Battlefield game except for Vietnam, but am loving this. The levels are superb, and when played with a coherent squad that actually communicates with each other, it's amazingly good fun.
I can sorta see why it might not be everyones cup of tea, but there's no denying how good it is. The fact that there's only one game mode at the moment doesn't matter, the levels are so vast and varied that you can replay them time and time again and never have the same game twice.
Regardless of servers, the game is the biggest pile of cack that I have played in a long time. The full game isn't much better than the fecking demo! How many game modes? 1!!!! Thanks EA!!!
If you watch out for the scrolling text at the top of the screen in the multiplayer setup mode it says that another mode will be added in an update after launch.
Not good enough for 40 brick. BF2 was a far better game online. Damn shame. And the tanks are rubbish too.
BF2 is my favourite FPS of all time (that is the PC version), but this beats Modern Combat easily, it is far superior in every way.
Complaining about game modes is strange considering the BF series has always just had one game mode called conquest, where each team basically try to dominate the map by capturing flags. I believe this will be making a return in Bad Company shortly, but in the meantime the gold rush game mode will do fine.
Bad Company has a compelling single player campaign which has some well written humour and a fantastic feeling of opportunity on the open battlefields, it is a much less linear experience both online and offline than the likes of CoD4.
I was playing all Friday night and all day and evening yesterday. Gotta be honest, I didn't get one single connection problem.
Same here, ran like a dream all weekend!?
Sounds like this version of Battlefield isn't your cup of tea Mark, but I'm getting a ton of fun out of it at the moment (not even touched the single player yet). For me the multiplayer game offers bags of choice and freedom, as well as providing a well balanced, focused team game with ACTUAL TEAMWORK! I'm loving it so far and will probably keep returning to it until Left4dead emerges.
All that said, I'm new to the Battlefield series (played COD4 without relenting though) and I'm more than a little annoyed that there is game content you can't access without jumping through EA's retarded little hoops... http://badcompany.ea.com/page/dynpid/8616/
Me and my bessy mate were massive bf2 fans but both of us hated this game. Even in my hours worth of play I spotted so many flaws. Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted. Why does everybody run off when we are supposed to be defending the crates? Why does it all look so rough? Why does it take ages to re-spawn? And when you re-spawn, why does it often throw you into a 10 man skirmish in a room the size of a lav?
Me and my bessy mate were massive bf2 fans but both of us hated this game. Even in my hours worth of play I spotted so many flaws. Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted. Why does everybody run off when we are supposed to be defending the crates? Why does it all look so rough? Why does it take ages to re-spawn? And when you re-spawn, why does it often throw you into a 10 man skirmish in a room the size of a lav?
I could go on....
There are definitely some flaws (the fact that bullets can't penetrate thin planks of wood seems odd after COD4!) but there's plenty on offer here. The game mode seems largely irrelevant since it's just a way of keeping the battle focused - I don't think I'd choose a different mode over goldrush even if there were loads of other options?
It sounds as though you had an unlucky run - once you invest some time in ranked games you'll get matched up with people who don't run off like lemmings (aren't the learning slopes like this for most multiplayer games?)
At higher levels your team mates will plant anti-tank mines in the right places, counter-snipe, go out sniper hunting in jeeps and actually bother to find and heal you when you're injured - it's an incredibly deep game. If you get nailed when re-spawning then you probably clicked 'squad' instead of 'base', which is a bad idea if your team mate is in the middle of a firefight (did make me laugh with that comment since I did this plenty myself in the early stages!)
Personally I think it looks great for a game with such huge environments - was never going to look like COD4.
Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted.
That's the whole point of being a sniper. If I had my way, you wouldn't even get a damage direction indicator ! For me personally, there's nothing more annoying than games that use a kill cam. If you're gonna have it then you may as well do away with the sniper class altogether.
I know it can be frustrating getting picked off from a distance, but that's where things like the snipers motion sensor can be used to your advantage.
Me and my bessy mate were massive bf2 fans but both of us hated this game. Even in my hours worth of play I spotted so many flaws. Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted. Why does everybody run off when we are supposed to be defending the crates? Why does it all look so rough? Why does it take ages to re-spawn? And when you re-spawn, why does it often throw you into a 10 man skirmish in a room the size of a lav?
I could go on....
There are definitely some flaws (the fact that bullets can't penetrate thin planks of wood seems odd after COD4!) but there's plenty on offer here. The game mode seems largely irrelevant since it's just a way of keeping the battle focused - I don't think I'd choose a different mode over goldrush even if there were loads of other options?
It sounds as though you had an unlucky run - once you invest some time in ranked games you'll get matched up with people who don't run off like lemmings (aren't the learning slopes like this for most multiplayer games?)
At higher levels your team mates will plant anti-tank mines in the right places, counter-snipe, go out sniper hunting in jeeps and actually bother to find and heal you when you're injured - it's an incredibly deep game. If you get nailed when re-spawning then you probably clicked 'squad' instead of 'base', which is a bad idea if your team mate is in the middle of a firefight (did make me laugh with that comment since I did this plenty myself in the early stages!)
Personally I think it looks great for a game with such huge environments - was never going to look like COD4.
Maybe I did'nt give it enough time. I don't get that much time to play games these days so COD4 was a breath of fresh air, with its quick and balanced matches. BC looks like you may have to invest a lot of time before it begins to shine. At my time of life I need more immediacy!
Me and my bessy mate were massive bf2 fans but both of us hated this game. Even in my hours worth of play I spotted so many flaws. Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted. Why does everybody run off when we are supposed to be defending the crates? Why does it all look so rough? Why does it take ages to re-spawn? And when you re-spawn, why does it often throw you into a 10 man skirmish in a room the size of a lav?
I could go on....
There are definitely some flaws (the fact that bullets can't penetrate thin planks of wood seems odd after COD4!) but there's plenty on offer here. The game mode seems largely irrelevant since it's just a way of keeping the battle focused - I don't think I'd choose a different mode over goldrush even if there were loads of other options?
It sounds as though you had an unlucky run - once you invest some time in ranked games you'll get matched up with people who don't run off like lemmings (aren't the learning slopes like this for most multiplayer games?)
At higher levels your team mates will plant anti-tank mines in the right places, counter-snipe, go out sniper hunting in jeeps and actually bother to find and heal you when you're injured - it's an incredibly deep game. If you get nailed when re-spawning then you probably clicked 'squad' instead of 'base', which is a bad idea if your team mate is in the middle of a firefight (did make me laugh with that comment since I did this plenty myself in the early stages!)
Personally I think it looks great for a game with such huge environments - was never going to look like COD4.
Me and my bessy mate were massive bf2 fans but both of us hated this game. Even in my hours worth of play I spotted so many flaws. Why can't you ever see who shot you? Snipers can hide 50 miles away behind a tree, on a hill and never get spotted. Why does everybody run off when we are supposed to be defending the crates? Why does it all look so rough? Why does it take ages to re-spawn? And when you re-spawn, why does it often throw you into a 10 man skirmish in a room the size of a lav?
I could go on....
There are definitely some flaws (the fact that bullets can't penetrate thin planks of wood seems odd after COD4!) but there's plenty on offer here. The game mode seems largely irrelevant since it's just a way of keeping the battle focused - I don't think I'd choose a different mode over goldrush even if there were loads of other options?
It sounds as though you had an unlucky run - once you invest some time in ranked games you'll get matched up with people who don't run off like lemmings (aren't the learning slopes like this for most multiplayer games?)
At higher levels your team mates will plant anti-tank mines in the right places, counter-snipe, go out sniper hunting in jeeps and actually bother to find and heal you when you're injured - it's an incredibly deep game. If you get nailed when re-spawning then you probably clicked 'squad' instead of 'base', which is a bad idea if your team mate is in the middle of a firefight (did make me laugh with that comment since I did this plenty myself in the early stages!)
Personally I think it looks great for a game with such huge environments - was never going to look like COD4.
Maybe I did'nt give it enough time. I don't get that much time to play games these days so COD4 was a breath of fresh air, with its quick and balanced matches. BC looks like you may have to invest a lot of time before it begins to shine. At my time of life I need more immediacy!
What is it the advert says again? The best things come to those that wait? Agree with what you say though, its not like when I was 14 sitting in my room playing for 12 hours solid, the Mrs would kill me.
Nowadays ive got to get into a game pretty much from the start for me to really enjoy it, COD4 ranked right up there, so far B:BC is doing that also, give it another try and as someone already said, if you can hook up with your frineds to play it, it really is a blast, literally.
I've had no probs on the PS3 version. Still wondering tho whether to mess with the port forwarding on my router like it says in the manual. Currently got NAT type 2 and it works ok but I wonder if I could get type 1. Defo can't DMZ the router as my flatmate uses it for his laptop and hence probably needs the security.
You don't DMZ a router, you put the PS3, laptop or desktop IP address into the DMZ.
It sounds like you don't know the difference between NAT 1/NAT 2/NAT 3 anyway so you probably don't have a clue of what you are actually trying to achieve in the first place.
Hint. NAT 1 is generally only relevant with static IP addresses.
It depends whether you are having problems with existing games. If not then leave it as it is because you won't achieve anything by changing it.
Find out what the different NAT types do, identify whether you have a static/dynamic IP address or are sat on a private network and make your decision.
Alternatively, talk crap about the PS3, defend it like it's your only child and then beg for help regarding connectivity and Port forwarding issues.
I've had no probs on the PS3 version. Still wondering tho whether to mess with the port forwarding on my router like it says in the manual. Currently got NAT type 2 and it works ok but I wonder if I could get type 1. Defo can't DMZ the router as my flatmate uses it for his laptop and hence probably needs the security.
You don't DMZ a router, you put the PS3, laptop or desktop IP address into the DMZ.
It sounds like you don't know the difference between NAT 1/NAT 2/NAT 3 anyway so you probably don't have a clue of what you are actually trying to achieve in the first place.
Hint. NAT 1 is generally only relevant with static IP addresses.
I dont see why you need to criticize him because he is trying something new. if you are going to make him feel stupid then you could at least inform him on how to achieve his goal. first you will have to set the device that you wish to dmz or forward port to on a static ip address that is not in the dhcp pool. if you do not do this you could get ip conflicts. then you would login to the router and set the dmz or ports to go the the ip that you configured on your ps3. and i would suggest doing this because if you are not forwarding port is can make it impossible to connect to people that have different nats. i have not done this on a ps3 but on a xbox 360 you have open, strict, and moderate nats. a open nat can connect to anyone regardless of the nat. a moderate nate can only connect to a moderate nat or a open nat. and a strict nat can only connect to a open nat. so if you have a strict nat you will have a harder time finding games you can connect to. im assuming that nat 1 is an open nat and nat 2 is a moderate nat. and nat 3 is a strict nat. so English Schmuppet can not connect to any with a nat type 3. so that is why i suggest forwarding ports. so paradaz next time you criticize someone actually know what your talking about. if you or english needs any other help with anything to do with the internet i can help. i hope this help you out english schmuppet.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
