EA to add more DICE servers to Battlefield 3

Saturday, 12th May 2012 14:10 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

EA has denied claims it shut down any official servers hosted by it or DICE, forcing players to play only on rental servers. “DICE is not shutting down servers,” an EA representative told Gamespot. “If DICE-managed servers appear unavailable, it is because they have been rented and customized by players. DICE will continue to add servers and will reserve a percentage of servers for players who prefer to connect through DICE-hosted servers.” Earlier in the week players were complaining that it was almost impossible to find a server to play on that wasn’t rented, and an official server search conducted by VentureBeat found 17 EA run servers, but no servers run by DICE.



  1. GrimRita

    For one second, I did actually ‘feel’ for EA here. Running servers costs alot of money and the PC Gamer(myself included) takes these things for granted. Thats why, during my time with Bf2142/BC2 etc(excluding BF3), I joined a good group of guys and donated some cash to run the very popular servers they had(64 player maps!)

    However, of late, EA have done nothing but turned digital into a greed machine. First they only put BF3 on shitty origin at £40 – for a fucking PC game, then take the piss with charging £4.50 for addition add ons etc(clearly this is why EA left Steam) and now withdraw ‘free’ servers.

    Had the price of the game been lower and they offered a service in the first place charging for servers, then maybe things wouldnt have become yet ANOTHER EA PR nightmare.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. back_up

    starhawk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>BF3

    #2 3 years ago
  3. DSB

    @1 The costs are wildly exagerated by the publishers though, and when you consider EA which not only owns a fuckton of multiplayer games, MMOs and a digital distribution client, the notion that they wouldn’t have a well developed serverfarm at this point is pretty silly.

    Not to mention that there are vastly different ways to skin that cat. If you’re doing P2P or letting people rent their own servers, then all you need is authentication servers to keep out the worst of the leeches.

    It’s not bad compared to the backend of other companies.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. freedoms_stain

    @3, I dunno man, I spent >600hrs playing BC2 on xbox and the quality of the servers was pretty shocking at times. Like occasions where the server would just shit the bed and drop half or all the players was pretty commonplace – and that’s not an assumption cus I used to play in groups of 6-8 guys in party chat and we’d be in a full server, then boom, most of us get cut and the guys left are in a 4v4 or like 3v2 or some stupid shit like that.

    Also “No-unlock” days were pretty common too where everybody was stuck on default weapons and guys with the specact upgrades raped through servers because they had better weapons than everyone else.

    Aside from that there were some days where there was pretty epic server-side lag where people just warped and rubberbanded all over the shop and it felt like you were running on ice skates up a hill.

    Also, there are some pretty reliable rumours that DICE had to fuck with their netcode because when the game sold beyond EA’s expectations they weren’t willing to pay to up the server capacity, so DICE had to try and square it so that more people could run on the same capacity, which resulted in a pretty shitty experience for everyone.

    There’s also the issue of server locations, there were only a few to serve the entire planet, Amsterdam served the entirety of Europe. It was also suspected that the Asian server farms were shuttered and Asian traffic rerouted to the European servers when we started seeing a lot of players with Japanese profiles on servers who were basically unkillable, you’d empty an entire clip into their backs and they’d calmly walk over and knife you and shit. It was insane.

    So my faith in EA’s ability to provide dedicated servers is not great.

    I do wonder what BF3 is like. They put so much marketing behind it I can’t believe they would only have like 3-5 server locations this time, especially if they’re renting them out too.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. roni1175

    How can a company that constantly trying to be the best shooter in the market (or at least saying) do such a thing and most terribly thinks its ok.

    Last night I played a server with 1500 tickets, it took me an hour to finish the round. In the end the game froze…

    They should limit the rented server or at least close empty servers. And if people wan to practice jet/heli flying make it local.

    Find other way to save money EA!! We aren’t all hardcore gamers that lke customized servers…

    Anyway, I love battlefield!!!!!!!

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Ireland Michael

    @1 “For one second, I did actually ‘feel’ for EA here. Running servers costs alot of money”

    As someone directly involved in the network engineering field, I can tell you right now… no they don’t. The costs of maintaining servers are vastly over-exaggerated in comparison to the money many people make from them in these kinds of situations.

    Blizzard is one of the worst offenders when it comes to this sort of stuff.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. GrimRita

    @6 – See the thing is, they probably are for a huge publisher who must have their own data centre somewhere. But if you are ‘Joe bloggs’ who wants to run a server for a game(like BF2142/BF3) – I think some charge a rent based on the amount of players you want to have.

    So for average Joe, yes they are alot of month – the guys I was with, hosting was costing a few hundred quid a MONTH because we had lots of VERY busy servers but of course, not everyone pays.

    Either way, this is all about EA trying to make even more money from a single purchased game.

    #7 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.