The Fate Of BF3′s In-Game Server Browser

By Lewie Procter on August 19th, 2011 at 10:25 am.


This story is a little surprising. BF3 Blog have done the legwork on this: first they spotted that Battlefield 3 on the PS3 and 360 is going to have an in-game server browser for multiplayer game-finding. Good for them. However, where this story turns sour is the news that the PC version will not have any in-game server browser, and to find a multiplayer game you have to exit the game or Alt-Tab out of it, and use the “Battlelog” application to launch games. Senior Gameplay Designer Alan Kertz has been assuring everyone that the process is relatively smooth, but why? And, if it has to be in another app, why isn’t there a server browser in Origin’s overlay? Why is there another system to complicate things? Ah, of course, because Battelog wants to be the free equivalent of Activision’s Elite thingum, with all that social and achievement stuff that you play games for.

[Edit - oops, we got that last bit slightly wrong. Those elements of Elite will, in fact, also be free, as will most of its core features. The exact nature of Elite's paid extra bits has yet to be announced, but from the relatively scant information we have so far would appear to be bonus content-based rather than related to social kinda stuff like this.]

Tune in next week for: mouse controls only on the PS3?!

Cheers R-F for flagging this one up in the forums.

, , .

308 Comments »

  1. skinlo says:

    This is entirely politically related, and won’t help Origins cause at all.

    I wish publishers would just fuck off when it comes to things like this.

    • Njordsk says:

      It’s not related to origin in anyway, it’s just a site.

      Though origin should be mandatory to play BF3, but that’s an other problem

    • skinlo says:

      Ah my bad =/

      Still politically motivated to the detriment of the consumer though.

    • Njordsk says:

      being a customer and having tried it, I can tell you a big “no”.

      It’s really a big plus for customer. People just have to quit whining about every damn little thing.

    • skinlo says:

      It seems the majority of customers disagree with you.

    • GenBanks says:

      With most games I usually just pick one server and play until I get bored, so I don’t think it’ll be a huge inconvenience… an inconvenience nonetheless.

      @skinlo you forget that njordsk unlike most customers has actually tried the system…

      People are forgetting though, that Battlefield server browsers have a long track record of being absolutely terrible. It would have been awesome if they’d just gone with Steamworks and used the steam server browser but oh well. Perhaps it’s better them doing this way if it’ll mean we have 100% server browsing functionality right off the bat.

    • Njordsk says:

      you forgot many people talk out of the butt just to rant.

      It’s VERY fast, quite nice to look at, you can make group with friend by drag-droping them in the group, group join servers, you have more filters than BC2, you can keep browsing while the game is loading in the background and THEN it pops up.

      No splash screen, ALT F4 takes 1 second or 2 at max, alt tabbing is very efficient.

      I’m sorry, but this system is way better than any I’ve tryied.

    • HisMastersVoice says:

      @ Njordsk – So which part of the external server browser could not have been implemented within the game? Because it just looks like DICE is being lazy with their coding.

      Anyway, I have yet to try Origin, but doesn’t it have an overlay like Steam?

    • skinlo says:

      If its so good, they must be great at coding, so why can’t they do it in game or with an overlay?

    • Njordsk says:

      As I said, origin is in NO WAY related to battlelog.

      BL is just a site with a plugin. Origin a required to launch BF3, but i’ve no idea why other than trying to impose their software.

    • Tams80 says:

      I don’t know about other people, but alt-tabbing when in a game never goes well for me.

    • sneetch says:

      Well, why not provide an in-game browser to the same site? There’s no need for this to be a second, seperate app. I distrust alt-tabbing too.

    • neems says:

      During the Alpha test they were saying that the browser functionality would be available from ingame as well in the final release (in response to the thousands of people moaning about it on the forums). I guess that fell by the way side.

      I’ll have to take Njordsk’s word for it as far as the friends / grouping goes, because it never worked for me, not once. I had to manually search for whichever server people were playing on. To be fair though, the search function actually worked, which is a plus.

    • Dirtyboy says:

      I’ve used it and don’t like it. It’s not natural or fluid and Bad Things tend to happen when you alt-tab programs frequently.

    • Premium User Badge Bastimoo says:

      Until now I had problems with alt-tabbing into/out of games of the battlefield series EVERY time,y besides 1942/vietnam. In BF2/2142 it needed waaay too long to load up again and BC2 randomly crashed/had graphic bugs when i tabbed in again, so the necessarity of alt-tabbing in BF3 is a very bad idea in my eyes. And no, my Hardware always was quite fine and up to date.

    • RedNick says:

      I hope I can use the Steam Overlay to access it.

    • Magnetude says:

      Hmm, I’m not terribly bothered by this. As long as this browser is as simple as possible (HTML is your friend, makers of unnecessarily complicated menu systems) I don’t see a problem with having to alt-tab away from one menu to another. The game itself won’t be running when this switch happens, so it’s not going to cause the kind of nightmares that tabbing out of Source games does.

    • Vagrant says:

      A few things people don’t seem to be considering:
      1) DICE always (ALWAYS!) releases a completely broken server browser inside their games. This will solve that problem. This could turn out to be the first time people don’t complain about the server browser.

      2) Everyone is complaining about alt-tab, but the recommended method I’m reading is alt-F4. If the game launches fast enough, this isn’t a real issue. The best method should be to quit at the end of a round. If DICE was smart, they’d not allow you to join a server after just alt-tabbing.

      3) Isn’t this the exact same as many other games nowadays? iRacing uses this method to great effect, as does other games like The Hunter and many other FTP games. Until you’ve actually used it, don’t automatically hate everything new.

      DISCLAIMER: I haven’t played the beta, so I have no clue how bad / good this works. I’m just able to think logically. On the internet. Shocking, I know!

    • Paool says:

      not deal breaking but an inconvenience all the same.
      my biggest problem is if you have a less than reliable internet connection having to cycle back and forth between a browser and the game repetively. I have cable internet that is fast and reliable, but I still have nights where I just get dropped repeatedly. It seems in these instances this out-of-game browser might become a bit agitating, but then again I don’t know how well it works so maybe we are just blowing steam for nothing. (lawl i said blowing steam….oh gawds….)

    • Magnetude says:

      This is the model all server browsers should build on. It’s simple, fast and can be easily changed and enhanced without the team having to dick around updating the actual game. Plus, if it offends you visually, you can skin it yourself with CSS.

      If the BF3 browser is like this, then yes please. If it’s the horribly involved, flash and javascript heavy mess that it may well turn out to be, then no thank you.

    • Commisar says:

      Njordsk is right, if you have played the Alpha like me and him, you should know that the Battlelog server browser is the best that DICE has ever made, Plus, origin has a web browser, so you can link it to that and not have to open a new tab/window :)

  2. saladin says:

    Sheer madness. Sheer, undiluted madness.

    This is what happens when you develop games to further your publisher’s agendas.

  3. Velvetmeds says:

    In game server browsers are so last gen

    Right?

    • Psico_Payaso says:

      So let me get this straight.. Everytime you want to change server, you’ll need to exit the game..?

      edit: ok, apparently you can alt-tab out.

    • Velvetmeds says:

      Just alt+tab. And it’s as fast as your browsing is, therefore it’s faster than the usual game server browser

      Unless your browsing is really slow.

    • BlankFlag says:

      You mean it’s faster than the usual DICE game server browser not including exiting the game and loading the browser

    • Froibo says:

      Are we sure that alt-tabbing is quick and painless? I have absolutely no knowledge with how smooth the game and its engine are but there are plenty of online games that don’t appreciate it (source engine). I would hope that they designed it based around that in mind otherwise they are trying very hard for me to not purchase this game. I’m still really confused why they didn’t implement something through Origin instead, seems how this is their big debut.

  4. RF says:

    Wooh, I got mentioned in an article. :D

  5. Snack says:

    gotta have nerves of steel these days to coupe with this utter garbage treatment.

  6. Njordsk says:

    I love battlelog and I’m glad DICE stayed straight in the idea.

    It’s fast, nice, usefull, easy to use. I loved it during alpha.

    No more loading, just browse internet during that time, no more splash screen, just play. It was really good.

    And it’s just like the all seeing eye back during my CS days.

    • Monkey says:

      While i havent tried it, i’m inclined to say lets try and THEN get the pitchforks. If its all integrated nicely with Battlelog i dont really see the problem

    • Njordsk says:

      Yeah.

      My only fear is the initial load. As usual EA might just shit themselves by only having one P4 server for the whole planet.

      But in the alpha state is was a gem

    • El_MUERkO says:

      After using BattleLog in the Alpha I wouldn’t want to go back to an in-game browser, it is superior to any in-game browser I’ve used in the past.

    • killmachine says:

      so, its not like, open browser, find server, start game, wait for dice/ea/frostbite splash screens… quit game, origin ad opens up, find new server, start game again, wait for dice/ea/frostbite splash screens … quit, another origin ad…?

      if its like quakelive i would like it very much, too. it all depends on loading times though.

    • El_MUERkO says:

      you’re using it wrong

    • Alastayr says:

      @killmachine

      The server browser is excellent. You find a nice server, easily, press join, the executable starts up and in about 10 seconds you’re on the server. No logos, shorter load times compared to BC2 and once you press “join” the Battlelog even reserves a slot for you.

      I don’t even know how Origin will fit into this, in the Alpha all you used it for was opening the Battlelog.

    • HybridHalo says:

      Just chiming in to agree with njordsk,

      The in-browser server browser was very smooth during alpha. More responsive than, and preferable to any in-game server browser I’ve used to date. I could also log in to it from work and add colleagues to my friends list instead of having to send an email of their usernames.

      Am interested in seeing how this works out when the full version is released – though my initial experiences have been wholly positive.

    • Eggy says:

      Exactly! Finally a like minded gamer. It’s just like All Seeing Eye. I loved All Seeing Eye. A universal server browser where you could search for your favourite game, server with all the filters you liked and connect instantly. You could track friends across multiple games as well. One of the biggest crimes was Yahoo taking over ASE and than abandoning it. I’ve never forgiven them for it.

      Battlelog will take some getting used to but I’m sure it will be far superior to the ingame browsers we’ve had in BF games. In general they were slow, unresponsive, offered little filter functionality and had friends lists that didn’t even work half the time.

  7. Baboonanza says:

    I assume you mean ‘alt-tab out of the game’ rather than exit the game and then have to restart it?

    • Njordsk says:

      Don’t blame before trying.

      I was very VERY skeptical at first, but loved it after 2 plays.

      You can alt tab according to demize99′s tweet or just quit and launch a new server, which takes something like 3 seconds, time to press alt F4 and “join”.

      It’s in fact faster than BC2 browser. Not talking about BF2′s which was… you know.

    • Lewie Procter says:

      I had thought I’d seen Alan Kertz say Alt-tabbing wouldn’t work, but I just double checked, and alt tabbing does indeed work, I shall update the post.

    • Theory says:

      It’s not hard to be better than Bad Company 2′s browser.

      What I really don’t get is why the page has to be open in a web browser on your desktop. Surely it would be better for everyone if it was embedded into the game?

    • Kaira- says:

      Initially I thought this external server browser is a moronic thing, and I still do think that a bit, but if it really is that fast and convenient as Njordsk says… well, it’s a minor complaint then. At least to me, should I buy the game.

    • BarerRudeROC says:

      @Kaira- I wouldn’t trust anyone yet until you try it out yourself.
      There seems to be a lot of viral going on if you know what I’m hinting at.

      Judge it when you try it yourself, don’t go off the opinions of others.
      From my own personal experience I found it atrocious and the sheer thought of it in future PC titles is more worrying to me than the apparent lack of a Homeworld 3 by Relic.

  8. atticus says:

    Oh man…

    I feel there should be a warning on all sites posting news related to PC gaming these days.

    “Contents will make you angry and/or depressed.”

    Guess we’re all suckers for hating on news regarding our favourite hobby, but really, who’s making me a miserable PC-gamer? Us or them?

    • Tomm says:

      Then every page on the internet would need a tag. This is the internet, there’s always someone who will get upset about something.

    • atticus says:

      I guess. But it does feel like things concerning PC gaming have been extraordinarily bad lately. Might be my own perception though…. “publisher-hate” > “brilliant new indie game” when it comes to remembering what I’ve read through the day.

    • Premium User Badge PoulWrist says:

      More like “content will make you grossly overreact on the slightest rumor”. Read some of the other comments, apparently it works a charm.
      Having it be a requirement makes it seem like the game will properly handle tabbing. Which is great, since so many don’t.

    • atticus says:

      Well put PoulWrist :) But it seems like mr. Procter was more critical to the fact that we are being treated differently than the consoles and not so much as to how Battlelog works.

      They could have done an in-game browser for us too if it wasn’t for all the “social” aspects of gaming which everyone tries to force on us these days. I for one am pretty fed up about this.

      Social hub/facebook-integration etc. as an element of the game you can use if you want to? Yes. Compulsory? No.

  9. The Dark One says:

    If only there was some sort of popular, free API that developers could use to integrate in-game (and out-game) server browsing along with friend notifications and invites. :(

    • mickygor says:

      That’s a great idea, an independent games developer should modify their patching client to provide this functionality

    • PiP999 says:

      I’ve heard of something like that, but the name slips my memory. Team…Stream…STEAM! Ooh its Steam :D

  10. arrjayjee says:

    What happened to designing a game to be an amazing game? Instead we get games that are just full of these little political stunts as if the entire gaming industry is engaged in some kind of cold-war, digital distribution service & social networking arms race. FFS, enough already. Everything a game needs should be in the game, not in a social application that runs along side it or a storefront that uses special EA Fancy Pennies to buy DLC that is, in the words of the publisher, both “entirely optional” and “necessary to enjoy the full adventure”. None of this makes me want the game more, it makes me want it less. Dear god, I’m not supposed to *lose interest* in your game as I learn about it! Fucking OPINION, AWAY!

  11. Keroton says:

    Worst experience of alpha testing was the battlelog, especialy when i have 4gb of ram and browser alone uses 1.5 – 2gb per play session. Game kept crashing all the time and was runing out of memory.

    • Njordsk says:

      1.5gb for a firefox/chrome tab?

      Your PC have a problem

    • Monkey says:

      As i write this chrome is using about 3 MB…..

    • Milky1985 says:

      “1.5gb for a firefox/chrome tab?

      Your PC have a problem”

      No i can say at least firefox has some major memory leaks, if you don’t close firefox for a few hours its memory usage creeps upwards.

      II use browsers at work and tend to leave them open when i go home, its not unusual for firefox to be using 500 MB of ram to display a simple text webpage after a couple of days (and about 1 – 1.5 Gigs of VM) .

      There are some major memory leaks in the codes of these browsers that have never been fixed. Sod all to do with the PC.

    • KenTWOu says:

      I guess, that’s why recommended system requirements for Battlefield 3 is 4 GB of RAM.

    • mickygor says:

      It’s not too hard to close Fx and then restore your tabs once a day. That’s all it takes to flush the memory.

    • Milky1985 says:

      @mickygor

      “It’s not too hard to close Fx and then restore your tabs once a day. That’s all it takes to flush the memory.”

      Thats not the point, yes i could easily do that (and then lose all my open tabs etc , unless I force close it let it restore itself….) but why should i have to do that? Woudl you say the same if someone had your hand in a vice? “its ok that we are crushing your hand slowly, you can always remove it from the vice for a bit then put it back in”. You would say “no why can;t you just turning the vice”.

      The software memory leaks to hell and has done for a while but its never been fixed, this is an issue with some browsers over extended periodsand oddly stuff eating away at your ram slowly impacts your gaming performance!

    • gamma says:

      @ Milky1985

      Just a hint re Firefox, you don’t need to “force close” (you on a mac? still applies if memory serves) to get the tabs back:
      if v3.6 > Tools > Options > General > and choose show my windows and tabs from last time from the first dropdown instead of show my homepage
      more recent versions that handy option is also hidden in the same way
      Stupid thing for mozilla to change from the previous method.

    • gwathdring says:

      Yeah, I’ve been doing that for years. Firefox just remembers all of my previously open tabs as long as they’re in a single window. And if something goes all wiggy, then Firefox will usually have a backup list of the tabs I had open and offer to restore them. Then I can shut down my computer to save power and not have to worry about doing anything fiddly to save my browsing session.

      Windows isn’t an especially stable operating system, though it’s not any less stable than Mac OS and Linux–depends on which versions you’re comparing. Most versions of all three systems require periodic shut-downs and restarts as opposed to hibernations and sleeps to function properly. Things start to go wrong after a while otherwise. Similarly you have to restart the OS after certain types of installations to avoid errors and registry corruptions. It’s not quite fair to blame Firefox for this because similar problems are inherent in the way the three major consumer operating system families function.

      I forget what it’s called but one of my friends who works with high level servers was telling me about an operating system that never requires a shutdown, and can accept hardware being added and removed as well as software and firmware upgrades and installations without blinking. A beautiful thing …. but it costs far too much for consumers and small businesses, if I recall correctly.

    • Mommenaizer says:

      if you use the tab reminder thingy dont forget to close all naughty tabs when you shut down your machine.. otherwise you’ll sit at work/ in front of your kids/wife booting your laptop…. BOOOM supriiiise

  12. Bilbo says:

    AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAA

  13. Basic says:

    Well I’m not sure I remember a Battlefield that had a good server browser.

    • pepper says:

      1942 was pretty decent. It just worked and was fast. Anything that came after it was crap.

    • Snuffy the Evil says:

      Well, it was usable. I’ll give them that much.

  14. BooleanBob says:

    Wh.. what??

  15. Ovno says:

    It seems EA and Ubi have got tired of saying ‘PC Gaming is dead” in the hope people would believe them so instead there going to actively try and kill it, nice1 guys….

    Though yeah if alt tab works its only a small inconvenience not a complete game breaker….

  16. iains says:

    Why do EA do what they do?

  17. testman3 says:

    What. A. Shame.

  18. LuNatic says:

    Oh great, another thing to break and go wrong.

    • El_MUERkO says:

      If an in-game browser is broken the game requires a patch, if BattleLog is broken or they want to add a new feature to it they just update the website. In my opinion it’s a better system than an in-game browser.

    • YourMessageHere says:

      Because steam updates are difficult for consumers, whereas every webpage run by a large company is frequently overhauled and functions flawlessly. EA have a proven track record of efficient, well designed and intuitive customer interfaces, after all.

      No, wait a second…

    • gwathdring says:

      But given that BF3 is not going to be on steam, and that if it was on Steam it would be using it’s own proprietary server browser, in game or otherwise, instead of something provided by Steam (which is what I think EA would do if BF3 were on Steam) … we would still have to deal with poor server maintenance and cludgy interfaces. It’s not just EA. DICE specifically has made some poor interfaces. Mirror’s Edge had resource-heavy menu that reacted slowly to user input even on a machine that ran the game like a dream (pretty animations between menu button clicks are not worth sacrificing slick response times). Battlefield 2 had a rather messy interface with a horrible server browser.

      Even for games designed by DICE and other EA supsidiaries, we can certainly blame EA proper for not putting on their editing boots and kicking all of these terrible interfaces out the door until their creators shine them up properly. And whoever designed the Origin interface could use a bit of a kick as well. It needs a lot of polishing up. But so did Steam when it came out, so I’ll give it a year or so.

  19. Inarborat says:

    Is it too much to ask for this and TOR to fail spectacularly resulting in the death of EA?

  20. Prime says:

    Is this really a problem? I thought ALT-TABing in Windows was one of the things we wanted games to be able to handle?

    • skinlo says:

      We do, but its even better not to have to do this in the first place!

  21. Milky1985 says:

    Alt-Tabbing a game can be a dangerous thign due to game design and the way graphics drivers work. Hopefully they are being careful with how they make the game but i can see issus happening with this way of chanign servers/

    • Theory says:

      DX10 fixes alt+tab, as I recall.

    • jon_hill987 says:

      DX10 might fix it but unless you are playing at your monitors native resolution you still have to wait for that to adjust.

    • gamma says:

      It will be hellish for those using 3D Vision systems, you actually get epileptic seizures just by loading a game when the video mode changes, imagine having to do just that whenever you want to change server… ntsk tsk tsk

  22. KBoogle says:

    I am so glad I’ve given up “mainstream” gaming a long time ago. There are enough indie games to fill every kind of game I ever want to play.

  23. D3xter says:

    Eh… it’s just their “Battlelog” feature being used as a Server Browser instead, it’s kind of a Steam-alike tool where you can click to Join other peoples games and whatnot, start voicechats or normally chat and browse servers quicker than the usual Refresh/Quick Refresh stuff ingame (cause it eliminates wait), if you click to join a server it opens a Magnet Link for BF3 and starts the game directly connecting to the server. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upWXvKYKaY0&hd=1

    Not sure how exactly it’s gonna be implemented in the finished version of the game yet, but it’s probably going to replace all the IG clutter and a few of the problems Bad Company 2 had, especially with its server browser.
    For instance: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-bad-company-2-pc/932284-cant-find-any-server.html

  24. Nemon says:

    It’s like a drive in where you have to park your car, get out and walk up to the microphone and order. Or close at least. A little.

    • Renfield says:

      I have the feeling that everyone’s reflexes for knee-jerk outbursts have been so sharpened by the rather more insulting stuff we’ve heard from other publishers this week, that people may be over-reacting a little bit more over this one. Alt-tabbing to find servers is not great, and it does sound a little daft to me, but it’s not like you have to bring up the (figurative) DOS Prompt, or pay them. Not yet!

      Edit: Point being, it is – like the drive-through example – an inconvenience.

    • MisterT says:

      Actually, more like this
      Normally, you go in, wait in line (splash screens, select MP, log in), order (select server) then wait, and then play, whereas this system you just call in your order and it’s brought to you while you wach pornography, not worrying about performance because you have 8GB of RAM and 4 cores of sandy vag

  25. Aemony says:

    So… I’m forced to launch my web browser to play the game…? You know… there’s a reason as to why I don’t even bother with games forcing me to click a Play Now! button on a website.

    No, the more I hear about Battlefield 3 the less I’m eager to buy it. Day 1 buy? Hardly, after the latest news. Week 1? Probably not… Month 1? Doubt it. Year 1? Myeah, it’s fifty-fifty.

  26. shellyc says:

    in-game server browsers are generally pretty dreadful anyway. Not sure this is a bad thing!

    • Tuco says:

      Yeah, cause web browser based server browsers (ehr…) are SO much better.

      Sorry DICE and EA, Battlelog as only way to run #BF3 on PC is an abomination.
      You forced Origin down to our throat, at least make good use of it, dammit.

      And then people wonder why some of us whine when forced to leave Steam to buy a game.

  27. aircool says:

    Alt-tabbing out of a DICE game? I don’t think there’s an easier way to crash your PC without chucking a bucket of piss all over your motherboard.

    However, not having an in-built server brower or server browsing via Origin is just criminal. As our conduit to the developers and publishers, PC game journalists must rip this idea apart.

    Save us RPS; you’re our only hope…

    • Tuco says:

      I agree, gaming press should eat their hearts for this abomination.

    • ankh says:

      Ive alt-tabbed BC2 about one million times (if not more) and its never crashed. NOT EVEN ONCE

    • gamma says:

      @ ankh
      I mostly confirm your experience, but it is definitely one of those things you want to avoid, and leave it as a last resource for when the app (whichever) hangs. One thing is alt-tabbing 2d apps, another is 3d apps.
      Afterall it is a OS level resource, DICE is forcing it as a feature for no reason…
      SAD

  28. MrMud says:

    The brower for bfbc2 is pretty terrible but this is not a good idea. Why should I have to wait for the game to start every time i want to see if the server is something I want to play on.

    • kibayasu says:

      Because this terrible waiting you have to do is less time than it takes to start up a game on Steam.

  29. jacobvandy says:

    Argh! Change? I hate change!

    … Seriously, of the things you should be upset with EA about lately, this is not really one of them. I used it in the Alpha test, and while it was kind of weird using a web browser to find and join servers, it was a hell of a lot faster than navigating the menus in Bad Company 2. Plus, there are no loading screens to sit through, the game is actually minimized until it’s ready to play, so you can be reading RPS or whatever while you wait.

    • Tuco says:

      I used it, too. And I *hated* every single minute of it.
      Also, forcing me tu run a web browser with the game client it’s an annoying way to waste RAM on my already-not-so-performing PC.

    • kibayasu says:

      If running a web browser is taking that much of your memory, you may want to look at what you’re doing wrong.

    • Milky1985 says:

      “If running a web browser is taking that much of your memory, you may want to look at what you’re doing wrong.”

      I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again, its not the PC its the web browser that can be the issue here.

      Some web browsers (a certain one that has somethign to do with the thing the posh gits in this country liked to “hunt” before we told them they were idiots and its not actually hunting) have memory leaking issues so even just leaving them idle or loading a simple new page increases there resource usage. Smoe other browsers have issues liek this too because really they were never design for this sort of thing.

      Oddly its alos a MASSSIVE security risk as web browsers are a primary attack point for lots of computer exploits nowerdays.And once you got one you got them all.

  30. ran93r says:

    The battlelog was great in the alpha, not sure why all the salty tears.

  31. Jnx says:

    Heh, well you better hope that this isn’t one of those games that crashes or refuses to recover from alt+tab then. Anyway I won’t be getting it with all the origin mumbojumbo. 2 digital store applications are enough for me and one game won’t change that.

  32. Soram00 says:

    The Battlelog in alpha was good. I don’t mind using it at all, quick and easy system.

  33. Phinor says:

    Battlelog itself was decent enough but having to go the following route to join a server was not: Browse to Battlelog website, log in, select server page, wait for the server list to load, find a server and join, wait for Origin to start, log in to Origin, wait for the game to start and load and finally end up on the server. Not really something you want to do for a quick 5-10min gaming experience.

    It’s the Origin part that takes it over the limit. It’s one step too much to simply join a server. Sadly unless they drop Origin requirement, joining a server is now about as optimized as it will ever get.

    • kibayasu says:

      Here’s a tip. Before you open your browser, open Origin. This time, turn on auto-login when you do. Now, you can either run Origin when Windows starts or you can open Origin and battlelog at the same time. Try a desktop shortcut to the browser of your choice.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      I really like the block function on this website.

  34. MuscleHorse says:

    This seems like a pretty monumental cockup on someone’s end, as if they forgot to put it into their schedule. I can’t think of a single AAA game, shooter or otherwise, that asks me to launch a web-browser to find a server.

    • domowoj says:

      or maybe (shock! horror!) it was an intentional design decision?

    • Kaira- says:

      Which would make it a bit odd, since when doing design, you usually strive to minimalize the things the user has to do before getting access to what he wants to do (if program supports that), so an external server browser seems a bit odd decision. Unless it proves to be superior to in-game browsers.

  35. Corrupt_Tiki says:

    I won’t lie, and say I will be ‘boycotting’ the game, but, I mean, please Dice, EA, for the love of god it doesn’t need more fluff and bells and whistles seriously, the game, that works good, and gets patched regularly will be fine, also, dedicated servers still win big time.- nuff said

    **Note; I have not tried the game/systems it might be really good, but, I doubt it will be better than dedicated servers, and also, there is a thin line between, functional, and detrimental.

    • MisterT says:

      try it yourself in the open beta this september.
      it’s actually pretty slick.

  36. deadstoned says:

    But I like in-game server browsers :*(

  37. Premium User Badge PoulWrist says:

    In this thread, loads of people overreacting to something they don’t know jack about, making total fools of themselves.

    • Spider Jerusalem says:

      Or maybe they just want a fucking server browser and not a fucking facebook-clone thing.

      I cancelled my bookingface account for a reason.

    • bigblack says:

      I see a lot of people wondering aloud why EA & DICE are asking gamers to do a bunch of unusually stupid shit outside the application they created in order to join servers and play the fucking game.

  38. vodka and cookies says:

    [quote]mouse controls only on the PS3?![/quote]

    PS3 actually supports that but it rarely ever gets supported by games.

    • Lewie Procter says:

      Indeed, bit of missed opportunity, that.

    • jon_hill987 says:

      I think that is because they know they would get complaints from non mouse users when they keep getting killed by someone who from their point of view looks to be using an aimbot…

    • ankh says:

      If I were to release a multiplayer FPS on consoles i wouldn’t allow mouse controls either. Except for myself. BWAHAHAHAHA

    • Lewie Procter says:

      I reckon there is a bit more to it than that, it would be possible to have “Controller only” “Mouse only” and “mixed” servers to resolve that issue.

  39. Tei says:

    This Battlelog thing seems a Social Media site, with Facebook-like interface. With all, even “Status messages”.

    If we visit this site to search a server, I bet 99% of the status will be “Searching a server”, woot!.

  40. MaliciousH says:

    I haven’t tried anything BF3 so I don’t know first hand but what I feel why people are getting hissy about this news is that its yet another thing that could be or should be done via in-game means or through Origin. Origin, being something that seems wanting to challenge Steam, its currently looking like its not stacking up to be a competent competitor. Hell, its driving home the point of Origin just being a download service.

    /rambling of a dead tired dude

  41. JustOneWay says:

    It seems an odd decision to me but I am happy to wait and see how it turns out. No use hating the unknown.

    I guess one advantage of this approach is that they have the ability to roll our constant upgrades and improvements without going through a cycle of patch distribution and all that entails. This could lead to more regular incremental improvements to the Battlelog. It might allow them to be more responsive to the communities desires on that front. Not a bad idea when getting into something so novel.

  42. Koozer says:

    I’ll just buy it on Steam and use the overlay’s brows…oh, yeah. Right.

  43. Antilogic says:

    I’ve used it, I think it works really rather well. The server browser is actually decent unlike say BC2 and it launches the game and right into the server quite nicely.

  44. necrozim says:

    I wonder if other websites can have links to their BF3 server, meaning that for example, somewhere on RPS there could be a link to server awesome and rather than hunting through in game or going to favourites, I can simply click that link, then my game will boot up and pop me into the server. Now that, would be pretty wicked.

    • jon_hill987 says:

      Quakeworld offered that, as did HL1 based games, all you hat do do was associate the protocol with the games executable.

    • mondomau says:

      Several posters in the Reddit thread seem to imply this is the case and that they found it to be a very positive experience: instead of firing up the game, logging in, then checking who’s on, they could open the browser and click a buddy’s game – BF3 would then reserve their slot while it booted up and dropped them straight into the map.

    • CMaster says:

      It’s also possible with Source games. In fact, the Steam:// protocol for web browsers is pretty nifty all around.

      Examples: Join the RPS TF2 server
      Play Frozen Synapse

      Edit: hmm, the RPS comments thing doesn’t parse them properly. Perhaps this should be fixed?

      They should look like this steam://connect/85.236.100.200:27015 and steam://run/98200

  45. jon_hill987 says:

    So not only is the server browser external to the game, but it is also a website rather than an executable?

  46. yhalothar says:

    For me, this game has gone from “Preorder” to “first week purchase” to “I’m not buying it” in about three to four months.

  47. Lemming says:

    Why are people so apologetic of this?

    “Oh but it’s really easy because..” Lemme stop you there.

    It’s clunky as fuck. End of.

    • kibayasu says:

      Actually, it’s not.

      See? I can make completely useless statements too!

    • Lemming says:

      It’s not a useless statement (but thanks for contributing your own). ALT-TABing out of anything to do something else is always clunky, and that goes double for having to ALT-TAB to do something required to continue using the original task.

      It’s not even an issue that would affect me (dual-monitors), but I can call a spade a spade. I don’t have to live in some kind of perpetual denial where I convince myself everything is fine. but again, THANKS FOR CONTRIBUTING! ;-)

    • gamma says:

      How does the saying go?

      “If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail”

  48. thesonglessbird says:

    I played the alpha and at first I was like “WTF?????????????????”, but it actually is a nice, smooth process. Works very well. Requires a browser plugin though, which is a bit gash (not the plugin…the needing it). I thought it was a nice convergence of the game and the social functions. I’d like to see it more often.

  49. Benjamin L. says:

    Given that previous server browsers in BF games were terrible, and given that it really isn’t necessary to use it a lot, and given that a lot of other things like MMOs use this technique, and given that this likely means BF3 will alt-tab like a dream, I honestly don’t see this as the horrible betrayal everyone is making it out to be.

    But then EA isn’t Valve so I guess I should expect this.

  50. Tomhai says:

    I smell a conspiracy here. You do know how people in order to draw your attention away from the big problems, create small ones. So that the media and public can chew on them and forget about the serious issues. That’s a classical example right here. We go crazy over something that’s probably a minor inconvenience and forget where the true evil of BF3 lies in – no real dedicated servers. That’s what we should go crazy about. That’s why you should either boycot the game or if you really want to play it (like I do:) ) go to a Russian cd-key site to get you key for the minimum legal price possible.

    • Matt says:

      Keep sniffing. DICE already confirmed dedicated servers a while ago.

    • ankh says:

      You say “no real dedicated servers” but you dont tell us what your definition of real is thus rendering your comment useless. Mines also useless then I guess…. you bastard.

    • gamma says:

      @ ankh & Matt
      5-10 years ago mainstream games (developers and publishers) provided an executable which you called a “dedicated server” which you could install (in a Linux box with no graphics card) and run a LAN only server, no internet required by no client running the game, and ENJOY a latency of 5-10 miliseconds
      That is the definition a “dedicated server” not a dumbed down one which you have to rent and ask for a license to run. Since the later is being refered with no distinction the “REAL” was appended for clarity.
      Too bad you didn’t get it. Too bad you apparently see no diference, if infact you remember those times.