336

I'll be honest: I think matchmaking is just a better experience for how I like to play FPS games. I never got a sense of "community" from sticking with a given server; I would come to find something like it via Discord years later but not just from frequenting a given game server. My server browser experience was mostly that I'd join a game in a progress, as other people come and go from a game in progress, and I wondered what the point of the match was if the teams weren't even the same at the end of the match as when they began. Most people's default when running a server was to turn player numbers to max and, in Battlefield's case, "tickets" needed to win as well, but just because the numbers are bigger doesn't mean that it's better pacing for a match, for instance. Matchmaking sets the defaults and ensures a pretty consistent experience from start to finish of each match.

This comment from the developer is true, too.

"Matchmaking servers spin up in seconds (get filled with players), and spin down after the game is over," Sirland wrote in a thread on X last week. "That couple of seconds when servers lose a lot of players mid-game is the only time you can join, which makes it a tricky combination (and full of queuing to join issues).

My preference for the matchmaking experience is reflected across the audience they cater to, and it contributed to an industry focus on matchmaking and the end of server browsers.

But we still need real server browsers.

If we bought a game, we should be able to do what we want with it, including running those max player/max ticket servers that run 24/7 on one map. We should be able to do it without DICE/EA's permission, on our own if we so choose, without salaried staff running master server operations, because one day the revenue this game brings in will not justify the costs to keep it going. We should be able to deal with cheaters by vote kicking them from the server rather than installing increasingly invasive mandatory anti cheat solutions that don't even fully solve the problem anyway, because it's unsolvable.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] voytrekk@sopuli.xyz 75 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It would be nice if we had both options. Let people matchmake for the default experience and let those that prefer custom servers to use those instead. There are problems with using only community hosted servers, such as game rules and less ideal admins.

That being said, the longevity that community servers offer is likely the reason they have been scrapped by EA. They want everyone to move to the next title that comes out like what people do with CoD.

EDIT: Typos from mobile

load more comments (1 replies)

I loved the servers that were 24/7 metro, no drags etc. some of those were (and still are) my favorite. Or pistols only, no Glock 18. When you get rid of custom servers you get rid of that custom experience.

[-] real_squids@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Didn't they try something similar in 2042 but on their own servers? edit: portal

[-] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, and it’s coming to 6 as well, now with a map editor.

[-] Zoot@reddthat.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

2042 always throws me off. That game was such a disgrace in comparison to 2142 with Titan Wars.

[-] justlemmyin@lemmy.world 34 points 3 weeks ago

Bit it doesn't even work on linux, basically DOA for me.

[-] Grass@sh.itjust.works 26 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

supposedly doesn't work on windows either if you play valorant or maybe other games with similar anticheats competing for the same system area no video game shoud have control over

[-] rozodru@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

ah so that post I saw the other day saying "begun the kernel wars have" makes senses. someone posted the fact they couldn't play BF6 cause Valorant was installed.

[-] Grass@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago

yeah. I've been wondering when this would happen since spore. Took longer than I expected really.

[-] Baggie@lemmy.zip 33 points 3 weeks ago

I miss community servers terribly.

[-] purplerabbit@piefed.blahaj.zone 33 points 3 weeks ago

One doesn't need to replace the other.:)

The big problem with matchmaking is that in the long run, it kills game. When people start to move on to a new thing, the population that stays because they're attached to the game gets fucked over by matchmaking.

The less people they are, the worse it works. That's when a server browser and the ability to run community server becomes crucial. It will keep a game alive for a decade after its last update.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

That’s perfectly acceptable justification to shut down gameservers and profit from people moving to the next version of the game. Gone are the days of private servers, especially with client and serverside mods, that kept people engaged with an older game for years. That’s not profitable.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

How would a server browser help in that case?

Matchmaking puts people into a limited number of servers. Yeah, you get the problem of realizing that those folk have been playing Tribes 2 for over twenty years at this point but you also have people to play with on that one 24 player server. Versus twelve servers with 2 players and a bunch of bots (if the game has them) each.

I always would rather both options. But from a game health standpoint... hoppers tend to have clear advantages at most player counts.

[-] Jeffool@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

I think the general idea is that if I want to spin up a server for my friend group that's been gaming together for 20 years, we can buy the game and do just that. That's opposed to the money I spent on the game being useless when they decide they want to stop paying for servers.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They will have community servers with its own browser. The servers will have full xp as long as the rules are close to the official ones.

Matchmaking wont be the only option.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 weeks ago

Bring back community servers, so the developers can keep their official servers and people that want to play on community servers can do that do.

It's a solved problem that publishers tells you is hard to do in the name of money.

Don't look harder into it.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

That's exactly what they did. You have official matchmaking, then you have community servers people host. If you use official rules, you can still earn xp in the community servers.

They have a server browser, official matchmaking servers just don't show up but they only last one game anyways.

[-] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 3 weeks ago

Vote with your wallet and don't buy this. Many years ago we've got dedicated servers and free map builders. Nowadays we get matchmaking and 3 maps and additional 3 for 20 bucks.

[-] smol_beans@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

When it comes to video games you will always get outvoted by millions or children who don't know any better and don't care.

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Oh no, whatever will I do with my time if I can't play with literal children.

[-] Mamdani_Da_Savior@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

I played the BETA, its good, I'm buying.

[-] garretble@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

I always liked going into older BF servers that weren't so populated just to be able to get a lay of the land without being destroyed in three seconds.

Or to be able to use the vehicles and get used to them without as much threat.

Maybe I just want a mode that lets you free-roam maps...

[-] poolhelmetinstrument@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

More like a real server browser with real self hosted dedicated servers. Couldn’t imagine mods at this point

[-] TheHobbyist@lemmy.zip 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Having long played some old CS, there was so much sense of community from connecting to a personal server instance, regularly seeing the same people, familiarize with specific rules to that server, getting to know the admin etc. I'm sure you feel a sense of community from match making, but it can definitely exist outside of matchmaking IMO.

And I'm not advertising for one over the other. But I'd be very happy to see the persistence of accessing personal servers for a game.

[-] shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 weeks ago

I want servers so I can avoid playing maps I don't like... Looking at you Siege of Cairo.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 11 points 3 weeks ago

God yes. I would rather have a few popular servers over endless empty matchmaking

[-] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago

Server browsers are the better experience for me. Jump in a game and its already going, less pressure to stay because there's no matchmaking ban/penalties. Everyone is there primarily to have fun because KD WL MMR ELO isnt being logged. If im desperately outclassed, or life gets in the way, I can just quit with no guilt or punishment. If im having a good time i can stay with mostly the same people for a long time.

Thats before you even get into the technicalities and longevity considerations.

[-] rozodru@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Plus it's great if the server is made specifically for a map you really love. Like TFC/TF2 with say 24/7 2fort. I love me some 2fort and yeah I will play it for hours on end, it's comfy.

[-] griffinite_psx@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

A server browser similar to Arma would have been a godsend as it allows people to set up unique rules, experiment with different game modes and play around the map itself. While BF isn’t a milsim sandbox game a server browser is what keeps older BF games alive especially on console and the removal of that does make you wonder if we’ll be playing BF6 a decade down the line.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

They are implementing just that. Official servers don't show up on it but everything hosted by the community does.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

They have a browser where you can run your own games. If you use official rules, you get full xp. I don't get what people are complaining about.

You can earn full XP in Portal matches as long as the house rules closely resemble the vanilla ones

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

As per the article, persistence, and a way to bypass DICE.

Speaking for myself, I miss multiplayer games before they had XP and progression.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

They are persistent, they stay open as long as someone is in it. No one is kicked after the game.

Bypass dice isn't a feature but a fantasy, never happening. I don't really get what it would bring to the table either.

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

The ability to keep the video game. The ability to play it on a LAN. It's not a fantasy; it's history. We used to have this.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's more then a server browser. You are just being deceptive. You cherry picked the one quote in the article that makes it look like there is nothing in your post and your comments aren't honest.

What you are talking about is a whole other debate entirely and simply not how the industry runs anymore when it comes to multiplayer shooters.

I want that stuff too but that's not what server browser means. The finals and cod don't have server browsers. Bf6 will have a server browser.

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

That limitation, and the inability to sidestep DICE by renting a server that never shuts down, made it difficult for communities to take shape in Portal.

The ideas are bound together. Same with anti cheat. Same with preservation. Removing private servers caused all of these problems at the same time. The author of the article speaks for the group who want the community that I admitted never mattered to me, that Portal doesn't provide, but other knock-on effects of the death of the server browser do matter to me.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] gwheel@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago

IMO it's the opposite, what exists now is less than a server browser. I'd call it a custom games browser instead. Whichever one you pick will be on the official servers.

I agree it isn't how the industry is now, but it isn't going to improve if everyone just accepts it.

[-] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago

Yep. This is the correct answer but that’s not what this thread is about; it’s a nostalgic circle jerk mixed with a sprinkling of “back in my day”.

Don’t get me wrong here, I like the suggestions in this thread but literally one of the suggestions being upvoted is how the game is planned to handle servers (quick join is random and then there will be a list of community servers).

I’m fine with the official servers being random join, as long as I can pick and choose a community server. Which to state again, is apparently planned.

I’m still waiting for reviews on release to make sure they hold true to their marketing though. Can’t trust shit from large studios.

[-] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

Based on the article, a server is probably a docker container or something like it they spin up and replace each new match. Sounds to me like they deliberately designed around a system that makes a server browser impossible.

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

The way I interpreted that part was that they were trying to smooth over the frustrating part of finding a server, because at large scale, you end up in a spot where it's difficult to actually secure a slot on one. That might be their reasoning, but it's still an excuse to omit a key feature.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

I know exactly why they didn’t make dedicated servers and why doing so would be a scramble. But we are going to need them regardless

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

It's very simple. If it doesn't have a Server Browser, has MTX, has Gacha, has Rootkits, is Online Only/No LAN, or is made by any of the AAA studios, I don't play it.

[-] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 3 weeks ago

Server browsers and dedicated servers are subjects that make me want to start with the old man "back in myyy day" style comments.

I saw somebody mention CS, which is a good one, but for me the peak was in Quake 2 because of personal circumstances like getting into overclocking and then moving to a university network connection when modems were the norm at home.

Certain servers running certain mods were awesome late-night hangouts. I have a few really fun memories of all of us coordinating to do goofy stuff rather than play whatever the game at hand was. Then somebody new would join the server and start wrecking us until we caught their attention with the text chat and got them involved too, lol.

[-] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago

The amount of time I've spent playing online games has fallen off a cliff after forced matchmaking, particularly SBMM. They've legitimately ruined my enjoyment of games.

I got into Overwatch for a bit, but the SBMM meant that at lower levels it was basically a coin flip if I would get a team that wanted to play as a team, or a bunch of kill whores who only cared about their K/D ratio. I don't want to have to drop hundreds of hours int mastering the game just to have actual teamwork.

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Oh, I love skill-based matchmaking. Without it, if you're having a good time, it means your opponent is almost surely having a bad time, rather than keeping the matches close. At low ranks, often times a single piece of knowledge can escalate your play to a higher level, which can make those low ranks feel kind of swing-y, but I don't know that that's a problem that can really be solved unless you remove the asymmetry. That said, I no longer wish to substitute matchmaking for the likes of a server browser.

[-] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Arguing against servers because you want match making is like arguing that you hate McDonalds serving Cheeseburgers because you want Chicken nuggets.

[-] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

They shouldn't be mutually exclusive, but the companies who want to monetize people perpetually see them as such.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
336 points (100.0% liked)

Games

42062 readers
843 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS