Titanfall: Do We Need Local Servers And, If So, When Are They Coming?

Titanfall's beta is now public and reactions are almost overwhelmingly positive but, for Australians, one issue remains: local servers. Do they matter? Is the absence affecting online experiences and, if so, when will that problem be fixed?

Both Respawn and EA have been reluctant to comment. There is little either company can do about the server situation. The issue lies with Microsoft and the Azure Data Centres it uses to run online games. For Australians the closest data centre is in Singapore and players are reporting pings in the early 100s at best. In the worst case players have to contend with pings over 230.

Players seem divided on whether the high pings are, in fact, an issue. I asked my followers on Twitter if the issue was noticable, and replies were evenly spread. Some seemed to think it was an issue, some called the game unplayable, but a huge number claim to be playing without incident. Respawn's netcode appears to be solid, and with many in-game encounters focused on AI grunts, even those with a high ping have found the game playable in bursts.

But reports on Respawn's official forums have been less friendly. Many are calling the server issues a genuine game breaker, particularly PC players used to playing games with better, local connections. As a general rule, console players, who primarily play online games on Xbox LIVE, have become more accustomed to poor connections. It's also worth noting that, in many asian regions, the Xbox One is still unavailable. The situation may change once more and more users begin straining the Singapore Azure Centre.

The major issue is this: Titanfall is a multiplayer game. There is no single player campaign. Meaning that, without local servers, Australians will most likely be paying more for a less satisfactory experience. In other words: players are right to complain. If you don't notice an issue, more power to you. If players are having issues, that is a legitimate problem and it should be addressed.

But is the issue being addressed? The truth is we don't know.

Here's what we do know: Microsoft has already committed to launching Azure Centres in NSW and Victoria. These are the centres currently being used to host games globally. According to some rumours, servers are already being installed in North Ryde, but they are not currently active. Microsoft has yet to announce a timeline for the launch of the servers, but some sources seem to suggest the Azure Center in Sydney will launch in May. At the very latest, both will be up and running before the end of this year. Hopefully.

That's the good news. These Azure Centers will not be available upon the launch of Titanfall in Australia, but they will be up and running at some point in the game's lifespan. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

"Our teams are hard at work to bring the new region online as soon as possible," a Microsoft spokesperson informed Kotaku. "We aren’t providing specific guidance on launch timeframes at this point."

There is, however, a secondary issue. Although Azure Centres are being launched in Australia, Microsoft has yet to confirm if it will actually use these centres for its gaming division. In short: even if we do have Azure Centres in New South Wales and Victoria, there is no guarantee these centres will be used to host games of Titanfall.

Azure Centres are being built specifically to aid Microsoft's Windows Azure service, which provides easily accessible storage to businesses. Local centres are designed to provide a more secure, speedy service for local businesses. That's the priority for Microsoft, not video games.

"[W]e have only announced that we will be offering Windows Azure services out of our Australian infrastructure," said a Microsoft spokesperson. "We have not made any announcements in relation to other services."

There is a high chance these Azure Centres will be used to host games at some point (Respawn, at least, seems to agree). The question is when? When will they be built? When will Australians have the chance to engage on a level playing field with the rest of the world?

At this stage, we simply don't have a concrete answer either way.


    I've got fiber and was still getting 200+ pings at times on the weekend. Not cool.

      your fiber sucks then... i was sitting on 150ms on my crappy adsl2

        133ms on ADSL1 (1.5mb/0.5mb) from Melbourne to SE Asia datacenter, while it's not ideal, the game has some fantastic net code and makes it feels more like 60-80ms. Very playable in my case.

        Last edited 18/02/14 11:26 am

        150 here on dsl too.

        If I compare it to the crappy lag I used to put up with on my 360, it's the same or better. If I compare it to TF2 / LOL that I play on local servers, it's pretty rubbish.

        Won't be buying it until there are local servers. Stupid decision not to let people create their own or LAN IMO.

        Last edited 18/02/14 11:54 am

        Ping speed has little to do with connection speed, its effected far more by the number of routers between you and the destination. In a ping for ping contest a dialup connection going through 1 router will very probably beat gigabit fibre going through 10. The speed will still be total shit but the round trip time will be smaller thanks to less processing along the route

          I get 70ms from Perth.

            Yeah I got about that as well. It seems like for THE VERY FIRST TIME, Perth isn't screwed over the most out of Aussie States. Don't get used to it

            I get 230ms from Perth, so not all west australian are happy :(

          You are mixing up the two measurements. Dial up and dsl are going to be similar in speeds (which is what ping measures), since they are all using copper cables. The difference is that dial up can only handle about 5/KBs, wheras dsl2+ can handle in theory 20/MBs.
          Latency, also known as ping, is going to be calculated based upon the distance, the number of routers and the material the cables are made out of.
          The distance is going to remain pretty static, though west australia is at a severe disadvantage, melbourne and sydney are at a slight disadvantage, brisbane will be the best since most of the underwater cables leave there.

          The material isn't going to change too much either. It will go though one cable overseas, that cable isn't going to change whether you have cable, fibre or dialup. You aren't going to have any choice in how your internet travels through australia either, with the exception of your internet provider to you. Thats where cable is going to shine, but the rest of the trip is made up of australias infrastructure, the overseas cables, and the other countries cable infrastructure.
          Each router it has to go through is going to add some extra time, maybe 10ms per router.

          The difference between dial up and dsl is in the amount of data it can handle, essentially the average amount you can download per second, cable can handle even more data, and since cable goes through fibre cables, there is also a 30%(I think) reduction in latency since light through glass is a lot faster then electricity through copper.

          EDIT: Turns out I forgot where singapore is. Normally for US/East Asia servers brisbane will be better, but in this case it's reversed with west australia being a lot closer and therefore faster.

          Last edited 19/02/14 3:51 pm

      Fiber isn't the best way to improve your ping. It helps it, but not really over those kind of distances. I'm getting around 180 or so, which is what I used to get on League of Legends contacting the NA servers. Not too flash if you ask me. It hasn't ruined my gaming experience, but it has definitely shown instances where people with 5, or even 50 ping, clearly have an advantage over me in a gun fight.

      I'm in inner city Canberra, on ADSL2+ and my ping has consistently been 100 - 140.
      Although, that said, it doesn't feel like 100 - 140 ping.

      Heh, transact.

        Yeah I'm on the ol' Transact in Canberra and get around 150.
        I know this sounds odd, but I played a lot of Halo 2 and 3 with lag but never used it as an excuse as to why I would lose a match (and would get good at compensating).
        I see all of these ultimatums of "no local servers equals no purchase" and I can't help but think that some people are too used to making excuses for their performances.
        The Titanfall beta has been more than playable on 150, in fact I am borderline addicted to the game and haven't once raged at a cheap kill due to lag.
        Just man/woman up and stop making excuses!

      I live in Perth, have ADSL+2 and my ping never went above 75.

      200 ping consistent. Very noticeable when going for local Bf3 server to non-local Titanfall. For got what it was like playing Doom on dialup...

    Local servers as in LAN... in this day and age?
    bwahahahahah... fat chance

      Local servers as in region you numpty.

        well my apologies, i just assumed that a they meant a local server in the context of a LAN, not a region specific WAN

        Last edited 18/02/14 12:50 pm

          Plus whats wrong with Having Lan servers anyways, since its only 6v6 its small enough that playing over your local network could be viable , especially in a lot of internet cafes

            I never said anything was wrong with LAN servers, the likely hood of them putting a LAN function in are next to none
            The days of the LAN Parties are dead as everything requires internet

          Have you ever played a game, like one that online and stuff?

            no iv never played a game in my entire life
            *insert sarcastic emote here*

      Local Servers = servers in your local area (aka. Australia, instead of connecting to Asian ones).

      LAN = Local Area Network. Which simply put is if you were connected to a game server by ethernet cord. Different things entirely :)

        Oops, double post

        Last edited 18/02/14 5:20 pm

    On Telstra Velocity I get a ping of 58ms to Singapore. I have played on a higher ping game and it wasn't too bad though.

      Yup, 65ms here (Perth, WA). Perfectly playable. Looking at a number of comments, people don't seem to appreciate how the dedicated servers will work for Xbox Live.

      Azure data centers are being built in AUS right now, once they are complete, game servers can be and will be deployed. Will WA see an improvement in routing across AUS than to Singapore? Probably.

      Last edited 18/02/14 11:37 am

      I'm in Adelaide and I've been getting 102 ping. It plays remarkably well with little to no lag. Feels about as good as playing Halo Reach with good connection search enabled.

    To be honest the Netcode is great so we don't have to shoot empty space in front to actually kill someone but occasionally it gets funny when you unload a whole mag on someone and they didnt die. During a 1v1 shooting it all depends whose latency is better to see which hit registers first.

    I really hope there will be local servers and the game will be so much better.

    One question in mind is, why they rely on Azure servers only? I understand it was build for Xbox One but why PC uses Azure server as well? Unless it is some sort of agreement between EA and Microsoft to promote the server. Crysis had their own server and tons of AU server to play on and it was still using Origin. PC should not suffer the same fate as Xbox One :(

    Last edited 18/02/14 11:09 am

      Chances are the PC version would use the same backbone specifically to reduce workload so respawn would only have to write and debug one set of netcode. For a multiplayer specific game that'd be a massive windfall of time.

    Do they matter?

    Yes! Geez, why is this even a question? I understand if someone in US asks this question, as they've never experience true lag before. But for the rest of the world it really is a deal breaker.

    and yes, I know that it is actually harder to open and run servers in Australia. Mainly due to our internet cap. One developer was talking about it once and was shocked that we still had capped internet, which made it a lot harder for them to open servers in Australia. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't try.

      You won't believe the amount of people telling me they don't matter and they're loving the game regardless.

        I am actually interested in finding out who these kinds of people are. I always feel that issues like this is important for gamers but for non-gamers they wouldn't know how servers work or why they're used. Maybe it's not so clear-cut between the opinions. Or maybe people are so used to it that they aren't aware that it can be better. Or maybe it really is a difference between PC and console players.
        Maybe in reference to Titanfall, since the AI bots are so weak (I've heard being left alone they still can't shoot each other) that people can get enjoyment out of these easy encounters and that's why it's still fun despite the latency.

        But it is an issue for many people, especially when it is so obvious. I can't be the only person who's annoyed when someone invades my world in Dark Souls and they teleport behind me for a backstab.

        Last edited 18/02/14 11:49 am

          Some just talk from experience.

          Do we NEED Local Servers? No, of course not the game runs without local servers already.
          Do we WANT Local Servers? Yes, most do because it removes many of the latency based issues and allows for fair, competitive play.

          Latency is something any gamer who plays online knows about and has experienced at one point, their chosen platform does not really hold much sway in the differences they experience.

          Saying people are used to it, is true. The truth is if your connection is below optimal levels, but within acceptable levels, you tend not to see latency as much of an issue. Most online games fall in to this area and give people a good experience that seems to be smooth and lag free for the most part.

          So I think the question should be "Do we in Australia have a good enough network to void the use of local servers" Which is obviously a great big fat HELL NO.

          I play and thoroughly enjoy CSGO on my laptop, where the slightest bit of lag will make the game unplayable. If it's slightly laggy, I just stop playing. That's the type of online FPS player I am...

          I tell you this so you have a point of reference into my statement of the fact that I've been playing the Titanfall beta, and even with the escalated ping have found it to be completely playable, without causing me any noticeable issues with hit registry. Could just be that I don't know any better for this particular game, and won't, until I play with a lower ping (it averages around 160-230 for me), but I can honestly say it's not causing me to lose any one on one battles. When I've lost them, it's been due to my aim, not due to any lagging issues, of which I've suffered none thus far...

          The net code is really very good and at a constant 150 I'm only getting very small, intermittent issues. I've had worse playing 80ms on TF2. Local servers or allowing private servers would make me the happiest boy, but so far, so good.

          We'll see how it rolls when the launch population breaks the hell out of it, but so far it's totally playable.

          As I wrote earlier, it feels about as good as playing locally searched games of Halo Reach. You know I quit Halo 4 because of the lag, but Titanfall is totally satisfying in the connection department, and not just fighting bots.

            I'm getting both sides of the argument here. It doesn't seem that one sided.

            Still, Australian servers would be prefered.

              Absolutely. It's the only way to go and we need to push for them.

              I also think lag maybe doesn't matter as much with this game. Lag in Halo is REALLY noticeable because of the longer kill times and finding yourself in a duel where you come across an enemy and begin a fight where you're trying to wear each other's shield's down. In those cases lag REALLY makes itself known. Titan fall battles often aren't the result of two people rounding a corner and beginning a duel. It's often dropping someone before they know what's hit them. The kill times are shorter than Halo but longer than COD. Once you start getting shot there's not much room to retaliate and strafe your way to winning the fight. I just don't think LAG kills this game like it does Halo when you can literally love dozens of gun fights because of lag.

              I'm having a blast with 100ms ping. But I'll love it more when it's half of that.

              Also, for the record, shot registration is instant based on your actions, you don't have to lead shots to have them hit. But there is the split second between head-shotting someone and seeing them fall over.

        They matter, of course, but they don't matter in a sense that 133ms feels natural due to good netcode on Respawn's behalf. It's a non-issue for a lot of us playing the game until Microsoft's Azure datacenters open up in Syd/Melb this year.

        It may be possible to enjoy the game regardless but local servers would provide an overall improvement. So they're still important in that respect.

        The lag situation will become a bigger deal as people move from the "I'm playing Titanfall!" stage into more competitive play. It is far from unplayable but if this was CoD or Halo I'd be looking for new servers if facing this kind of lag.

        At least everybody is in the same boat, playing at peak last night only one or two players had full connection bars, most of the server were at one or two bars. It is only a small sample but the player with the best connection was well clear at the top of the leaderboard too.

        Last edited 18/02/14 11:36 am

        Sure, everyone agrees that two scoops of ice cream is great. That doesn't mean that three scoops wouldn't be even better.

        I can't tell if everyone just has higher standards than me, or I'm not very competitive, or if there's sth weird going on. My partner and I played all weekend with 350-400 ms ping and had a blast. There were definite delays with between shooting and people dropping dead, and it sucked occasionally dying half a second after getting into cover, but we were scoring kills on pilots. I mean, it was playable; certainly not enough to detract from the game being fun.

          You are not very competitive. Playing with 350-400ms is between a third of a second and half a second delay, And a second is fairly long as far as reaction times go.

          It is essentially like being forced to play a game drunk.

          Remember the game isn't just for those who pick it up and play for a few hours every month, and for those who are playing it regularly and end up dying despite them getting those first hits or repeatedly dying after getting into cover, and ofcourse the eventual abuse that will be thrown their way as the game releases and people aren't in beta "shiny new thing" mindset anymore.

        I'm loving the game because it's a great game, but having Aus servers would take it from being a good game, to a great game. Been in several situations where I've definitely shot someone enough to die only for them to realise, turn around, and waste me. Same type of thing that happens if I play Battlefield on international servers, which is why I only play local.

        I jumped out of a two bar connection game earlier to have dinner, unfortunately the rest of the night I could only get one bar games which were pretty crap. All I could really do is take out grunts, spectres, and capture hardpoints.

        Last edited 19/02/14 12:04 am

    From my experience with both the PC & Xbox One betas I wouldn't necessarily call it game breaking. It certainly isn't ideal and some actions such as melee attacks do suffer from delay but movement and shooting mechanicsare largely tolerable. Still, I wouldn't say no to local servers.

    Local servers are a blessing and a curse for us in Australia.

    A blessing in that our ping times are much better.

    A curse in that we have a small population and it probably won't be long before our local servers are effectively dead, forcing us onto the American or European servers anyway just to be able to play.

    Last edited 18/02/14 11:18 am

    Can anyone tell me what the deal is with this issue compared to Battlefield 4? I know the game sizes are smaller – should I be expecting a better performance than I get in Battlefield?

    Both being EA made games on Microsoft consoles (I play the Xbone version) it seems to play pretty well on my Optus DSL connection (in Sydney).

    It’s hard to tell if it’s a genuine issue or not. If there’s one thing you can guarantee about gamers who post on forums- it’s that they’ll burst into tears and do the whole “I’m not ever ever buying this game ever!” over things that at the end of the day aren’t huge issues.

    I’m really not buying the game if it’s going to lag terribly though. I haven’t been much on an online FPS gamer for a LONG time so I don’t know how bad 230 ping really is these days. That would have been a deal breaker for me back when I was playing Quake II but most console shooters (which I play very casually) just come up with a coloured bar showing how my connection is going.

    Last edited 18/02/14 11:22 am

      If you play on the Xbone or PC you get put together with players of similar pings (usually) so you might not notice the diff, but when you get put with players that have better pings you will. The game is only published by EA, made by two different dev's, DICE (BF4) Respawn (TF).

        I know the devs are different (and thus the netcode), but is the server set-up the same?

        I’m pretty sure Battlefield uses dedicated servers- I’m assuming they wouldn’t be based in Australia either.
        Or do DICE pay for their own servers and actually have their sh*t together?

        You’d think that if a developer can afford their own servers that MS or EA could sort something out short-term if they needed too.

          You'll find that most PC servers for popular multiplayer titles are run by ISPs.

    What I don't understand is why not?? Servers have been shown to not cost that much money - this game is going to sell well, despite what I believe is an over-hyped game - yes it's fun, but it's not 'ground breaking' or innovative. I'm sure our market isn't that small not to warrant some servers, this issue really gets under my skin. I think we as consumers should demand more from a product, and that's not self entitlement, that's not being a mindless consumer.

    I for one am disappointed by this game overall. A source engine on a AAA title?? I mean it looks like shit, and I would expect this from an Indie title - hell even indie titles use the Unreal engine. I think, sure its Respawn's first game, so maybe after this one sells a bagillion copies, the next game will be frostbite 3 or better, have destructible environments, all the bells and whistles - because if you look at all the advertising for titanfall, the game looks nothing like that.

    Oh and I'm not discriminating here, the game looks OK on PC and terrible on Xbone. WTF is going on with the xbone?? I mean it can't even push out the source engine at 1080p?? Wow.

    Anyway, servers are needed, it just grants us optimal playing experience, for our dollar, which I do think we are entitled to. I will say that during my testing on the PC, with pings ranging from 130 - 240ms, I still did alright, because the majority of players were in the same boat. BUT I did get matched with some people with 20ms and they owned everyone's arse. I'm always hated CoD for having no servers and it's crappy match making - I just thought Respawn would have at least tried to do things a little different. Oh well.

      Servers might be cheap, but internet connections aren't. Companies aren't able to get domestic internet connections, and they also require a lot of upload, so they need to get their own plans. In New Zealand, I was working for a game development company that spent I think about $4k per month, and that wasn't for hosting servers or anything, that was just for everyone browsing the internet.
      Since the domestic internet plans are a similar price, I imagine the commercial internet plans will be similar to new zealand's too.

        It is much cheaper than that in aus I can tell you that right now as someone who's main job is setting up networks for companies.

    I think we do. I think my ADSL2 is particularly crappy (despite being <1km from the node or whatever) but the best server I had was apparently West US at 200ms. The Southeast Asia one was 250+.

    I played on the West US one and it was hard to be competitive. Empty a clip into a guy only to have him kill me - Killcam shows he has 100% health and from his point of view he walked in and plugged me in the face without me even firing a shot. I know I'm not great at online multiplayer but I'd like more than the illusion of being competitive by only consistently killing grunts.

    I will probably still pick up the game with or without the serves (I can still contribute ok in objective gametypes like Hardpoint, I guess) but I'd prefer Aussie servers sooner rather than later. I'll probably be done with Titanfall and onto Destiny by the time the local Xbox Live servers are up.

    You have met these people, they're the same people who ignore scientific research and proven data. They're the ones who aggressively say "GAY" when you ask what they're problem is (I'm not sure what this mean to them but I've had this occur a number of times) and have a huge problem with displaying and practicing (especially when others do it) empathy. Just those weird people whose whole perception of the world is based on contrarian, wilfull ignorance. I think it might be a lot.

    And yeah, they're the people who tell everyone there is no difference between 720p and 1080p or DVD and Blu Ray because they can't see what others can and we're talking PING!? SERVERS!? There's no way they aren't going furrow their brows in a vain attempt to understand that one.

    Last edited 18/02/14 11:43 am

      No sure why you are getting negged. What you said is the truth. There are plenty who says 30fps and 60fps are the same, no difference between 360p, 480p, 720p, 1080p, 1440p.

      Like our great Tony Abbott said, "There are no difference between ADSL2+ and Fibre". These are the people that are stopping the world from progressing.

        He’s getting ‘negged’ because he went on some ridiculous rant about how anybody who disagrees with his views on the seriousness of lag must be a homophobe who can’t tell the difference between a DVD and a Bluray. It’s stupid, so it’s getting negged.

        This may shock both of you, but I consider lag to be a bigger issue than the difference between 720p and 1080p, I think watching movies in 1080p is very important BUT I consider the difference between 30fps and 60fps fairly minor in most cases! It’s almost like I have a properly considered opinion!

        (As a taxpayer I also think the NBN is too expensive for the benefits it will offer. I’m sorry I’m stopping your planet from progressing, I’m certain you’ve got several billion dollars worth of productivity initiatives that can’t be implemented on a FTTN connection).

          He did not say those disagrees with him is homophobe, he just says most of them that disregard the issue and saying there are no difference usually just responds with the word 'GAY' whenever they were asked questions. I think he meant those people are mainly teenagers that don't care about anything.

          I consider all of them to be an issue ESPECIALLY lag. My priorities are always latency and screen resolution. I can't bear playing below my monitor native resolution due to the blurness. Not sure if it's because of my bad eyesight I actually hate blurry things (I wear specs). Second would be the FPS. Having finally bought a high end PC I can't tolerate not able to play on 60fps :P. It makes me mad that the money I spent are not giving me what I want. I'm looking at you my stupid GTX670.

          As a taxpayer as well, I believe the money the government spent on NBN will make us on par to compete with other powerhouse countries. Being 10-20 year behind technologically does not improve Australia's position in any way.

          The monthly price for NBN is not even that expensive. Look at Telstra's ADSL pricing, for the same price you can get NBN with more data and much much faster speed. If the government is supporting NBN, we can see decrease in the monthly prices for NBN which makes it even more affordable (it is already affordable as it is).

          Funny enough it is my clients that complains to me the most that there are no fibre for their business.

          I personally can't tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps, as long as it's constant. I also can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p and I normally just watch tv shows in 480p. I can however, tell the difference between slow internet and fast internet.
          This doesn't mean I'm going to say everyone should watch tv shows in 480p, or play games in 30fps. Of course they should play/watch in what they prefer.

          However if your government hadn't tried to control everything, then telstra would have already released fibre countrywide for a fraction of the price.
          The NBN is relevant, the speeds are already capped at 20/mbits, yet the size of everything is only increasing. Pretty soon it will be the equivalent of dialup, and even browsing my emails is painful with dialup.

            Think about how those of us who create video content for youtube feel trying to upload 1.5-3gb files 10 times a week on a 1mb connection, 100-120KBps is just painful lol -sobs- especially when uploading 6-10 videos a week

    Consistantly getting 60-100MS from Perth. Basically what i get on "Australian" servers when they are based over east. While i understand it is an issue for those over east, particularly in NZ and i do hope it does get resolved ASAP for you guys, finally living in WA has a very small advantage.

    Of course it matters, dieing when you've gotten around a corner for safety but died anyway gets annoying after a while.

    For once there is an advantage to living in Perth! >90 ping to the datacentre!

    Last edited 18/02/14 11:52 am

      WA Master race, we have all the natural resources and titanfall, we win!

      Last edited 18/02/14 12:44 pm

        Bloody master race. Create a VPN for me to access to play Titanfall!

          I don't think you get how the internet works.

    I think it does make a difference. Having played it since Friday night I have been taking note of how the game runs and what advantages/disadvantages the game give players of different ping levels.

    I admit that that game does run smoothly considering I am averaging around 150-230 ms ping and when against the AI enemy I have no problems. When I go up against other pilots I see it pretty dramatically from near instant deaths to dying around corners. Even in Titan combat I feel I have to pump twice the amount of ammo into to them compared to other footage i have seen on the internet with people with lower pings.

    There are to many unknowns here and I think as consumers who are paying money for the game we have the right to know what is happening in regards to local servers. EA has danced around the server question here is Australia and they need to show some transparency.

    I honestly think if the continue the sweep this under the rug and ignore us the game will become a graveyard by the time the Azure network comes online. The reputation of EA from the gamer's perspective will be of a money grubbing company who cares little about there community.

    mines fine during the day bout 140ms, but night is a joke, i sit at about 250ms, although its playable i still feel it against pilots.

    I'm use to pings around 110-120 back during CoD4 when connecting to Sydney based servers (I'm in Wellington, New Zealand). Of course over the years infrastructures improved in both NZ and Aus. However when it comes down to not having the choice for an Australian based server I'm stuck with either Singapore which is around 230ms ping which is down right unplayable for a fast pased fps (MMORPGs are ok at that ping) or 180ms ping to US West Coast which is currently the only option for NZ players. The problem with that is separation of the Aus/NZ player base because there's no happy-medium for both player bases. Although this game has great net code, I would like to at least get a ping below 150ms.

    Played on Singapore servers last night - ping averaged around 160ms or 2 bars. everyone on the server had the same connection so the lag was not an issue. There was one guy with full bars and if you came face to face you'd always lose - so I'd just made sure I always shot him from the side - or from a great distance.

    I figure if they keep the aussies/kiwis playing together and don't include the locals then we won't have too many issues with Titanfall not having access to local servers yet.

    Thanks mark! ive been pulling my hair out trying to reach out the the devs and Microsoft about this. If anyone can help, please goto the respawn forums http://www.respawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=5569

    Last edited 18/02/14 12:44 pm

    local servers would have been a day1 purchase for me... will be holding off till they are available, assuming interest in the game is still existent at that point.

      to add, beta averaged 183-220ms to south east easia data centre. on 19.4/0.87mbps adsl2+ connection from melbourne

    Also for those interested, this is the Lag in question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M30hiHk_-Gc

    Just short video but its wide spread. I get 15ms to my Isp on 100mbs cable and I cant get better then 130ms in Titanfall. Mark can you please keep pressuring these guys for an answer. I find it quite disgusting that we pay the prices that we do and only now are they being silient on the isssue conveniently in the lead up to launch. I feel bad for anyone unsuspecting that forks out 100 bucks just to be at a disadvantage from the rest of the world.

    Whats worse is that some people wont know considering that when shooting bots, its pretty smooth, get shot by another player tho and watch them warp around the screen. Those same people will be in awe of they missed out on once the servers do come here. You know Us players are on 17-30ms?

    Vince Zampella himself said "the game works fine in Australia"
    Well Vince, it doesn't.

    Last edited 18/02/14 12:38 pm

    For once living in western australia works out, i get 80ms on the southeast asian servers, which is about the same as what i'd usually get from an eastern state server, so it doesn't affect me much if we got an australian server, however it is necessary for people on the other side of the country, couldn't imagine playing the game with lag.

    however i'm having a blast with the game, and seeing as servers are fine for me, it'll probably be a day one purchase.

    I get around 160ms ping on just normal 8mbps ADSL. I get a few hiccups every now and then but it's very playable most of the time. I can deal with playing on the Singapore server for now but the sooner we get some in our neck of the woods, the better. Like Mark said, things can get alot different (worse) when more Xbox One launches in more countries in the Asia region.

    Another big concern is the prospect of a "Titanfall Premium", Day 1 DLC and Burn Cards becoming P2W.

    120 minimum for me, fail. wont be buying it

    Oh? What that Skippy? We can really help the problem by supplying games with client-run dedicated servers and LAN support?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now