Star Wars Battlefront Server Browser Petition

[AiRJacobs]

There is a petition that was started by Perri Mitchell on Change.org to add a server browser to Star Wars Battlefront. To complete the petition, the goal needed to reach is 2,500 signatures. So far 2,160 people have signed the petition; only 340 more signatures are needed. As you can see this is very close to success. Please help save Star Wars Battlefront by going here: https://www.change.org/p/electronic-arts-dice-ea-please-add-a-server-browser-for-battlefront

[Unit 33]

When the goal is reached, it simply increases to another integer. So once there's 2500, it'll say '500 needed to reach 3000' or something.

I have signed it. Even if there's another few thousand signatures, it's not a sure thing that DICE will add a server browser.

[Syyy]

Signed even though I don't believe in petitions, I'm also gonna play devil's avocate.

The way they plan to organize the multiplayer is way better in term of selecting which players you play against. Just like competitive CSGO the game will find you worthy opponents, or atleast people whom skill is similar to yours. If we had to choose which servers to play on, it would be a hassle, we'd have completely new players and godlike players you'd swear they come from another dimension where time is just a number.

Best way to compare the two options are CSS and CSGO.

What we need is both options, so we can play with friends, so we can organize matches between teams, we can't even think of competitive play if there's no way to choose who we play against. I'd rather have Battlelog than no server browser at all.

[Ultimo]

Signed even though I don't believe in petitions, I'm also gonna play devil's avocate.

The way they plan to organize the multiplayer is way better in term of selecting which players you play against. Just like competitive CSGO the game will find you worthy opponents, or atleast people whom skill is similar to yours. If we had to choose which servers to play on, it would be a hassle, we'd have completely new players and godlike players you'd swear they come from another dimension where time is just a number.

Best way to compare the two options are CSS and CSGO.

What we need is both options, so we can play with friends, so we can organize matches between teams, we can't even think of competitive play if there's no way to choose who we play against. I'd rather have Battlelog than no server browser at all.

I agree.

Curious question, have any of you seen the Rescue mode in Battlefield Hardline? It's just like the hostage missions from Counter Strike. 5v5, multiple hostages that need to be brought out of the Bad Guys base and carried back to the Good Guys base.
This gamemode is already pushing Hardline onto some competitive platforms, so at least we know DICE is capable of making a good competitive game.

[AiRJacobs]

Signed even though I don't believe in petitions, I'm also gonna play devil's avocate.

The way they plan to organize the multiplayer is way better in term of selecting which players you play against. Just like competitive CSGO the game will find you worthy opponents, or atleast people whom skill is similar to yours. If we had to choose which servers to play on, it would be a hassle, we'd have completely new players and godlike players you'd swear they come from another dimension where time is just a number.

Best way to compare the two options are CSS and CSGO.

What we need is both options, so we can play with friends, so we can organize matches between teams, we can't even think of competitive play if there's no way to choose who we play against. I'd rather have Battlelog than no server browser at all.

Your probably right, but it's still worth a shot. I actually don't mind Battlelog; I find it more convenient than using the game program. Hey, sometimes I just feel like changing my loadout and opening Battlepacks. I don't want to launch the whole game to just do that.