nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Battlefield V

Spear

And so the hype begins:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/817ox7/leaked_logo_for_battlefield_2018/

initially referred to as Battlefield 2, it's renamed to Battlefield V. Which is still odd, all other version used a number, rather than a roman numeral.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Child Item

Comments

Varik

Don't know what they didn't go with 2, they had battlefront 1 & 2 which even if they didn't make the originals is still the same.

Spear

Didn't want to cause confusion with the actual BF2. Not entirely unwarranted, if an interested customer went and googled BF2, only to find 13 year old screenshots, that could be off putting.

Varik

Spear wrote: »

Didn't want to cause confusion with the actual BF2. Not entirely unwarranted, if an interested customer went and googled BF2, only to find 13 year old screenshots, that could be off putting.

Didn't bother them for Star wars.

Evade

Spear wrote: »

And so the hype begins:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/817ox7/leaked_logo_for_battlefield_2018/

initially referred to as Battlefield 2, it's renamed to Battlefield V. Which is still odd, all other version used a number, rather than a roman numeral.

Maybe it's a v, not a 5.

Dcully

Whatever the setting i hope they lose the simplistic shooting gameplay of BF1 and go back to something like BF3 ,BF4 or better still BC2.
More than anything i hope the drop this silly sweet spot mechanic at play with BF1 sniping, making it a one shot kill anywhere in the body, utterly stupid and clearly there to please the console crowd.
Bring back headshot being the only means of a 1 shot kill, it was so satisfying in all the previous games in the series.
It also required real skill the be an effective sniper unlike in BF1 where every noob and his dog is running around with them.

ThumbTaxed

Don't care anymore; Battlefield is ruined. Vehicles are only a small part of the game, conquest scoring is terrible, rush with 24 players and few vehicles is boring, community are a gang of noobs and the speed of the game is way too fast.

So disappointing.

Noxin

lol, fake picture is fake.

Shadowplay FPS counter does not have a blurry border around it.
Also calling it a Dev build? Pretty sure nothing is called a Dev build. They start out being called a Pre-Alpha build.

Anyway, not saying it's not WW2. Have no clue personally and neither do the gamechangers I know. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Potential-Monke

Dcully wrote: »

Whatever the setting i hope they lose the simplistic shooting gameplay of BF1 and go back to something like BF3 ,BF4 or better still BC2.
More than anything i hope the drop this silly sweet spot mechanic at play with BF1 sniping, making it a one shot kill anywhere in the body, utterly stupid and clearly there to please the console crowd.
Bring back headshot being the only means of a 1 shot kill, it was so satisfying in all the previous games in the series.
It also required real skill the be an effective sniper unlike in BF1 where every noob and his dog is running around with them.

I was more of a CoD fan, but I got a good bit of time out of BF3 & 4, and the recent BF1 wiped the floor with CoD, so i'm leaning towards the BF games, but i'm the opposite of you. There should be certain parts on the body that give a 1 shot kill, ie: a sniper bullet to the heart would do it. Similarly, a bullet to the gut would kill, as would one to the lungs if done right. I think they have it right in BF1. I didn't enjoy how slow some of the older ones were, so I was very happy with BF1. Just make the drop/sway harder to control, like real life. That'll get rid of the noobs. Maybe also include a small hitbox on the body, around the vital organs, and they would be a 1 shot kill also.

The reason 3 and 4 had headshot only kills was probably due to armor. No such thing (really) in WW1/2 times, so it makes sense body shots can kill, if realism is what Dice still want to go for.

I think BF1 had the right mixture, not too slow, not fast, realistic, weighty, and fun.

dreamers75

Bf4 is the pinnacle of the series imo.

Just took a while to get there it has the perfect mix but lacks the player base.

pretty sure I have tickets to the BFV hype train and if its Vietnam I shall **** myself but I doubt it.

I think it will be modern for 2 years then BFV or maybe Bf2, People who played Bf42/v/2 are not the target base anymore.

gimli2112

dreamers75 wrote: »

Bf4 is the pinnacle of the series imo.

Just took a while to get there it has the perfect mix but lacks the player base.

pretty sure I have tickets to the BFV hype train and if its Vietnam I shall **** myself but I doubt it.

I think it will be modern for 2 years then BFV or maybe Bf2, People who played Bf42/v/2 are not the target base anymore.

Saw a friend playing Bf4 last night, loaded it up just to fly around in a chopper with him. Always have problems making squads on the PS4, it's terribly frustrating. Once the gaming began it was freaking funtastic.

Lord Nikon

I honestly think we need a BF2142 remake, with the Titan. Sick of pre-modern shooters with all skins and no attachments, I know that's what it was like, but it's boring.

Akrasia

Lord Nikon wrote: »

I honestly think we need a BF2142 remake, with the Titan. Sick of pre-modern shooters with all skins and no attachments, I know that's what it was like, but it's boring.

Eh, Titanfall?

Shlippery

Akrasia wrote: »

Eh, Titanfall?

Ah but the magic of assaulting the titan.. and those launch pod things.

Great memories!

Noxin

Titanfall is good but it's more COD-like. Smaller maps in general.
I'd love to see it on large scale maps similar to BF4. Never played BF2142 but man do I wish I had.

TerrorFirmer

I assume it'd be called BF V rather than BF2 simply to indicate the time period in which it's set - another modern take, whereas if it was simply Battlefield 2 it would imply WW2.

I'd love a WW2 one. Would be happy with a follow up to BF4 though, that's still probably the best of them outside the original Battlefield 2 (for its time).

I also agree with the guy above that the feel of BF1 was excellent. I didn't put as many hours into it as BF4 but I really thought it was fantastic. Didn't play the last few DLC as I've moved onto other games but I could never argue I didn't get my money's worth about 10 times over.

In comparison bought COD: WW2 as well and after about 10 hours I was sick of it.

Lord Nikon

Why are people mentioning Titanfall?

Spear

Lord Nikon wrote: »

Why are people mentioning Titanfall?

Because people who weren't around for 2142 don't know what a Titan is.

And there's probably a few confused Warhammer 40k players too.

Akrasia

Spear wrote: »

Because people who weren't around for 2142 don't know what a Titan is.

And there's probably a few confused Warhammer 40k players too.

I have BF2142 and its well down the ranks of battlefield titles for me. Just above Hard-line tbh.

Titanfall isn't exactly the same but it is an EA futuristic war game based on the frostbite engine

TerrorFirmer

Yeah I was really looking forward to 2142 at the time but I didn't like it so much. It didn't sell nearly as well as other main BF games though obviously it still would've been profitable. Wouldn't be totally against a new futuristic BF though - Titanfall on a much bigger scale wouldn't be the worst.

Spear

Seems the reveal is coming on May 23rd:

https://www.ea.com/neverbethesame

Spear

Someone on Reddit suggested something interesting. The page has a link to a BF specific image of a white horse. And there was a unit in the Vietnam war called the White Horse, and a book about Vietnam was named "We've Never Been the Same: A war Story". So the V may be for Vietnam, not a 5.

Edit: I corrected the book/show title. It does cover a unit that had a Medal of Honor recipient.

But the horse aspect seems very vague and a tenuous link to Vietnam. Even the Korean War had a Battle of White Horse. So take this with a major grain of salt. The horse is definitely linked, but it's not clear how.

TerrorFirmer

Another indication that it's Vietnam. Content warning for upcoming promo: "ESRB: MATURE (17+) with Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Use of Drugs".

Hardly WW2 with the hard drugs angle.

Evade

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Another indication that it's Vietnam. Content warning for upcoming promo: "ESRB: MATURE (17+) with Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Use of Drugs".

Hardly WW2 with the hard drugs angle.

Wouldn't morphine syrretes count as drugs?

TerrorFirmer

Evade wrote: »

Wouldn't morphine syrretes count as drugs?

I would doubt to a point the promo had to carry an age-related disclaimer for simple medical use of drugs, it's usually recreational.

Evade

Where did you see the one that mentions drug use? The one on the bottom of webpage only has blood, strong language, and violence.

TerrorFirmer

141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »

Wouldnt "multiple theaters of war" rule that out?

Absolutely. Sorry, I didn't know that they'd already confirmed that.

Evade

I don't think China, Burmah, India, or Russia have been covered by WWII Battlefield before.

Varik

Russia would have already been done, might have been 1 of the 1942 expansions but it was done.

Don't understand the people who keep saying you've done a historic BF game now got back to modern, there's more modern at this stage than anything else and most of them were right after each other.

Would be disappointed if it wasn't WW2 but won't buy it if it's modern.

Evade

Yeah, I ctrl+f'd Russia instead of Soviet on the wiki pages.

TerrorFirmer

Korean War would be a good compromise and more technologically advanced than WW2 but 'multiple theaters' would be a stretch for either it or Vietnam unless you were being very liberal with the phrase.

Does sound like it really has to be WW2....

I'll pretty much buy it regardless but I'd hope it's anything but modern.

Child Item