Battlefield V

Homelander

I started playing it again online to take a break from Siege and Apex which I have been over-playing, it's actually great to play something on such a big scale again. The pacific maps are pretty good.

Wasn't a huge fan of most of the base maps, nothing wrong with them but not as memorable or iconic as other maps in previous entries. Find it strange they didn't go for the classics like D-Day, Stalingrad, Normandy, Market Garden, Battle of the Bulge, Anzio, etc.

Breakthrough on D-Day would be amazing, Iwo-Jima on breakthrough is close and pretty good, but I'd much prefer an Omaha version.

Killinator

Homelander wrote: »

I started playing it again online to take a break from Siege and Apex which I have been over-playing, it's actually great to play something on such a big scale again. The pacific maps are pretty good.

Wasn't a huge fan of most of the base maps, nothing wrong with them but not as memorable or iconic as other maps in previous entries. Find it strange they didn't go for the classics like D-Day, Stalingrad, Normandy, Market Garden, Battle of the Bulge, Anzio, etc.

Breakthrough on D-Day would be amazing, Iwo-Jima on breakthrough is close and pretty good, but I'd much prefer an Omaha version.

It seemed from the very start they were going with the 'unknown' war and didn't want to go with the locations synonymous with every other ww2 game.
It would be nice to get Normandy, Stalingrad, the Bulge, etc... at this stage.

Spear

6.2 is out tomorrow. It finally brings the long promised tank customisation, and it reverts/reduces a lot of the widely hated TTK changes. They didn't release patch notes yet though.

jonski

I am encountering cheats on a daily basis these days, blatant and boasting about it .

gimli2112

jonski wrote: »

I am encountering cheats on a daily basis these days, blatant and boasting about it .

Never understand why there can't be bans for this. Of course you risk been banned incorrectly but for blatant cheating there should be consequences. Was looking at a youtuber recently who was talking about fellow youtubers using modded controllers, cronos max and other hacks. He didn't see anything wrong with it, it helps them with their job/earns them more money and is a victimless crime.

Dcully

Modded controllers are nothing compared aimbots or wallhacks on PC.
On console im sure they are an advantage though.

gimli2112

Agreed they can give an advantage on something like a semi auto rifle or pistol but it's not totally game breaking like some other stuff. I saw a video about a year ago of a guy spinning in circles in that French map (BFV) on top of a church and killing players all over the map. People do this stuff for hours on end just to grief.

Spear

6.2 is now delayed till Thursday due to some last minute issue.

fergus1001

Spear wrote: »

6.2 is now delayed till Thursday due to some last minute issue.

come on i want my MG34 back to its old genocidal self

Homelander

So I have been playing a ton of this lately....it's actually incredibly good, especially since I started playing Breakthrough. That honestly should be the standard mode instead of conquest, it's much more intense and you get that real crazy sense of a full tilt battle taking place.

My impressions of the game now are much more positive than they were when it was released in late 2018 or whenever it was.

Not sure which is the better game, BF1 or BF5. I feel like with BF1 they were way more committed to a vision of a WW1 game.....the lead-up to and lunch of BF5 was very rocky, they hadn't a clue what sort of game they wanted to make.

I think most people just wanted a phenomenal sequel to Battlefield 1942 with modern graphics, but a huge array of skins (some slightly wacky), putting female soldiers in the game, over-modernising some weapons, etc kinda takes away the WW2 battlefield experience of it a little, makes it feel a little more (too) modern and Call of Duty-ish.

I did play single player as well, apart from the French Senegalese story which was pretty OK, the war stories are fairly bad. Never played the BF1 war stories but plan giving them a go as well.

So yeah anyway, I think BF5 is actually a really good game, just not necessarily a great WW2 game. I'm a bit disappointed because lord knows when, or even if, we'll ever get another Battlefield set in that era.

Saw this picture on Reddit of BFV yesterday, my first thoughts were a) how BFV looks nothing like that usually and b) how much I wish it had a more uniform appearance for the factions and a real proper WW2 atmosphere like older games do.

Smiles35

Homelander wrote: »

Breakthrough on D-Day would be amazing, Iwo-Jima on breakthrough is close and pretty good, but I'd much prefer an Omaha version.

Omaha was so memorable in 1942. Satifiing it was too. Simply by the amount of kills you could rack up. The develpers seem to like Wake island. Seems like most people felt the same as me that it was boring linier map. I used to solo it in a jeep just to get it over with quicker.

I only just got Battlefield V a few days ago. Enjoying it immensely. Made my first tank kill with a lunge-mine yesterday. What a fun little gadget. :pac:

Banana Republic.

Smiles35 wrote: »

Omaha was so memorable in 1942. Satifiing it was too. Simply by the amount of kills you could rack up. The develpers seem to like Wake island. Seems like most people felt the same as me that it was boring linier map. I used to solo it in a jeep just to get it over with quicker.

I only just got Battlefield V a few days ago. Enjoying it immensely. Made my first tank kill with a lunge-mine yesterday. What a fun little gadget. :pac:

Such a fun gadget and plenty of mishaps getting used to it Bazooka is fun too as you can blast someone with the power in both ends of it. You will love BFV, we loved BF1 & thought how can they top that, well they did. Wake Island is alot of getting to the different islands, not my favorite. The Jungle map is my fav at the moment, a snipers paradise. For the price of the game the value is ridiculously good.

Gamer Bhoy 89

BFV is on sale on PS4, but it says "Year 2 Edition".

The base game is still full price.

Is there a reason for that?

fergus1001

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote:

Is there a reason for that?

Reason: EA

Gamer Bhoy 89

fergus1001 wrote: »

Reason: EA

Good one lol No seriously, am I missing on anything if I buy the Year 2 Edition?

Grumpypants

The year 2 edition includes bucket loads of stuff released in the first year.

They have a tides of war thing to unlock weapons. So you get 17 of those guns.

All the maps are free so the rest of the year 2 stuff is just the outfits, weapons skins and vehicle skins.

Gamer Bhoy 89

Grumpypants wrote: »

The year 2 edition includes bucket loads of stuff released in the first year.

They have a tides of war thing to unlock weapons. So you get 17 of those guns.

All the maps are free so the rest of the year 2 stuff is just the outfits, weapons skins and vehicle skins.

Literally just came back here from checking. That's pretty neat in fairness. Still weird that it includes the base game and is on sale for €25 yet the base game on its own is full price. I'd have thought it'd be at least €20, but like your man said above, because "EA".

Thanks!! Downloading it now

fergus1001

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote:

Thanks!! Downloading it now

cant wait to destroy your Hope's and dreams on the battlefield :pac:

Gamer Bhoy 89

fergus1001 wrote: »

cant wait to destroy your Hope's and dreams on the battlefield :pac:

is that a quote off something? xD

Spear

After a few years of mismanagement, Dice have officially abandoned BFV.

Something to bear in mind when they start pushing BF6, if Dice still exist at that point.

Calhoun

Spear wrote: »

After a few years of mismanagement, Dice have officially abandoned BFV.

Something to bear in mind when they start pushing BF6, if Dice still exist at that point.

What will they tell their daughters though?

Royale with Cheese

Absolute shítshow of a game, hard to imagine it two years ago going this badly.

Varik

There was hope for it after battlefront 2 getting so much support, but that might have been Disney's influence since it was a licensed game and they're not fully in control. They can choose to kill off their own stuff.

Might be Corona related, continued development being more difficult and not worth the return.

Smiles35

Reports say they are going to put some time into anti-cheating. I'm not one to complain about that, however I definatly did notice myself getting hit when I was clearly in cover. Shore that up and they will have a nice legacy title they can sell for the next 10 years.

Banana Republic.

Smiles35 wrote: »

Reports say they are going to put some time into anti-cheating. I'm not one to complain about that, however I definatly did notice myself getting hit when I was clearly in cover. Shore that up and they will have a nice legacy title they can sell for the next 10 years.

Absolutely, I’m sick of getting killed by “Curvy Bullets” No idea why you would play a game and think you’re great by cheating, sad really. It’s a great game I love it, I think even the cracking up after getting a dodgy shot is therapeutic in some way but it’s definitely taking allot of joy from the game.

Shlippery

I love the Battlefield series, but god damn this game left a sour taste. It had some real highlights with the Pacific and definitely got a lot of hours out of it....but it seems every patch was always one step forward, six million steps backwards. They lost a lot of senior developers and producers in the past few months. Definitely issues at DICE.

90% of the game was outrage or some controversy or a removal of functionality from the past. I'd hoped they'd be able to turn it around a la Battlefront 2 but instead seems like they've opted to throw in the towel. Feels like the base code was a house of cards.

They had a ribbon system in place at one point but they disabled it because they found a GAME BREAKING bug if they enabled it...

Spear

There clearly was a lot more content planned, something they made obvious from past previews and videos. The enthusiasm that the Pacific release showed that it was possible to revive the game and get it back on track. And the release of the Soviets and the Eastern Front was a major opportunity to do so again. I don't whether this came from Dice wanting to focus on BF6, or EA just being greedy bean counting scumbags, but either way it's the worst possible choice to have made.

Telling us they're spending time on the anti-cheat for an abandoned game is just adding insult to injury.

BlitzKrieg

not a massive surprise, the issue with the "Live Service" model is you got to stick with it for quite sometime and be willing to completely change direction.

EA were never going to do that unless it was a huge success right out the box, what people tend to forget is that fortnite was an add on to another game and the developers shifted focus when they saw the popularity.

That was something EA never got with either Battlefield or Anthem, they wanted to have successful games from the start and just add on them top of them more and more of the same.

Most live service games radically change over their life and require a lot of work and freedom to take things in new ways.

DICE never got any of that and running of an established franchise made it hard to do any of that.

Varik

Tired of the Live service games, they become homework and you've only so much you can play at once.

Previously BF games were at least complete at launch (buggy as hell but there was a full game there), and then DICE/EA got 15 from a decent amount of people for a nice drop of content. So there was an incentive to cater to that group, but as said unless it's hugely popular most micro transaction fuelled games can't make it.

Spear wrote: »

There clearly was a lot more content planned, something they made obvious from past previews and videos. The enthusiasm that the Pacific release showed that it was possible to revive the game and get it back on track. And the release of the Soviets and the Eastern Front was a major opportunity to do so again. I don't whether this came from Dice wanting to focus on BF6, or EA just being greedy bean counting scumbags, but either way it's the worst possible choice to have made.

Telling us they're spending time on the anti-cheat for an abandoned game is just adding insult to injury.

Don't know if you can call it greedy for abandoning a under performing game.

My biggest issue is that this may be it for WW2 BF, we got maybe half of what it could have been.

We had some unironically complaining about another historical game after BF1 and at the same time wanting modern after modern game.