Battlefield V Live Reveal: May 23

[Megalith]

EA has announced that the next Battlefield game will be unveiled on May 23. Daily Show host Trevor Noah will be headlining the event, which will be broadcast on YouTube and Battlefield.com. If the rumors turn out to be correct, the series will be revisiting World War II.

Watch the Battlefield V Reveal hosted by Trevor Noah on May 23 at 1 PM PDT/4 PM EDT/10 PM CEST on Battlefield’s YouTube channel or Battlefield.com. The livestream will also be featured on Twitch and on Mixer.com. Prepare for May 23. Battlefield will never be the same.

 

[sfsuphysics]

Battlefield 5... even though it's like the 15th version of Battlefield, and that's not even counting the DLC.

 

[macksomerville]

Trevor Noah? ugh and double ugh EA.

 

[DarkStryke]

Hope they put out a BR mode to light a fire under bunghole.

 

[Patton187]

An unfunny man promoting a very likely unfun game. Call me when red dead drops.

 

[NeoNemesis]

Genuinely surprised its not Battlefield IIIII

 

[Flogger23m]

Please don't be WWII. Don't know who that guy is and don't care. No idea why video games bring celebrities into it? Didn't think gamers were big celebrity fans.

An unfunny man promoting a very likely unfun game. Call me when red dead drops.

Another cookie cutter open world game that sucks in every way possible? Hey if they can make it somewhat decent in some way that would be great, but the GTA games are so underwhelming and underdeveloped it is astonishing. Not that this has anything to do with BF.

 

[USMCGrunt]

Battlefield as a series has really lost it, imo. The original 1942 and the Desert Combat mod were fantastic. After Battlefield 2, I feel like things started going downhill. Not like, flaming wreckage and huge crater bad, just nothing to really innovate or iterate on the gameplay. I bought Battlefield One, played a few hours and never looked at it again.

 

[TheOne&OnlyZeke]

Ahhh this is funny. When I lweft EA I got a sign thats about 3' by 8" that said 'BATTLEFIELD 5'
They got it printed before the name of Battlefield 1 was released
So....now I have a sign for the new game....kinda, the new one using V for victory I guess

 

[readeh]

Please don't be WWII. Don't know who that guy is and don't care. No idea why video games bring celebrities into it? Didn't think gamers were big celebrity fans.



Another cookie cutter open world game that sucks in every way possible? Hey if they can make it somewhat decent in some way that would be great, but the GTA games are so underwhelming and underdeveloped it is astonishing. Not that this has anything to do with BF.

doesn't sound like you like games at all. We haven't had an BF game setting in WW2 since 1942, and yes there was a crappy console game with 1 map called 1943, but not a full game.

How is GTA underdeveloped? It's probably one of the few games in history that takes so long time to develop.

 

[NeoNemesis]

doesn't sound like you like games at all. We haven't had an BF game setting in WW2 since 1942, and yes there was a crappy console game with 1 map called 1943, but not a full game.

How is GTA underdeveloped? It's probably one of the few games in history that takes so long time to develop.

To be fair, we may not have had a Battlefield game set in WWII since 1942, but in the intervening years, there have been an overabundance of games set in that era.

 

[STrooperTK421]

Oh boy...another WWII shooter, I'm so excited.

 

[readeh]

To be fair, we may not have had a Battlefield game set in WWII since 1942, but in the intervening years, there have been an overabundance of games set in that era.

Like what? CoD WW2? Yeah, no.. I'm talking about actual good WW2 multiplayer games like we had in the early 2000's.

 

[NeoNemesis]

Like what? CoD WW2? Yeah, no.. I'm talking about actual good WW2 multiplayer games like we had in the early 2000's.

You are pretty much forgetting the first 5 CoD games.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_video_games

 

[theplaidfad]

As a long time Battlefield player (since 1942, and I still play 4 sometimes), I'll have to hold off on this one until I see extensive game play reviews and footage. I did not like Battlefield 1 at all and wish I hadn't spent my money for it.

 

[readeh]

You are pretty much forgetting the first 5 CoD games.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_video_games

What? They were all early 2000's except for World At War which was 2008'ish and still didn't live up to cod 2, but still miles ahead of CoD WW2. Cod4 was modern and probably the most popular call of duty made.

There was more than 7000 games released in 2017 on steam and some of them will be WW2, but we still haven't had a WW2 multiplayer game from an AAA game developer in a looong time.

 

[NeoNemesis]

What? They were all early 2000's except for World At War which was 2008'ish and still didn't live up to cod 2, but still miles ahead of CoD WW2. Cod4 was modern and probably the most popular call of duty made.

There was more than 7000 games released in 2017 on steam and some of them will be WW2, but we still haven't had a WW2 multiplayer game from an AAA game developer in a looong time.

Enough of them have been made in the last 10 years for there not to be a need for a new one. You can only storm the beaches of Normandy so many times before it loses its magic.

 

[katanaD]

the daily show.. i miss watching it and the colbert report

 

[Seventyfive]

I feel like EA is more and more out of touch everyday. I can maybe understand why they're doing WW2 but Trevor Noah? AFAIK this guy has never been a serious gamer of any kind. He's rabidly anti guns which is a weird person to pair with a game that focuses on shooting people. Now I wonder if they're trying to Mass Effect Andromeda this BF series.

Why not someone like Terry Crews, Vin Diesel, Olivia Munn? Any of those people are more fitting, less polarizing, and above all, they're actual gamers.

 

[Flogger23m]

doesn't sound like you like games at all. We haven't had an BF game setting in WW2 since 1942, and yes there was a crappy console game with 1 map called 1943, but not a full game.

How is GTA underdeveloped? It's probably one of the few games in history that takes so long time to develop.

I have little interest in WWII, especially if everyone runs around with automatic weapons like in BF1. I have 77 hours in BF1. I'll likely play it some more but I seldom do because it is boring, in part because of the theme and in part because it is consolized.

GTA5 was very under developed. Essentially most missions involve you getting somewhere, pressing a single key to perform a basic action or two, and then fend of hordes of spawning enemies. With terrible combat mechanics. Take that high rise robbery mission as an example. You press a button or two to get there, press a button or two inside to hack something (I don't even recall) then press a button to rope down the building. Essentially a giant QTE interrupted with hordes of enemies to gun down. The shooting sucked, the other weapons sucked, weapon selection menu sucked, mission design and objectives sucked. Everything was poorly done. It was a passable game but very underwhelming. Sleeping Dogs was far superior. Much more interesting theme and story and the combat was very fun.

 

[DPI]

I feel like EA is more and more out of touch everyday. I can maybe understand why they're doing WW2 but Trevor Noah? AFAIK this guy has never been a serious gamer of any kind. He's rabidly anti guns which is a weird person to pair with a game that focuses on shooting people. Now I wonder if they're trying to Mass Effect Andromeda this BF series.

Why not someone like Terry Crews, Vin Diesel, Olivia Munn? Any of those people are more fitting, less polarizing, and above all, they're actual gamers.

Now sure why Trevor Noah is "polarizing", because he doesn't gush mindlessly about the supreme leader? Most people have never even heard of him.

I don't care who's been hired to babble on about the game, I'm much more interested in seeing gameplay.

 

[Viper87227]

A lot of people bitching about WW2 like its 2005 in here.

10-15 years ago, WW2 was everywhere. COD, Medal of Honor, BF1942, and Return to Castle Wolfenstein were all hugely popular and that put a lot of attention on WW2 in video games. In today's market, not so much. There's obviously COD:WW2, and as far as I'm concerned, that game is trash. It's not WW2, its Modern Warfare with a WW2 skin on top. It doesn't play like a WW2 game should play. Battlefield 1 did a significantly better job of striking a balance between a pace that is fun to play and a game that still feels (mostly) authentic to it's time period (obviously I know this is WW1, just using it as an example). What other WW2 games have come out recently? Wolfenstein, but again, you're talking a WW2 sci-fi mash up that isn't true-to-period. Sniper Elite is about the only recent WW2 game I can think of that actually feels like a WW2 game.

In truth, there's no era I'd rather see Battlefield revisit than WW2. I still remember many nights lost to BF1942, that was the game that really got me into competitive online play. If they can recapture some of that magic and make a competitive WW2 shooter that actually feels like WW2, I'm 100% in.

 

[{NG}Fidel]

Cannot wait for this. Im not going to do the standard bitching fair where I just complain that an independent company is not allowed to make a WW2 shooter.

 

[readeh]

A lot of people bitching about WW2 like its 2005 in here.

10-15 years ago, WW2 was everywhere. COD, Medal of Honor, BF1942, and Return to Castle Wolfenstein were all hugely popular and that put a lot of attention on WW2 in video games. In today's market, not so much. There's obviously COD:WW2, and as far as I'm concerned, that game is trash. It's not WW2, its Modern Warfare with a WW2 skin on top. It doesn't play like a WW2 game should play. Battlefield 1 did a significantly better job of striking a balance between a pace that is fun to play and a game that still feels (mostly) authentic to it's time period (obviously I know this is WW1, just using it as an example). What other WW2 games have come out recently? Wolfenstein, but again, you're talking a WW2 sci-fi mash up that isn't true-to-period. Sniper Elite is about the only recent WW2 game I can think of that actually feels like a WW2 game.

In truth, there's no era I'd rather see Battlefield revisit than WW2. I still remember many nights lost to BF1942, that was the game that really got me into competitive online play. If they can recapture some of that magic and make a competitive WW2 shooter that actually feels like WW2, I'm 100% in.

This.
I think most of the people complaining about it being in the era of WW2 never played 1942. That game was by far my favorite game of the Battlefield series, and BC2 a close second.

 

[Dekoth-E-]

They already revealed, released and I played BF:V. It was fairly decent, the radio option was great. The engine for modding was a little wonky at times. The plane physics were absolutely terrible though. Still though it was the last decent installment of the franchise before EA decided to shit on the modding community that made additional BF games happen in the first place by keeping 1942 alive and selling.

 

[Gatecrasher3000]

I need BFV to come out simply because finding a BF1 server, for PC, with my ping below 150 is next to impossible. I like BF1 more then any other BF, but you simply can't play it right now due to lack of servers on PC. Today, when looking at the 'server browser' in BF1 and BF4, you can find about 3x more available servers in BF4 over BF1, its sad. I live on the East cost of North America, but can only ever find populated BF1 servers in Europe or Asia, last night I had to play on a Japanese server, and I cried a little.
Why do all these damn kids have to be playing Fortnite and not Battlefield???? /rant *shakes fist*

 

[__hollywood|meow]

i very much hope this game is worth buying, but considering wat happened to the actual BF5, i cant help but be mildly concerned. i would absolutely love a modern & worthwhile WWII campaign (fuck cawadoody), & the potential MP setpieces in frostbite have me...well, anticipatory.

Now sure why Trevor Noah is "polarizing"

im no republican, but its probably because hes a leftist echo-chamber mouthpiece for a comedy show that constantly bashes gun owners & the military. hooah.

i, among others, find his selection for this event extremely puzzling. the only logical conclusion is that they are attempting to draw a casual & potentially console-babby demographic from his wide televised audience, which doesnt bode well for the direction of the series. hopefully im mistaken

 

[Viper87227]

They already revealed, released and I played BF:V. It was fairly decent, the radio option was great. The engine for modding was a little wonky at times. The plane physics were absolutely terrible though. Still though it was the last decent installment of the franchise before EA decided to shit on the modding community that made additional BF games happen in the first place by keeping 1942 alive and selling.

I think your anger towards EA in regards to modding is misplaced. The industry has changed in a big way over the years. In the glory days of BF1942, Half Life, Quake, Unreal, etc. being able to create total conversions was a big deal, and we saw some really excellent mods come to be. That doesn't happen anymore, but it's not the games that are to blame. Modding these days is focused on small scale add-ons created by single individuals. They focus on assets meant to integrate into the original game. In today's market, if a large group of people wanted to come together and make something new, they can still do that, but now they have the tools to profit from it. There are major engines that can be utilized by way of profit sharing instead of huge up-front licensing costs, and with Steam you have a platform that literally anyone can release content on. There is no more a desire to create massive total conversion mods for free when the same tools can be used to create a retail product. Indie games didn't exist 10-15 years ago, and thus modding flourished. Those days are gone, so why should EA invest resources into modding when they aren't likely to be utilized anyway? Better to lock your game up tight in hopes of keeping cheaters at bay.

 

[nEo717]

Like what? CoD WW2? Yeah, no.. I'm talking about actual good WW2 multiplayer games like we had in the early 2000's.

I'll 2nd that... sure we have a number of WWII set games out there, however, we are in need of a BF WWII with dedicated servers, mods, custom maps (plus a single player mode).

 

[Dekoth-E-]

I think your anger towards EA in regards to modding is misplaced. The industry has changed in a big way over the years. In the glory days of BF1942, Half Life, Quake, Unreal, etc. being able to create total conversions was a big deal, and we saw some really excellent mods come to be. That doesn't happen anymore, but it's not the games that are to blame. Modding these days is focused on small scale add-ons created by single individuals. They focus on assets meant to integrate into the original game. In today's market, if a large group of people wanted to come together and make something new, they can still do that, but now they have the tools to profit from it. There are major engines that can be utilized by way of profit sharing instead of huge up-front licensing costs, and with Steam you have a platform that literally anyone can release content on. There is no more a desire to create massive total conversion mods for free when the same tools can be used to create a retail product. Indie games didn't exist 10-15 years ago, and thus modding flourished. Those days are gone, so why should EA invest resources into modding when they aren't likely to be utilized anyway? Better to lock your game up tight in hopes of keeping cheaters at bay.

Misplaced? Hardly. EA is single handedly responsible for killing total conversion mods not due to lack of people wanting to do so, but because they outright blocked it starting with the frostbite engine claiming it was to advanced for people to work on. Which is absolute condescending bullshit. In short, Fuck EA and any of their games.

 

[nEo717]

I'd love to see a good BF version of the North Korea War with few maps from Kosovo and Lebanese War... on servers like the old days (game servers etc...), truly dedicated and ran by us.


I'm all burned out on far-reaching future space boots boost games and small maps with team kills that have weapons like pistols that shoot as far as sniper guns - though I may be the minority I suppose as it seems almost every game is running (not walking) from this sorts of design.

 

[zetachi]

BF 2142

 

[Darunion]

Can we get rid of healing yet? I think it is about time for location specific damage to the player too. I do hope it is fun to play. the last BF was decent but I cant place my finger on it but somethign felt missing and I don't know what it is. I played BF4 to death but couldnt get that into this one.

 

[defaultluser]

I need BFV to come out simply because finding a BF1 server, for PC, with my ping below 150 is next to impossible. I like BF1 more then any other BF, but you simply can't play it right now due to lack of servers on PC. Today, when looking at the 'server browser' in BF1 and BF4, you can find about 3x more available servers in BF4 over BF1, its sad. I live on the East cost of North America, but can only ever find populated BF1 servers in Europe or Asia, last night I had to play on a Japanese server, and I cried a little.
Why do all these damn kids have to be playing Fortnite and not Battlefield???? /rant *shakes fist*

Because Battlefield 1 was a shit game, and cost way too much for the lack of depth.

The loyal players go back to BF4, which is palatable, if boring. Everyone else goes on to the new hotness, which is more fun to play.

EA hasn't hit one out of the park since Bad Company 2. Their SALES numbers have gone up with each iteration (marketing machine in action), but the game quality and longevity has gone down with each release.

I will try this in the open beta, but I expect to be bored once again.

 

[firas]

Because Battlefield 1 was a shit game, and cost way too much for the lack of depth.

The loyal players go back to BF4, which is palatable, if boring. Everyone else goes on to the new hotness, which is more fun to play.

EA hasn't hit one out of the park since Bad Company 2. Their SALES numbers have gone up with each iteration (marketing machine in action), but the game quality and longevity has gone down with each release.

I will try this in the open beta, but I expect to be bored once again.

maybe this is what they wan't, players abandoning the last game quick and easy to buy the new game.
maybe BC2 for them is a mistake, I still call myself a BF player because I still play BC2 though I didn't buy BF4 and BF1, if BC2 wasn't fun and didn't have populated servers right now, I would've bought BF1.

 

[Darunion]

maybe this is what they wan't, players abandoning the last game quick and easy to buy the new game.
maybe BC2 for them is a mistake, I still call myself a BF player because I still play BC2 though I didn't buy BF4 and BF1, if BC2 wasn't fun and didn't have populated servers right now, I would've bought BF1.

Yup, none of these companies want you to play forever, they want you to play long enough to buy dlc and then buy the next game.

 

[Flogger23m]

Because Battlefield 1 was a shit game, and cost way too much for the lack of depth.

The loyal players go back to BF4, which is palatable, if boring. Everyone else goes on to the new hotness, which is more fun to play.

EA hasn't hit one out of the park since Bad Company 2. Their SALES numbers have gone up with each iteration (marketing machine in action), but the game quality and longevity has gone down with each release.

I will try this in the open beta, but I expect to be bored once again.

BF1 was essentially BC2. Smaller maps, more run and gun, more wonky shooting mechanics that didn't make sense, few vehicles per map. Really, you got what you asked for, a watered down consolized experience like BC2. And yet when you get what you ask for you're still upset. BF3/4 was the most PC focused AAA multiplayer game in years and may be the last of its kind if people keep asking for another BC2/BF1.

BF1 was boring both due to the theme and gameplay changes. There is a reason why the player base dropped off so much quicker compared to BF3/4. WWII will be a bit better but you run into the same problems as WWI.

Though I personally think it would've been better if they had jumped to the 70-80s for this game, then for the next went to WWII. After that, another modern game, after than another WWII (or some older theme), ect. Keep alternating it from game to game to cater to the different audiences. The slow build up through time is a nice concept but I think alternating the timelines by decades each release would be better.

 

[defaultluser]

BF1 was essentially BC2. Smaller maps, more run and gun, more wonky shooting mechanics that didn't make sense, few vehicles per map. Really, you got what you asked for, a watered down consolized experience like BC2. And yet when you get what you ask for you're still upset. BF3/4 was the most PC focused AAA multiplayer game in years and may be the last of its kind if people keep asking for

I'm sorry, did you and I play the same beta? that desert map is as big as any map from battlefield 4, and has exactly as many vehicles.

 

[Flogger23m]

I'm sorry, did you and I play the same beta? that desert map is as big as any map from battlefield 4, and has exactly as many vehicles.

I didn't just play the beta, I actually own BF1 + the Premium pass. Same with BC2, although I bought the Vietnam DLC too late to really enjoy it. I've played plenty of BC2, BF3/4 and BF1 to form an opinion on them.

I did pass on Hardline after trying the beta. In a lot of ways I think I liked that more than BF1 ironically.

 

[defaultluser]

I didn't just play the beta, I actually own BF1 + the Premium pass. Same with BC2, although I bought the Vietnam DLC too late to really enjoy it. I've played plenty of BC2, BF3/4 and BF1 to form an opinion on them.

I did pass on Hardline after trying the beta. In a lot of ways I think I liked that more than BF1 ironically.

I'm just saying, for someone who thinks they're qualified to critique map design, you're coming up awful short.

The distinctive aspect of normal Battlefield maps have always been the open-design. There are very few choke-points on any map, so battles can happen anywhere you want, and cover is sparse. There have always been a few command posts and trenches distributed thinly to give you places to hole-up and capture flags, but they're mostly optional at any given moment in the battle. And flag capture could be fairly casual while still winning a map; your game strategy at any given moment could be pretty fluid.

BC2 changed this by not only making the maps smaller, but making them out of a small number of deadly choke points. Unless you controlled each choke point, the enemy would prevent you from advancing, or could shoot you from behind easily, costing you serious losses. Artillery and anti-tank plays more of a role than it has in any previous battlefield game, because the buildings can be destroyed, thus creating more choke points as the round progresses.

You want to tell me how any of these qualities have made their way into Battlefield 1, game that plays exactly like Battlefield 4, except with a few people on horseback? The maps are huge and loosely-populated with obstacles just like previous mainline Battlefield games.