Battlefield V Review | PS4, Xbox One, PC

A world in complete despair as the allies
and axis powers rage war. While most know the grander picture of things,
Battlefield V aims to act as a deep dive into the backbone of those operations, the soldiers,
the people. It’s a continuation of the foundation started
by Battlefield One in 2016 moving on the second global war. The war stories format that was established
in Battlefield 1 returns once again for a dive into the lesser known conflicts of World
War 2. Where the Call of Duty series focused on historic
battles such as D Day and the Battle of the Bulge, Battlefield takes a different approach
without abandoning the horrors of the war. Instead it tries pay a tribute to the people
behind the war, those that had to face it head on. In an almost ironic fashion, it focuses on
the individuals and not so much on the battlefield. It can be bit jarring and counter intuitive
to what has made the series stand out so far. The prologue for example, gives you a taste
of the nature of the war. Operating tanks, flying in planes, sniping
from afar or just run and gunning. All of this was part of the war. The approach the campaign takes is having
you play as a soldier that while does feel like an integral part of the mission, doesn’t
so much feel like their part of a team or the battlefield. Take for example the Norway vignette that
drops you in a German occupied Norway. You play as a young woman that stealthy taking
out soldiers at a far cry like linear outpost. It almost feels taboo to the gameplay Battlefield
is known for. Thankfully it does open up later in the mission,
letting you choose your own approach to the objective. However, this mission that at times has you
skiing across the snowy tundra avoiding soldiers, was the lowest point of the campaign for me. The under no flag missions takes place in
1942 northern Africa where you play as a soldier in the special boat service. Ironically there isn’t a ton of boat action
in this mission but you do get the chance to mess around with other vehicles. It feels like a much more open version of
the first mission I mentioned still having those elements of stealth and far cry like
outpost gameplay but much less linear. The final mission was my personal favorite
and that follows Operation Dragoon in France. While this mission had you mostly on foot,
it found a great mix of storytelling and true battlefield gameplay. Despite being on foot, you feel like you’re
part of an actual squad on a large scale scenic view of the battlefield. You’re still given that individualistic
perspective of the war but don’t feel like you’re separated from it but rather a part
of it. It’s all accompanied by a narrative vignette
that deals with the tragic realism of the war, dealing with shades of racism and anguish. In the future, a free DLC campaign will be
added called The Last Tiger that’s from the perspective of Germany. There’s also a co-op campaign coming next
Spring that will let squads of three take on missions. While that sounds exciting, it’s not here
at launch and leaves the rest of the campaign clocking in at about 6 hours with only really
60% of that time having my attention. As far as replay value goes, there’s collectibles
scattered throughout every mission set as alternate objectives. Personally I wasn’t too invested into some
of the main objectives to begin with so I wasn’t drawn by the side missions much either. In the end I would have liked to see more
of the campaign take the approach of the France mission. Give me an individual perspective and story
while still keeping the battlefield scenes and squad based gameplay. While at first glance you might think Battlefield
v’s gameplay looks familiar if you played Battlefield 1, in practice it feels a lot
faster pace, almost lighter in a sense. A lot of feedback from the betas has been
implemented into the final game and it’s most apparent in the roles. They’ve vastly changed from previous roles
while maintaining their basic foundation. Assault is still the anti vehicle class that
work on attacking vehicles and heavy armored fortress. Medic is still the healer of the squad, throwing
medkits to soldiers and being able to revive fallen soldiers. Those medkits play a valuable role too as
health doesn’t regenerate all the way now. However everyone on the team can revive fallen
teammates but the medic is able to do it much faster. Support is equipped with explosives while
carrying around ammo for the rest of the team. They also play a part in the new fortifications
on maps that let you build offensive structures on the battlefield. Lastly there’s the recon class that feels
like the most standard sniper focusing on more long and mid range combat. Some of the new changes to the multiplayer
are the evolution to the dynamic maps. Of course the maps are still destructible
as they used to be but furthermore, basic bullets will do a lot more destruction this
time. Varying on your weapon and its caliber, you
can slowly crumble down buildings or see the effects of a firefight across a small town. On the opposite side you can even build upon
maps now. The fortifications support classes can build
can be anything from barbed wire to block the enemy or even a trench as a way of escape. They add a new strategic factor to the battlefield
and the dynamic changes to maps. I often found their addition to be a risk
and reward factor as I’d ask squad mates to cover me while I’d try to build something
to help out the rest of the team at the cost of holding everyone at that location. The progression system has also seen a revision
with assignments and company coins. Assignments act as challenges that can be
performed on different multiplayer game modes and completing them earns you company coins. You can think of these as currency to upgrade
your company. This is the general rank system but just about
everything else in the game has its own ranking system too. Individual classes for example can get ranked
for playing your role and then unlocking new weapons, equipment or even combat roles. Weapons and vehicles can also ranked up for
more ways of earning company coins. This all plays into Battlefield’s new micro
transaction system. While you still can use real world money,
it can only be used towards cosmetic features while the company coin you earn through progression
can be spent on new weapons, vehicles and cosmetics too. At launch there’s three multiplayer playlists
of sorts, conquest, grand operations and infantry focus. Infantry Focus acts as the all around package. It’s a rotation of maps and games that focus
on smaller game modes like Team Deathmatch, domination and frontlines. These smaller scale game modes are the same
as ever though now built upon the gameplay changes that battlefield v brings. I found myself gravitating towards the classic
team deathmatch and dominations modes for smaller scale gameplay sessions. Of course part of what makes the battlefield
franchise famous is its large scale matches too and those are bigger than ever. The classic conquest mode that feels properly
shown off in the final game. I wasn’t too big of fan of the maps during
the beta but in the final game, the rest of the maps feel much more fleshed out. One again teams split up with 32 players each
as they fight to control sections of the map. Using the new fortifications features in this
entry, conquest feels better than ever with new elements of offense and defense at play. While it doesn’t feel completely new from
the battlefield 1 iteration, it feels more polished now. The big new game mode at launch is grand operations,
an evolution of the operations mode in battlefield 1. It’s a in game multi day operation that
starts off with an airborne attack, dropping you into the battlefield and if the scores
are tied, ends with a final stand, a miniature version of a battle royale. These matches can last a pretty lengthy time
truly feel like you did go through a whole war battle in one sitting. It’s no doubt that this is the stand out
mode for this new entry but just like conquest, it doesn’t feel entirely new but rather
just another evolution of what was here prior. That’s really the trend with the multiplayer
for me. I personally enjoyed what Battlefield 1 had
to offer and seeing revisions to that formula in battlefield 5 is great but just how like
an iPhone 6S isn’t a substantial upgrade for an iPhone 6 owner, battlefield 5 feels
like a minute upgrade. More importantly it feels like an unfinished
product. Opening up the game I see things that are
planned but aren’t here. Practice range and the tides of war section
that’s set to bring a new narrative every chapter are both missing. The battle royale mode that’s sure to be
the big shiny feature for this entry, isn’t here until next spring. The same can be said with parts of the campaign. While I appreciate that all this expansion
is going to be free now rather than paid content through a premium pass like previous entries,
it leaves the current package feeling incomplete. Furthermore there’s a weird system for purchasing
the game. If you bought a $10 member to EA access you
can play 10 hours of the game right now but if you bought the regular $60 version of the
game, you don’t even get to play it until November 20th. There’s essentially three different release
dates for the game and EA had to make an infographic just to get the point across. The frostbite engine truly shines with this
new iteration of the battlefield series but with it comes the aging of the base line consoles. If you’re running on a PC or an enhanced
console like an Xbox One X or PS4 Pro, visual performance is much better with higher quality
looking textures and shadows. The world looks beautiful despite the destruction
reigning through it. The post effects in combination with the dynamic
weather looks stunning. With that said performance issues arise pretty
much on every platform. Baseline consoles range from 720p to 1080p
with lower resolution textures and shadows. Their frame rates are even more worrying with
them hitting as low as the high 30 frames per second mark in heated firefights. PS4 Pro and Xbox One X on the other hand,
use a dynamic resolution with checkerboard rendering to occasionally hit native 4k but
more often than not land in the 1400-1800p range. Frame rates a better on pro and x too with
them randing around 50 to 60 frames per second. As always, PC is the best performing platform
though some better optimization could be done. Many pc users are experiencing lower than
expected frame rates and if you’re one of them, I recommend enabling future frame rendering. It increases input lag slightly but can make
the difference between a 40 fps 1080p machine and a 60 fps 1080p machine. When you do get a stable performance on your
platform, it looks extraordinary as most recent frostbite games have. The technology has always been able to work
wonders with large scale maps and player counts and Battlefield 5 is no different. However, that engine increasing outpace the
hardware it’s on and it’s most apparent with battlefield 5 and consoles. The battlefield series has never slacked when
it came to audio design and battlefield 5 is no different. Weapons, vehicles and most importantly, the
battlefield sound authentic. Frostbite has always done a great job at bringing
the visuals of the battlefield to life but really the sound design deserves as much praise
too. Explosions in the battlefield aren’t just
impactful because of the visual destruction but also the sound of booms howling in your
ear. There’s a great use of dynamic sound that
takes into account your position. Firing a weapon inside vs outside sounds different
and a grenade going off in front of you vs one off in the distance, varies beyond just
sound volume. Up close, you can hear the environment residue
falling back to the ground. Really the one flaw with the audio design
I found in the game were the performances in the campaign. I wasn’t really too enamored by the performances
in war stories, specifically the war story in Africa fell flat to me and often just wanted
to get past cutscenes because of it. When writing my thoughts down for Battlefield
5 I feel very conflicted about which score to give it. While playing it, I had fun when it worked. Despite only feeling like revisions to battlefield
1, the gameplay was entertaining and felt somewhat grander than before. However, there was no shortage of gameplay
and visual bugs. I had moments where literally both teams were
stuck on the deploy screen and so the entire match was everyone just looking at the map
for 5 minutes. In gameplay character rag doll often with
weird physics and clipping into the environment. A lot of the game at launch is also missing,
with promises that “hey it’ll be free but you have to wait until next month or next
year”. It all feels like this game was just rushed
out when it shouldn’t have been. Had this launched with all the content that
was advertised like the big battle royale mode we have yet to even see, then this would
have felt like a more substantial entry in the series. Playing it now though, it just feel like a
minor upgrade from battlefield 1 that isn’t even done yet and can still use a bit more
polishing across the platforms. There is some fun to be had here but there’s
no doubt in my mind that this all could have been executed much better. I give Battlefield 5 a 7.5 / 10 and with that
I say either hold off for the rest of the game to come out or if you want to try it
now, just spend the $10 it takes to get origin access or EA access and play it for 10 hours. You should know by then how you feel about
the package as is.

19 thoughts on “Battlefield V Review | PS4, Xbox One, PC

  1. I dont understand why people dont get that the developers sed this game before releasing an announced was historically accurate like the battlefield games have been. And this is what they give us an incomplete game made to be a live service, with no battlefield. This is more like a call of duty with a few vehicles. You dont feel the grand battlefield is supposed to be. Nobody is saying the the gameplay isn't solid or fun or that the game mechanic are bad but a battlefield is not.

  2. Thank u for doing a real review. These other idiots giving it 9/10 are such posers and shills. It's pathetic. Almost as bad as what they did with bo4 scores and destiny 2 scores. And all those games ended up being awful

  3. As much as I am excited for this game and I want to try this live service idea, I think 7.5/10 is fair for now. Based on what you said.

  4. game sucks, i like bf3, bc2, and even bf1 is better. bfv has a few things right, but in a whole, it's not worth the money.

  5. I'm more of a "gameplay" guy than a "historically accurate" guy, I didn't touch single person in bf1 and i still absolutely love the game.
    So I'm going to buy it since gameplay looks pretty cool

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *