User Reviews

The game is low on content with very little maps, the game throws away historical accuracy even though it was marketed as a realistic ww2 game. The devs promised consistent updates with new content and almost a year has went by with barely any new content brought into the game. The single player is also a lazy attempt at pleasing the campaign audience. They ruined the chance to make a good ww2, in-depth story by breaking it into "war stories" which are mini campaigns taking place in different battles and different perspectives. The short amount of time each war story takes does not give enough room for character development and does not have any good action set pieces and is basically a gallery shooter of killing multiples enemies at once, than moving on. Would not recommend this game to anyone even if you are, like myself, a huge battlefield fan.

I'm a big fan of Battlefield franchise. Here's the Pros and Cons in this game.

Pros: The music and the graphics THAT IS IT.

Cons:

• Single-player campaign

.Too short and so damn boring, AIs are so dumb, doesn't feel like playing "Battlefield", there's no "Battlefield" moment at all. stealth kills over and over again (I'd rather play FarCry series than this garbage)

• Multiplayer

.TTK/TTD is ridiculously fast, thus so many freaking campers everywhere. .No 3D spotting system which really sucks, because the visibility in this game is bad and It's so hard to see enemies. .Can't hear enemy footsteps even though using headphones. .Medic class is a joke, why only useless SMG? .The physics are terrible, The developers should take notes from Red Dead Redemption 2's ragdoll physics. .The maps are worse than BF1, I got bored of them pretty quickly. .Women scream like damn pigs, really annoying (actually kinda funny) ."PRACTICE RANGE" is not even available at launch... Are they stupid?

I am so regretting that I paid $60 for this trash on PSstore. The most disappointing game of 2018. Black Ops 4 is far better.

In 90% of the maps and game modes there is a clear superior side, if you're not on it you will lose. No matter how hard you try. Spawn deaths are frequent and weapons are poorly balanced. Battlefield's battle royale won't even load matches most the time. You sit in the home menu waiting for a match that never starts. These are all things that could be fixed by EA, but they're too cheap to put in the effort.

They should've gone with Battlefield 2.

I mean, I'm just saying.

Battlefield V started out with crap maps and campers everywhere, even now a year later it still has campers just not nearly as many, and now that they added in the pacific maps the game feels a lot better now. When they make another battlefield they need to have a proper story mode though, and not a glorified tutorial.

Well the game is over now and I must say as someone who's played it since the beta that it was quite a roller coaster. It went from a bad glitchy historically inaccurate shooter to a good game like 5 times and kept going back in forth due to devs who seemed out of touch with the community. In the end they managed to make it somewhat accurate and enjoyable, but it's not what you would expect from a game that is meant to be a ww2 game. The second half of the war (along with the eastern front) is completely absent from the game. Overall it did not paint EA or Battlefield in a great light

I never leave reviews for anything, but I made an account so I could leave this one. This game is nothing like other battlefield games and is negative fun. Very glitchy, no spotting, revives/resupplies/healing is ridiculous and takes too long. I gave it a 2 because it was kinda fun in the beginning.

Full of bugs. Game play is rubbish. Worst game I've played this year

Battlefield is a series that I got into when playing the 4th installment and I have always liked the gameplay presented. However, here, Battlefield remains kind of the same in comparison to Battlefield 1 with not many innovations. This is not necessarily a bad thing because the multiplayer remains easy to hop in and to have fun for some matches. Where I found Battlefield V to be lacking is in the campaign. The stories told are pretty interesting because they tell stories of the Second World War that are not often highlighted in media and I was genuinely interested in them. Where it falls flat here is the gameplay design (and especially on higher difficulties). The levels first start out with some stealth which does not work well on higher difficulties since you basically cannot sneak past them without them noticing you even if you just try to look around a corner to see if there are enemies at all. And at the end you get this big map where you basically do the same but now you need to travel between long distances. The last two war stories did try to mix it up a bit but this was still lackluster since it then became your standard first person shooter affaire. Overall, I think that Battlefield V is not a bad game, but that it definitely needs some changes in its campaign (especially the design) to convey these stories better. I hope that the next Battlefield I play is going to innovate more and that it does not solely rely on its multiplayer because in my opinion this only stays fun for some casual games.

I don't know how they messed this game up. All that had to do was improve on the negatives of battlefield one and this game would of been perfect. Instead they produce the worst FPS I have ever played just plain awful.

It's just as good, if not better than Battlefield 1.

BfV is a huge step down from its predecessor Bf1, taking a more Cartoonish and historically literate approach to war.

Battlefield 1 overall feels like a more polished version of BfV. Griddy violence, chaotic atmosphere, thematic uniforms, no silly cosmetics, Fortnite skins, and clunky gimmicks.

Bf1's warstoies are more meaningful and intriguing than BFV's quirky "happy-go-lucky" adventure-like campaign. 'The Last Tiger' is the only warstory that felt meaningful to me.

The game was awful at launch, and was until 'War in The Pacific launched'. WITP is what BF fans wanted, not a steampunk-looking British woman with a prosthetic arm.

I enjoy this game, I really do. When it is playable, that is. Time and time again I find myself struggling to get into playing the game due to either the glitching of collectible tracking in the campaign (which to fix you have to restart ALL your campaign progress by deleting your cloud data) or the crashing of the game when playing online (not connectivity problems, the whole game literally crashes and I have to restart).

I don't normally write reviews, but I find it pretty terrible that EA could release this game and not address simple quality problems such as this even after half a year. It can be fun, but prepare to be tremendously frustrated.

Singleplayer Plot:

My Country Calling:

The prologue, following Battlefield 1's "Storm of Steel," comments on society's quick forgetfulness of the horrors of World War I. Serving as a tutorial, it introduces players to basic mechanics and sets the tone for war stories. Spanning various locations and characters, it starts with a British paratrooper in Narvik, a German tank commander in Tobruk, a Free French sniper at Kasserine Pass, a Bf 109 pilot in the Bombing of Hamburg, and a British machine gunner in the Final Defense at Nijmegen railway bridge.

War Stories: Under No Flag:

Set in 1942 during the North African campaign, the story follows William Sidney "Billy" Bridger, a convicted bank robber conscripted by the British army. He, along with George Mason, infiltrates North Africa to sabotage German airfields. Depicting the first SBS Operations in Libya and as part of the upcoming Operation Albumen.

Nordlys:

In 1943 during Operation Checkmate in Rjukan, Norway, the story revolves around Astrid, a Norwegian resistance soldier, and her daughter Solveig. A British commando unit, accompanied by Astrid, attempts to sabotage a German-occupied facility producing heavy water for nuclear research.

Tirailleur:

Set in 1944 after the Normandy landings, Senegalese Tirailleurs soldiers, including Deme Cisse and his older brother Idrissa, face discrimination from the French army. The story follows their struggle to gain recognition, culminating in a daring assault on a German position. Despite success, the Senegalese soldiers are forgotten, and Deme recounts the story in the present, expressing pride in their actions.

The Last Tiger:

In April 1945 during the encirclement of German Army Group B, veteran Tiger I commander Peter Müller and his crew defend the Ruhr against American forces. The narrative explores the crew's loyalty, disillusionment, and their ultimate fate.

Negative Aspects:

EA's venture into open-world gaming results in the opposing military in the game lacking situational awareness and communication. Actions like destroying a large enemy radar less than 1 km in direct view of an airfield do not trigger an alert at the airfield. This contributes to an overall more 'arcadey' tone, worsening the series' emphasis on the player and a small team winning the war, rather than a combined arms effort. This is somewhat countered by having multiple campaigns, as in BF1, but with the exception of "Tirraileur," you almost have no friendlies.

The anachronistic use of gear and optics is evident. The first reflex sight for a portable weapon, the Nydar, was patented and released in late September 1945, after the war had already ended. It was designed for hunting shotguns, was relatively expensive, somewhat fragile, and never gained widespread popularity.

Enemies in Battlefield 5 drop Universal Ammo, so you never worry about weapon/ammo compatibility.

Medics can revive enemies, even with HE shots to the head.

Positive Aspects:

Graphics.

Joke at the end of the first campaign.

All characters speak in their native language, with subtitles provided for the non-English speaking campaigns.

War Story "Tiralleur" tackles a point almost no one dares to speak of.

War Story about the German perspective.

The war stories in Battlefield V werent really fun, I suppose you can do the challenges to get the melees for Multiplayer. The Multiplayer in the other hand is really fun, Conquest is the most popular mode in the game, you are supposed to capture and defend objectives, you have wide array of weapons for different classes. The classes are: Assault, Medic, Support and Recon. The Assault class uses assault rifles and semiautomatic rifles, such as the Gewehr 43 or Sturmgewehr 1-5. The medic uses submachine guns, the Support uses light-machine guns and machine guns. The recon uses sniper rifles, mostly bolt-action rifles but sometimes self loading ones, you also have an exclusive throwing knife for the recon class.

If I had to imagine hell, I would picture something like the multiplayer of battlefield v. One question. Did the developers not test the online part? If they did, did they think this is how it's supposed to play?

I like it!! It's great I can't understand the bad reviews!!!

Firstly i am a massive fan of BF1 but this is no where near as good.it looks like and feels like it was made years ago. Ideal game for campers and useless players. In 24 years of gaming this is the only game i have ever traded in. I had enough after 6 hours of play and have returned to rrd2 and bf1

I'm not gonna delve into the war stories, because I heard that they aren't any good. What I am gonna talk about is the multiplayer: It's very good. Pretty addicting, and lots of fun. The immersion is great, but can be ruined by the buggy frostbite engine. But the sound design, the graphics, the maps, the guns, all amazing. (Though the KE7 needs a nerf and the medic guns need a buff.) Overall a great multiplayer. Worth the money.

Absolutely did not deliver. What even is this game?

This is a amazing game. The graphics, sound design, maps, gunplay, everything is amazing. It's not without it's flaws though. It has it's fair share of bugs and Glitch's but all will get better with time. Take bf4 anderen bf1 for example, buggy at launch but amazing now. Mark my words, this will become one of the best battlefields the series has ever seen.

I really believe that Battlefield is better than most first personal shooters. But it really lost its touch. Since their first video games, for example Battlefield 1942, they had it all right, it was realist, you could use tanks, airplanes and ships, and feel really inside the game. Yet now in this last game you die constantly, the amount of players per game are lower, and the speed of the game just madera it way too frenetic. Another of the things lost is being able to play local. Battlefield 1 was a very great game yet if i try to play it today i wouldnt be able as no one plays it anymore, and is sad that the only game i can play of battlefield that i can enjoy are the old ones. And with this last purchase of the Vth i feel discouraged on buying anymore from their franchise. I Will keep on playing the old ones, while i know the new ones, no matter how tempting their graphics can be, in 2 years or so Will become useless CDs that i could only use as a mirror.

Battlefield V takes us back to WWII (which in my opinion is a bad thing) but finds a way to work really well. The story lacks in a whole lot of content, and I don't understand why a lot of content is locked at release (because it is 2018) I still find Battlefield V to be an enjoyable game. Grand Operations is what saves Battlefield V in my opinion. It consist of several days and different game modes. It gives Battlefield that gritty war feel and I can appreciate that. I can see this game getting better with content, but right now we have to deal with what we have. 8/10

When EA decide to remove gamemodes and show how greedy they really are, the game become a big dissapointment. And problems from game launch that have not been fixed yet, makes this hard to recommend. Short story is that Pro's made BF3 and BF4 but amateurs made BF5. I love the BF genre and play BF5 regular because i hope for the better. But until now i get more and more frustrated. I do not like temporary gamemodes and don't like the lack of new content. Last i like to say that i really hope this will change in near future and maybe this review will be a shame.

I feel sick to the stomach when I read reviews that gave this 1-3 stars, and only single out bugs as the reason. You don't have to like the game, but you should at least shine more light on your opinion.

Sure, I would've preferred they launch it as finished as possible, but with a developer as big as dice behind it, you know they're going to fix everything they find.

The game is very good when you get past the bugs and just have fun. My favorite modes are Grand Operations, Frontlines and Team Deathmatch. Keep in mind, you have to take some time to play, these modes aren't all short.

There is not as much content as I would've liked, but more is on the way. Can't wait for their take on the battle royale mode!