If its anything like BF1 they have lost a major Battlefield fan.I have not played the game since December 2016,I uninstalled it ages ago.

Battlefield 5 Digital Deluxe Ultimate Preorder Booster Pack DLC Edition

^ Hit the nail on the head 😀

I wasn't even going to read the article because i'm still salty about BF1. I Highly doubt i'll be fooled this time. I'll pick it up in 2019 when they've given all the DLC away for free and is on sale for £20. That's only if there is a single player campaign mind you.

It will be a sequal or a new verson of Battlefield 2142.

Bought BF3 - skipped BF4 because I was afraid it was going to be all the same. Bought BF1 - will skip BF5. Unless it's Bad Company 3... but given the state of the late Battlefield games and EA's greediness, even that will be ruined.

Looking forward to this Battlefield V, and curious as to what it'll be like. I've never ever played any Battlefield game before, not until the last 6 weeks or so, but recently bought Battlefield 1 and really enjoying the Team Deathmatch, the larger scale battles in some of the other game modes seem random to me and like meat grinders (but I probably need to learn the maps better in order to develop better tactics) - previous to that I'm a massive Titanfall nut, was pretty damn good at Titanfall; Battlefield 1 has been a major learning curve as completely different, getting better though & still enjoying - looking forward to what Battlefield V will bring!

This is the same losing formula that was started with bf3 and I was never gullible enough to go through bf4 or bf1 you have the best game engine yet you can't improve the servers and allow third parties and communities to actually flourish you greedy formulaic corporation. This is a business transaction and nothing more the games will be artificially held back and never improve to what it could be. Same story with Battlefront. Dlc death by a thousand cuts and tiny tickrate servers.

jdc2389:

This is the same losing formula that was started with bf3 and I was never gullible enough to go through bf4 or bf1 you have the best game engine yet you can't improve the servers and allow third parties and communities to actually flourish you greedy formulaic corporation. This is a business transaction and nothing more the games will be artificially held back and never improve to what it could be. Same story with Battlefront. Dlc death by a thousand cuts and tiny tickrate servers.

Jackfrags did the walkthrough for the easter egg dogtag. At the end it plays the classic 1942 music. Then we see a skeleton arm on a morse code sender. Makes you think back to how much freedom the devs had. Perhaps they regret merging with EA?

https://www.elizabethletts.com/the-perfect-horse/

the biggest issue with the BF franchise is that they do nothing about cheaters. Their FF software is garbage, and only catches cheaters using aimbot and no spread/recoil. People dominate using wallhacks. EA doesn't give a crap at all. They completely ruin the game. I would say at least half of the people hack. You would be amazed at how many members are at these hacking forums buying hacks. I will not buy BF5, or any BF, until they fix this problem.

Bigbeard1986:

the biggest issue with the BF franchise is that they do nothing about cheaters. Their FF software is garbage, and only catches cheaters using aimbot and no spread/recoil. People dominate using wallhacks. EA doesn't give a crap at all. They completely ruin the game. I would say at least half of the people hack. You would be amazed at how many members are at these hacking forums buying hacks. I will not buy BF5, or any BF, until they fix this problem.

I'd be surprised if half of the people hack, I'm sure it's way less than that, although I do think there are quite a few wallhackers that play. I play Team Deathmatch mostly and because they're small scale battles with smaller numbers of players I can normally 'feel' if there's people using wallhacks - it normally manifests itself as the same 1 or 2 people killing me way more than they should in comparison to the total number of kills they have - so effectively using the wallhack to single out players - if this same pattern happens over a few matches with the same suspect players then probabilities suggest that they are using wallhack because you can't single out players without wallhack. Scenarios like this happen almost everyday, but not in every match or every lobby. Because I often play Support, score highly due to handing out packs like a nutter, and get quite a lot of kills I probably can easily become a prime bullet magnet for any wallhackers! Thinking about trying to quantify the number of wallhackers based on my experience above: 20 players per Deathmatch play about say 10 matches on a day when I play over those 10 matches players come & go - perhaps 35 different people will cycle through that day. This means I play with about 35 different people on a day that I play. I'd say that at some point in the day I experience wallhacker activity at least 2 out the 3 days I play. In a wall hacker lobby there's usually no more than 1 or 2 suspect players. So: 35*3 = 105 total people played with over a 3 day period. wallhackers seen on 2 of those days, no more than 2 suspect players on average per day = 4 wallhackers 4/105 = 4% of population are wallhackers. That's an estimation based on my experience, thought it would be fun to try & roughly work out the number. This is just accounting for the wallhackers that pick on me & single me out in contrast to the other players in the team, so it's possible there are other wallhackers out there that don't use it to single out particular players, but instead just to score highly - so likely the number of wallhackers is somewhat larger than 4%, how about we double that then so 8%. I'd say 4-8% could be wallhackers. Guess!

Robbo9999:

I'd be surprised if half of the people hack, I'm sure it's way less than that, although I do think there are quite a few wallhackers that play. I play Team Deathmatch mostly and because they're small scale battles with smaller numbers of players I can normally 'feel' if there's people using wallhacks - it normally manifests itself as the same 1 or 2 people killing me way more than they should in comparison to the total number of kills they have - so effectively using the wallhack to single out players - if this same pattern happens over a few matches with the same suspect players then probabilities suggest that they are using wallhack because you can't single out players without wallhack. Scenarios like this happen almost everyday, but not in every match or every lobby. Because I often play Support, score highly due to handing out packs like a nutter, and get quite a lot of kills I probably can easily become a prime bullet magnet for any wallhackers! Thinking about trying to quantify the number of wallhackers based on my experience above: 20 players per Deathmatch play about say 10 matches on a day when I play over those 10 matches players come & go - perhaps 35 different people will cycle through that day. This means I play with about 35 different people on a day that I play. I'd say that at some point in the day I experience wallhacker activity at least 2 out the 3 days I play. In a wall hacker lobby there's usually no more than 1 or 2 suspect players. So: 35*3 = 105 total people played with over a 3 day period. wallhackers seen on 2 of those days, no more than 2 suspect players on average per day = 4 wallhackers 4/105 = 4% of population are wallhackers. That's an estimation based on my experience, thought it would be fun to try & roughly work out the number. This is just accounting for the wallhackers that pick on me & single me out in contrast to the other players in the team, so it's possible there are other wallhackers out there that don't use it to single out particular players, but instead just to score highly - so likely the number of wallhackers is somewhat larger than 4%, how about we double that then so 8%. Guess!

"Wallhack" = flaregun LOL Noobs allways complain about "cheaters" They just can't believe someone is better than them...

nizzen:

"Wallhack" = flaregun LOL Noobs allways complain about "cheaters" They just can't believe someone is better than them...

I don't think you read my post properly, or didn't understand what I based my calculation on. My determination of a wallhacker is based around certain players killing me way more than they should for the total amount of kills they have, so in this situation I constitute a large proportion of their kills (say 40-80% of their total kills for that match). If that happens with the same suspect players over a few matches then this very strongly goes against probability & they pretty much have to be using wallhack in order to pick out & kill certain players - this has got nothing to do with flare use, it's to do with singling out, picking on & killing the same player, which can't be done without wall hack. Yes, there are definitely players that are better than me, but my stats do seem to put me in the Top 20% at least in the Battlefield tracker, I've only been playing for about 6 weeks, so should get better. It depends what stat you look at though, BTR/min I'm in the top 0.6%, but I think that's just because I'm doing well after only just started playing the game.

My best fun was in Battlefield 3 with a friend. I was heli pilot, he was my gunner. Hell, we were wrecking! And then they nerfed helicopters to trash, buffed AA and any retard engineer running around with an anti-air rocket could take you down easily. GG....

Actually hung in there with BF4, and eventually EA/DICE got all (or at least 90%) of the bugs ironed out. BF4 ultimately was a really good game, and a very good looking one (despite it's terrible launch and buggy netcode). My son and I sunk a ton of hours into it (yes I know it's now full of people glitching/cheating/exploiting/hacking). BF1 got old real fast however, and I haven't played it much since launch. It just didn't have that play one more round feel. Not sure yet how I feel about another WWII themed game, but we'll just have to see I guess what DICE can do next.

bulldog75:

If its anything like BF1 they have lost a major Battlefield fan.I have not played the game since December 2016,I uninstalled it ages ago.

I was in the same boat. I hated the BF1 release so much I quit it. After growing bored with PUBg after a month of playing and not being able to find a shooter worth a darn, I started playing again about two weeks ago and found they really improved the game. It is now probably the game it should have been a year and a half ago. Just about everyone I know that was a BFBC2, BF3 and BF4 fan also hated BF1 and quit the series because it had the same lame feel as Star Wars Battlefront upon release. Now it's a heck of a lot better.

If it had bots I would be interested, although If it's World War 2 that would kind of push me away like World War 1 did. BF4 was the last good BF game for me, I wish it had Bots.

Bigbeard1986:

the biggest issue with the BF franchise is that they do nothing about cheaters. Their FF software is garbage, and only catches cheaters using aimbot and no spread/recoil. People dominate using wallhacks. EA doesn't give a crap at all. They completely ruin the game. I would say at least half of the people hack. You would be amazed at how many members are at these hacking forums buying hacks. I will not buy BF5, or any BF, until they fix this problem.

With that logic you simply shouldn't play online shooters. The amount of cheaters with pretty similar to other FPS games I've played, nothing out of the ordinary. Servers and netcode also drastically improved in BF4 after patches. I just hate how rock/paper/scissors the gunplay in BF1 is. I hope it ends up being closer to BF3 or Bad Company. BF3 was better than BF4 imo in terms of gun balance, especially near the end of its supported life cycle. Lot's of guns used even in competitive: AN94, AEK, M16, M416*, G3, ... *M416: special case, arguably the M16 was better, but I did a lan tourney in BF3 and for some reason the low ping did something very favorable for the M416 and I kept double tapping people in the head. Never been able to reproduce it online though with pings of 25 and up.

I would like to see EA go after the individuals creating the cheats, taking them to court, one of the big ones being ArtificialAiming, to this date EA's stance is pretty much "Meh, they will buy the game again when the get banned"...... EA couldn't care less about cheaters, it's just more money for them.