Battlefield V‘s Update 6.0 moves the war forward and into the jungle.
Moving further away from the ruins of Europe, it also leads us closer to the end of the war. Nevertheless, DICE mentioned it has plenty of content to deliver until mid-2021. The latest update was featured in Battlefield V’s latest teaser trailer.
The new Battlefield V update is now available for download, but it will only go live next Thursday, February 6, at 9AM GMT. PS4 and Xbox updates will go live 1 and 2 hours later respectively.
Welcome to the Jungle
The new Battlefield map takes inspiration from the Solomon Islands. It features a river that runs across the whole map. As expected, it includes plenty of choke points and close-quarters action. The new map will be available on Conquest, Squad Conquest, Breakthrough and Team Deathmatch.
The update also brings a crate of brand new old weapons, including the Type-11 LMB, Model 37 Shotgun, M2 Carbine, and the M1A1 Bazooka.
A new suicidal Lunge Mine is also expected. Lunge Mines are literally bombs on a stick that you use to banzai-charge tanks – hopefully harming them and certainly killing yourself.
Further updates incoming
DICE has announced that they expect to release a bunch more fixes, balances and even new content in the coming months. Two new elite commanders are expected later in the chapter. Update 6.2 will also feature a considerable change to weapon balancing.
Tank customization seems to have been progressing steadily with the latest teaser trailer which featured a tank with a “Coming Soon” text and an American flag.
My thoughts on the new update
This is my own personal viewpoint.
I love playing Battlefield games. I certainly do enjoy Battlefield V – but somehow, it feels like its getting less and less enjoyable by the day.
Maybe I’m getting old, but even though many players seem to really enjoy game modes such as “Grind”, I find them extremely chaotic and tactic-less. Personally I prefer matches where intelligence plays a part. Where you can make use of the map’s scale and try to outsmart and flank your enemy.
Unfortunately (for me), maps seem to be getting more and more focused on close-quarters combat, even when their scale is enormous. New weapons seem to be faster, more deadly and less precise. The age of long-range hunts is at an end.
The new update brings even more of this with the new choke points, new shotgun and even the Lunge Mine that prevents tanks from pushing into enemy territory. Coward tank pilots are definitely NOT something we need in this game.
Because of this, and even though I appreciate any new content, I’m shrugging at the sight of the new update.
I’m trying to figure out what it is… Something feels different when playing Battlefield V.
As you might have noticed from my previous post on gender wars in Battlefield V, there’s a bunch of stuff in that game that feels out of place. Slightly strange and even awkward at times!
I know – it all sounds silly – and it is indeed hard to explain. Battlefield V is very similar to its predecessor, Battlefield 1 (again, EA has trouble with numbering systems), but somehow …its gameplay FEELS totally different. It isn’t easy to figure out what has changed – but something definitely did.
When playing on my first map ever someone was crying in chat:
-“This game has way too many animations!”
I thought that was laughable at first. I couldn’t figure out how that could be a bad thing.
The quantity and especially the quality of animations is one of the key factors in driving immersion in a game. Consider the effort that AAA games are putting into animation nowadays!
GTA V, Star Citizen, The Last of Us or L.A. Noire have amazing casts and technology to provide a truly credible cinematic experience.
Competitive multiplayer games have specific needs…
But I think I get it. He might even be right. There are so many things moving, running, burning, falling, firing, exploding… down to the micro animations that each character and weapon has!
Player characters are now even able to run while crouched or lay on their backs while firing and also roll around while waiting for a revive.
It does take some time before we’re able to get used to all of that. For a new player, it may indeed feel a bit overwhelming.
The truth is that maps are indeed ENORMOUS …and too small at the same time! It comes down to what maps are available in each game mode and how player respawns work. Indeed there are gigantic maps but most of the action is focused around one or two objectives and nothing else is going on on the rest of the map. This is not entirely bad. The problem is the map layout.
The way they built most of the maps as a narrow rectangle doesn’t really entice the enemy to flank and capture an objective behind enemy lines in the Conquest game mode. Which is a good thing as it prevents massive waves of enemies from spawning behind the player.
The problem seems to be the fact that it condenses the action around those two choke or capture points. It becomes a slaughterfest for both sides.
Add to that how easier it is now to spawn next to your squadmate in the middle of a thick battle.
Maps are also uncommonly detailed with plenty of open buildings, rocks and hills, where it is easy to hide for a whole match without the enemy ever seeing you. Yesterday I spent the whole match lying down inside a truck capping an objective and forcing the enemy to stay in that area not to lose it. They never found me. Summit1g also did that a few days ago. He just stood there while waves of enemies went by. Interestingly, at the same time, there are groves everywhere yet it is still terribly difficult for a sniper to get a good and clear vantage point. This pleases some and angers many.
Add weather to the mix: wall-thick fog shows up quite often in larger maps.
Thick fog reduces visibility drastically and it forces players to go into close-quarters and melee combat.
Then there’s the fact that there’s so much more to do now. Starting with the new ability to build fortifications. You are now able to build sandbag defenses, barbed wire, and anti-tank barriers. This is a cool new feature, but plenty of players die trying to build these often times ineffective defenses.
Sure, medics are still healing and recons are still sniping. But you are now able to find new perk packs to picking a class that are probably ignored by most players. They certainly affect gameplay and may take some time for a new player to figure out.
As an example, Support is the only class able to build stationary turrets in specific maps but that isn’t clear to most players.
Every player is now also able to revive squad members – but medics do it faster and can even run faster IF they equip the Swift Effort perk AND tag a wounded soldier. We’re not just talking about class-based effects, but combat perk packs that affect how a class performs.
Having so many new perk options makes the game smarter. Not everyone appreciates these changes, however.
Personally, I don’t dislike them, but information is lacking when you first start to learn to play with these classes – there are many of them – and indeed they do feel very different to play with – starting with the weapons.
Weapons feel incredibly differentfrom class to class. Many people complain that medics have water guns and that support isn’t able to use their LMGs to actually kill enemies – instead only able to lay down suppressive fire. I feel like that’s actually a good thing in disguise.
Even though it is frustrating to play as a medic and not be able to kill the enemy in front of you most of the times, it forces players to focus on their class abilities. In this case, healing and reviving players.
Laying down suppressive fire still feels pointless – and you won’t last long until a sniper gets to you. It only works well in choke points or bad weather where there’s too much going on before a sniper scope finds you.
All these factors only add to the complexity of learning the quirks of the game. It overwhelms new players and it justifies the frustration that many complain about.
There’s also something very strange going on with close-quarter combats.
My ping isn’t high, but it seems like I always lose very close quarters 1-on-1 gunfights. I’m not missing any shots – but somehow I never get to kill the enemy. As if their weapon fires more rounds in the same amount of time. Or if they started firing before me, even though their animation didn’t start before I shot.
Other players complained about this as well. I’m convinced that this has to do with packet delay management or lag compensation for large numbers of players. It feels unfair quite often.
Above all else, the game has a very different pace.
I’m pretty sure it comes down to the aiming system. In Battlefield V it seems to be harder to aim properly until you get used to the way it works.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a complex aiming options menu. You can actually go into detail by adjusting the aiming speed according to the zoom value of your weapon!
There are also other options that I’ve never seen before in other FPS franchises like “Soldier Aim Ratio” or “Uniform Soldier Aiming”. They include lengthy descriptions that only make it more cumbersome to understand.
The truth is that this only makes good players better and newbie players worse – as most new players don’t even know how to adjust these settings properly. This leads to newbies calling out good players as cheaters and a lot of bad vibes in chat and frustration to both sides.
Hide. Think. Act.
I REALLY like to have additional complexity in games. I like to feel that my skills and battle sense are progressing over time. But I think that, in the end, Battlefield V is not as newbie-friendly as other previous games.
Last night I had a great run. I was determined to figuring out how to play Battlefield V properly. I decided to take a more relaxed, counterattacking stance. If someone fired at me I would… Hide. Think. Act.
I wasn’t going to run towards the enemy nor would I shoot as many bullets as possible at them. I realized that two shots to the head or three to the body were all it took for my weapon to kill. So I started being more mindful of my presence and taking aim before firing or revealing my position.
Aha! I became the top player in most rounds! I think I may have figured the key to succeeding in Battlefield V.
Something different, something new
In the end, it feels like there’s definitely some balance to do and a learning curvethat most players aren’t used to from previous games.
It is hard to understand exactly what to learn and how to progress… But, there’s light at the end of the tunnel if you manage to relax, learn and enjoy the game for what it is, without expecting it to be something else.
Instead of becoming frustrated, I’m actually enjoying the game now!
I would like to apologize in advance if this review offends you. If you feel offended, please send me a private message. My views are moderate but I may sound blunt sometimes – English isn’t my first language and this article features sensitive topics that can be easily misunderstood. Thank you for your understanding.
The saddest day of the year
So, apparently, today is the saddest day of the year. -“That’s ridiculous!” I thought to myself. Apparently, it relates to the fact that the holiday season has come and gone and what was new and exciting a couple of weeks ago is now uninspired and unsurprising. Enough time has passed and now you realize that all your New Year’s resolutions and attempts at becoming a better human have caved miserably – like in every previous year. All that is left is an indiscriminate number of uneventful work days until something happens that actually sparks your interest.
This past season was VERY intense for me. Personal investments, social interactions, and even a brand new blog distracted me… and the season flew by very quickly. The truth is, I got to skip a load of games and new releases. But yesterday I felt the need to play something new and something decent.
I was holding back on buying Battlefield V. The franchise features an over-the-top base price (+DLC content) – and prices tend to lower past the holiday season. So I decided to give it a go. After a painstakingly lengthy 53Gb download and installation (which I cleverly decided to sleep through it), I finally got to try it out.
This drew me to a very tense debate going on in-game.
Following the footsteps of its predecessor, Battlefield 1 (numbering systems are broken at EA btw), which included a negro-based squad that historically did fight bravely in WW1, Battlefield V surprised everyone when it showcased several female protagonists in a World War 2 setting.
When I first saw the trailer for Battlefield V I thought it was so awesome that they included female characters. At the same time players watching the trailer at the event were concerned on how that could impact the game experience.
Even though the role of women was determinant – and there were a LOT of women fighting throughout Europe – the proportion of battling women in this game is pretty much equal to that of men. This can be tricky when you’re attempting to be historically accurate in a game.
“My immersion is RUINED!!!” – someone cried on Twitter.
EA would likely have replied: Dear Bob, We are very sorry that your immersion is ruined. Our statistics show that at least 10% of our audience is female and they are not being accurately represented in our game. This is why we’ve made a game where 50% of our characters are female. Thank you for understanding.
The gravity and complexity of the situation was clear to me when I noticed 3 female characters dressed as German generals stabbing players in the heat of battle while they were using voicechat to scream “FEMINAZI BANZAI CHARGE!!!”
I felt like My trust in Humanity was gone for good. At the same time, my history-nerdy-brain proceeded to die a little.
A sad day for a sad society
The truth is, we live in a sad society where women are still being treated differently… and that is truly unnecessary. EA has taken a bold step to try and break that mold that society imposes on itself. But at what cost? Does it make sense for an entertainment media that takes pride on a certain degree of realism to bring a contemporary perspective to a historical reality through politicized fiction? Will that somehow affect our understanding of the past and blind us to the future? Even though it does spark debate, it mostly seems to anger a majority of their mostly male playerbase.
I am a true believer of diversity and equality, but politicized entertainment feels cringy at best. Are they going for the long run? Re-educating boys into accepting girls in games (when a kid spends 4h every day playing a game he does learn something…), or maybe trying to motivate girls to play in order to expand their female playerbase?
It might be commendable to a certain extent, but let me clarify why this affects me: I see human beings as human beings. If I ran a company, “race”, gender, sexual orientation or religion would be irrelevant to me – but being the nerdy type that I am, sacrificing historical accuracy – for what appears to be a business decision based on modern-day politic concerns – is …disappointing. Playing Battlefield V somehow feels like an advertisement that you paid to play.
Lost in Action
I would LOVE to see a game that focused on the resistance fighters or spies (many of which were women). I would love to see a dramatic aspect to the game that highlighted the effort that young widow mothers had to endure during the war. Women also kept the gun, ammo and canning industries running throughout the war – without that effort who knows how the war would have progressed! …But a game like this wouldn’t be Battlefield would it?
Battlefield V also fails to represent – and thus lacks respect – for the life and death of the men and women who perished in those fights. Instead it leads young players to believe that this was the true reality of war and even treat it more as a fun historic fact rather than an actual tragic event.
While I value the fact that they’ve actually thought about women and “minorities” and made real steps towards embracing them as equals, I feel like this isn’t the right game nor the right way to demonstrate that so profusely. It’s like making surgery with a butcher’s knife – and the player’s reaction might even backfire in the long run. Will EA make every game follow the same logic now? Should it?
It is understandable that Mass Effect does it.
Mass Effect is set in a fictionalized future in an alternate reality of mindset. …Should we be concerned about how to depict our past if we wish to learn from it?
…On a side note, they forgot to add women to Battlefield 1 until the last patch – and she had to be bald – were there no women before WW2?
So, yeah I do understand Bob who shouted that his immersion was ruined… but Bob must realize that even if clubfooted, messy and somewhat reprimandable, this was a step in the right direction.
The features they’ve included are all okay – just in the wrong proportions – and definitely the wrong battlefield.
It’s great that a player is able to pick a female character to play with. It is also great to see more variety in the game and even that women play a non-sexualized protagonist role – just do it in an alternate universe where factual history isn’t a problem.
…well I guess at least EA made sure their clothes weren’t camo bikinis in this game.