Whether you are or aren't a Battlefield player, I would stay away from this game until major fixes & changes are implemented. As tradition is with this forsaken franchise, the launch is incredibly messy and the game is in quite a poor state. Of course like all titles from this franchise, the game can only improve from here on out, but I would avoid buying this game right now.


Believe it or not, I would say there is some "good" in this game. I like the movement system, the sliding, running, and strafing all feel great and I think it brings Battlefield up to par with the current generation of shooters (whether or not you like this, it feels good). I love being able to use tactical sprint just feels like I'm actually moving, especially on these bigger maps.

I like the freedom of choice, in terms of weapons and gadgets. Some people argue this will lead to certain metas... but old games like BF3, BF4, BF1 had certain metas so I really don't think weapon and gadget freedom has a huge impact on how a lot of people have already played this franchise in the past. Yes, people may gravitate towards one weapon or gadget set over the rest, but I just hated how I needed to play certain classes in the past just so I could use my favorite guns.

I think Portal is an interesting add-on and the logic editor has huge potential for creative modes, its just really up to EA/DICE to open the flood gates and allow us to edit all of the modes to a custom design. I think its great to see old Battlefield content remastered all together under one umbrella. We could've had it a lot worse and these "remasters" could've gone the Call of Duty route and been separate games. I don't think way is great for the health of this franchise, I think its better to concentrate everyone into one overarching title. I'm not too huge on the Hazard Zone mode, but I like that they are experimenting with new modes overall.

Sound seems fine to me, I play on surround sound, war tapes enabled. Some people say the sound is muffled? But I'm not entirely sure what they are talking around. Maybe I am not paying enough attention to it, but the sound to me in this game is fine, sorry I'm not an audiophile.

The destruction is appropriate for this game. While I would like a few more buildings here and there that we could completely destroy, I would actually find it quite annoying if every single building I came across in the 128 modes was completely destroyed and offered no cover. I have experienced this when the tornado in Hourglass comes through and remove certain buildings in the desert and it makes fighting within these areas feel like utter crap.


Coming off the destruction point, the levelution events are quite lackluster. I think more events should've been implemented in the maps, but I am unsure what they could be or how they would impact game play in this new 128 mode environment. But it should be noted, some maps are a bit disappointing in terms of this feature. For the destruction in Portal game modes like BFBC2 and BF3, I don't think there is enough and their old destructive environments should have returned.

I think the maps are.... I wouldn't say utterly terrible, but not that great either (just OK). There are a lot of dead zones, i.e. open fields and locations with sparse cover. However in areas with typically high concentration, the locations feel good and there is enough cover or spaces to battle over for objectives and territory. The issue is the areas in between these locations just play awfully unless you are in a vehicle or are running with a group of players. In Breakthrough, a lot of the objectives based on top of or in the skyscrapers are very questionable design choices. At least on the tops of the buildings, they are pretty much impossible to penetrate. Taking the elevators up is pretty much sentencing yourself to a death by firing line. I don't think players should be allowed to call in vehicles on top of these buildings as well as it just adds on to the "impenetrable" feeling. Fill in dead space and rid of the Breakthrough objectives on top of buildings please.

The Specialists are just OK. I've gotten used to them and you should too because lets be real here, they are NOT leaving and this game will probably NOT go back to a class system. Some of the specialists the abilities feel a little bit lackluster and not as stand out as a few of the other specialist's. As of launch, Casper, Rao, Dozer, Falck, and Paik (wow she's so OP guys, LOL) feel a little underwhelming. I think their ability deployment speeds should be either buffed or the "help" provided from them should be reworked. Falck's usefulness is borderline to me, but the others feel like they need some help competing. Some abilities from the other Specialists may need to be looked at and re-balanced, but its too soon to tell in regards to whats meta.

The graphics are appropriate enough. They look good, but I would say in some areas it is a bit of a step down from the previous games. The claims from people that the graphics look cartoonish are just outlandish. I think there is a level of "HD quality" missing, but the graphics are good enough to me. The UI is a bit too much and too little. This mostly means that there are sometimes a lot of useless information on your screen but in other instances there isn't enough information shown. The big map is also annoying to use. Targeting players to spawn in on is annoying as heck as everything is overlapped and way too small to click on. You are also unable to zoom in/out on the big map which can make it frustrating when trying to "read" the map.

Gadget selection should be revisited. Maybe having two gadgets is too OP, but having a system like being able to use AA but no ammo crates as well, but at least being able to bring a repair tool would alleviate certain... teamwork... issues...


There aren't enough weapons from a launch perspective. Sure weapons can now be added in, but this game should've launched with more than 22 weapons... 3 of which are sidearms. The weapons themselves... well, some of the attachments just feel utterly useless or provide no benefit over others. The patch addressing weapon bloom/spread has helped weapon diversity severely, but man it only feels like 4 attachments are viable on all weapons. For the weapons that are available, I like them. I think the designs look good and the weapons feel good to use, unless its the AC-42. The recoil direction on that gun just feels... off...

The optimization as of launch is just awful, 100% CPU load and almost no GPU utilization. I'm using an i5-9600K and a 3070 Ti and in my opinion, I think a i5-9600K is a pretty solid CPU for most of today's games. I don't really care about playing on max settings, I've always been a low settings, fps goblin, but this game does not seem to care. Low or High settings, 100% CPU load, no difference in FPS. What is the most annoying thing is when you are in high concentration areas you will have low FPS, expected, except when you are downed... you immediately gain a ton of FPS. I don't understand coding but something is definitely not right here. In Breakthrough you will feel performance dips often or constantly, in Conquest performance issues are alleviated a bit, but you will still often feel these dips. On Portal and Hazard Zone servers (64 players or less) FPS and performance is actually great, if not amazing. Makes you think that this game would've been better off having 64 player lobbies offered to All Out War as well.


I think all the pieces are here for a successful game, EA/DICE just really need to focus on what the community wants from them in order to make it a good game. However, in its current state, I would avoid buying this game until many of the major bugs and issues are resolved... so in like half a year.

Whether you are or aren't a Battlefield player, I would stay away from this game until major fixes & changes are implemented. As tradition is with this forsaken franchise, the launch is incredibly messy and the game is in quite a poor state. Of course like all titles from this franchise, the game can only improve from here on out, but I would avoid buying this game right now. [h1]What's Good[/h1] Believe it or not, I would say there is some [i]"good"[/i] in this game. I like the movement system, the sliding, running, and strafing all feel great and I think it brings Battlefield up to par with the current generation of shooters (whether or not you like this, it feels good). I love being able to use tactical sprint just feels like I'm actually moving, especially on these bigger maps. I like the freedom of choice, in terms of weapons and gadgets. Some people argue this will lead to certain metas... but old games like BF3, BF4, BF1 had certain metas so I really don't think weapon and gadget freedom has a huge impact on how a lot of people have already played this franchise in the past. Yes, people may gravitate towards one weapon or gadget set over the rest, but I just hated how I needed to play certain classes in the past just so I could use my favorite guns. I think Portal is an interesting add-on and the logic editor has huge potential for creative modes, its just really up to EA/DICE to open the flood gates and allow us to edit all of the modes to a custom design. I think its great to see old Battlefield content remastered all together under one umbrella. We could've had it a lot worse and these "remasters" could've gone the Call of Duty route and been separate games. I don't think way is great for the health of [i]this[/i] franchise, I think its better to concentrate everyone into one overarching title. I'm not too huge on the Hazard Zone mode, but I like that they are experimenting with new modes overall. Sound seems fine to me, I play on surround sound, war tapes enabled. Some people say the sound is muffled? But I'm not entirely sure what they are talking around. Maybe I am not paying enough attention to it, but the sound to me in this game is fine, sorry I'm not an audiophile. The destruction is appropriate for this game. While I would like a few more buildings here and there that we could completely destroy, I would actually find it quite annoying if every single building I came across in the 128 modes was completely destroyed and offered no cover. I have experienced this when the tornado in Hourglass comes through and remove certain buildings in the desert and it makes fighting within these areas feel like utter crap. [h1]What's Not So Great[/h1] Coming off the destruction point, the levelution events are quite lackluster. I think more events should've been implemented in the maps, but I am unsure what they could be or how they would impact game play in this new 128 mode environment. But it should be noted, some maps are a bit disappointing in terms of this feature. For the destruction in Portal game modes like BFBC2 and BF3, I don't think there is enough and their old destructive environments should have returned. I think the maps are.... I wouldn't say utterly terrible, but not that great either (just OK). There are a lot of dead zones, i.e. open fields and locations with sparse cover. However in areas with typically high concentration, the locations feel good and there is enough cover or spaces to battle over for objectives and territory. The issue is the areas in between these locations just play awfully unless you are in a vehicle or are running with a group of players. In Breakthrough, a lot of the objectives based on top of or in the skyscrapers are very questionable design choices. At least on the tops of the buildings, they are pretty much impossible to penetrate. Taking the elevators up is pretty much sentencing yourself to a death by firing line. I don't think players should be allowed to call in vehicles on top of these buildings as well as it just adds on to the "impenetrable" feeling. Fill in dead space and rid of the Breakthrough objectives on top of buildings please. The Specialists are just OK. I've gotten used to them and you should too because lets be real here, they are [b]NOT[/b] leaving and this game will probably [b]NOT[/b] go back to a class system. Some of the specialists the abilities feel a little bit lackluster and not as stand out as a few of the other specialist's. As of launch, Casper, Rao, Dozer, Falck, and Paik (wow she's so OP guys, LOL) feel a little underwhelming. I think their ability deployment speeds should be either buffed or the "help" provided from them should be reworked. Falck's usefulness is borderline to me, but the others feel like they need some help competing. Some abilities from the other Specialists may need to be looked at and re-balanced, but its too soon to tell in regards to whats meta. The graphics are appropriate enough. They look good, but I would say in some areas it is a bit of a step down from the previous games. The claims from people that the graphics look cartoonish are just outlandish. I think there is a level of "HD quality" missing, but the graphics are good enough to me. The UI is a bit too much and too little. This mostly means that there are sometimes a lot of useless information on your screen but in other instances there isn't enough information shown. The big map is also annoying to use. Targeting players to spawn in on is annoying as heck as everything is overlapped and way too small to click on. You are also unable to zoom in/out on the big map which can make it frustrating when trying to "read" the map. Gadget selection should be revisited. Maybe having two gadgets is too OP, but having a system like being able to use AA but no ammo crates as well, but at least being able to bring a repair tool would alleviate certain... teamwork... issues... [h1]What's Pretty Bad[/h1] There aren't enough weapons from a launch perspective. Sure weapons can now be added in, but this game should've launched with more than 22 weapons... 3 of which are sidearms. The weapons themselves... well, some of the attachments just feel utterly useless or provide no benefit over others. The patch addressing weapon bloom/spread has helped weapon diversity severely, but man it only feels like 4 attachments are viable on all weapons. For the weapons that are available, I like them. I think the designs look good and the weapons feel good to use, unless its the AC-42. The recoil direction on that gun just feels... off... The optimization as of launch is just awful, 100% CPU load and almost no GPU utilization. I'm using an i5-9600K and a 3070 Ti and in my opinion, I think a i5-9600K is a pretty solid CPU for most of today's games. I don't really care about playing on max settings, I've always been a low settings, fps goblin, but this game does not seem to care. Low or High settings, 100% CPU load, no difference in FPS. What is the most annoying thing is when you are in high concentration areas you will have low FPS, expected, except when you are downed... you immediately gain a ton of FPS. I don't understand coding but something is definitely not right here. In Breakthrough you will feel performance dips often or constantly, in Conquest performance issues are alleviated a bit, but you will still often feel these dips. On Portal and Hazard Zone servers (64 players or less) FPS and performance is actually great, if not amazing. Makes you think that this game would've been better off having 64 player lobbies offered to All Out War as well. [h1]Conclusion[/h1] I think all the pieces are here for a successful game, EA/DICE just really need to focus on what the community wants from them in order to make it a good game. However, in its current state, I would avoid buying this game until many of the major bugs and issues are resolved... so in like half a year. [h1]6.5/10[/h1]