EA has released a new trailer for Battlefield 5 that showcases the multiplayer maps that will be available at its launch. According to its description, players will fight through the unexplored settin... Battlefield 5 Trailer Multiplayer maps
If I am not mistaken with their concept of "game as a live service", they are deploying maps in a somewhat chronological order. I believe these are supposed to be ~1940. Operation Barbarossa was in '41 and Stalingrad in '42. I think they confirmed that iconic theaters/battles will come at a later date.
Yeah, but it's kinda meh. Most players are there from the launch and will get bored and leave before new maps will arrive. Same thing as in BF1. They should have rather taken more time and release more.
I would have liked to see 10 maps vs the 8 it looks like we are getting at launch. Appreciate the new settings and (supposedly) big maps, but the content updates will need to come fast to keep the player base growing rather than shrinking. You can only play the same 8 maps so many times... I think BF1 had 9 at launch and then went to 10 a few months later with the giants shadow map (which was free).
No it wasn't. It was Hitler's incompetence and the Russian weather. In any case, these maps look like they're set at the start of WW2, so there's bound to be a few Russian maps introduced later on.
I hope for the exact opposite. BF1 single player was one of the best single player games that actually made me feel something in a long time. Most other games are shallow and do not give you a feeling that you are even remotely "in the game".
Who needs single player if you have battle royal mode? Oh wait, they will ad even that later, the game is screwed But at least it looks nice, i can give them that.
I'll admit, there are like 3 maps in there that I think will be pretty good. I still think it's a major mistake to release the content like this. I know it makes sense for their war tides plan, but by the time the iconic battles show up, it might be too late. I sure want to see Stalingrad/D-day in frostbite engine.
It looks nice, but they really should have used some of the more famous locations and battles, aswell as the swastika! Would have loved to have a berlin map from the end of the war, with swastika's all over the place.
I would say Russian bravery, resilience, Katyushas, T-34s and eventually cold weather made the difference.
It was a collective effort in a lot of aspects , who can forget Churchill's not a single step backwards policy? And the uk airforces keeping the skies relative clear ...then again hittler did not help the case attacking the russians was literally poking a sleeping bear with a stick while trying to fight thw wolfs!
It was a collective effort but Russians (Soviets) suffered enormous losses, and Western countries are belittling Eastern sacrifices for reasons unknown to me.
Not to turn this thread into something else, but the Soviet Union and Stalin was no better than ***** Germany and Hitler. Yes, the Russian people suffered the most casualties wise (followed by the Germans), but a significant part of it was due to Stalin's complete disregard of his own people, with purges before the war and then the insane meat grinding strategies during the war. And I won't even count the millions of deaths and hardships caused by enforced communism after the war...
I am from Russia and see that everyone here is a historian, have military education and in-depth know every (even some) grand battles in Eastern front, write essays about capitalism, fascism, socialism, communism, etc. and because of that they can freely say something like "it's weather, not a Soviet people that win", "***** = Soviet Union", "Insane meat grinding strategies" and so on. Shame. I would used more rude words, if rules would allow it. What a ignorance to say something like that about people that suffered enormous losses, about my ancestors, when you only know a surface about battles on Eastern front, what people/generals/general headquarters do to win.
I never had intention to belitle the russian significance at all .hell the war might have been lost or at the very least hold for many extra years with out russia . Also i am greek we did well holding the italian axies forces but when german ones joined em they swallowed us. Wasn't a non aggresion treaty between russians and germans in place before hitler decided to go on and open another front with a huge powerfull nation (russia)? Because you know that made strategic sense!
