670°

DICE teases Battlefield V details: War Stories, new Battlefield in a new setting, gameplay changes

In order to further hype the official reveal of Battlefield V, DICE has teased some new details about this new Battlefield game. In a series of tweets, the official BF Twitter account shared things that may interest Battlefield fans.

Read Full Story >>
dsogaming.com
ArchangelMike2166d ago

I skipped out on Battlefield 1, but this has me intrigued, especially for the new setting. We already know that at least one of the new modes will be Battle Royal. In any case colour me interested.

Obscure_Observer2166d ago

@ArchangelMike

"We already know that at least one of the new modes will be Battle Royal"

Has DICE confirmed this information?

ArchangelMike2166d ago

Here. I'm not sure if it has been confirmed as yet, but trust me, they won't pass up the opportunity, especially as they are already half way there with 64 player maps.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/...

Skull5212166d ago

The V is for reVolution. Gonna be red coats and muskets. Battlefield like you’ve never experienced before.

MagUk2165d ago

V will be for Victory with Winston Churchill giving us the the two fingers on the front cover ✌🏻

Usperg2165d ago Show
BadElf2165d ago

Nah, the V is for "Vagina". They will be PC and add Women as playable characters.(ooooof)

Nodoze2165d ago

I wish, as I would be interested to play. Instead we get rehashes of WW2 over and over and over.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2165d ago
Lionalliance2166d ago

Where exactly did you get that it has a battle rotal mode?

ArchangelMike2166d ago

As I posted above, I'm not saying it's been confirmed by DICE - it's just a very good educated guess that they will do it if they can. Why not when they already have 64 player game modes.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/...

Elit3Nick2165d ago

BF3 already had a BR-esque game mode called Scavenger, where you started with a pistol and had to find weapons laying around, although there were respawns.

ORyanDeee2165d ago

I though dice said it was going to have a battle royal mode but not to expect it at launch ? I’m sure I read that somewhere

Obscure_Observer2166d ago

@UCForce

Now you´re excited about an EA game?

Sam Fisher2166d ago

Not excited, just wanna see whats new. Everyone is either counting down on hype or disappointment

UCForce2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

I don’t. But I do want to see what it is. Even my previous statements, I would rather buy Rage 2 over COD and Battlefield. So don’t be mistaking here.

Obscure_Observer2165d ago

@UCForce

Good. For one second i though you would support an EA game. Keep fighting the good fight.

UltraNova2165d ago

So we have to hate on the games as well if we decided to boycott the Publisher? Is that your logic's extend?

No Obsucure, I love BF games. I love their campaign amd their MP. I will continue to love this franchise even if EA f**** it up with MTs. I'll simply buy it used and I wont spend a single cent online (how it really hurts EA).

Damn some people are blinded by the hate...

Obscure_Observer2164d ago

@Ultranova

A few weeks ago:

"I couldn't wait for the new Battlefield game, now how can I support them when they blatantly declare that they regretted nothing? Damn you EA, really damn you."

Now:

"No Obsucure, I love BF games. I love their campaign amd their MP. I will continue to love this franchise even if EA f**** it up with MTs. I'll simply buy it used and I wont spend a single cent online (how it really hurts EA)."

Damn some people are blinded by the hate..."

Yeah, some people are really blinded by their hate. To the point of their own hate speech turn against them, it will trap them and eaten them alive while exposing their true nature as a bunch of turncoats and hypocrites.

UltraNova2164d ago (Edited 2164d ago )

Oh my...after everything I said do you actually believe I went back on my word? Are you so delusional?

Here let me turn on the lights for you; by support= buy it new or even buy a potential season pass!

Jesus Christ dude why so serious?

PS: I always mean what I say whether you like it or not, who gives a damn...I sure don't.

Obscure_Observer2163d ago

@UltraNova

"PS: I always mean what I say whether you like it or not, who gives a damn...I sure don't."

Good. Because it isn´t about me anyway. It´s you against yourself. But don´t worry, you´re not the only one. You´re just a number in a long line of people that will have to resort to lame and pathetic excuses to validate their purchases and support GaaS.

"I´m gonna buy it used", "I´m gonna buy it for the Single Player Campaign"

Anthem, TLOU 2, Death Stranding is upon us. And GaaS is gonna be your friend! And i know you´ll support it.

Cheers.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2163d ago
fredpinta2165d ago

There are EA games....and there's Battlefield

sKiiTs82165d ago

why is this simple comment getting down votes? i swear this website has the most toxic users

Scatpants2166d ago

If it has a single player campaign it wins. At least in my book. Looks like they're Battlefronting COD.

morganfell2166d ago

I'll purchase just for the campaign.

2166d ago
morganfell2166d ago (Edited 2166d ago )

Fun Fact: No it isn't the same thing as a woven story. Its more like the background shallow trash you get in a fighting game so that makes you quite wrong.

2166d ago
Obscure_Observer2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

@morganfell

"I'll purchase just for the campaign."

Lol! Yeah, right...

morganfell2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

"Lmao! Yeah, right..."

You are hilarious. I have purchased more games than I can remember that, while having a popular multiplayer, only appealed to me for the Single Player. As I remarked elsewhere, I haven't played COD MP since MW3, yet I have purchased every single COD title and all of those latter ones for the Campaign alone.

What is worth a "LMAO" is people such as yourself that are completely unaware numerous people have no interest in the MP for a great many titles. It demonstrates the narrow field of your gaming acquaintances. I purchased Battlefront II and did not play a single MP game. Not one. I never even went so far as the MP lobby. Plenty of people, as God of War (perhaps you have heard of this game - maybe not because it is a PS4 title) recently demonstrated, numerous individuals love Single Player far more than online.

Aren't you supposed to be making more absurd predictions in some thread elsewhere?

@Dank,

Adding a mission isn't close to the same thing have an enveloping Story. It is a cheap one off. Campaigns are about far more than playing a set piece against AI.

GMEN7182165d ago

This! I truly enjoyed War Stories on BF1.

Obscure_Observer2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

@morganfell

"You are hilarious."

Am I? You think so high of yourself, so smart, yet you couldn´t resist the urge to tell everybody that you gonna pay full price for an EA game only for the single player mode ignoring that it could be a 3 hours campaign game!

So the jokes is on you! I love to see people like you so full of themselves falling in contradiction over and over again! You love to hate EA just to give them your money next! And i can´t wait to see you doing Microsoft the same favor! So please, continue to move the goalposts!

"I´m gonna play this game on my PC"

There! Another absurd prediction for you.

2165d ago
Sm00thNinja2165d ago

I buy Call of Duty games just for the campaign..... Usually never touch the multiplayer. That shouldn't be so unbelievable.

ArchangelMike2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

I have to agree with Morgan here,

I too purchase (some) multiplayer heavy FPS games for their single player campaign. There's nothing wrong with that. I guess I'm from the old school generation where the multiplayer portion of a game used to be the free added bonus, but you got the game primarily for the single player campaign.

How things have changed aye?

morganfell2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

@Obscure,

I didn't tell everyone that because I think highly of myself. How is that even a common sense remark? I think I am great so I tell people I spend money? One might do that to impress others with their wealth but in your rush to attack me your comment lacks rationality.

In fact I stated it because it is true and to rebut those that purport to speak for all persons concerning the purchasing of COD titles. I stated it because as with all my previous purchase for COD dating back to after MW3, it has been for the campaign. Remarking the campaign will be 3 hours is simply clutching at straws. You are also an individual that determines worth of an experience by time. Such a poor yardstick.

@Dank,

I have experienced such titles before and they never seem like they have any filling to them at all. In addition they lack that over arching story that also drives interrelation among the characters. A title can have great mechanics and smooth gameplay but if it lacks story or the MP doesn't relate and tie into a great story I could care less. On the other hand a game may have less than perfect gameplay, it may be buggy and crash but if it has a great story I will play that title more than once. That isn't everyone's preference but it is certainly mine and I am aware of more than a few other's that share this view.

@Sm00th,

Apparently persons such as you and I along with Archangel have passed unawares for certain board members here. As I said, I know of quite a few people that think in a similar fashion, along with those that are only about the multiplayer. It would seem the social experience of some others is not so broad.

@Archangel,

I would bet even money that you and I are the ones that grew up on PC, spent a great many late nights trying to get DOS and Win 95 to run some title. I would purchase more games for their MP only nature or at the very least MP first structure were that MP not simple twitch shooting. 95% of my online time is now coop. To me that was what really made MP worth it. The teamwork. I only run with people I personally know and none of us care for aggro 12 year olds that do not even bother to operate together or employ decent tactics. I have a longer attention span that that required to play most modern MP titles. In any event, if this game has a normal campaign it will be a purchase for me. I haven't played an EA MP game since BF4 so regardless of the MP, I am looking forward to this. If the MP turns out to be something I like then that is a boon.

I understand very well why some people purchase a game like COD for the MP and never touch the campaign. Are such individuals so narrow in their perceptions they cannot comprehend why some persons would do the reverse? Who really lacks comprehension in this case?

morganfell2165d ago

@Archangel,

One other thought. Our purchasing habits apparently concern some people. If other people want to purchase COD they are welcome to do so. I have said I will not due to the lack of a standard campaign and such a decision by me and those that think in a similar fashion has set some people aghast. They apparently lay awake at night in turmoil over our decision not to buy a game. Persons whom they do not know and could exist half a world away.

But that is not the worst. In this thread we announced our decision to purchase a fully packaged title (in the traditional sense) and simply not play part of the game and they are bewildered. So it isn't just our purchasing habits which have set them on edge, it is also our gaming preferences which have them in a quandary.

ShadowWolf7122165d ago

Too bad War Stories isn't a campaign.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 2165d ago
SirBradders2166d ago

It will be the same as bf1's war stories.

SirBillyBones2166d ago

I was honestly hoping they would drop the campaign and pour those resources into the multiplayer. The last four Battlefield campaigns have ranged from terrible to painfully mediocre, and have felt like a waste of time, effort and money. The same can be said about COD, except I hold the Battlefield franchise in much higher regard.

Scatpants2165d ago

If anything they would drop the campaign and pour those resources into their pockets. Same price for the game though.

ArchangelMike2165d ago

Don't you dare start giving them ideas. There are many that still love the single player story driven campaign, and who are not into the juvenile mindlessness of the endless grind that are the multiplayer modes.

Moreover never ever ever ask a company to give you less content for your money.

Never.

It's financial suicide.

Don't do it.

Rachel_Alucard2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

You need to understand when things get removed they don't get replaced in the entertainment world. I remember Arc system works got a ton of feedback saying that people didn't like having to wait 6 months for a Blazblue localization, so to release around the same time they removed the english dub for Central fiction. People were outraged and now Cross tag battle has a full dub as a result. But if you request removing features with the intention of putting those resources toward multiplayer, they'll never do it. They sell you something that passes as a $60 product and nothing else.

ArchangelMike2165d ago

I've always preferred Battlefield games over COD, and I stopped playing COD a long time ago; but saying that, not all Battlefield games are created equal. For example Battlefield Bad Company 2 is still the best in the series in my humble opinion; but then Battlefield Hardline was for me a terrible game.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2165d ago
Twinblade2166d ago

We have WW1, WW2, modern and future settings... what new setting? Civil war?

Kabaneri2166d ago

Vietnam war would be cool.

2166d ago
SirBillyBones2166d ago

Vietnam wouldn't fit with their sprawling, multiple-front narrative. There's not enough scope for a modern day BF game.

Twinblade2166d ago

Vietnam war has been done in Bad Company.

morganfell2166d ago (Edited 2166d ago )

The old PC game (console attempts were trash) called Vietcongn which had a full CAMPAIGN along with the full CAMPAIGN Add On called Fist Alpha demonstrated that Vietnam based stories could be intriguing, respectful, accurate (for the most part) and enjoyable. It also wasn't a politically correct game.

This guy turned off the music which was actually very well done: https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Skull5212165d ago

Are you people all too young to remember Battlefield: Vietnam? They’ve already done it, twice now with bad company’s DLC. If I remember correctly it was the second Battlefield game made.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2165d ago
The 10th Rider2165d ago (Edited 2165d ago )

They've done WW1, WW2, Vietnam, the Middle East, and 2142.

Civil War seems like it would be an awful choice. I'd take the American War for Independence over that, but even that seems ridiculous. If it is truly a new setting I would guess an alternate modern timeline so it's modern, but not in the Middle East, or the Korean War (which would be amazing).

Most likely by "new" they mean "new" from Battlefield 1's setting, meaning it could really be anything.

Bhuahahaha2165d ago

hmm i think they should do the forgotten war~ korean war

The 10th Rider2165d ago

I think that would be amazing, but the chance of that ever happening has always seemed slim. I was thinking about it and EA actually originally shot down BF1 because they didn't think people would know enough about WW1. After the success of BF1 maybe something like the Korean war isn't so farfetched anymore.

SixFragz2166d ago

This game will obliterate Call of Dookie Wack Ops 4.

Parasyte2165d ago

People say that every year, and CoD still outsells it.

SixFragz2165d ago

Obliterate in terms of innovation, quality, and just about every front where CoD is just uninspired.

Battlefield always sells handsomely and their games last. Call of Dookie games last for a single year until it's time for the next rubbish game on the conveyor belt that's the same exact rubbish as the game before.

Don't be surprised when Wack Ops 4 does terribly compared to other CoD's or even Battlefield V. The game is riding a trend as its only selling point, and surprisingly, a considerable amount of people aren't fooled. Trends die, and so will Call of Dookie.

Razmiran2165d ago

People sure forgot about EAs microtransaction scandal fast

UCForce2165d ago

Yeah, i’m not going to buy Battlefield and COD this year. I rather buy Rage 2.

Show all comments (84)
110°

Battlefield V now broken on Steam Deck / Linux with EA anticheat live

That's all folks. EA anticheat has now been added into Battlefield V, so it's the end of being able to play it on Steam Deck and other Linux systems.

This joins the likes of Plants vs. Zombies Garden Warfare 2: Deluxe Edition, EA SPORTS FC 24, EA SPORTS FIFA 23, Battlefield 2042 and Madden NFL 24 that all have EA's own homegrown anti-cheat that make them simply unplayable on systems running Linux.

Now if you try to run it, you'll be greeted with an error. A shame to see a game that's multiple years old get broken like this and no doubt EA will continue to use their own EA anticheat in future online games. Battlefield 1 is still okay, and Apex Legends is also still running but perhaps it's only a matter of time before EA force it onto those too?

Read Full Story >>
gamingonlinux.com
just_looken19d ago

more comments here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/St...
https://steamcommunity.com/...

47 comments in hours bf5 won't launch anymore ea is saying meh not my prob bitch tosses a faq
https://answers.ea.com/t5/B...

Yes counter cheating that is good but when the ea app on pc is still totally broken and these cheaters are on 2042 same anti cheat this is just putting scotch tape on trumps file cabinet to prevent leaks its nothing more than a stop gap.

I mention ea app as for 4years it was in beta then tossed out with 3 year old issues and i still cant not get the products that i purchased on origin yeah i purchased digital but guess what there is no dvd games on pc anymore.

Philaroni18d ago

Likewise, I'm about to do some games with some friends here but if you wish to PM me I could share my Discord if you like to talk further. Oddly you bring up THQ that I did some work for in the past.

Also for Starfield I have just a Stock GTX 1080. Not even the 1080i version on an ultra wide and with some Ini, changes and other weird things I know I got it working at Series X frame rate. Sure not the the fancy graphics options. I know Bethesda games have always been more CPU then GPU limiting. A good application I don't see many using is Process lasso. It helps with may CPU heavy games on PC. (Battletech is the main one I use it for) Can find it here if you like. https://bitsum.com/

""Xbox has made custom engines like forza/unreal they used to support epic back in the day like slipstream like you said but they make so much cash they do not need to work as much as sony.

But the issue i find is the lack of passion behind games aswell as the mass amount of users that love the broken/microtransantion filled games we get every day. Back in the day when a game was crap or had something wrong it was a oh crap are we going to get shutdown or like thq just poof gone. But today its na who cares fix it later or write it off then oh wait never mind they like it such as the new cod.""

Going to combine me response here. You are right, MS and I do feel like what they do with not just Froza and also the tech they use in Flight Sim. Is not given enough credit. If I am correct the next Fable game is going to be using a mix of things from the Turn 10 Team, maybe Unreal? Hard to say at this point, But MS along with Sony both own a full License of the tech (Days Gone for Sony) I agree with you on the talent and passion part, games have become too much, at least AAA games the 'Milk, butter, eggs and toast" to support places now days. Innovations in gameplay and such has fell lower and lower. I still don't see mechanics and ways of playing games like I did so many years back, its a bummer.

For MS maybe the end as even though they might have a massive advantage in software and services (I use to work in Azure) They can kind of do some things at cost but seem to fail at it a lot. The cloud gaming push I don't think is going to have the effect so many hope for (Not sure why anyone wants that) I still want MS to have a chance but, if I sit here with my magic dice and roll it on MS games over the last forever, it could land on Crackdown 3 (Remember that?) The cloud powered game... and now they are trying to do it again with Kojima some what. As an engineer, its not happening now, tomorrow or anything in the next 24 years. I remember back on this interview with John,

https://www.reddit.com/r/nv...

We are not even at that point yet. So hope we get there and I hope MS is still a player but I do feel you are right in many ways, they are already trying to slowly retreat just by the rhetoric alone.

Ether way again PM me and we should talk more, would love to do so.

Philaroni18d ago

The rough part of all of this is that for those of us on PC mostly be it Windows or Linux based, the anti-cheat sucks up a lot of resources. It kind of reminds me of the conversation between, security and freedom. Too much of ether is both good if managed well or very bad. We just as gamers keep seeing this pop up over and over again. Wish I had some magic wand to stop cheaters... but I don't... hell we just seen what happened with Apex at a high level event.. getting that kind of access and such is not good... but at the same time. Can anyone, one person provide me an example where Anti Cheat has even like a hit rate above 50? I know I'm pulling numbers out of my ass, but it seems the cheaters beat the systems in place time and time again. Where there is a lock, and a smith to make it. We always will have a thief that breaks it.

just_looken18d ago (Edited 18d ago )

I can

Sense everyone seems to have brain rot and forgot the ps3 that is the solution.

The ps3 for its first half had systems that would only launch the game if it saw you had a ps3 controller along with a inhouse operating system and a real gpu/cpu it was way harder to run cheats off of along with the ability to make custom rooms.

Yes there were p2p lag switching then later on thanks to that dev kit leak cheat menus but for years games like killzone/mag had dedicated servers that were hard to crack a operating system/cpu those in public had 0 knowledge how to make stuff on them.

Right now if they put all mp files on the server so we just stream the game that would be a huge step or make the multiplayer run in a sanboxed mode separate on the system.

Philaroni18d ago

I'm glad you brought that up that Killzone had Dedicated servers. I remember the Yellow Dog Linux days of PS3, as well. EA use to do more Dedicated Servers for games but as time went on they would 'rent them out' and slowly the official servers would die down.

P2P Lag always had that magical thing (Gears 2 (Aak the shot gun) and Halo 2,3) fans know as host advantage. That alone allowed for lags switches, booting of others from games. ECT. (Though I admit, was the most fun I had when our team could beat cheaters. Man was that a good time)

I fully agree with you, the fact so much is working how it is has in a hard way compromised network/client security issue. I'll pick on COD for example where some assets are local and other are on server, between games and between even evolutions/iterations of the engines used.

just_looken18d ago

@phil

Thank you for the reply i am glad others on here remember

Now back to the series x having games with the same frame rate as a 2005 xbox 360 but the masses thinking that is fine and next gen.

Starfield on series x native 780ishp fallout 3 xbox 360 720p both 30fps gaming has "grown so much"

Sadly we are not in large numbers and see mp/sp tech wise/cheater wise has gotten worse not better.

Philaroni18d ago

I hate to say it about Starfield I'd have too look at reports from way back when. I swear to god they said it was going to launch with Creation Kit 2 (I worked with 1 alot in Skyrim mods in the block based aka cell based structure) Back then it was great, but for the life of me I don't know how a Studio like Obsidian can make a game same as Bethesda but with less bugs and bull shit. (Fallout Veg and Outer Worlds) Not that it was with out bugs but when a 3rd party does better with your own tech... I find an issue... with it all.

Frame rate stuff I only understand from two points, design and marketing. On the Design part yes back in the day 30FPS was I swear almost more common then now days. It was not a design compromise to keep it at 30 as the hardware and the way the game was being 'displayed' (Key thing there) was as impactful. Now days I feel the Marketing side wants a 4K trailer running likely rendered on a Xbox or PS system with little text saying (Oh wit was on a PC that no one is able to afford... of course teasing there a bit.)

I do understand that Starfield is a 'simulated world' where like every item you drop is there, for like forever... cool, that is not too new now days and design wise, is kind of a dumb thing.... who cares how many carrots you can collect... is it cool sure, makes for good PR in some ways. Lack of tangible game play is the issue. I can't take credit for this but a buddy of mine worked in advertising and I shit you not at Fast food. They would make wax and even 3D print now and then post render foods you would get, just for you as the client at a Burger King to not be given as you where sold on. (((( He did not work for them FYI.. but others)))

Issue with gaming as you are saying is too much is on the 'presentation.' It does not sell like it use too, that type of advertising. Most of it is word of mouth, who my friends tell me is a good game or not, what my friends are playing. Then comes the reviews.

Its dumb that our next gen systems feel like we gone all but up a step that we already went down two to three on. Take Uncharted 4 for example 30FPS SP and 60 MP. That I can deal with, and that was a PS4 game.

I do at times dis Xbox a lot, but come on, they still have yet to make there own damn game engine. Slipstream failed heavily, where Sony and most of their own studios have tech they made for the games they are trying to build. I am unsure how Xbox is again now saying the 'next' system will be the best ever. Sure it will be duh? Tech changes and grows, but I never seen a system use it so poorly. (I blame alot on the bloated Xbox OS FYI)

just_looken18d ago

@phil

You can have both presentation and framerate pc's have been doing both for decades now 4k ray tracing bla bla yeah that is different but starfield is no maxed out minecraft with its seed tech with ray tracing minecraft uses seeds also with huge buildings but for years pc's can do 60fps on that.

I mentioned 30fps because back in the day we had hd consoles alot of users had sd tv's just getting into hd tv's so i get the graphics difference but we are talking about 20years of hardware difference.

A real hardware console 6700 3700x 16gb of ram can run starfield at 60fps not maxed out but its possible this was pre performance patches:
https://youtu.be/hNM488QIKO...

Remember the apu/igpu tablet crap the consoles are using are based off of the 6700

The xbox operating system has always been windows based from windows 2000/xp xbox-xbox 360 the tail end of the 360 using vista/7 then to the series x using windows 10 that is why backwards compatibility works great its all direct x based with the same bc as a window's pc. What we see today is just the change from needing games to survive to making games as a product m$ makes more money in a week than what sony can make in months.

Xbox has made custom engines like forza/unreal they used to support epic back in the day like slipstream like you said but they make so much cash they do not need to work as much as sony.

But the issue i find is the lack of passion behind games aswell as the mass amount of users that love the broken/microtransantion filled games we get every day. Back in the day when a game was crap or had something wrong it was a oh crap are we going to get shutdown or like thq just poof gone. But today its na who cares fix it later or write it off then oh wait never mind they like it such as the new cod.

The new cod is making bank yes users hated it but the sales show the masses that do not post love it sadly

Heck did you see that wow has limited time store items now with hundreds online defending it because they think the store its what's need to keep the game online despite the $15 a month payment and m4 ownership.

I find in the end of this generation Microsoft will go the way of sega they might also just buy sony as everything sony except music/games is not making money they are a cheap buy for microsoft right now so we would just have 2 companies fighting in the gaming ring with papa os watching from the sidelines.

Great chatting 2 you may i recommend looking at rpgm games? they are out there even though i have a i9 4090 custom rig right now along with a ps5 i have been playing 4yr old games or rpgm stuff this year. Its funny i remember being a 2360/ps3 owner stacks of adventures now i am like well time to see what is in the past.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 18d ago
80°

EA anticheat and Battlefield

Battlefield V, getting easy anticheat

We're pleased to share that EA Anticheat will be extended to #BattlefieldV this Wednesday, April 3rd at 08:00 UTC.

You will need to restart your game to benefit from the changes of this Client Update.

Learn more via our updated EA Anticheat Blog:

just_looken27d ago

Other sources from battlefield official accounts.

https://twitter.com/Battlef...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Ba...

So steamdeck might have issues and those out there that are anti kernal drm will get a surprise. Depending on your setup you also might get new issues as i know rgb software likes to fight with easy anti cheat.

140°

Amazon Digital Game Sale For Xbox Series X/S & Xbox One

Daily Video Game writes: "There is a new digital game sale Amazon is offering for both Xbox Series X/S and Xbox One that heavily discounts several popular titles like GRID Legends, Mass Effect Legendary, Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order, and more for Xbox owners right now!"

Read Full Story >>
dailyvideogame.com