Where we talk about the three Cs: the camera, the control and the combat.
We Chat to The Division 2's Game Director David Kennedy
We play through the neon colours of Far Cry New Dawn, the direct standalone sequel to the events of Far Cry 5
Far Cry New Dawn Review - A New Dawn, A Nuke Day
A spiritual successor to Advance Wars, of sorts, from indie studio Chucklefish.
Wargroove Review - Advance Wars Returns?
Sex, Raids and Rock and Roll Javelins
Anthem - The Big Interview
Post by Steve Farrelly @ 12:41am 09/11/18 | 0 Comments
We've taken Battlefield V to the same races we took Battlefield IV, but this time there's skylight above and fish in the water, writes Nathan Lawrence, in our naturally in-depth review.

Here's a snippet:
I was on the infamous Battlefield 4 review trip. It’s “infamous” because the game I played in Redwood, San Francisco and the game that launched felt like two different beasts. What I played was a stable online experience, afforded by controlled online matches powered by the kind of internet that, to this day, still seems like science fiction in Australia. For those who played Battlefield 4 at launch, though, they’d know how unplayable it was.

Ever since then, playing any sort of multiplayer-focused game, especially one built by DICE, under controlled review conditions breeds nervousness as to whether what I’ve played will compare to what is delivered. Despite its very apparent warts, last year’s Battlefront II had stable networking at launch. The same is true of Battlefield 1 and the recent Battlefield V beta was promising. Enough time has passed and DICE has learnt its lessons, it would seem, but I wanted to flag upfront that my experience of Battlefield V was played under controlled conditions in Sweden.
Click here for our in-depth Battlefield V review.








Latest Comments
No comments currently exist. Be the first to comment!
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now!