• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Battlefield 1

Teager

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
I'm not a big gamer but this is a pretty intense game trailer.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4pY3hlQEOc0
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
I am so excited for this game.

WW1 has definitely been a underutilized era for video games so for a big studio like EA to tackle it will be awesome.

I hope it's better executed than hotline though.
 

PuckChaser

Army.ca Fixture
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
226
Points
780
Agreed, pondering a preorder. Totally untouched time period for FPS games. Getting it for PC, or console?
 

runormal

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Eh, I'll wait for the release. Knowing EA half it will be DLC and the game will cost double the listed price...

It is cool that a game from this time period has been released. I personally wouldn't mind another WW2 shooter or a 1942 relaunch as well, but we will see...
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
PuckChaser said:
Agreed, pondering a preorder. Totally untouched time period for FPS games. Getting it for PC, or console?
Playstation probably,don't have a good enough gaming PC.

I know the reason it was untouched, it's because everyone would have machine guns and anything that popped it's head above a trench would be mowed down.

I hope they limit machine guns the same way they limited armor in BF4. Two per team and take a few minutes to reappear after they get destroyed. And make the player using them extremely slow.

If it's run and gun I'll be pissed.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
runormal said:
Eh, I'll wait for the release. Knowing EA half it will be DLC and the game will cost double the listed price...

It is cool that a game from this time period has been released. I personally wouldn't mind another WW2 shooter or a 1942 relaunch as well, but we will see...
Ya, but with infinite warfare backlash anything EA did with boots on the ground would have been a hit.
 

PuckChaser

Army.ca Fixture
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
226
Points
780
Altair said:
Playstation probably,don't have a good enough gaming PC.

I know the reason it was untouched, it's because everyone would have machine guns and anything that popped it's head above a trench would be mowed down.

I hope they limit machine guns the same way they limited armor in BF4. Two per team and take a few minutes to reappear after they get destroyed. And make the player using them extremely slow.

If it's run and gun I'll be pissed.

I think they will. The gameplay video from E3 had some mounted MGs placed around the map, but it didn't look like something you could choose as a class. Everything was very early submachine guns and bolt actions. I'm thinking it won't be 100% realistic, but if they spend time on the campaign mode it could be phenomenal.

I'll be on PC as my thumbs haven't evolved enough to aim quickly with my PS4 controller. I'm an old school keyboard and mouse guy.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
I've watched a few game play videos and here's my take on it.

1. It's a battlefield game. It's not a WW1 game by battlefield it's a battlefield game that happens to be in WW1. Far too many smgs, a bit too fast paced for what I think a WW1 battle would be, but it was on conquest mode. More on weapons later.

2. I'm really intrigued about operations mode. A bunch of battles spanning different maps? A group of attackers vs a group of defenders? Objectives to be attacked and defended?Sounds like rush on a bigger scale. I hope the maps slow the pace down by concentrating firepower to a narrower front, will be excited to see gameplay of this. I did feel they missed a opportunity with this mode though. The plan for this mode is for it to last more than an hour but this can only happen if the attackers keep pushing forward. If the defense wins the match could be done in 5 minutes. They should make it like a football match, attackers fail, well, have fun because here comes the counterattack. Pushing the former attackers back would also make the battle be fought over already damaged land, allowing for the moonscape environment that one sees in old WW1 photographs. A pity.

3. This behemoth vehicles thing is a little gimmicky IMHO. Soldiers jumping into battle off a blimp firing from 2 or 3 machine guns? In WW1? Not sold. But it is cool to watch that thing come down.

4. Vehicles seem a little fast but they seem more or less balanced. In that infantry runs in fear kind of way. I hope they have cavalry for MP

5. Weapons. Sigh...When I heard WW1 game I pictured dug in defenders fighting infantry desperately using every bit of cover that they could find. I didn't picture soldiers running around every which way firing smgs at other soldiers running every which way firing smgs. I know that smgs were used in WW1 and figured they would be in this game but I had hoped they would be underpowered compared to rifles. Obviously not because everyone and their mother is using it in the video. I know this isn't a Sim of WW1 but it shouldn't play like a WW2 game.

6. Tactics. The video I saw was of conquest and that mode leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to tactics IMHO. I've always been a rush kind of guy, which is why hardline has been gathering dust Iin my house and BF4 is in constant use. But in the video it seemed a lot more run and gunny than I would have imagined. Again, maybe operations mode funneling soldiers onto a narrow front will change that.

7. The environment.  The game is beautiful and like how dynamic weather should make every match different from the last. I like that the map remembers every crater, and that most every house can be turned to rubble. BF4 failed in this regard because of the tall Asian skyscraper maps left the map mostly intact.  I used to love running around in BFBC 2 using c4 to blast new routes through the battlefield that the enemy wouldn't expect. I loved turning a well defended town into flat ruins after a good shelling. This game makes it look  like that's coming back.

Conclusion. I'm cautiously optimistic that EA can pull this off. I had hoped for a game more true to the era but this is close enough for the realists and casual enough for the hordes of COD fans coming over after the infinite warfare fiasco. That said if they screw this up, infinite warfare has modern warfare remastered.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
147
Points
780
Altair said:
I've watched a few game play videos and here's my take on it.

1. It's a battlefield game. It's not a WW1 game by battlefield it's a battlefield game that happens to be in WW1. Far too many smgs, a bit too fast paced for what I think a WW1 battle would be, but it was on conquest mode. More on weapons later.

2. I'm really intrigued about operations mode. A bunch of battles spanning g different maps? A group of attackers vs a group of defenders? Objectives to be attacked and defended?Sounds like rush on a bigger scale. I hope the maps slow the pace down by concentrating firepower to a narrower front, will be excited to see gameplay of this. I did feel they missed a opportunity with this mode though. The plan for this mode is for it to last more than an hour but this can only happen if the attackers keep pushing forward. If the defense wins the match could be done in 5 minutes. They should make it like a football match, attackers fail, well, have fun because here comes the counterattack. Pushing the former attackers back would also make the battle be fought over already damaged land, allowing for the moonscape environment that one sees in old WW1 photographs. A pity.

3. This behemoth vehicles thing is a little gimmicky IMHO. Soldiers jumping into battle off a blimp firing from 2 or 3 machine guns? In WW1? Not sold. But it is cool to watch that thing come down.

4. Vehicles seem a little fast but they seem more or less balanced. In that infantry runs in fear kind of way. I hope they have cavalry for MP

5. Weapons. Sigh...When I heard WW1 game I pictured dug in defenders fighting infantry desperately using every bit of cover that they could find. I didn't picture soldiers running around every which way firing smgs at other soldiers runnig every which way firing smgs. I know that smgs were used in WW1 and figured they would be in this game but I had hoped they would be underpowered compared to rifles. Obviously not because everyone and their mother is using it in the video. I know this isn't a Sim of WW1 but it shouldn't play like a WW2 game.

6. Tactics. The video I saw was of conquest and that mode leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to tactics IMHO. I've always been a rush kind of guy, which is why hardliners has been gathering dust I  my house and BF4 is in constant use. But in the video it seemed a lot more run and gunny than I would have imagined. Again, maybe operations mode funneling soldiers onto a narrow front will change that.

7. The environment.  The game is beautiful and like how dynamic weather should make every match different from the last I like that the map remembers every crater, and that most every house can be turned to rubble. BF4 failed in this regard because of the tall Asian skyscraper maps left the map mostly intact.  I used to lost running around in BFBC 2 using c4 to blast new routes through battlefield that the enemy wouldn't expect. I loved turning a well defended town into flat ruins after a good shelling. This game makes it look  like that's comping back.

Conclusion. I'm cautiously optimistic that EA can pull this off. I has hoped for a game more true to the era but this is close enough for the realist and casual enough for the hordes of COD fans coming over after the infinite warfare fiasco. That said if they screw this up, infinite warfare has modern warfare remastered.

The best battlefield game to date and the one that required the most skill has been the original Battlefield 1942.  As far as I'm concerned, nothing EA has released has come close to replicating that experience.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
1942 was great but I need destructible environments now.
 

AwooBot

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I don't know about this game either. Game looks gorgeous though.
But gameplay looks like another Battlefield game, just in a different setting. Not really the Trench Warfare I'd imagine in WW1.

Like other people said above, this game will probably have DLCs up the wazoo (like the current Battlefield instalments).
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
197
Points
680
After careful review, I wont be buying this game.

I had hoped DICE would try to create a WW1 game, instead its clear they simply created a Battlefield game with a WW1 skin on it.

Fun for some I'm sure, but I wont be playing a WW1 game where everyone is running around using Sub machine guns.

I've found Verdun on the PS4 and that actually has a realistic feel to a WW1 game, although its user base leaves something to be desired.
 

Inspir

Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
I'll stick to BF4 where I can kill people with my defibrillator pads and blow torch
 
Top