• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Battlefield 5 retail listing at World of Games (Swiss), "tactical shooter in WW1"

A

Auctopus

Member
derder said:
Holy shit if true. I've wanted a proper WW1 shooter for a while. Hopefully this doesn't have stupid perks.
Click to expand...

"Whistle - Force Allies To Throw Themselves Over The Top"
"Bicycle - Gain a bicycle to reach a blistering 8mph through waterlogged battlefields"
"Trenchfoot - Use Trenchfoot to your advantage and OHK enemies with a swing of your foot"
"Write Letters Home Twice As Fast"
"Medicine - 15% Less Chance of having First Aid go septic on you."
"Gasmask - When your enemy reaches the game's ultimate killstreak (4) and unleashes their Gas Attack perk. Counterattack using your fragile first generation Gas Attack"
 
K

Kosma

Banned
Lot of people seem to think WW1 was only trenches, when in fact the opening period was quite dynamic.

EA could totally make a game with the awesome tech that launched in WW1 without getting bogged down.

Zeppelins, tanks, machine gun nests, fighters, armored cars, tank, artillery, chemical attacks, calvary (horses).
 
J

Johnny M

Member
Tactical WW1 shooter
Tactical
WW1
j5TmbrW.gif


Sorry but that doesn't make sense, unless they wanted to use tactical as realistic.
 
DeepEnigma

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Johnny M said:
Tactical WW1 shooter
Tactical
WW1
j5TmbrW.gif


Sorry but that doesn't make sense, unless they wanted to use tactical as realistic.
Click to expand...

Maybe not so much like CoD run/gun arcade, and more R6? Using tactics more than spray and pray?

It will be in the Civl War era, let us go back further! :p
 
K

Kosma

Banned
Johnny M said:
Tactical WW1 shooter
Tactical
WW1
j5TmbrW.gif


Sorry but that doesn't make sense, unless they wanted to use tactical as realistic.
Click to expand...

How doesn't it make any sense?

WW1 saw some of the biggest advances in infantry tactics and the basis for modern small infantry units.
 
T

Trojan

Member
We need more World Wars in order to provide a fresh setting for new shooter sequels. This is a serious problem facing society today.
 
P

PeskyToaster

Member
Johnny M said:
Tactical WW1 shooter
Tactical
WW1
j5TmbrW.gif


Sorry but that doesn't make sense, unless they wanted to use tactical as realistic.
Click to expand...

Modern squad based tactics were pioneered in WWI. Rapid movement based infiltration and assault of the enemy trenches by multiple, coordinated, yet independent groups. They were often equipped with machine guns, trench guns, flamethrowers, rifles, rifle grenades, and other tools for rapidly eliminating defenses and fighting in the trenches.
 
D

DoublePayje

Banned
PeskyToaster said:
Not really. DICE made a Secret Weapons of WW2 expansion for Battlefield 1942. An entire expansion of rare, experimental weaponry. Even had jets that took off on a tube thing. They had plenty of experimental weapons in the modern games that barely saw use in real life. Even the M1911 is in BF4. I wonder when that was invented.
Click to expand...

Expansion -> exactly that, not the main game. People would have disliked seeing all the Secret Weapons expansion stuff in the main game as a part of the normal gameplay. You remember all the controversy about Hardline because of how wierd the setting feels for some people (besides all the other critizism Hardline got).

The modern games do not take place in their specific year of release but a bit in the future. All used stuff is real or plausible. Su50 for russians? The thing flew the first time 2010. Sure they use it for a game playing in 2020. The "future stuff"? All part of DLCs aswell. Very rare guns? DLC stuff. The M1 in Bad Company or the M1911 is a nod to fans (and M1911 is still used and produced today, just saying).

Authenticity is expected in different levels for different settings. You can have rare items to bridge something, but going off the rails is something people dislike. They won't do it for an AAA release. As mentioned by someone earlier: Part of singleplayer campagn or not happening at all.
 
A

Auctopus

Member
Bedameister said:
This is so true.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. It's how business works.

If developers were all chasing their own artistic goals instead of following the hot trend until it blows out their arses then people wouldn't get as bored so easily.

I'm not saying the devs are artistically bankrupt, there's clearly talented and devoted Devs in there but the publishers follow the money and there's too much to lose in the FPS genre.
 
Tal Shiar Agent

Tal Shiar Agent

Member
I'd love an American Civil War Battlefield game. Near the end of the war breech loading cartridge rifles were coming into use so they could theoretically make it so weapons don't take too long to reload.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
They could do alternate universe WW1 or add a twist time travel weapons from the future, or introduce zombies/aliens. But basic WW1 with a realistic bend would not be terribly interesting to play.
 
P

PeskyToaster

Member
DoublePayje said:
Expansion -> exactly that, not the main game. People would have disliked seeing all the Secret Weapons expansion stuff in the main game as a part of the normal gameplay. You remember all the controversy about Hardline because of how wierd the setting feels for some people (besides all the other critizism Hardline got).

The modern games do not take place in their specific year of release but a bit in the future. All used stuff is real or plausible. Su50 for russians? The thing flew the first time 2010. Sure they use it for a game playing in 2020. The "future stuff"? All part of DLCs aswell. Very rare guns? DLC stuff. The M1 in Bad Company or the M1911 is a nod to fans (and M1911 is still used and produced today, just saying).

Authenticity is expected in different levels for different settings. You can have rare items to bridge something, but going off the rails is something people dislike. They won't do it for an AAA release. As mentioned by someone earlier: Part of singleplayer campagn or not happening at all.
Click to expand...

I just think you, and a lot of other people, are boxing yourselves in with the common perception of the war and you're not giving it the credit for being an extremely varied and modern conflict with a great, and untapped, potential for gaming.
 
Chozo_Lord

Chozo_Lord

Member
I highly doubt it. Though what would be interesting is if the next main BF wasn't ready for this year, so they made a digital only $20 WW1 battlefield sort of like how BF1943 was.
 
N

Nabbis

Member
ITT people who don't know shit about WW1 claiming it can't offer a Battlefield experience( what ever the fuck that means anyway, aside from not having choppers).
 
P

Paganmoon

Member
Hmm, probably been mentioned but... WW1 didn't have that many (any at all?) gun attachments. They changing it up from the last few entries with the battlepacks?
 
J

josecitoxnyo

Member
I'm actually surprised DICE have'nt announced the game yet, they usually do it at the start of the year the game launches, see BF3 and 4 for example, bulding up the hype for the gameplay reveal at E3.
 
K

Kill3r7

Member
PeskyToaster said:
Modern squad based tactics were pioneered in WWI. Rapid movement based infiltration and assault of the enemy trenches by multiple, coordinated, yet independent groups. They were often equipped with machine guns, trench guns, flamethrowers, rifles, rifle grenades, and other tools for rapidly eliminating defenses and fighting in the trenches.
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about shock troops but WWI was really about the power of industrialism and the mass production of weapons, primarily artillery. Grand scale battlefield tactics were far more important in WWI than infantry warfare. That said, it can't be denied that the evolution of modern warfare started during WWI where command shifted from large companies to small squads.
 
C

Crackbone

Member
Can't wait to go over the top. Charging MG positions and being reduced to goop via massive artillery positions.

I'm not even joking I'd love them to take a risk like this.
 
The Wise Old Man

The Wise Old Man

Member
You fools are overlooking the obvious. This is possibly an ALT-HISTORY version of WWI using steampunk motives of giant machines stomping about and massive blimps carpet bombing everything. Complete with primitive tin metal exo suit armor for soldiers to appeal to the COD crowd. That would be something new and fresh!
 
D

DoublePayje

Banned
PeskyToaster said:
I just think you, and a lot of other people, are boxing yourselves in with the common perception of the war and you're not giving it the credit for being an extremely varied and modern conflict with a great, and untapped, potential for gaming.
Click to expand...

I am boxing myself in with the expectations EA has for this franchise and what the consumer wants from a AAA-shooter like Battlefield.

I have personally visited Verdun, Hartmannsweilerskopf and parts of the Maginot line. I visited a lot of museums around the old battlefield too, as i live not too far away from the historic places. I know about the potential and i would welcome this scenario as it is, indeed, untapped. Just the game and the potential you picture is nothing you would find in a game DICE and EA would develop. You saw Battlefront and how true they had to stay to this Disney-franchise? If you are AAA, you can't break out and do crazy stuff.
 
S

shandy706

Member
CryptiK said:
WW1... Why the hell would they do that instead of WW2.
Click to expand...

I wish they would go back further. Civil War...Revolutionary...random campaigns from the late 1800s to 1910 around the world...or something.

I want a change of combat, locations, and play styles.
 
G

G_Berry

Banned
giancarlo123x said:
That would be pretty awesome. I hope it's gruesome.
Click to expand...
This is the key to them going back to the two world wars, it needs to be gruesome, it needs to be gory and theirs no way around it.

TTK needs to be super low too. Battlefields of 64 infantry running around getting blown to bits is what we need. Artillery barrages, gas, the first heavy machine guns oooooooooh baby, I'm down like Charlie Brown!!!!


Edit: and bring back that the battlefield theme properly!!!

Edit 2: and imagine the cool as fuck maps! Verdun, Flanders, Ypres the Somme!!!!
 
P

pulsemyne

Member
A lot of people don't realise that WWI was much more mobile on the eastern front than on the trench dominated western front. Even the western front saw non trench warfare so the scope for a battlefield game is quite large. Also there was air warfare (even bombing) and tank warfare.
In many ways it's the perfect setting for rush based gameplay. It could also provide some stunning set pieces for singleplayer.
 
MiguelItUp

MiguelItUp

Member
I really hope this is true. I'm so over the modern day and futuristic themes. It's gotten to the point where they're all just kind of stepping all over each other and they hardly produce any variety. I often miss 1942 and Vietnam's aesthetics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phil Spencer interview - Says that their intent is for all Xbox games, including Call of Duty, to be available on Xbox Game Pass Day One
2 3
102
8K
Kenneth Haight replied
Battlefield 1 |OT2| "All Quiet on the GAF Front"
33 34 35 36 37
2K
201K
Insane Metal replied
Battlefield 1 |OT| Make War Great Again
396 397 398 399 400
20K
1M
Fluffhead14 replied
One Year Later: Does XB1 still lag behind PS4 for new digital game releases? (yes)
2 3 4 5 6
289
42K
Head.spawn replied
NeoGAF Official SEGA SATURN Community
NSFW Games 26 27 28 29 30
1K
174K
nush replied
Top Bottom