Support NeoGAF

[-Pyromaniac-]

It would be cool if they did an alternate history BioShock Infinite kind of setting. Not in terms of a floating city, but more so the stylization of the game and its weapons. So diesel punk, I guess.

nooooooooooooo the whole point of going WW1 would be the amazing period weapons and scenery and all that jazz. The entire reason I HATE all these near future and scifi games is all the dumbass made up guns and technology.

 

[Jabba]

People seem to think that WW1 was horrible, so a game about it would have to be horrible as well. It's like they think Battlefield is a realistic representation of war.

You'd be suprised possibly. I've had many fps players ask me, how close does BF or CoD come to war. Heard many of players talk about how awesome they'd be because......I'm awesome at whatever game they're playing.

 

[Gnome Scat]

nooooooooooooo the whole point of going WW1 would be the amazing period weapons and scenery and all that jazz. The entire reason I HATE all these near future and scifi games is all the dumbass made up guns and technology.

I just meant so that there would be a wider variety of weapons and vehicles that look like they fit in the setting of World War 1, I don't want diesel mechs or anything. EA would never permit a mainline Battlefield game where mostly bolt-action rifles and horses are in use.

 

[The Beard]

No thanks. I'd be happy with WW2, but WW1 would be lame. Bolt action rifles, slow as fuck tanks, propeller planes, no helicopters.

I'd prefer another modern war in a cool setting with a nice variety of maps.

 

[CitizenVectron]

No thanks. I'd be happy with WW2, but WW1 would be lame. Bolt action rifles, slow as fuck tanks, propeller planes, no helicopters.

I'd prefer another modern war in a cool setting with a nice variety of maps.

WWI would be interesting, but maybe limited...but I really want them to do something different after BF3/4. Take us 200 years in the future, or back to WWII or Korea or something. Or hell, give us a BF: Red Alert game set in an alternate universe where the USSR and USA waged a hot conventional war.

 

[Nikodemos]

The thing most people gloss over when discussing Great War gameplay/mechanics...

Calibres. At the time, every large-ish country adopted its own calibre for rifles and machineguns. So, if you were an Italian soldier who got hold of a K.u.K. Steyr-Mannlicher, you could shoot it until it was empty then use it as a club or an impromptu fencepost, since otherwise your 6.5 Carcano clips were completely incompatible with the 8mm bore of that rifle.

The days of 5.56/.308 versus 5.45/7.62R were loong in the making.

 

[XxRampage07xX]

Yes, that's why it's called MP40

For some reasons, I thought the AK series were the only guns that carried the year of their manufacture in their names. Didn't know that MP40 was exactly the same too.

 

[5taquitos]

For some reasons, I thought the AK series were the only guns that carried the year of their manufacture in their names. Didn't know that MP40 was exactly the same too.

1911 is another one, and I think there are tons of other examples.

 

[Maximus P]

Completed a play through of Valiant hearts quite recently.

I'd love it if this was confirmed. There's a lot of potential with WW1 and i think a lot would be surprised with some of the weapons and tactics used during that period.

 

[privitsan02]

No thanks. I'd be happy with WW2, but WW1 would be lame. Bolt action rifles, slow as fuck tanks, propeller planes, no helicopters.

I'd prefer another modern war in a cool setting with a nice variety of maps.

That's what I thought as well. The main issue with WW1 would be weaponry and game design. I also don't hold DICE to such an extreme high regard when it comes to pulling these things off in a meaningful way. It goes beyond just the trenches.

Next thing you know, people will complain nonstop about how its no BF4/BF3/BF2/BC2. While I think WW1 is an incredibly interesting setting, especially from the perspective of France and the fall of Constantinople, an fps wouldn't be the best way to represent the setting, especially with the standards and expectations from the genre.

Best wishes.

 

[XxRampage07xX]

1911 is another one, and I think there are tons of other examples.

Damn my military knowledge sucks.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Yep. Damn that deflated my hype.

"You see, it's like the past, but everything from the future shoehorned into it!!"

God, I hope I'm wrong.

I hope he elaborates, but I took it to mean adding and modifying certian things to make it fit the mold. Not necessarily adding future guns or vehicles.

Like imagine Assault rifles and lmgs modeled like guns from the time period. No Ak47s, or M16s, or even S44s just fanasty guns that fit the time period.. So you could still have a similar class setup to Bf4. It would be an alternate reality in the sense that certain guns, and vehicles, didn't exist yet, or at all... Could be wrong though. What he said could mean several things.

 

[The Beard]

Completed a play through of Valiant hearts quite recently.

I'd love it if this was confirmed. There's a lot of potential with WW1 and i think a lot would be surprised with some of the weapons and tactics used during that period.

That's what I thought as well. The main issue with WW1 would be weaponry and game design. I also don't hold DICE to such an extreme high regard when it comes to pulling these things off in a meaningful way. It goes beyond just the trenches.

Next thing you know, people will complain nonstop about how its no BF4/BF3/BF2/BC2. While I think WW1 is an incredibly interesting setting, especially from the perspective of France and the fall of Constantinople, an fps wouldn't be the best way to represent the setting, especially with the standards and expectations from the genre.

Best wishes.

WW1 would definitely be an interesting setting for a game, just not a balls-out multiplayer FPS like Battlefield.

 

[TheSinkingKnight]

MP 40 wasn't made until World War 2 began if I recall correctly.

True, but if this is really an alternative history WW1, we could have anything they want to put in.

 

[Anton Sugar]

They need to make their fucking Battlefield: Dinosaurs game already.

 

[TedBundysNips]

Didn't someone a while ago say it was a modern day military battlefield?? Sure I seen that somewhere.

 

[Netherscourge]

I wish they would do a Medieval-style FPS.

Maybe even a Cyberpunk or Steampunk spinoff.

It's a great FPS engine, but all they do is WW or Modern Combat rehases.

Battlefront was a good change of pace for Frostbyte. But they can do a lot more IMO.

 

[The Beard]

I wish they would do a Medieval-style FPS.

Maybe even a Cyberpunk spinoff.

It's a great FPS engine, but all they do is WW or Modern Combat rehases.

Battlefront was a good change of pace for Frostbyte. But they can do a lot more IMO.

A medieval shooter? Huh?

Battlefield is already established as a military shooter. They can create another IP to utilize the Frostbyte engine in a different way, but turning BF into something completely different wouldn't make any sense.

 

[RoboPlato]

Didn't someone a while ago say it was a modern day military battlefield?? Sure I seen that somewhere.

They said military themed, nothing about time period.

 

[Netherscourge]

A medieval shooter? Huh?

Battlefield is already established as a military shooter. They can create another IP to utilize the Frostbyte engine in a different way, but turning BF into something completely different wouldn't make any sense.

Why not archery? Crossbows? Swords, catapults, seige towers?

 

[Nikodemos]

No Ak47s, or M16s, or even S44s just fanasty guns that fit the time period..

You mean like the Fusil Automatique Meunier? Or the Fusil Automatique Mle. 1917?

 

[kennyamr]

maybe it's just an error but seriously, we haven't had any WW game in a very long time.
I stopped buying BF and CoD for a while now but I'd buy this. I'll love it.
*remembers old school Medal of Honor*

 

[Charcoal]

I just installed MoH: Airborne a few days ago, and it still holds up great, IMO. Really hoping we start moving back to that time period again.

 

[beastlove]

Cannot see a WW1 setting at all. World war 2 is a possibility but I think modern day shooter is most likely. I know a lot of people who don't like the COD future setting.

 

[Malygos]

I've been wanting a WW1 game for so long now! Please be true!

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Finally someone taking a stab at WW1? I'll buy it at a high price.

 

[Evolved1]

Biplanes would be so fun, but DICE's flight model is a little poor to really get the full enjoyment out of it.

 

[Maximus P]

Why not archery? Crossbows? Swords, catapults, seige towers?

WW1 had very 'medieval' type weapons used for trench raids, including maces, stilettos,, swords, axes and clubs.

This is a pic i found from a Museum of a selection-

Best of both worlds, guns and brutal hand to hand.

 

[Xion86]

If this is the case, I'll most probably be buying Battlefield again! Getting sick of all the futuristic/modern shooters now. Really hope this is true.

 

[TheSinkingKnight]

WW1 had very 'medieval' type weapons used for trench raids, including maces, stilettos,, swords, axes and clubs.

This is a pic i found from a Museum of a selection-

Best of both worlds, guns and brutal hand to hand.

They did recently add swords to Hardline, so maybe they were just testing melee combat out more.

 

[Nikodemos]

It is said soldiers removed hand-holds from French trams and converted them into skullcrackers. The hand-holds had a large, robust spring in the middle which was perfect for a flexible cosh.

 

[Mahonay]

They did recently add swords to Hardline, so maybe they were just testing melee combat out more.

Different dev team so it's hard to say what they'd keep from Hardline. I think DICE already plucked out what they liked from Hardline and put it in recent BF4 updates (better map indicators and other UI improvements).

 

[Slick Butter]

World War I could make a great game if they get creative with it. It better make me feel dirty and scared though. They could give us a couple of weapons that weren't really used much in WWI but were created at the end/just after the war.

like this French SMG and its big brother:

and the German MP18:

It doesn't have to be 100% historically accurate... I like the idea. Plus, either way, there's a huge variety of pistols, shotguns, and rifles to choose from.
There's also swords and cavalry, too!

 

[The Beard]

WW1 had very 'medieval' type weapons used for trench raids, including maces, stilettos,, swords, axes and clubs.

This is a pic i found from a Museum of a selection-

Best of both worlds, guns and brutal hand to hand.

Why not archery? Crossbows? Swords, catapults, seige towers?

Yes, because Dice is totally known for their great hand to hand combat. Is there anything more satisfying than their QTE-esque pre-baked knifing animation?

Spoiler

/s

Battlefield is military combat on a grand scale. There's nothing grand about a crossbow being your longest range weapon, and a horse being your only mode of transportation. Come on guys.

 

[Coonce]

Verdun did WW1 pretty damn well. It can be a real campfest at times with all the snipers, so if DICE can find a way around it it would work really well.

 

[Nikodemos]

Verdun did WW1 pretty damn well. It can be a real campfest at times with all the snipers, so if DICE can find a way around it it would work really well.

Large numbers of snipers in a setting like that aren't very historically accurate, firstly because optics of that quality were rare, expensive and rather limited in capability, secondly because the idea of accurisation appeared very late in the war, lastly because ammunition was still of wildly varying quality (no such thing as marksman grade ammo yet).

 

[Lord of Castamere]

You mean like the Fusil Automatique Meunier? Or the Fusil Automatique Mle. 1917?

Is there enough for an entire class? Like Bf4 had 19 Assault rifles. You got 17 other examples.

 

[mcz117chief]

Large numbers of snipers in a setting like that aren't very historically accurate, firstly because optics of that quality were rare, expensive and rather limited in capability, secondly because the idea of accurisation appeared very late in the war, lastly because ammunition was still of wildly varying quality (no such thing as marksman grade ammo yet).

Even without scopes and high grade ammo you had people hiding in all sorts of holes popping heads at 100 yards

 

[Smokey_Run]

Is there enough for an entire class? Like Bf4 had 19 Assault rifles. You got 17 other examples.

Why do we even need 19 assault rifles? Especially when you consider most of the player base uses only a handful and the others collect dust? I don't understand the need to have a million items in a game as some sort of basis of value.

 

[Nikodemos]

Even without scopes and high grade ammo you had people hiding in all sorts of holes popping heads at 100 yards

100 yards (~90 metres) isn't sniper range. IIRC that's either the first or the second blade setting on old-fashioned iron sights.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Why do we even need 19 assault rifles? Especially when you consider most of the player base uses only a handful and the others collect dust? I don't understand the need to have a million items in a game as some sort of basis of value.

Well yeah, I agree, but one of the key elements of the last two games was the number of weapons. There's just some things I can't see them changing. Especially with 5 in the title. Even Battlefront had close to 40 weapons, I believe.

The only reason to do an inaccurate WW1 games is to bend the period to your way of making the game. One of those ways is a sizeable amount of weapons. Also the only reason more guns don't get used is because Dice is shit at balance.

 

[Nikodemos]

Also the only reason more guns don't get used is because Dice is shit at balance.

But it's harder to balance x-ty quadrillion guns compared to, say, 6.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

But it's harder to balance x-ty quadrillion guns compared to, say, 6.

That's good and all, but it's not what they'll do, because it's not what's expected. Could they do it? Sure. Rainbow Six: Seige only has a handful of weapons, but if you're gonna do that why make it alternate reality? Regardless, nothing in the last 10 years from Dice would suggest a 60$ game with 6 weapons.

 

[Rockyrock]

Imagine if it had a Titan equivalent mode and instead of boarding the Titan, you board a Zeppelin. Mmmmmmm.....

how the hell would you board it tho? lol

 

[Deleted member 80556]

how the hell would you board it tho? lol

With another zeppelin, of course.

 

[Mahonay]

how the hell would you board it tho? lol

Human towers.

 

[Alienous]

I guess I get to shoot horses in the face?

 

[wowbaggerBR]

Verdun did WW1 pretty damn well. It can be a real campfest at times with all the snipers, so if DICE can find a way around it it would work really well.

Artillery

 

[Smokey_Run]

That's good and all, but it's not what they'll do, because it's not what's expected. Could they do it? Sure. Rainbow Six: Seige only has a handful of weapons, but if you're gonna do that why make it alternate reality? Regardless, nothing in the last 10 years from Dice would suggest a 60$ game with 6 weapons.

Battlefront?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Battlefront?

It has over 15 counting Star Cards, and 12 base weapons.