Support NeoGAF

[Smokey_Run]

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

Still, a lot less than the dozens upon dozens found in the last Battlefield game.

 

[Bedameister]

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.

Most of the German weapons of that time got named after its manufacture

Gewehr 98 (1898)
MP40 (1940)
StG 44 (1944)
Gewehr 43 (1943)

And so on.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Still, a lot less than the dozens upon dozens found in the last Battlefield game.

So what. They are all fun, and most prefer to use 2-3 at most.

And the 'dozens upon dozens' are variants of the same firearm, lol.

 

[Lurgan1337]

Most of the German weapons of that time got named after its manufacture

Gewehr 98 (1898)
MP40 (1940)
StG 44 (1944)
Gewehr 43 (1943)

And so on.

I don't know german, but isn't gewehr just rifle in german?
with stg being sturm-gewehr and mp40 being machinen-pistolen 40 ?
my bad if i'm wrong
edit: aaaaand i can't read. I did think the talk was about name of the manufacturer - like AK for avtomat kalashnikova , rather than years in the title

 

[Timu]

DICE needs to confirm this or something, guess we'll probably know in March.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

So what. They are all fun, and most prefer to use 2-3 at most.

And the 'dozens upon dozens' are variants of the same firearm, lol.

Battlefront isn't an established franchise though, and one of the biggest ips in general. A light on content game was going to sell, and clearly did. It was also a reboot. By this account, this will be bf5. It's not the same.

It's one thing to suggest that EA greenlight a mainline Battlefield title set in a difficult to market, though admittedly fresh, era, but to also say that EA is allowing minimal weapons and attachments is too unbelievable. Regardless of what would make a better game.

 

[mcz117chief]

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

Then maybe 500 meters? I think that is achievable with iron sights even with WW1 rifles.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Battlefront isn't an established franchise though, and one of the biggest ips in general. A light on content game was going to sell, and clearly did. It was also a reboot. By this account, this will be bf5. It's not the same.

It's one thing to suggest that EA greenlight a mainline Battlefield title set in a difficult to market, though admittedly fresh, era, but to also say that EA is allowing minimal weapons and attachments is too unbelievable. Regardless of what would make a better game.

Of course, for Battlefield that cannot since it is established this way. It did not always have dozens upon dozens of the same variants.

That was not my argument, mine was the snide comment towards Battlefront, which was without fact, but more Battlefront trolling.

There can be plenty of options for a WW1 type game as this thread has been presenting (bringing people through a nice history lesson as well), with fresh way to play, incorporating the mix of post Civil War era (as the Industrial Age picked up steam, no pun intended) to early tech advancements in weaponry/tactics. Not saying it WILL happen, but it sure as shit would be a more fresh take, than another current timeline war game. With the very same weapons, and swapped aircraft skins of something different.

How would that even work?

Read through the thread. How would it not work with the information presented?

 

[Scipio]

How would that even work?

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

It could work, start off the match with a whistle and running out of your trench towards the enemies, fight through cramped dark dugouts, night-time fights with sporadic flares going off, large lumbering WW1 tanks barreling across the battlefield in between randomly timed artillery bombardments.

And that completely discounts any alternate history liberties they could take with it.

 

[Mad Season]

Not even sure why thread is still going. It's all conjecture

 

[Nikodemos]

Then maybe 500 meters? I think that is achievable with iron sights even with WW1 rifles.

500 metres is technically possible, in that the bullet would still have a predictable trajectory, and many weapons did come with blade sights for that distance (IIRC some went all the way to around 700 or so), but the average soldier would miss about 85% of shots at that distance. For that matter, the average soldier wouldn't even bother engaging at that distance, prefering instead to save his shots until the enemy drew nearer. This fact didn't pass unnoticed by interwar designers. During the Great War, the average barrel length for a standard infantryman's bolt-action combat rifle was 75 cm. At the start of the Second World War, that length had decreased to 60 cm (with the sights adjusted downwards accordingly).

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Not even sure why thread is still going. It's all conjecture

It was. Now it's being backed by multiple people, with not a single dissenting raised hand.

What are the odds of a Swiss retailer having the product listing match an old rumor that insiders know, not 2 weeks before BF5 is most likely going to be revealed (GDC 2016)?

 

[Hip Hop]

Explain how customization would work in this, because that is a very important part of the series.

I don't see this happening, it may be a new take on the series, but you just can't go back to basic and simple that your series isn't known for. Especially now tha AAA games are known for "Bigger" and "More".

This WW1 has to be part of the campaign or something smaller, akin to how Bad Company 2 did it in SP and MP.

 

[out0v0rder]

im just tired of modern/future guns with hardly any recoil and red dot sights. killing enemies should take a while, it should be harder to do.

 

[Theorry]

I doubt EA will risk it. Its gonna be very static/slower gameplay i think and i am sure alot of people will not like that. WW2 is a safer bet with variety weapons wise etc and people still will eat it up because many are bored of modern/future fps games.

 

[mcz117chief]

Explain how customization would work in this, because that is a very important part of the series.

Is it? There is no weapon customisation in any of the Battlefield games up to 3 and class customisation would work very easily with all kinds of gear being available during the Great War era (all kinds of melee weapons, explosives, protective gear, etc.)

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Is it? There is no weapon customisation in any of the Battlefield games up to 3 and class customisation would work very easily with all kinds of gear being available during the Great War era (all kinds of melee weapons, explosives, protective gear, etc.)

Yes it is. Ever since Bad Company 2. You don't just filp the table on the franchise people have grown accustomed to. Bf4, after all of it's dlc, had 112 weapons total. God only knows how many attachments it had. Bc2 had 46 with limited attachments. Not only do you need a base set of weapons that's sizeable, to stay consistent, but also guns that keep coming through the 4-5 expansions.

I also don't think it's far fetched to say that most of the people that bought Bf4 haven't played Bf2. It's nice to think that they would go back to how they did things, but why? They're making more money than ever before. It doesn't make sense. Which means(considering this is looking to be true), that they found a comprimise. Alternate reality.

 

[Timu]

Is it? There is no weapon customisation in any of the Battlefield games up to 3 and class customisation would work very easily with all kinds of gear being available during the Great War era (all kinds of melee weapons, explosives, protective gear, etc.)

In BC2 you customize your weapons with scopes, magnum ammo and such!

 

[wowbaggerBR]

There can be plenty of options for a WW1 type game as this thread has been presenting (bringing people through a nice history lesson as well), with fresh way to play, incorporating the mix of post Civil War era (as the Industrial Age picked up steam, no pun intended) to early tech advancements in weaponry/tactics. Not saying it WILL happen, but it sure as shit would be a more fresh take, than another current timeline war game. With the very same weapons, and swapped aircraft skins of something different.

Read through the thread. How would it not work with the information presented?

People don't read things, let alone ideas and information which challenge biased concepts and uneducated opinions set in stone. The general consensus is that "oh, trenches, such a FPS game would be impossible! Battlefield wouldn't work on this setting!" and seems to me there is nothing that myself and others can say to bring more information about WWI to some guy who don't know that even in the western front there was exploitable angles to make a action driven FPS game.

It's just like the kind of the arguments I had with others way back, when we were discussing Chivalry Medieval Warfare concept: sure, it isn't for everyone, but lots of folks who said a FP"S" game with swords and axes wouldn't work are some of the ones who enjoyed it the most.

In BC2 you customize your weapons with scopes, magnum ammo and such!

I'd pay for exclusive mustaches.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

Hopefully there isnt a bajillion weapons in 5.

Fuck, 1943 was the last great BF game, and the weapon balance was superb.

BC2 had a good balance of weapons per class too.

 

[ReDelicious]

Would much prefer a Battlefield 2143, but with an alternate history WWI where they can add some interesting unique weapons, I could keep my mind open to that.

 

[raindoc]

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

The next BF game I'll buy is the one without 19 assault rifles. Or SMGs. Or launchers.
I don't give a fuck about the year it'll be set in, but a reduced number of toys that are, in turn, more specialised would be a real turn on for me.

 

[DaciaJC]

Fuck, 1943 was the last great BF game, and the weapon balance was superb.

Not really, the rifle grenades were hilariously overpowered and the M1/Type 5 rifles themselves easily outclassed the rest of the infantry weapons in the game. And the two factions had carbon-copy weapons, a fairly lazy way of balancing things.

Still a fun game, though, for all of its faults.

 

[Triscuitable]

.....have you played BF3 and 4?

The most popular map of each game are literally all trench and chokepoint warfare.

Because it's easy to farm kills. They're easily the worst maps in the entire series in terms of Battlefield-style gameplay. They embody the absolute bottom of the barrel that Battlefield has to offer in terms of gameplay diversity.

 

[Max]

Why is this exciting? WW1 is so completely technologically underdeveloped compared to what we're used to playing in FPS games

Like how do you even begin to imagine this being fun to play any kind of trench warfare

 

[Heavy_D206]

Why is this exciting? WW1 is so completely technologically underdeveloped compared to what we're used to playing in FPS games

Like how do you even begin to imagine this being fun to play any kind of trench warfare

Not everyone wants 500 round LMGs with 10x Scopes and OP Hyper Extreme Killstreaks.

Some people like more simple, refined gameplay.

Day of Defeat and CS 1.6 are some of the best times I've ever had with an online shooter.

 

[BLOODED_hands]

Hm.... On one hand, I will miss my modern to near future Battlefield this year (and possibly for the next 2 to 3 years) but on the other, I am truly intrigued how DICE Sweden can make WWI interesting.

Reduced customization does sound pleasing, less but more refined weaponry does too.

I'll be keeping my ears open for further confirmation besides knowing that Harker is connected!

 

[BLOODED_hands]

Triple post shame -_-"

 

[BLOODED_hands]

Freakin' hell, sorry mods and people. Internet went to shit there

 

[Palculator]

Freakin' hell, sorry mods and people. Internet went to shit there

It was the GAF servers, actually. Seem to be getting better but they've been super unresponsive for a while.

 

[Saintruski]

Idk I'd rather have battlefield 1775 or battlefield 1865 than that...why not WWII??


If you don't know your American history that's the American Revolutionary War and American civil war respectively

 

[Grassy]

Maybe there'll be a World War 1 expansion/DLC of some sort, instead of the whole game being based in the World War 1 era? Not sure how anyone outside EA/Dice would know that already though.

I skipped Battlefield 4, so I'm keen to see where it ends up being set.

 

[Saintruski]

Double post, think something is wrong server side

 

[eot]

Back to the roots eh? It's like another Codename Eagle

 

[orava]

I hope battlelog is back.

 

[Eclectic Jabber Monkey]

I hope battlelog is back.

I hated it at first but it has has kind of grown on me over the years. BF 2016 definitely needs a server browser, but I think its return will be a no-brainer as BF is meant to appeal to more core FPS players. Battlefront is designed for the unwashed casual FPS masses. (Disclaimer: I own all Battlefield games and Battlefront).

As for the topic at hand, I would be legit shocked if they went with WWI. I don't think the setting would resonate all that well with the user base they have built with BF3 and BF4. To me a 2143 setting makes more sense in that futuristic games are pretty big right now. With CoD and Destiny being very popular I think EA would green-light a future based BF game.

I would prefer a 2143 setting as I really enjoyed 2142 and a lot of the unique weapons, gadgets and game modes they came up with. Hover tanks, motion mines, using pods to take out aircraft (lol at people crying about hacking when taking them out), etc.

If they do set in that timeframe I hope they bring back Titan mode. It had its quirks but to me it is still the best Battlefield mode to date, one that benefited greatly from having a commander. I experienced so many back and forth matches where the outcome was determined at the very last second. This mode required more coordination and teamwork than any other BF mode, so maybe it wouldn't make the cut. Oh well, one can dream.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Maybe there'll be a World War 1 expansion/DLC of some sort, instead of the whole game being based in the World War 1 era? Not sure how anyone outside EA/Dice would know that already though.

I skipped Battlefield 4, so I'm keen to see where it ends up being set.

Dice announced Battlefield 4 at GDC. Which is in 15-19 days depending on what day their conference would fall on. If they do this again we should start seeing teasers very soon, and it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility for retailers to already have some info to prepare preorders(tbh I'm not sure how true this actually is, it sounds good though). This chain just jumped the gun, presumably.

Just seems too far fetched that this chain happens to list something, that insiders have known about(but not talked about) for months, right before the games likely annoucement. I'd use the above in the opposite direction, but we've now had at least 4 people supporting (of various legitimacy), and nobody against it.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

but we've now had at least 4 people supporting (of various legitimacy), and nobody against it.

any links?

 

[Lord of Castamere]

any links?

3+plus the op btw. I'm gonna start with the strongest. Sounds odd, right? Random redditor may be the most conclusive evidence we have to WW1 battlefield? Well, life is stranger than fiction, or so they say.

More evidence: A Reddit user posted this 6 days ago:


'I have a fried who works at EA that told me it's a world war 1 theme for battlefield 5. He watched game play of it.'


https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield5/comments/3pq5ei/battlefield_5_past_present_or_future/

So, who is Mouse Caulk? A younger man from Vancouver, BC. From his reddit history he doesn't appear to be an enthusiast, or play many games at all, mainly sticking with Battlefield... and NHL. He hasn't appeared to leak anything in the past, and didn't gain anything from this leak. In fact, this leak was done 8 days ago, 6 days before this retail listing. The kicker? He doesn't say his friend works at Dice, no, but at EA. Any idea where the NHL games are made? Vancouver, BC, at EA Vancouver. A stretch maybe, but idk. This is all weird.

John Harker next. Pretty straight forward. Heard the rumor months ago, and has been teasing since.

been under the table directionally teasing this game for like a year, i don't think anyone picked up on any of it haha

People seemed to like Wolfentenins alternative take on history

I didn't go through his posts entirely. Funny enough, I remember reading this one and it throwing off warning bells back when it happened. This was almost 3 months ago in early December.

I cannot wait for a new Battlefield. I really, really hope it's not set in the future though.

-->

That's the opposite of the rumor mill

Last is another poster implying about the rumor, posted before John too. Small one.

So the cat is out of the bag... I understand my words has no meaning here but I would be VERY suprised if this turned out not to be true. Anyway looking forward to it!

 

[Verder]

yo i could so go back in time for a WW1 shooter.


all these futuristic shooters look the same

 

[Boss Man]

Something different is definitely good. Seems like WWII would be a better choice because it's still modern enough, but I am definitely interested to see what they do. I guess WWII got kinda played out anyway.

 

[Woo-Fu]

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.

You mean like Hardline?

 

[Malygos]

I'm imagining a World War 1 FPS with a minimal HUD and Battlefront level graphics. Hnnnnggg.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Snip

Nice

Cant wait to see what they are cooking up.

 

[maxcriden]

ITT I learned that battlefront and battlefield are two different franchises. For some reason I never realized that before.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

The possibility is so fucking exciting. I'll be there day one. Or likely 1-2 months after release so some bugs are ironed out.

 

[XPE]

ww1hopefully we are fighting about villages again bad company style!

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

The possibility is so fucking exciting. I'll be there day one. Or likely 1-2 months after release so some bugs are ironed out.

The game wont launch broken...

 

[DeepEnigma]

3+plus the op btw. I'm gonna start with the strongest. Sounds odd, right? Random redditor may be the most conclusive evidence we have to WW1 battlefield? Well, life is stranger than fiction, or so they say.

So, who is Mouse Caulk? A younger man from Vancouver, BC. From his reddit history he doesn't appear to be an enthusiast, or play many games at all, mainly sticking with Battlefield... and NHL. He hasn't appeared to leak anything in the past, and didn't gain anything from this leak. In fact, this leak was done 8 days ago, 6 days before this retail listing. The kicker? He doesn't say his friend works at Dice, no, but at EA. Any idea where the NHL games are made? Vancouver, BC, at EA Vancouver. A stretch maybe, but idk. This is all weird.

John Harker next. Pretty straight forward. Heard the rumor months ago, and has been teasing since.

I didn't go through his posts entirely. Funny enough, I remember reading this one and it throwing off warning bells back when it happened. This was almost 3 months ago in early December.

Last is another poster implying about the rumor, posted before John too. Small one.

Whelp, if this pans out as true, and I hope it does, I will be buying Battlefield again.

I skipped 2142, 4 and Hardline, after playing 2, 3, BC2Vietnam on the PC for years.