Battlefield 1

[Marduk1813 62]

So... This is it. Battlefield I (what a silly name...), and it takes place during World War I. 

 

 

That's what we get after the shitfest Hardline. World War I, just like the first rumours said. I have to admit it is a bold step by DICE and EA, bringing this setting to a AAA-shooter. Looks like they understand that no one ever realy liked this Sci-Fi-setting they tried to establish with Titanfall and the last CoD's - Activision obviously didn't. Defintly a interesting idea, but I'm curious how they want to to combine the unlock, level-up and customization-system with that time period. The hosts mentioned they wanna bring the customization of the weapons to a new level after Bf4 and that the game will have many gadgets. This sounds a bit scary. Besides that they promised massive destruction and a big variety of different WWI-war zones.    

 

Anyone who watched the stream? God, the talking at the beginning was so annoying. Why do they think they have to explain to the audience what Battlefield is all about? And why do they have to fuck up such trailers with those ugly dubstep-remixes of popular modern songs? Are there no more good soundtrack-composers with a bit of inspiration out there? What happend to all of them?!

 

Edit: Release will be 21. October. 

[ineptaphid 6413]

Although I think The Great War is a good setting that has not been explored much in gaming, I really don't think this is the way to do it. WW1 was a pointless,senseless slaughter that ground down nations and people for years. Nothing good came from it, it's reasons for starting were fragile and it just continued in a terrible cascade effect across Europe and beyond. It's after effects can still be seen in some of the more recent regional conflicts in the Balkan states and the middle east where arbitrary boundaries were drawn by the "victors".

 

Games such as Valiant Hearts that show the ludicrous nature of the conflict,I feel are more suitable then something like Battlefield which gives a polished, slick, totally unrealistic vision of war in a neat little package.

 

Wow-I did not realise I felt this strongly about it, but the idea of Battlefield 1 (stupid name) actually sickens me.

[veles-zv 176]

Should I even care about games such as battlefield, call of duty and counter strike which are in the same boat of being casual nonsense, no teamwork, cult of drone followers, Bs marketing hype such as Dice saying that Battlefailed is the first game to have combined arms, forest bite engine being the best engine, so call "levolution" which is just destructible environments which alter the level (which is nothing new and has been done with games as far as red faction, half life ect) games such as Arma, red orchestra, squad, verdun, ect should be promoted instead of the run of the mill basic boring Battlefailed titles which have been the same since BF3 and they also charge another 60 for DLC content which is not backwards compatible...

 

the only reason why I would buy Battlefield and the newer call of duties is not because of the game-play but because of the development of the assets in the game, the buildings, vehicles, weapons, the sounds ect how are these done are they done poorly, are they done well, are they accurate or are they inaccurate  and best of all would it be worth it to recreate these mesh and textures with revision/similar style so that I could import them in to games such as Arma, and other open modding type games which I fancy. 

[icebreakr 3157]

It's not WW1, it is much more like modded SW Battlefront, alternative universe style WW1 ;)

[Marduk1813 62]

Although I think The Great War is a good setting that has not been explored much in gaming, I really don't think this is the way to do it. WW1 was a pointless,senseless slaughter that ground down nations and people for years. Nothing good came from it, it's reasons for starting were fragile and it just continued in a terrible cascade effect across Europe and beyond. It's after effects can still be seen in some of the more recent regional conflicts in the Balkan states and the middle east where arbitrary boundaries were drawn by the "victors".

 

Indeed, but you could say all those things about WWII, Vietnam or every other war. There are tons of games out there with this settings. Are they somehow more suitable for videogames, have they been less violent or cruel? No, they were much worser and insane in some ways, I get your point that trailers and games like those only give you a "polished" and "one-sided" point of view about a war. But on the other hand, this games should be played by adult and educated persons which got knowledge about this times.  

[Tonci87 163]

I honestly can´t begin to imagine how they would will sell this setting to the BF target audience. A WW1 can´t be as fast paced as a modern war game. They had bolt action rifles back then and the tanks were so slow people could walk faster. 

 

I can only imagine a very arcadey and shockingly untrue representation of WW1 combat... Judging by the Trailer, this is exactly what they will deliver.....

[target_practice 163]

Bs marketing hype such as Dice saying that Battlefailed is the first game to have combined arms

It seriously pissed me off when they said that in the livestream, but even worse is the fact that they had to sheer audacity to call Battlefield a true sandbox.

 

Although I think The Great War is a good setting that has not been explored much in gaming, I really don't think this is the way to do it. WW1 was a pointless,senseless slaughter that ground down nations and people for years. Nothing good came from it.

You can't really make that argument when people are perfectly accepting of games being made out of the Vietnam war. That was a war that the US had no good reason to start, even with the pretext of halting the spread of communism. It accomplished nothing and simply caused immense suffering and death for all sides in the conflict.

[Mynock 244]

When does this movie come out? (no way that's actual gameplay and not pre rendered footage)

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Looks awesome imo.

[target_practice 163]

When does this movie come out? (no way that's actual gameplay and not pre rendered footage)

 

Well they did say In Engine and not In Game. It's probably pre rendered gameplay and cinematics.

[Marduk1813 62]

I honestly can´t begin to imagine how they would will sell this setting to the BF target audience. A WW1 can´t be as fast paced as a modern war game. They had bolt action rifles back then and the tanks were so slow people could walk faster. 

 

I can only imagine a very arcadey and shockingly untrue representation of WW1 combat... Judging by the Trailer, this is exactly what they will deliver.....

 

Especially when you keep in mind that XBOX appears to be the main platform for Battlefield now. The amount of XBOX advertising during the stream was disturbing... 

[veles-zv 176]

Especially when you keep in mind that XBOX appears to be the main platform for Battlefield now. The amount of XBOX advertising during the stream was disturbing... 

who cares about consoles? there is really no good games that Ive seen that would make me purchase a $400 USD console which is designed to break in a timespan of around 2 to 4 years... only good console exclusive was back in play station 3 and 2. most of the consoles users are children who had their parents buy them the device for their birthday or for Christmas. 

[target_practice 163]

I see the price is also typical of EA. The 'standard edition' is £49.99/$72.

Oh and not mention that they are already selling DLC for the game before it is even launched.

"Be the first on front lines - snag the Early Enlister Deluxe Edition today and get the Hellfighter, Red Baron, and Lawrence of Arabia packs full of themed weapons and gear; five extra Battlepacks stuffed with great items; and access to the full game on October 18, three days before release."

[Marduk1813 62]

who cares about consoles? there is really no good games that Ive seen that would make me purchase a $400 USD console which is designed to break in a timespan of around 2 to 4 years... only good console exclusive was back in play station 3 and 2. most of the consoles users are children who had their parents buy them the device for their birthday or for Christmas. 

 

Well, I do, because they adjust games to console needs more and more, and it affects PC-users that way that games are limited to the power of the consoles. Besides that console-gamers are a different community then PC-players with other, and probably more simple needs. It's a shame that Battlefield has become a console-first-series.  

[ineptaphid 6413]

 

You can't really make that argument when people are perfectly accepting of games being made out of the Vietnam war. That was a war that the US had no good reason to start, even with the pretext of halting the spread of communism. It accomplished nothing and simply caused immense suffering and death for all sides in the conflict.

I know.For the record I dont like games about Vietnam either.And I know all war is cruel and mostly senseless.I just feel WW1 is somehow the worst,the most pointless and destructive.So many broken promises, so many countries still divided and so much hatred still remains from it. 

 

Also..the game looks crap ;) Battlefield is just a silly game in my opinion. If you want a game like COD that's fine.Then you have CS for more fast paced stuff. Combined arms-well Arma obviously. I don't know-Battlefield just does nothing for me. i played a lot of BF:BC2 and enjoyed it,and I played BF3 and...enjoyed it a lot less. But once I switched to Arma, there was no going back.

[target_practice 163]

Also I know this is kind of a derailment, but It seems to me like Arma's engine and optimisation are the only things really holding the series back right now.

If Arma 4 comes out and it runs on Enfusion or another new engine designed to fully utilise modern tech, Arma will be virtually unstoppable.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Battlefield, World War 1. I could see this going so right... But on the contrary, i could see this going so wrong. 

 

Also, everyone keep in mind the description they stated was "Alternate" history. Thus, i don't think they're going to try to glorify any victors in this one. Speaking of which, i wonder what nations are going to be at play, given there were a lot more than just Germany, France, Britain, Russia, the US. I would like to see some multi-national gameplay. Would be quite interesting to see what they do with this alternate history.

[nodunit 397]

Also I know this is kind of a derailment, but It seems to me like Arma's engine and optimisation are the only things really holding the series back right now.

If Arma 4 comes out and it runs on Enfusion or another new engine designed to fully utilise modern tech, Arma will be virtually unstoppable.

 

For its market, which is not what battlefield is now...1942-BF2142 players perhaps but not likely 3-..1....apparently.

The setting is interesting but I'm hoping it doesn't gimp the combined arms thing, sorta the point of battlefield..

If they can make it work then hey more power to em.

 

So... This is it. Battlefield I (what a silly name...), and it takes place during World War I. 

 

That's what we get after the shitfest Hardline. World War I, just like the first rumours said. I have to admit it is a bold step by DICE and EA, bringing this setting to a AAA-shooter. Looks like they understand that no one ever realy liked this Sci-Fi-setting they tried to establish with Titanfall and the last CoD's - Activision obviously didn't. Defintly a interesting idea, but I'm curious how they want to to combine the unlock, level-up and customization-system with that time period. The hosts mentioned they wanna bring the customization of the weapons to a new level after Bf4 and that the game will have many gadgets. This sounds a bit scary. Besides that they promised massive destruction and a big variety of different WWI-war zones.    

 

Anyone who watched the stream? God, the talking at the beginning was so annoying. Why do they think they have to explain to the audience what Battlefield is all about? And why do they have to fuck up such trailers with those ugly dubstep-remixes of popular modern songs? Are there no more good soundtrack-composers with a bit of inspiration out there? What happend to all of them?!

 

Edit: Release will be 21. October. 

 

The funny thing is that 2142, the most sci fi setting was one of battlefields most successful sells, granted it was also the point where teamwork was most important in taking down the ships.  I think the problem with a lot of sci fi games of today is that they 'skirt', they don't go far enough, so you get a little bit of something interesting but a lot of familiar 'usual'.

Also that racket..holy crap, I listen to all kinds of electronica including dubstep (heck I even love the noisecontrollers mix from TKOH) but I felt just like that guy at 0:48...why not use the battlefield theme, a good one like 1942-2142, not this new...noise.

[cosmic10r 2331]

one of my favorite MP memories was me and my very close buddy sitting back to back while we lived together and him flying the zero with me on the rear gun in Bf 1942... many happy memories from that.

I really enjoy the more archaic weapons for multiplayer as they create very interesting gameplay imo...

 

BF was a special series through bf2... bf3 was good and i played a fair bit on console with my friends... many good memories there as well. 

However BF3 let me down on the "building destruction" ... that was a joke compared to 2 where you could bring a building down and kill the people inside...

BF4 was an even bigger disappointment for me... that was still on console mind you but the gameplay got to arcadey imo...

 

It looks flashy but i have little confidence that it will bring back some of the epic gameplay from the early days...

Playing rush with my buddies on those big maps was a hoot....

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

one of my favorite MP memories was me and my very close buddy sitting back to back while we lived together and him flying the zero with me on the rear gun in Bf 1942... many happy memories from that.

I really enjoy the more archaic weapons for multiplayer as they create very interesting gameplay imo...

 

BF was a special series through bf2... bf3 was good and i played a fair bit on console with my friends... many good memories there as well. 

However BF3 let me down on the "building destruction" ... that was a joke compared to 2 where you could bring a building down and kill the people inside...

BF4 was an even bigger disappointment for me... that was still on console mind you but the gameplay got to arcadey imo...

 

It looks flashy but i have little confidence that it will bring back some of the epic gameplay from the early days...

Playing rush with my buddies on those big maps was a hoot....

I feel the other way. BF2 was combined arms, a a portion more tactical. BF3 got bad. There were exceptionally less classes to chose from, and it got extremely arcade. However, BF4 turned out to sorta be a balance between BF2 and BF3. They brought back commander mode (though i'm not sure how well that ended up being after already being dead for so long, many main stream players couldn't give less of a shit about it), and the gunplay felt great. Until the patch that they claimed "fixed everything", that was only a patch driven by mainstream players. Not to mention they revealed BF4 to a majority COD fan base, live, confirming their carelessness to the original title standard that was BF2 and the games before it. Honestly, i couldn't care what they do with the series anymore. Project Reality, and Squad are where i will look for when it comes to that kind of gameplay.

[kbbw123 115]

Well fact is for me: I hate battlefield it went downhill for me from BF4 onwards (ssds (same shit diffrent skin)) but if that was not pre-rendered than it does look absolutly gorgeous

[target_practice 163]

Until the patch that they claimed "fixed everything", that was only a patch driven by mainstream players.

Never heard of that before, can you tell me what it did exactly?

[_Hawkeye_ 43]

Just had to laugh when I saw this video. Looks like a flop in the making, just like Hardline. I was hoping for the rumor that they was going back to there roots(BF1942) so much for hoping. TG Apex is coming, along with a cpl other titles, the new http://store.steampowered.com/app/418460 looks better than this crap.

[Marduk1813 62]

Just had to laugh when I saw this video. Looks like a flop in the making, just like Hardline. I was hoping for the rumor that they was going back to there roots(BF1942) so much for hoping. TG Apex is coming, along with a cpl other titles, the new http://store.steampowered.com/app/418460 looks better than this crap.

 

Yeah, looks like this year Rising Storm 2 is the game to wait for. I also hope that Squad will have a good progress. 

[kavoven 4]

Although I think The Great War is a good setting that has not been explored much in gaming, I really don't think this is the way to do it. WW1 was a pointless,senseless slaughter that ground down nations and people for years. Nothing good came from it, it's reasons for starting were fragile and it just continued in a terrible cascade effect across Europe and beyond. It's after effects can still be seen in some of the more recent regional conflicts in the Balkan states and the middle east where arbitrary boundaries were drawn by the "victors".

 

Games such as Valiant Hearts that show the ludicrous nature of the conflict,I feel are more suitable then something like Battlefield which gives a polished, slick, totally unrealistic vision of war in a neat little package.

 

Wow-I did not realise I felt this strongly about it, but the idea of Battlefield 1 (stupid name) actually sickens me.

 

Exactly my thoughts. There are certain parts in history that should not be touched by games in my opinion...