If DICE really wanted to make a "new WW2 game" game, why only British and Germans?

Battlefield V General Discussion
1

The title says it all, why adding only the British and Germans at launch? At least the French and Italians could have been also at launch.

The french were those who were defending their country in 1940, the brits were supporting the french army. In my opinion, Arras and Twisted Steel should have been Germany VS France.
I would leave the brits in Norway, Netherlands and North Africa of course.

The italians could have been in Aerodrome and Hamada. Since in North Africa the majority of the axis soldiers were italian (and in 1940 the germans hadn’t come to Libya).

If this game is really going to put the players on unexplored parts of WW2 why not adding 2 factions that are generally overlooked: the french were considered the strongest army of the world and in North Africa at the beginning there are the italians, they got kicked back to Tripolitania and then the germans come (just 2 divisions) and they only take in the fight against the 8th army …

I’m not writing this to show BF5 in a bad light, I’m really looking forward to BF5, but only because DICE said that this game will cover overlooked parts of WW2, that’s a good idea, but especially in the early war you are overlooking France and Italy, two factions that played a big role in 1940!

The italians could come back in the new update of the battle of Greece, but after it the Italians will never take part in another update; their major theaters were the Balkans and Africa. (And I’m sure that the battles for East Africa will be avoided).
What about the French? After the battle of France … partisan actions? The british and germans could fight in many other maps so why cutting France & Italy’s possibility to appear? At least to give that “diversity” for the maps or that’s just a Germany VS US, UK, USSR just like any other WW2 game.

What I fear is a very low faction count, especially when there are the possibilities: I understand that if a game is set in 1944 - 1945, except USA, UK, USSR, Germany and Japan are the bigs it needs. But if you’re starting in 1940 the factions are much more! Then as the war goes on you can add whatever battles between Germany and the British Army.
Also the missing Polish faction … that’s really something that can’t miss in BF5. What I also fear is that factions such as Finland and Hungary.

2

I think they wanted to add Asian women to the allied force so that forced them to make it British for some reason.

3

lol french partisans what a terrible idea for a faction.

4

Yesterdays baguette as a melee weapon would be awesome, also berets.

Maybe they intend to sell us these cosmetics down the line? Want to play as an american, sure you can but you must then purchase the purely cosmetic uniform first.

5

Room to add in factions and countries later on in the free DLC. To keep a game alive for 24+ months, you need a constant flow of content now. Most WW2 games hold off to bring in russian, japanese, and american weaponry and forces anyways so this is no surprise to me.. I just hope EA doesn’t hold back on what WW2 was about and pander to those who are triggered by swaztikas and the fact that there were a lot of prototypes during the time.

In time, they could make a standoff DLC for the cold war like they did for BC2 vietnam

6

Swastikas like the easter bunny aren’t real.

7

Could definitely see us playing as French Partizans,
Main weapon would be both hands in the air
Gadget 1: Large White Flag
Gadget 2: The String of Onions Bolas
Baguette Melee
Deadly Garlic Gas Grenade
And a tank with very fast speed in reverse..

8

The game is a complete fantasy from the get-go. Asking for historical accuracy is kinda silly considering what’s being presented

9

They could get increased sprint speed when running away.

10

BFV is a live service game. All other factions will be added later when their time comes.

11

Correct, for example it seems that they have announced that they will have parts of the war that happened in Greece during WW2. So maybe there will be Italian and Greek armies or Resistances

12

I doubt minor factions will appear at any point of the game.

13

I’m not sure DICE know what they want from this game - aesthetics wisw

14

Rather than playing as an irrelevant faction, I would want a proper representation of the French Army when they are implemented: Half North-African and Half Sub-Saharan Africa.

As for Greece I highly doubt we will see a minor faction that, albeit fighting valiantly, were only a footnote in the larger scheme of the conflict. Imagine the costs of adding a whole faction, when you can simply use the british from the base game already. If it weren’t for the first content drop I would not even assume the Italian army to make it in and have only Germans and British fight for Greece, same as Rotterdam.
As it is the first “major” content I believe we will see Italy as a showcase what to expect. So, uniforms, weapons, vehicles along with the spaghetti whip as melee weapon and a folded green-white-red flag to use as bandana. Oh and goggles of course, you got to include goggles. Very Gucci.

15

DICE just seem muddled in what they want from the game. They have a WW2 setting, yet play fast and loose with the player customisation so it doesn’t really ‘feel’ like WW2 to many. They say they want to showcase unknown battles, yet have totally the wrong protagonists portrayed in those battles - so whats the point!. Also the Tides of War idea is a great concept, it’s just not being implemented as well as it should/could. We start in Spring 1940 and the fall of France, but they dont want to spend the time actually implementing the French army. Or the early battles in N.Africa, but instead of the Italians, they stick the Afrika Corp there when the German Army didn’t enter until a later date. They could have done a chronological introduction of weapons and vehicles over the course if the war, yet they put Tiger tanks in 1940 Norway, and assault rifles that weren’t introduced until later into the war in from the start.
.
It’s not to say the game wont be great, but it could have been so much better. It’s like it has been seriously rushed, or different parts of the development aren’t communicating to each other.

16

Well, we 'll see what they will do with the Greek maps.
As far as I know that there was some last stand at Crete that involved German vs Brits but the rest of the fights in Greece were mostly Italian vs Greeks and Germans vs Greeks.

This is what we know so far

Video: This is Battlefield V
17

I know, but if in the battle of France there won’t be the french, in what other theater of war could the french army fight except late Western Front (in which they played a minor role compared to UK and USA), minor actions in Italy and North Africa or partisan actions? The battle of France is their right time period.

That historical accuracy is needed, at least the correct armies, maybe the Dutch army played a smaller role in WW2 compared to French and Italians, but the other two need to take part in it. Especially in the early war. The battle of France is French army correct theater of war, just like North Africa for the Italians.

I agree but for the french, their time has already gone, and the italians could only come in the Balkans and Greece.
I don’t know DICE plans but just making a hypotesys:
BF1 had Premium Pass and we had 29 maps + 2 air maps, probably BF5 will have that number or lower, let’s make this count:

  • 8 maps set in 1940 (Western Front and Norway + 2 in North Africa)
  • 2/3 maps in Greece (surely Crete, probably 1 or 2 maps set in Northern Greece and Albania)
  • 6 maps set on the Eastern Front (from Barbarossa to Berlin, anyway 6 maps for a WW2 game are too much, as long as the american market is the biggest one there should be a greater focus on the US)
  • 6/8 maps on Western Front of WW2 of 1944 - 1945
  • 2/3 maps on Italy
  • 4/6 maps in the Pacific

The count is 28 - 34 maps

There will be of course Germany, USA, UK, USSR and Japan since they’re the main factions.
If they’re going to add “minor” factions the only I can see are the Italians, Greeks and Finns/Hungarians.
Are you sure you want the same thing done to death? I mean, in the time period they have chosen there was the possibility to add the French and Italians, and probably some french and italian players could buy the game also because they can play as “themselves”. Just to clarify, I am Italian, I would love to play as the Italian army despite how the war went on for it, I’m sure that many other people would buy this game just for being “represented”, this means also the French, Greeks and Poles. I would buy it anyway, but that will be another reason to buy it, just like BF1 had the battles of Monte Grappa, Caporetto and the Adriatic coast.
The 5 big ones already could be in tons of maps, why reducing the possibilities to appear in a WW2 game? Especially since now any army is basically the same, you can choose the weapon you want, the vehicles are more or less the same (I’m talking about the statistics) to make them more balanced, they differ just in skins and voice.
Instead of making campaigns based on “minor” nations such as Norwegian partisans or French colonial troops, why not making MP armies? Adding many more armies I think that people will surely buy more customization stuff.

I fear that Greece will only involve Brits and Germans in Crete and Sfakia. But that’s sad since it would be similar to making maps on the pacific only with soviets vs japanese … what about Okinawa? Iwo Jima? Burma? I’m sure that british and american players will ask themselves what has gone wrong?
Or North Africa just USA vs Germany. The brits? The italians?

I’m pretty sure that if DICE had the time to make a campaign based on norwegian partisans, making MP armies won’t be that time wasting. In fact, since BF is mainly a multiplayer game, they could benefit much more with MP than singleplayer, so adding the “minor” factions to BF5 could help DICE in getting more sales in the specific country.

18

I think the major issue is people approaching a BF game with accuracy and realism as a priority, despite the entire franchise being the opposite of that.

19

@lorenzburd
You can only expect Soviets, US, Japan and Italy to appear at some point. Everything else is highly unlikely.

20

I know, but the core should be right, then you can give everybody the weapon they want, even prototypes, but at least to match the correct things, in Stalingrad you can’t choose the Americans and the Japanese, I don’t expect the soviets to win everytime in Stalingrad of course, but at least the correct armies should be in the map. Just think at the great outcry if in a possible battle in the Ardennes you’ll have the British VS Germans, I know that in the Ardennes there were also the brits, but the americans played the great role.

Soviets, US and Japan sure. Italy probably. But whoever has made that decision of not implementing the french, poles and italians in the maps at launch has made the wrong decision.
I also think that’s quite a stupid decision since they could sell more stuff for customization, the more armies are, the more they could sell, in my opinion.