Quite frankly, I’m not that impressed so far with the idea of WWI in Battlefield or the trailer…It doesn’t show ingame footage, just footage created with the same engine. I feel like they are hiding something if they can’t even show ingame footage.
Presonally I’d prefer if they kept a modern and current battlefield and removed all the ‘magic weapons’ like death by UCAV, Hunting Bows and scopes on pistols etc…The game lost it’s edge of ‘realism’ when that stuff was introduced.
I’d also like to see the return of things like player drive-able carriers and AC-130 and battleships and player destroy-able artillery. Being able to move the carrier to a better location, or manouvre the AC-130, or hit the enemy commanders artillery or Radar stations at crucial times really made the game a squad and team based game where players cared about the outcome of the game and their squads performance.
Since the removal of those features and the introduction of ‘magical’ weapons to the battlefield, the game has become a single player, self obsessed, KDR game rather than the team and squad based game play of it’s predecessors in BF2 and BF1942. I still remember jumping out of a plane at Omaha Beach to spawn in, or as a commander requesting SF with C4 to hit the enemy artillery just prior to another squad hitting a beach to take a flag.
I also think as a WWI game, the lack of Helo’s will alienate many players who love to fly them. Honestly, I can’t think what DICE was thinking when they decided to create a WWI game.
So, so far I’m not really impressed. DICE will really have to lift their game to keep me in the franchise.
Well its a reveal, and based off of the hype it seems to be generating, it would be smart to reveal the details in a trickle rather than it one shot. I understand what your comparison the BF2 and 2142 and agree that those games were superior to 3 & 4. It seems however that you want the game to remain modern, but I think that WW1 can also serve as a teamwork oriented game if done right. With less gadgets and lock ons I think this game has improved teamwork potential. I think it is a refreshing change from the recent glut of modern and futuristic shooters.
I have been playing FPS’ers since the original Quake… I have played all the UT Series, MOH series, some COD series, even Red Orchrestra, etc., Bad Company 2 and all the BattleField games. Now why in the world do you think an experienced player like me would be interested in a WWI oriented game. BORING…You lose me on this one EA, no way am I interested, not even remotely…
I’ heading along your line of thinking Major_Fragger…I’ve been playing since Wolfenstein! You must be as old as me!
Major_Fragger shakes hands with old dude Hammo01
Can you guys be more specific as to why you think World War I cannot be a suitable setting for Battlefield? So far all I heard is something along the lines of “this franchise isn’t what it used to be” (I can agree with that), and that you’ve been playing games for many years (me too, but I don’t think it lends any weight to my opinions). I am not sure what you guys are expecting from a 1 minute trailer designed to generate hype. You can’t draw any reasonable conclusions of the game without seeing more. Also of all the games you listed none of which are WW1.
Red Orchrestra 1942 or whatever it was called was WWI…BORING…Limited weapons, slow shooting, trench warfare, bi-planes, give me a break. I won’t mention the tanks that traveled about 3 mph.
I have never run into a COD game I liked, maps so small, choke points galore, but the new one they are advertising with space involved might end up a better alternative or I’ll just stick it out on BF4 even though they ruined it when they took the rooftops, ladders, cranes, towers and the like out of the picture, which was quite asinine for them to do.
Despite those happy to see those things go, we long-timers still hold the rein on the ill-experienced player who does not have a clue as to the strategy to play a fps’er game.
Of course, having the proper equipment and connection to play is essential.
@quicktiger said:
Can you guys be more specific as to why you think World War I cannot be a suitable setting for Battlefield? So far all I heard is something along the lines of “this franchise isn’t what it used to be” (I can agree with that), and that you’ve been playing games for many years (me too, but I don’t think it lends any weight to my opinions). I am not sure what you guys are expecting from a 1 minute trailer designed to generate hype. You can’t draw any reasonable conclusions of the game without seeing more. Also of all the games you listed none of which are WW1.
I think a lot of people that aren’t happy with the ww1 setting aren’t happy because they can’t sit in the helicopter for an entire round and farm kills and pad their k/d. They’ll actually have to use a gun and shoot people to do well.
@Major_Fragger said:
Red Orchrestra 1942 or whatever it was called was WWI…BORING…Limited weapons, slow shooting, trench warfare, bi-planes, give me a break. I won’t mention the tanks that traveled about 3 mph.
The Red Orchestra series takes place during WW2, so I don’t know why you bring it up.
Yep, you got me on that one, you are right, so if it was boring, you can imagine how boring WWI will be. haha
@Major_Fragger said:
Red Orchrestra 1942 or whatever it was called was WWI…BORING…Limited weapons, slow shooting, trench warfare, bi-planes, give me a break. I won’t mention the tanks that traveled about 3 mph.
I have never run into a COD game I liked, maps so small, choke points galore, but the new one they are advertising with space involved might end up a better alternative or I’ll just stick it out on BF4 even though they ruined it when they took the rooftops, ladders, cranes, towers and the like out of the picture, which was quite asinine for them to do.
Despite those happy to see those things go, we long-timers still hold the rein on the ill-experienced player who does not have a clue as to the strategy to play a fps’er game.
Of course, having the proper equipment and connection to play is essential.
man you must be special, you give the date of the game (1942) and then say it was WWI (1914-1918). pure
It was as antiquated as WWI…haha
We can all run around shooting 8 mm German Mausers.
@Major_Fragger said:
Yep, you got me on that one, you are right, so if it was boring, you can imagine how boring WWI will be. haha
have you done research on WW1?? there were plenty of urban battles and plenty of close quarter combat, as well as a good variety in weapons.
@Major_Fragger said:
Yep, you got me on that one, you are right, so if it was boring, you can imagine how boring WWI will be. haha
You are terrible at this.
I really hope they post the mp gameplay they showed at the reveal for attendees. You guys wouldn’t worry as much, I think
I think I will wait for this one to come out first kinda got screwed on Hardline.
I have to say I was eagerly waiting for the next Battlefield, like !!KiILLJOY!! I was slightly disappointed by Hardline. Seeing this Trailer makes me interested but not excited. I was really hoping for a more modern Battlefield, this might be ok but it really is too early to say if it up to BF3 or BF4. Please can we look to updating BF or will the next one be Cavemen using rocks and Dinasours?
It’s a shame you got into BF at such a late stage. A lot of us have been playing modern BF for the last 10 years.
I’m happy and excited that the game went back to world war 1. Really excited to see what DICE does with it , and to see the graphical and destructive beauty of it!
I don’t know why you guys want more Modern Warfare… You’ve got BF3 and BF4 that is modern warfare, and I’m happy they didn’t go into the future with BF. I remember 2142 and it just wasn’t as good. I remember being bored with it very quickly…
I hope they follow up with WWII and Vietnam!