BF5 going back to WW2?

[Solo4114]

So, for starters, don't expect anything remotely resembling historical accuracy.

Things that were different about WWI from every other game in the Battlefield series:

- There really weren't many vehicles. Oh, sure, you had automobiles, and the French are famous for ferrying soldiers to the front in Parisian taxicabs, but by and large, you don't have a "combined arms" doctrine. Tanks literally only existed for the British. Not the Americans, not the French, not the Germans, not the Austro-Hungarians, not the Turkish. JUST the British. I suppose you could say they had railway stuff, but that strikes me more as a stationary device.

- There were no man-portable rapid-fire weapons. I mean, yeah, you have things like machineguns, but they had to be stationary to operate. Literally the most rapid-fire weapons available were things like pistols, usually revolvers at that (e.g. Colt M1917, Webley revolvers, etc.). There weren't any automatic battle rifles, and the only SMGs appeared at the very, very end of the war (e.g. the Lanchester 1918 SMG and the MP-18 which saw basically no service).

- Most infantrymen were equipped with the same bolt-action rifle as everyone else in their army. That means the K98, the Lee-Enfield No.1 Mk. III*, the Springfield 1903, and the Mosin-Nagant 1891 Dragoon model. AND THAT'S IT.



Personally, what I'm most looking forward to is the realism mods that come out, where at the start of each round, a whistle blows, everyone goes over the top, and 70% are automatically killed by a fusillade of rifle and MG fire 2 seconds after that. That or the entire team is obliterated in an artillery strike.


Now, try to imagine selling any of this stuff to your average Battlefield fan. this is going to go over like a, well, lead Zeppelin. And not the rockin' kind, either. These are people used to rapid-paced, rapid-fire games, not stuff like, say, Red Orchestra.

That or it'll just be full-on fiction in a vaguely trench-hell-ish environment.

 

[Daunt]

Personally, what I'm most looking forward to is the realism mods that come out, where at the start of each round, a whistle blows, everyone goes over the top, and 70% are automatically killed by a fusillade of rifle and MG fire 2 seconds after that. That or the entire team is obliterated in an artillery strike.

LOL that would be fucking hilarious.

But what you say is too true. The footage they released already features a MG of some sort being carried by a player, if I remember correctly.

Overall, and part of the reason we've never really seen a big-time FPS set in this war (or older wars) is because it's not fast-paced shooter that is usually the big demographic.

I am hoping at the very least the weaponry will be accurate with almost all the infantry have bolt-action rifles.

I thought also the French had tanks later on? Either war I'm not sure at all how they'd balance one side NOT having tanks at all.

There will always be sacrifices for gameplay against realism, the question is how far will they take it? I can understand some of it, but a heavy weapons class running around with an MG would make me cringe. And medic classes haha. Or worse yet, something like a rocket launcher...

 

[tmtm]

Historical accuracy? Shit man, look at that video. The biplanes have the same flight model as the fighter jets in every other BF game.

I'm hoping for an unlockable POISONGASATTACK that kills the entire other team, then blows back and kills your own team.

 

[Shilka]

Sure doesn't look like the planes in the video have gravity feed carburetors XD
And yeah, poison gas should definately be in there...

 

[Solo4114]

LOL that would be fucking hilarious.

But what you say is too true. The footage they released already features a MG of some sort being carried by a player, if I remember correctly.

Overall, and part of the reason we've never really seen a big-time FPS set in this war (or older wars) is because it's not fast-paced shooter that is usually the big demographic.

I am hoping at the very least the weaponry will be accurate with almost all the infantry have bolt-action rifles.

I thought also the French had tanks later on? Either war I'm not sure at all how they'd balance one side NOT having tanks at all.

There will always be sacrifices for gameplay against realism, the question is how far will they take it? I can understand some of it, but a heavy weapons class running around with an MG would make me cringe. And medic classes haha. Or worse yet, something like a rocket launcher...

Right. I mean, I accept that it won't be total fidelity to realism. The thing that I think is weird is the distinct lack of rapidfire weapons for this era. At best, you have some man-portable LMGs like the Chauchat (which sucked due to the open magazine), the Lewis gun, and very late in the war the BAR 1918. Everything else is -- AT BEST -- semi-auto and most likely something like a boltie or a revolver. Oh, and the occasional pump-action shotgun.

I don't get how this is gonna cater to the COD crowd, unless EA/DICE's attitude is that they've finally lost that war and are now trying to radically shift the paradigm to something else through things like enhanced melee combat and innovative settings.

Historical accuracy? Shit man, look at that video. The biplanes have the same flight model as the fighter jets in every other BF game.

I'm hoping for an unlockable POISONGASATTACK that kills the entire other team, then blows back and kills your own team.

That would be AWESOME. And yes, the planes look absurd. I mean, you can pull some pretty crazy crap with a biplane (see also, Howard Hughes' Hell's Angels), but still. Basically, it strikes me that DICE designed a WWII game, and has never really been able to deviate from that general design principle, except by introducing things like, say, helicopters. Otherwise, the games all basically function the same at their core, except that DOESN'T WORK with the WWI era.

 

[Shilka]

Wouldn't expect any historical accuracy.... According to this interview the game will be 'inspired by WW I'.

What should players expect to see in terms of historical accuracy?

Gustavsson: As always since Battlefield 1942, we have done extensive research into finding the authenticity and picked out the core gameplay pillars. One of those core gameplay pillars is perceived realism.

What do you mean by that, "perceived realism"?

Gustavsson: It is that we base the game on authenticity, and we extract those pieces to create a game, meaning that we don't get bogged down by history.

You can also expect to pay seperately for map packs, as well as micro transactions, as mentioned here.

Given that in Battlefield 1, you will see both macro monetization opportunities from us like maps and large scale content, as well as micro monetization opportunities, smaller increments of gameplay, and then over time, what you will see from us is elements of gameplay that allow gamers to engage and drive, and extend and enhance their experience, much the way people do with FIFA Ultimate Team or Madden Ultimate Team today.

 

[Solo4114]

Translated interview:

What should players expect to see in terms of historical accuracy?

Gustavsson: As always since Battlefield 1942, we've done extensive research on the weapons and armies in question, and then basically disregarded it for what "felt" right to us.

What do you mean by that, "felt right"?

Gustavsson: I mean historical accuracy is for niche shooters, and we're in it to appeal to the broadest swatch of the masses as possible. In other words, we really don't give a fuck about historical accuracy. I mean, come on, in Battlefield 1942, you could harm a tank with a hand grenade. And planes were immune to the Defgun. But shit, it was fun and nobody really cared.

To be clear, I don't think that historical accuracy is necessary for a good game. For that matter, realism isn't even all that important. What really matters is avoiding some of the dumber, incongruous stuff or the things that make you say "WTF?! Oh, come ON!!!" and to keep the game balanced and fun without completely destroying any sense of immersion in the environment as presented.

 

[mondo]

Solo, the French had allot of tanks. If we look at the battles in the Middle East and early on in the north of France/Belgium, there was allot of armoured car use. If they add horses, the battles in the deserts could be fun, if they get it right.

 

[Kitlope]

"And planes were immune to the Defgun. But shit, it was fun and nobody really cared."

Not true (I think). I believe Defguns did in fact harm planes

 

[tmtm]

They worked better on fools standing around, but yeah, they were hard on planes if you did it right. These chuckleheads love to invoke Bf42 while completely missing what made it fun and enduring.

Oh wait, never mind. They are purposely shoveling out and immediately obsoleting a BF game every year on purpose.

 

[ElektroVodka]

"And planes were immune to the Defgun. But shit, it was fun and nobody really cared."

Not true (I think). I believe Defguns did in fact harm planes

Everything could harm planes in '42... after a couple wingclip rounds i got owned by a landmine trying to wingclip an engineer.

Not to mention pistols taking a plane down.

 

[Daunt]

 

[Kitlope]

Battlefield 1 makes front page on CBC newssite

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/battlefield-1-trailer-analysis-1.3592599.

 

[Solo4114]

"And planes were immune to the Defgun. But shit, it was fun and nobody really cared."

Not true (I think). I believe Defguns did in fact harm planes

Maybe. But I know for a fact they couldn't kill a plane in one shot. Because I shot a plane with a defgun once and it DIDN'T DIE.

 

[Solo4114]

So, basically, it sounds like the game will be a mostly generic BF game with a WW1 wrapper.

 

[ElektroVodka]

It probably will be yeah, which doesn't have to be a bad thing if they do it right.

However i do have a weird trembling pinky when it comes to that tho, especially with the ability to buy shit.

 

[Solo4114]

Eh. I've found myself perfectly able to resist the urge to buy at release. This often screws me in terms of gameplay, because you get these dudes who are just GOOD and have unlocked everything, know the maps inside and out, etc. On the flipside, I pay half price. And I can always, I suppose, buy the "Unlock everything because you have a job and don't need to play the game as if it's your job" pack.

 

[Kenadian]

The one positive you can say though is that they release public betas that are free to try for like a week or so.

Of course in saying that BF4 took just about 2 years to live up to the promise of the BETA but at least it happened, finally.

 

[Ninj]

BF WW1? Think I'll stick with Verdun tbh and save the money and bitter disappointment.