Support NeoGAF

[ATOMICJORGE]

I just came home from the movie theater I watched Captain America Civil War tell it was awesome but can someone tell me please if I missed any new news?

 

[Lakitu]

I just came home from the movie theater I watched Captain America Civil War tell it was awesome but can someone tell me please if I missed any new news?

Nothing really, not until Friday.

 

[endlessflood]

You generally had more variations of weapons in WWII, but the technological gap wasn't as large as it was in WWI


For example, in WWI near the start of the war you had fighting with cavalry. Then with the MG's/artillery many forces stopped using horses for that purpose (which in time gave way to tanks for that role). Horses still served in other roles (scouts, messengers) and in some areas were still used in combat later on but not nearly as much as the start.+

The start and end of the war was a very different type of battlefield vs WWII where the gap wasn't nearly as big in terms of the technology or tactics.

To give you another example of some things they used:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leach_Trench_Catapult

which got replaced by things like:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokes_mortar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_inch_Medium_Mortar

Then you had things like melee combat. Generally starting with Bayonets and then people saw how useless they were in tight quarters since it was usually attached to a long weapon.

This gave way to using things like spades(shovels), to trench clubs (basically wooden maces with steel and other things at the end) to trench knives(many o which were made from the bayonets), axes, and other things you probably didn't expect to hear about them fighting with in WWI.

Then look at airplanes. Starting out they were mostly used for recon, seeing where troops were and other things. Then slowly started taking a more active role. From dropping things down on the enemy (including darts/arrows) to nades, gas, etc. They generally used regular guns inside to fire at other planes but these were quite inaccurate. then an MG on the tail but these were generally for defensive purposes and fighting other planes. Then came the synchronisation gear, which allowed them to mount mg's at the front to fire through the propellor without hitting the blades. This started the huge push of aerial combat in WWI.

Those things (the technological progress during the war) are certainly very interesting from a historical perspective, but how do they add to the MP experience? You can't have asymmetrical equipment for balance reasons, so it'll have to be a fixed point in time that they go with.

After Mirror's Edge they might think they're ready to do a lot more melee combat, but I think that would be a big mistake too.

 

[ATOMICJORGE]

Nothing really, not until Friday.

All right thanks!

 

[Stiler]

Those things (the technological progress during the war) are certainly very interesting from a historical perspective, but how do they add to the MP experience? You can't have asymmetrical equipment for balance reasons, so it'll have to be a fixed point in time that they go with.

After Mirror's Edge they might think they're ready to do a lot more melee combat, but I think that would be a big mistake too.

Sure you could.

You could have different era of the wars depending on the maps and things. Even a progression system where the server plays a series of maps/battles and over the course it unlocks different weapons/equipment to use in each battle.

They don't even have to be historically accurate and could mix/match things, servers could set time periods for the maps which in turn alter what equipment you can use.

They could allow you your own unique soldier using what equipment you want from any point of the war with each piece of equipment tied to a number/point system.

Even side-stepping history and allowing later things in earlier points of the war if they were inclined to.

You could balance this out with a point system. So for example, you are allowed say "50 points" to outfit your soldier, you can then mix/match whatever you want but it's capped at 50 points. The more exotic/better equipment cost more points, the more normal/earlier ones cost less.

A bolt-action rifle for example would cost less points to equip vs a semi-auto rifle. However the guy using the bolt action has more points left over and could use those for other better equipment aside from his rifle.

You could tie this into both offense and defense.

I mean it's not like as the war progressed they just got "rid" of all the earlier equipment. They still used a lot of the earlier equipment even to the end of the war.

Then you also had instances of them picking up and using the other sides equipment. This happened in WWII as well but usually (for some reason) it's not really shown/allowed in video games even though it happened.

 

[forms]

This time they have just jumped past the obvious bullshit, and are releasing the game as DLC installments.

 

[fritolay]

There is no way this game ends up being WW1 themed.

Other than the people in this thread asking for it, no one else would buy it. Not one average person would see that and go "Yay, bi-planes, trench warfare, and mustard gas".

EA likes money and they would be stupid to think they could put this out against whatever CoD is doing and come out on top. No matter how much CoD fatigue the general public may be feeling there is no chance in hell they would pick Kaiser Fighter 2016 over CoD Space Marines.

I think you are right honestly, I think the same thing after your post.

 

[E.B.E]

There is no way this game ends up being WW1 themed.

Other than the people in this thread asking for it, no one else would buy it. Not one average person would see that and go "Yay, bi-planes, trench warfare, and mustard gas".

EA likes money and they would be stupid to think they could put this out against whatever CoD is doing and come out on top. No matter how much CoD fatigue the general public may be feeling there is no chance in hell they would pick Kaiser Fighter 2016 over CoD Space Marines.

Prepare to eat crow.

 

[Coffinhal]

There is no way this game ends up being WW1 themed.

Other than the people in this thread asking for it, no one else would buy it. Not one average person would see that and go "Yay, bi-planes, trench warfare, and mustard gas".

EA likes money and they would be stupid to think they could put this out against whatever CoD is doing and come out on top. No matter how much CoD fatigue the general public may be feeling there is no chance in hell they would pick Kaiser Fighter 2016 over CoD Space Marines.

I love this posts where people make surveys and forecasts in their own head. "Yeah people don't like that, EA must likes this, Activision that"...

 

[ElzarTheBam]

Im fully expecting a retailer leak on the friday.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Im fully expecting a retailer leak on the friday.

Yep :/

Nothing stays leak free nowadays^^

 

[Anfony O]

Now watch Activision reveal CoD on the 5th.

Hahahaha this turned out to be true

 

[Lakitu]

I was rather hoping for a 2143 if I'm honest. Something about a proper next-gen title invading Titans with transport carriers got me excited.

But a World War 2 game is also pretty good. I wonder if DICE LA will head the next Battlefield and not Visceral.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Hahahaha this turned out to be true

Not really.

They will reveal the game today in 6-7 hours or so

 

[Henrar]

I love this posts where people make surveys and forecasts in their own head. "Yeah people don't like that, EA must likes this, Activision that"...

If people really loved that and would buy WW (first or second) themed games, we would never go to modern or future themed military FPS. Publishers go, where the money is, and WW1 is definitely not a money maker.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

If people really loved that and would buy WW (first or second) themed games, we would never go to modern or future themed military FPS. Publishers go, where the money is, and WW1 is definitely not a money maker.

Until proven otherwise...

I was rather hoping for a 2143 if I'm honest. Something about a proper next-gen title invading Titans with transport carriers got me excited.

But a World War 2 game is also pretty good. I wonder if DICE LA will head the next Battlefield and not Visceral.

We will get a proper WW1 game.

There is not really something that you can call "nextgen" gameplay wise. A lot of games we have on current consoles could have been possible on the old ones too just with way uglier graphics.

 

[sammyCYBORG]

If people really loved that and would buy WW (first or second) themed games, we would never go to modern or future themed military FPS. Publishers go, where the money is, and WW1 is definitely not a money maker.

Um world war 2 games sold like crazy.

The move to modern war settings was just to stand out from the crowd and then obviously that became the standard as ww2 was beforehand.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Shotguns in WW1 Trench Warfare were so effective that the Germans issued a diplomatic protest against the American use of shotguns, alleging that the shotgun was prohibited by the law of war." A part of the German protest read that "t is especially forbidden to employ arms, projections, or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering" as defined in the 1907 Hague Convention on Land Warfare.

In retrospect, this is pretty rich coming from the country that was the first to deploy mustard gas on the battlefield

I don't want to talk smack, but "The French were the first to use chemical weapons during the First World War, using the tear gases ethyl bromoacetate and chloroacetone."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_warfare

Germand used chlorgas shortly after.

That was in 1914. Mustard gas came in 1917.

 

[Henrar]

Um world war 2 games sold like crazy.

The move to modern war settings was just to stand out from the crowd and then obviously that became the standard as ww2 was beforehand.

Exactly. Sold. They don't sell that much anymore.

 

[sammyCYBORG]

Exactly. Sold. They don't sell that much anymore.

It's been a long time since someone tried to do one on the scale of a BF game.

Too many armchair analysts here.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

Exactly. Sold. They don't sell that much anymore.

The market got tired of them.

And now there is seemingly fatigue on the modern/future front.

There hasnt really been a major AAA ww1/2 game apart from Wolfenstein, which sold pretty well.

 

[EuanThePooan]

Exactly. Sold. They don't sell that much anymore.

Because no one is making them

 

[Patrick Bateman]

The market got tired of them.

And now there is sememingly fatigue on the modern/furture front.

There hasnt really been a major AAA ww1/2 game apart from Wolfenstein, which sold pretty well.

The Elite Sniper-series? Must have sold pretty decent when they made three games.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

The Elite Sniper-series?

Hmmmm good point never played them.

They sell well?

Edit: Looks like they did.

 

[Creaking]

After seeing that Call of Duty trailer...

Please be set in the past, Battlefield.

 

[Camper182]

It can't possibly be futuristic, or i mean i really hope it isnt...

Titanfall 2, new COD, and THIS TOO futuristic all coming out later this year? It's just too much

 

[strafer]

Here's the reveal trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCEFOx5Hc2Y

Spoiler

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

This game is going to have to be seriously impressive to get me to shell out for both Call of Duty 4: Remastered (with bonus Infinite Warfare) and this game at launch.

 

[Crv756]

This game is going to have to be seriously impressive to get me to shell out for both Call of Duty 4: Remastered (with bonus Infinite Warfare) and this game at launch.

I am on the other side. Whatever dice delivers, it can only be better than cod iw.

I'll be buying the remaster when it comes out as a standalone though.

 

[AmyS]

 

[Reckless Onion]

This game is going to have to be seriously impressive to get me to shell out for both Call of Duty 4: Remastered (with bonus Infinite Warfare) and this game at launch.

 

[Scotia]

Well, all eyes are on Battlefield for me now after that Infinte Warfare trailer.

 

[Psychoward]

Exactly. Sold. They don't sell that much anymore.

Because no one makes AAA WW2 titles anymore. A lot of people play Red Orchestra though and that's a pretty niche game.

 

[GlenChivas]

I love this posts where people make surveys and forecasts in their own head. "Yeah people don't like that, EA must likes this, Activision that"...

It's not about liking things as it is just a sound financial move. EA is a publicly traded company and putting a ton of money into a game about a conflict that no one aside from military/history buffs would play is silly.

This isn't about my personal taste either. I would probably try a WW1 themed BF but I'm 30 years old. Find me one average person under the age of 21 who would pick WW1 over CoD in space.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

Given DICE has created multiple compelling FPS based on historical time periods, I'm not especially worried they suddenly can't craft a compelling experience from WW1 if they took a few liberties.

Maybe DICE and EA feel the Battlefield brand is strong enough to finally step out of COD's shadow and choose a different setting. If the gameplay and graphics are there, I'm sure DICE/EA can craft a marketable advertising campaign out of it.

 

[Asgaro]

Here's the reveal trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCEFOx5Hc2Y

Spoiler

Leaked pre-alpha build footage.

 

[Irobot82]

I'm still holding out hope for 2143.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

Considering the official 1942 page got updated with a different picture in a similar style to the BC2/BF3/4 logo recently, I'm sort of expecting this to be a BF1942 remake.

 

[GavinUK86]

Here's the reveal trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCEFOx5Hc2Y

Spoiler

I HATE YOU

 

[GinoFelino]

Oh come on. Why would you want to remind anyone of that scene?!

Spoiler

I'm not crying.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Considering the official 1942 page got updated with a different picture in a similar style to the BC2/BF3/4 logo recently, I'm sort of expecting this to be a BF1942 remake.

Its not.

They updated the Artwork for every game on the website.

The 1942 was done for the 10th Anniversary.

 

[Stevey]

2143.
Believe

 

[Newlove]

EA have Star Wars and Titanfall, and Mass Effect for their sci-fi. Plus Infinite Warfare being Titanfall 2's direct competition. You would think they would add some variety to their rooster so I don't expect a future setting, but really who knows .

 

[Weyland Y.]

My money is set on a modern / very near future timeframe with some experimental weapons and vehicles.

The latest BF4 DLC with the hovering tanks, remote controlled drone gun and rail gun might be a hint of what the team has been working on for the last couple of years.

But since the BF3 / BF4 timeframe was such a commercial success for EA I think there's little chance of a WW1 or WW2 game.

However, it would be cool if EA did the same as Activision and tied in a remake of BF1942 with BF5. That would be a win-win in my book.

 

[GinoFelino]

My money is set on a modern / very near future timeframe with some experimental weapons and vehicles.

The latest BF4 DLC with the hovering tanks, remote controlled drone gun and rail gun might be a hint of what the team has been working on for the last couple of years.

But since the BF3 / BF4 timeframe was such a commercial success for EA I think there's little chance of a WW1 or WW2 game.

However, it would be cool if EA did the same as Activision and tied in a remake of BF1942 with BF5. That would be a win-win in my book.

I don't think they will/should remaster BF1942 again. It would be silly to remake it every generation. Besides, BF4 had a Wake Island tribute map already.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

Its not.

They updated the Artwork for every game on the website.

The 1942 was done for the 10th Anniversary.

Ah yeah it seems you're right, it's from the Anniversary.

 

[VincentMatts]

EA have Star Wars and Titanfall, and Mass Effect for their sci-fi. Plus Infinite Warfare being Titanfall 2's direct competition. You would think they would add some variety to their rooster so I don't expect a future setting, but really who knows .

Logic wins

 

[TheCanisDirus]

My money is set on a modern / very near future timeframe with some experimental weapons and vehicles.

The latest BF4 DLC with the hovering tanks, remote controlled drone gun and rail gun might be a hint of what the team has been working on for the last couple of years.

But since the BF3 / BF4 timeframe was such a commercial success for EA I think there's little chance of a WW1 or WW2 game.

If i had to guess i'd go this way as well.

They've been working on some future tech weapons and vehicles... the DLC speaks to their possible "testing" of them... who knows.

They've been making money on present timeline and the WWII fad wasn't that long ago... i can't see them ditching the near future prospect only to jump right back 60+ years.

I bet (and also hope) well see a near to distant future or present time alternate reality/universe.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

A DLC pack is really no indication what the next game will be....


BC2 got a Vietnam Pack and we still got BF3 instead

 

[Gamezone]

If this game is anywhere near Battlefront in content, there is no way that I`m buying it.