Battlefield 1 Reveal Trailer, PC/PS4/XB1, Oct 21st [Up2: Screens, Info, Open Beta]

v9We0ZR.gif
 
I hope for fuck's sake that the flying is not the dumbed down trash it is in Battlefront.

I will buy this for the flying alone if it's competent.
Don't set up your hopes too high then, because the odds of DICE making a new flight engine are prety low
 
If there's one thing that makes me feel great about an upcoming game, it's DLC being hawked in its first public reveal.
 
The way the two wars were fought.

Trench warfare is the single most brutal, disturbing, horrifying form of warfare ever created. And it was fought over nothing. No grand effort to drive back the fascists, no stalwart defense of the motherland, no liberating labor camps or cities from the yolk of oppression.

Just the worlds bloodiest family squabble over nothing. Quite literally nothing.

You're comparing a genocide to infantry warfare. Infantry warfare in WW1 was by far more brutal, disgusting and terrible than WWII.

In this context though, why is it offensive to make a BF game in the theme of WWI and not WWII? All games skirt over how miserable and horrifying war is, regardless of which was the deadliest or most brutal.

It's strange to me that this complaint surfaces now when these games have existed in a graphic fashion for decades.

DICE never claimed they'd be making gritty and hyper-realistic survival/war simulators. We're talking about games where you magically respawn on your teammates..

Did BF 1942 authentically depict what WWII was like for soldiers? No, but they weren't pretending to do that in their game.
 
Looks bloody amazing!

Can't wait to use bolt action rifles, storm through gas filled no man's land with a gasmask and stab people with bayonets in trenches!
 
I wish publishers would stop putting numbers in their game names that have nothing to do with the game's place in the series. It's almost as bad as calling your reboot "Thief" or "Need for Speed". It makes Google searching for the first game in the series a pain in the ass.
 
I mean.. the Holocaust took place in WWII. What happened in WWI that made the events of WWII pale in comparison so much that there's a clear difference in making video games that take place in either war? Genuinely curious.

War is gruesome either way, but the warfare of WW1 (or at least, the most famous parts of it), were famously gruesome. It should be noticed that after the first World War there began a huge anti-war sentiment due to this. The treaty of Versailles rendered the whole thing absolutely worthless.

WW2, for the victors at least, ended on a high note. The invasion was succesful, as were the bombings of Germany and Japan. War was great, war was succesful. There was an important human rights movement, but pacifism had to wait till Vietnam.

Just compare it on google images, notice the heroics and exciting action for WW2 and the dullness and dirtiness of WW1:

WW1

WW2
 
Wow that actually does look good. It's a nice change from WWII or futuristic war. I'm hoping SP campaign will be good and fun, not an afterthought.

Now hurry up and bring Bad Company 1 and 2 to XB1 :D
 
Looks bloody amazing!

Can't wait to use bolt action rifles, storm through gas filled no man's land with a gasmask and stab people with bayonets in trenches!

I'm glad Battlefield 1 now exists, as it will show people that early modern combat was much more varied than that.
 
Lots of people ITT who don't know much about WW1 or what dubstep is. (Hints: it's a remix not a cover, and it isn't dubstep).

Hype trailer, and after Battlefront I don't know why anyone is remotely worried about how it will look (900p/~60 on PS4base & Xbone: 1080p/60 on PS4Neo).

Not too sure about the celebratory tone of the PR though. I know it's BF but the whole W00tW00t!!!! START OF WAR YAHHHHH!!!!! thing coupled to WW1...no war should be celebrated, but at least WW2 had at least some moral justification for itself...WW1 was purely about aristocrats using young men's lives for cannon fodder using tactics & strategy horrifyingly ill-suited to the technology in use.

Still - fuck man did you see that Dreadnaught artillery barrage!??!?
 
As someone really interested in WW1, I am glad that it is a theme of the game, regardless of "Hollywood style" and anachronisms galore. I think they injected it with a bit of dieselpunk and steroids. The aesthetics are what is drawing me in.

Honestly, considering the amount of trench wars that were present for much of the war, I don't think it would translate well into a modern FPS. There was one game (Verdun, was it?) that tried it but I don't know if it turned out good or not.

I hope Austria-Hungary is represented in some way. Their Russian and Serbian fronts had some serious action going on but it tends to be underplayed in modern media and world history in general.

Never bought a Battlefield game in my life. Had a good enough time with Battlefront. I might nab this.
 
Expected to get the traditional 6-7 min campaign of pure gameplay, pretty disappointing reveal, not juicy enough.

Game looks beautiful obviously.
 
I got excited for Battlefield 3, after loving Bad Company and 1943, but it didn't do much for me. The campaign was too glitchy to really enjoy, and the multiplayer was too big.

Battlefield 4 bored me.

I'm cautiously optimistic for this, but am not going to go crazy over it. It probably won't end up being for me.
 
Wow. Where are the jet packs? The exos? The space warfare? Who would want to play a game so stuck in the past?

In all seriousness - wow. This jumps straight to my most anticipated release of 2016. I'm anxious to see if this gets an update for PlayStation 4 Neo / 4K / 4.5 as well.
 
To be honest, I was pretty disappointed that it looked like it was an American focus when they were barely in the war. If that's the case, I've just read up about the HH and super excited if it's really about them.
 
4 classes. Assault medic,support,scout.
If a mainstay role of the series has grown redundant, then that is of concern to me. Particularly since that is my favorite role. Guess I'll hope they've rolled engineer into support.

And right, there won't be propelled explosives for infantry at all, will there? You'll only be able to blow holes in things by walking up and placing TNT or whatever.
Rockets are fun, they make things explode and crumble, have to figure out the arc, momentum of target and timing. Repairing things is not exactly fun, but being able to allows for things like driving vehicles like you don't give a shit, and I feel it's an important teamwork role for these games.

I can feel my hype deflating.
 
This game literally has incredible amounts of potential.

The trailer is simply fantastic and really captures the feel of the global and highly varied war that WWI was.

I'm also glad they're not just focusing on the obvious European and American sides and taking a global look at the war as a whole. Heck, I've learnt a couple of new things from that trailer itself!
 
War is gruesome either way, but the warfare of WW1 (or at least, the most famous parts of it), were famously gruesome. It should be noticed that after the first World War there began a huge anti-war sentiment due to this. The treaty of Versailles rendered the whole thing absolutely worthless.

WW2, for the victors at least, ended on a high note. The invasion was succesful, as were the bombings of Germany and Japan. War was great, war was succesful. There was an important human rights movement, but pacifism had to wait till Vietnam.

Just compare it on google images, notice the heroics and exciting action for WW2 and the dullness and dirtiness of WW1:

WW1

WW2

Right, and I understand that point from the previous posters, but my question still stands.. does WWI being the most gruesome/brutal war put it into more "untouchable" areas in terms of what developers can and cannot use as a vehicle to create their games? War has for a long time now been incorrectly depicted in favor of fast moving/entertaining action set pieces -- so why does WWI instantly get this criticism when WWII (or any other war games, for that matter) did not?
 
Not really. It's a game, I just don't understand how people can so easily be disturbed by something like this.
What kind of excuse is that? "It's a game". The medium doesn't matter, the execution does

Just like how Saving Private Ryan tried to show brutal and chaotic storming the beach was, and in turn inspired the approach those WW2 shooters took
 
In this context though, why is it offensive to make a BF game in the theme of WWI and not WWII? All games skirt over how miserable and horrifying war is, regardless of which was the deadliest or most brutal.

It's strange to me that this complaint surfaces now when these games have existed in a graphic fashion for decades.

DICE never claimed they'd be making gritty and hyper-realistic survival/war simulators. We're talking about games where you magically respawn on your teammates..

Did BF 1942 authentically depict what WWII was like for soldiers? No, but they weren't pretending to do that in their game.

I don't find it offensive at all, and hopefully when we see actual gameplay it at least covers some of the brutality of infantry warfare of that time period. I wasn't expecting This War of Mine: WW1 Edition.

I was just responding to your claim that because WW2 had the Holocaust the infantry fighting in the two wars is comparable.
 
Top Bottom