-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 1 - The 5 War Stories (campaign) detailed
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
Sorry, don't want sound rude. It's just that I'm a big Battlefield fan and don't get how they manage to continuously fuck up their singleplayer campaigns after BC2 and Mirrors Edge, so that's why I am only finding harsh words.
I guess that is how the rest of the world (USA) will see them forever isn't it?
1940
Nazis!
1915
What a Hitler Jügend Nazi!
1800s?
A congregate of Nazis in dress!
1700s?
What a bunch of foppish Nazis.
1600s!?
THERE'S THAT NAZI EAGLE, WE FOUND THE SOURCE!
Shameful of DICE really, and EA, mostly EA, but EA HQ sucks so not much that could be done there.
1940
Nazis!
1915
What a Hitler Jügend Nazi!
1800s?
A congregate of Nazis in dress!
1700s?
What a bunch of foppish Nazis.
1600s!?
THERE'S THAT NAZI EAGLE, WE FOUND THE SOURCE!
Shameful of DICE really, and EA, mostly EA, but EA HQ sucks so not much that could be done there.
Complicated
Banned
Seems like they went for diversity in locales as well as in perspectives which makes sense for a typical video game. Still looking forward to some audiovisual spectacle that puts me in the middle of such a fascinating war.
jediyoshi
Member
Who are you talking to? I am literally making the point that people were literally under the assumption that not only would the campaign contain mainly playable American troops, but that they would be the main focus. I don't understand how this distinction is alluding you. Am I mentioning troops other than American troops? Can you quote me directly?
PapaEmeritus
Member
I just ordered the green one yesterday, Good deal for everything that's included
Gai Murakumo
Member
No Canadian army too. I know that technically they were part of the British Army back then but us Canadian's did work during that war.
PapaEmeritus
Member
So I'm confused with this game. Is this supposed to be an arcing storyline, or just 5 separate stories that have nothing to do with each other?
Since they have had a lot of trouble with their campaigns since Bad Company I guess the thought is to do a bunch of campaigns and hope that at least a couple turn out ok.
I understand the idea of trying to get a taste of all of the different settings that WWI took place but this doesnt seem like it is going to work for me.
I understand the idea of trying to get a taste of all of the different settings that WWI took place but this doesnt seem like it is going to work for me.
Battlefield 1's campaign might be more interesting than its multiplayer - Eurogamer, says each war story is 90 minutes long.
Battlefield 1's War Stories might be the best campaign DICE has made - PC Gamer
Battlefield 1's War Stories might be the best campaign DICE has made - PC Gamer
Dictator93
Member
No french, german or russian perspective is frankly baffling still. Like, the eastern front was fucking massive! The french were the allied power in the war.
We have to go fruther back.
look at all those nazis fighting the romans
We have to go fruther back.
look at all those nazis fighting the romans
They fought on the "wrong" side.
User 479360
Banned
This doesn't sound very promising. The idea that there's only these stories, they're separate (I guess?) and that they all take place on multiplayer maps sounds awful.
Plus, it's a DICE campaign, and outside of Bad Company, those are usually awful.
I'll be borrowing it from the library, just to play the campaign. I'll likely hate it, though.
Plus, it's a DICE campaign, and outside of Bad Company, those are usually awful.
I'll be borrowing it from the library, just to play the campaign. I'll likely hate it, though.
iRAWRasaurus
Banned
Huh? Read the thread. As of now, that is incorrect regarding War Stories missions only taking place on multiplayer maps.
Sounds like it will be a far less scripted campaign than Battlefield 4 or Call of Duty. Probably not a bad idea for Battlefield, but funny enough would I have been okay with a heavily linear WW1 campaign because the setting is so unused.
A bit more encouraging.
Gnome Scat
Member
Too bad the Germans aren't being represented.
GinoFelino
Member
What does that mean? I seriously have no idea what you're saying.
That's not a particularly high bar to cross.
Croatoan
They/Them A-10 Warthog
Get logic out of here!
GinoFelino
Member
What does that have to do with logic? Also, you're acting like everyone is up in arms here
It's not at all weird to expect all factions represented in what DICE says is a sensible, mature depiction of the war.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
How is that logical?
That misses the entire point of doing a period piece on World War I.
SomeRandomWeirdGuy
Member
I just can't support this game. I was really excited at the prospect of a big budget WWI shooter, but the choices surrounding this game are just disgusting. WWI was a terrible event because there were no real bad guys, everyone got pulled into the then biggest war ever by crazy systems of alliances and had to send millions to their death due to ties and agreements that no one really even wanted to use. It's a grey war, not a black and white one.
So DICE makes it entirely about the "good" guys (read: winners), cuts out the people who did most of the damn fighting and dying on the entente side (French, Russians), and relegates Germans to multiplayer only.
This game infuriates me. I don't care if they have a Harlem hell fighter on the cover (and they were fantastic), or a female Bedouin in the campaign. I can't see this game as "progressive" for cutting out the majority of the people who fought in the war and presenting it in so one sided a fashion.
Hopefully we'll get another big budget WWI shooter down the line that actually gives a shit about the war it's presenting
So DICE makes it entirely about the "good" guys (read: winners), cuts out the people who did most of the damn fighting and dying on the entente side (French, Russians), and relegates Germans to multiplayer only.
This game infuriates me. I don't care if they have a Harlem hell fighter on the cover (and they were fantastic), or a female Bedouin in the campaign. I can't see this game as "progressive" for cutting out the majority of the people who fought in the war and presenting it in so one sided a fashion.
Hopefully we'll get another big budget WWI shooter down the line that actually gives a shit about the war it's presenting
mcz117chief
Member
HO! LY! SHIT! They actually did it and added Arditi in the Alps! Ok ok ok ok ok ok now THAT is the reason to get the game...omg what should I do...I didn't like the multiplayer beta one bit but the having the chance to fight as the Arditi in the Alps is beyond amazing and I think I will never see a game do that again. Oh damn, I don't know, I DON'T KNOW!
It is after Bad Company 1
It is after Bad Company 1
iRAWRasaurus
Banned
Welp it was a struggle for DICE to convince EA to allow them to make a WW1 game.
Please dont remind me of that turd ever again. What a huge disappointment.
mcz117chief
Member
What? Red Orchestra 2 is fantastic, man. The graphics, feel, music, gameplay and everything is top notch in that game.
Whom_Gods_Annoy
Banned
I think he is talking about the singleplayer, which is just multiplayer maps with bots.
Great game. Crap campaign.
mcz117chief
Member
Well I guess that's true. I still liked them though.
Golden_Pigeon
Banned
Being able to play only one side of the history is really disappointing...
Let's fight for the establishment of the Saudi regime in the Arabian Peninsula... yay.
Let's fight for the establishment of the Saudi regime in the Arabian Peninsula... yay.