• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

savagejoe444

Battlefield 5 will be set in WWI???

27 posts in this topic

hmmm...I'm not quite sure how much content could expand from trench warfare, but it would be awesome to fight in biplanes and for once only use semi-auto rifles for most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see it now. Mustard Gas Spammers

 

Side note, you know there gonna have some sort of Red Barron dlc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, a step back to step forward, I actually kind of like that.

 

Not that I have faith in DICE to accurately tell the stories of WW1 with any care or dignity. Even historians barely know the full story about that war. Screw the multiplayer, it's the campaign they have to get right, and based on thier recent track record... yeah, people are going to shout at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why cite/source ign?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, a step back to step forward, I actually kind of like that.

 

Not that I have faith in DICE to accurately tell the stories of WW1 with any care or dignity. Even historians barely know the full story about that war. Screw the multiplayer, it's the campaign they have to get right, and based on thier recent track record... yeah, people are going to shout at them.

Meh, Battlefield was always about the multiplayer. First ever Battlefield that had a proper campaign was Battlefield 3 and we had like 5 major Battlefield titles which never had a campaign. Best you could do was go vs bots. Okay and Bad Company 1&2 had a campaign which was actually 10x better than BF3 or 4.

 

FPS and war just aren't good to anyone now and too many games out there with war themes and always the same. Battlefield's biggest sale point was always the awesome battles in the multiplayer so I Battlefield should prioritize multiplayer I think and then campaign. 

We all know from previous games that they never nail both, so they will probably just nail one or fail both. And I doubt Battlefield would live long enough just on the singleplayer. I guess if they really make a good WW1 themed campaign, great...but imo I don't know what they could do to be unique in that matter, besides just making a spectecular game in graphics and soundFX. 

At least with MP they can make some really fun mechanics to use in matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i know, no matter what setting the game is.

The game is going to be broken as hell on launch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i know, no matter what setting the game is.

The game is going to be broken as hell on launch

And balanced as fuck.

The good old days of BF3. When USAS + Frags could control day and night.

Alexander452 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaannnddd... More Ultimate Edition shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaannnddd... More Ultimate Edition shit.

 

The "Francis Ferdinand Survived" DLC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i have mixed feeling it depends on how they do this just pray they dont mess things up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i have mixed feeling it depends on how they do this just pray they dont mess things up

It's a leak, nothing is confirmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DICE can't get their own bullshit right with Battlefield, so much so that for Battlefront they didn't even try.  So how they expect to tell the story of a war so complicated that even to this day historians debate how the hell it even happened is anyone's guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DICE can't get own bullshit right with Battlefield , so much so that for Battlefront they didn't even try.  So how they expect to tell the story of a war so complicated that even to this day historians debate how the hell it even happened is anyone's guess.

I don't think they need to say how it happened, specially if game will have no campaign. If it will be, well it will probably be a tale of a soldier just fighting. Maybe a few fictional major enemies that aren't neccesarily famous. There is a way to do this.

 

Also this isn't confirmed. Apparenlty some retailer categorized the game in WW1, but that could just be random too. Retailers often do random shit, so I would take this with a grain of salt. There is a bigger chance it's WW2 then. It's basically a leak and rumor. Mind you that BF4 was hyped to be in future setting and it turned out to be in modern setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said they should make a ww1 game over a decade ago and I got blasted for it. Dumbest idea ever type deal... Not in this community mind you. I think it was kongregate or something.

I hope the game owns so I have the last laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WWI? Could go for a WWII game instead it's been awhile since I played a good one. Cod World at War and the first three were the last good one's I played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Multiplayer tactical shooter in WW1"

If they mean "tactical" by running and gunning as if it were WW2 or modern era then *facepalm*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they talk about a tactical shooter in WWI, do they mean strategically moving from trench to trench, waiting hours to peek your head out without it being cut open by a sniper; this is what combat usually was in the first world war. Frankly, I don't know how much content they could get out of this. I have a strange feeling that they are going to base the game of the "Rush" game mode except involving trenches (Fight, whoever sustains most casualties or something along those lines. Whistle blows, run, get gunned down my mounted machine gun). Then again, you could be right and maybe it is just running and gunning. I can see the future clearly now....People running with 50 pounds of gear on their back, bunny hopping through no man's land dodging heavy machine gun fire due to unnecessary amounts of lag from the clients and EA servers- Spams potato grenades (What? I like the nickname), quickscopes everyone with his rifle. Now multiply that times sixty-four and you have the most likely result. I don't want to hate, but I think EA would deserve if this game bombed out because if EA stays true to their believes of greed and profit, then it will consist of no campaign and a half-baked multiplayer experience(hopefully DICE will be able to pull this out of the water if this game goes down this way).



Speaking of which, I heard war stories that aren't necessarily true, but this just popped into my head. What if somewhere along the campaign when you are fighting as a British soldier, you come across a worn out, heavily fatigued and dirt covered German soldier in the field, and you decide to let him live. I remember there being theories based on Adolf Hitler's dialogue and other supposed evidence that he was spared during the First World War by a British soldier who chose to lower his weapon and not to end him. Just wondering if that would be an interesting idea as a small event in the campaign if there would be any.


And this is the story of how I typed this in 10 minutes at one o'clock in the morning.

Apex Spartan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least there trying something different, not sure how well it's going to work though Brokensteel mentioned WWI warfrare is just trenches which might not make for the best gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they talk about a tactical shooter in WWI, do they mean strategically moving from trench to trench, waiting hours to peek your head out without it being cut open by a sniper; this is what combat usually was in the first world war. Frankly, I don't know how much content they could get out of this. I have a strange feeling that they are going to base the game of the "Rush" game mode except involving trenches (Fight, whoever sustains most casualties or something along those lines. Whistle blows, run, get gunned down my mounted machine gun). Then again, you could be right and maybe it is just running and gunning. I can see the future clearly now....People running with 50 pounds of gear on their back, bunny hopping through no man's land dodging heavy machine gun fire due to unnecessary amounts of lag from the clients and EA servers- Spams potato grenades (What? I like the nickname), quickscopes everyone with his rifle. Now multiply that times sixty-four and you have the most likely result. I don't want to hate, but I think EA would deserve if this game bombed out because if EA stays true to their believes of greed and profit, then it will consist of no campaign and a half-baked multiplayer experience(hopefully DICE will be able to pull this out of the water if this game goes down this way).

 

 

I thought about it being "tactical" in the sense of strategically moving from trench to trench, but I'm not sure how that can work in traditional Battlefield fashion. Unless it's something like Rush as you say. That or they would basically totally revamp what we are use to expecting from a Battlefield title. Sorta like what Rainbow Six did with the recent R6 Siege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I love the idea of seeing any game at all tackle the first world war. Everyone knows it happened of course, but it's the one of two major world wars that everyone forgets about all the time mainly because it was so overshadowed by the sheer size and tragedy of the second war. WW2 basically happened because of issues caused and left unresolved from the first war after all, it fueled much of the prejudices from all sides. Most shooters that go to that era focus on WW2 because it's more "memorable" and people had cooler weapons, I don't think I've ever actually played a single game that ever revolved around the great war. It could be a wonderful change of pace if they choose to actually tell a story, while also staying historically accurate. When it comes to real wars, I love games that feel almost like documentaries at the right times.  

Actually I miss when games like COD focused on that era in general. Now everyone's gone all modern-warfare halo future robocop soldier. 

Zero Foxtrot likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gameplay wise, I'd prefer a WW2 game as it was much more dynamic, a bit more weapon variety, and some better vehicles. It was just a more mobile and dynamic war. Plus I haven't played a good one since WaW although I have heard Red Orchaestra is quite good too.

While WWI would be interesting, I just feel the gameplay would be a bit boring: Charge across no man's land, get blown/shot up. Respawn in friendly trench, wait for enemies to charge, mow them down like grass. Repeat.

Also Bi-Planes aren't the most useful close air support craft and the tanks of WWI were pretty slow.

Apex Spartan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question how do you go from modern war all the back to World War 1 like does that not make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question how do you go from modern war all the back to World War 1 like does that not make sense?

From what I understand, the Battlefield series rarely has any branching story archs, and each one is kind of does its own thing. You could parrelel that even with COD. Despite the fact that some of their games like Black Ops or MW have sequels, it's essentially a name they slap on a bunch of games that kind of do their own thing in different eras. 

I don't think I'd even really mind if Call of Doody later tries to copy this game's idea because I'd really like to see more historical shooters in this day and age. I'm sick of the generic space marine robot soldier shit that everyone's been doing for who knows how many years now. They're all starting to feel the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now