Battlefield Franchise Megathread V2 - 'The Future of Warfare Is in the Past' Edition - Games

[QUOTE=G.I.U.L.I.O.;50514314]Criticize me for being 'an old timer,' but BF1942 and BF2, while not realistic, were entirely authentic.[/QUOTE] Lmao. Rose tinted glasses. You must not remember how the devs were too lazy to model weapons and Americans were running around with enfields and the brits with BARs. Battlefield has always been like this. Would you rather it be like RO where the people with SSDs and fiber internet always get the good weapons at the very start of the round and everyone else is forced to bottom-feed? Would you rather the tanks take [B]LITERALLY[/B] upwards of 15 minutes to get to the center of the map from spawn? What absurd kits exactly? The most absurd thing so far is the rocket gun thing. The planes issue is something i'm fairly certain is contained to the demo build they showed at the livestream. We've seen Camels and F2Bs in screenshots but not in the livestream. [t]http://imgkk.com/i/d08y.jpg[/t] Are you implying the camel pictured above is not in the game because it's not in the livestream? I've been a sperg for this shit since I was a kid and DICE is 100% taking it in the right direction. They could have went down the bullshit crying war poet hollywood "war is hell" route but they instead went for the awe-inspiring industrialized clash of flesh and steel route that was necessary to actually sell this game to a public who's vague perceptions of this war were shaped by [I]fiction[/I] like "All Quiet on the Western Front" and not [I]fact[/I] like "Storm of Steel".

Didn't they mention new gamemodes? I'm hoping there's a slower-paced realism gamemode where the vehicles aren't as fast, nations spawn with their own equipment and there's no floaty icons and stuff, with ambush- and entrenchment-focused gameplay. That wouldn't be tough to implement and it'd leave both sides of the realism argument satisfied. Additionally, the odds are good that the singleplayer will be much more authentic.

At the very least if people make a big enough stink about it they'll probably add filters for servers that'll allow for "realism." [editline]13th June 2016[/editline] Well, if bolt actions become available for every class then it'll be possible.

It just seems silly to think that they'd make a WW1 shooter and then not have MP gamemodes geared toward more realistic play, when the framework exists and it's literally as simple as changing some variables for that gamemode. I'm sure some extra whiny babies will still complain that there's an "arcade" mode at all, but fuck em.

Didn't BF3 and BF4 have things that allowed servers to block certain weapons? Someone could probably do that with BF1 then, just strip away all the automatics and only keep the mainline weapons and you'd have a much more realistic experience if you combine it with hardcore.

I really like how colorful the game looks in that video. They don't seem to be putting heavy filters on like with BF3/4.

In case anyone is wondering, nothing of value was said during the BF1 interview with Geoff Keighley.

[QUOTE=simkas;50510347]Or because there was quite a few semi-auto rifles developed during WWI? If they only had all the main weapons, that'd be a pretty limited selection. And it's way more interesting to see weapons that don't usually appear in stuff rather than only seeing stuff that's seen in all other WWI media.[/QUOTE] Yes, the abundance of WW1 media. Like hm....uh...blackadder and that old ass all quiet movie?

Its interesting how gameplay changes since people cant just blow through walls with grenade launchers. You get a lot more indoor fighting I feel, while when everyone has grenade launchers, you dont stick in houses really. If anything, it makes it easier to be killed, since they can just take it down or blow up the wall you're behind

[img]http://imgkk.com/i/zzge.png[/img]

[QUOTE=G.I.U.L.I.O.;50514314]Criticize me for being 'an old timer,' but BF1942 and BF2, while not realistic, were entirely authentic.[/QUOTE] LOL Jackhammer?

[QUOTE=abananapeel;50515151]Its interesting how gameplay changes since people cant just blow through walls with grenade launchers. You get a lot more indoor fighting I feel, while when everyone has grenade launchers, you dont stick in houses really. If anything, it makes it easier to be killed, since they can just take it down or blow up the wall you're behind[/QUOTE] Rifle Grenades when?

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8UB9LVhh6A[/media]

[url]https://twitter.com/terrycrews?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor[/url] Well, at least it seems Terry Crews had fun.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50515010]Didn't they mention new gamemodes? I'm hoping there's a slower-paced realism gamemode where the vehicles aren't as fast, nations spawn with their own equipment and there's no floaty icons and stuff, with ambush- and entrenchment-focused gameplay. That wouldn't be tough to implement and it'd leave both sides of the realism argument satisfied. Additionally, the odds are good that the singleplayer will be much more authentic.[/QUOTE] This would honestly be the best compromise. Doesn't even have to have faction specific weapons either, just bolt actions, pistols, limit on the machine gunner class (if possible), no attachments, and it's good to go.

[QUOTE=Avager;50512078]Pretty good aggressive scout gameplay with some melee stuff: [video=youtube;5qqBbyvF7mk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqBbyvF7mk[/video] I like how the new melee works compared to that disgusting shit in bf4.[/QUOTE] Finally someone who actually used the Luger lol. Seems none of the people who played during the livestream bothered to make a point of showing off the equipment options. Levelcap shows most of it in the 40 minute video over multiple points though.

[QUOTE=mastermaul;50514928]I've been a sperg for this shit since I was a kid and DICE is 100% taking it in the right direction. They could have went down the bullshit crying war poet hollywood "war is hell" route but they instead went for the awe-inspiring industrialized clash of flesh and steel route that was necessary to actually sell this game to a public who's vague perceptions of this war were shaped by [I]fiction[/I] like "All Quiet on the Western Front" and not [I]fact[/I] like "Storm of Steel".[/QUOTE] They're really not going the right way, and fact is and always will be better than fiction when it comes to the First World War. Just as far as Storm of Steel goes since you brought it up, Ernst Jünger (the guy who wrote it) for those that aren't aware was basically a real-life German Indiana Jones. His father was a wealthy chemist, he went to all kinds of boarding schools as a child, and he traveled around Europe as a Wandervogel club member when he was 16 writing poetry. He ran away from home, joined the French Foreign Legion, deserted in Algeria, was caught and eventually wound up back in Germany, went back to school, and then joined the German Army to fight in the war in August 1914. When he was 19. He did all this shit before he was even 20-years-old. That's fucking incredible. As far as his war exploits go, they're legendary. He served for all four years of the conflict and was wounded more than a dozen times (serious injuries too, everything from being hit in the back of the head by a bullet that went through his helmet to getting shot in the fucking chest [i]twice[/i] on separate occasions-- one of which almost led to him dying by drowning on his own blood when the bullet hit his lung), rose up from a private to a lieutenant, led stormtroopers during Operation Michael in March 1918, forced retreating troops on his own side to join in multiple times on holdout efforts (several of which happened when he held them at gunpoint), and he took I have no idea how many prisoners. He was awarded the Iron Cross and the Blue Max, and he filled over a dozen notebooks journaling his experiences during the war. [t]http://66.media.tumblr.com/903973db2684b27f88a3ffd18838dfa3/tumblr_nik3nopyfY1u7vgzzo2_400.jpg[/t] What's not awe-inspiring about this exactly? And this isn't even going into detail about all the incredible things he did after the war in Germany (in science, politics, and the military), nor the fact that he lived to be 102-years-old. World War I is damn interesting, even when you strip away the run-and-gun "ACTION! ACTION! ACTION!" approach that DICE is clearly going for here with BF1. Again, that's the way it is with reality, and more people need to be taught to realize this.

[QUOTE=mastermaul;50515188][img]http://imgkk.com/i/zzge.png[/img][/QUOTE] No Canada... ...maybe in singleplayer?

[QUOTE=Daemon White;50515583]No Canada... ...maybe in singleplayer?[/QUOTE] The game through authenticity and historical accuracy out the window. Did you really expect Canada to show up?

[QUOTE=Govna;50515572]What's not awe-inspiring about this exactly?[/QUOTE] I do not think you read my post correctly.

[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;50515609]The game through authenticity and historical accuracy out the window. Did you really expect Canada to show up?[/QUOTE] I expected SOMETHING. For fuck's sake, does Vimy Ridge mean nothing? Yes, I'm legit upset over this right now. ..I'm just tired of not having Canadians in any games these days. France deserves a spot in this game as well and they're also missing. America can fuck off in this one imo, they only really joined the war in the last few months.

[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;50515427]This would honestly be the best compromise. Doesn't even have to have faction specific weapons either, just bolt actions, pistols, limit on the machine gunner class (if possible), no attachments, and it's good to go.[/QUOTE] That sounds fun imagine a Somme map where artillery is tearing up the landscape in Frostbite, then you "go over the top" with everyone wielding bolt action rifles, machine guns blazing and trench knives out with planes duking it out above while tanks are rolling in to cover the advance - would be pretty neat to see as an alternative to the run-and-gun-around-a-church Call of Duty styled of play

[QUOTE=G.I.U.L.I.O.;50513745][B][Citation needed][/B][/QUOTE] Wired, S. (2016) Contemporary representations of the First World War that appeal to the mass market. [I]Facebreaking Business, 2[/I] 8-8. Retrieved from [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1521671&p=50515722[/url]

[QUOTE=mastermaul;50515615]I do not think you read my post correctly.[/QUOTE] How was I supposed to read it then? G.I.U.L.I.O.'s point is that the arcade route they're going for here is not the right direction to take the game in, and I agree with him. The pacing they're aiming to have as far as combat goes is [i]way[/i] too fast for a World War I game, and it's silly. If they toned it down, it would still be a fun game to play, and it would be at least a little bit more authentic.

[QUOTE=Daemon White;50515657]I expected SOMETHING. For fuck's sake, does Vimy Ridge mean nothing? Yes, I'm legit upset over this right now. ..I'm just tired of not having Canadians in any games these days. France deserves a spot in this game as well and they're also missing. America can fuck off in this one imo, they only really joined the war in the last few months.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty pissed off about Canada not showing up either, but I'm honestly not holding my breath for them or the French, even in the campaign. What I am expecting though is a Vimy Ridge DLC that adds a shitty Vimy Ridge map that's designed around run and gun close quarters gameplay, a Ross Rifle that can't have its scope removed, and probably a Sten gun with the way the weapon choices are going.

[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;50515769]I'm pretty pissed off about Canada not showing up either, but I'm honestly not holding my breath for them or the French, even in the campaign. What I am expecting though is a Vimy Ridge DLC that adds a shitty Vimy Ridge map that's designed around run and gun close quarters gameplay, a Ross Rifle that can't have its scope removed, and probably a Sten gun with the way the weapon choices are going.[/QUOTE] would you come off it already? We get it, you're mad that a Battlefield game (((arcadey by nature))) isn't Trench Foot Simulator 2016. jesus christ I fuckin collect and research WW1 history if anyone should be mad about this it should be collectors and historians like me, just take a deep breath and play Verdun if you want a more authentic experience. It's a battlefield game lol, they've always been theme-park arcade shooters. I expect a realism mode just because it'd be easy to add but even if there isn't one you know what I'll do? I'll fuckin get over it

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50516074]would you come off it already? We get it, you're mad that a Battlefield game (((arcadey by nature))) isn't Trench Foot Simulator 2016. jesus christ I fuckin collect and research WW1 history if anyone should be mad about this it should be collectors and historians like me, just take a deep breath and play Verdun if you want a more authentic experience. It's a battlefield game lol, they've always been theme-park arcade shooters. I expect a realism mode just because it'd be easy to add but even if there isn't one you know what I'll do? I'll fuckin get over it[/QUOTE] Exactly, and the few niggles I do have with the direction they've gone will probably subside with release when we know the full weapons and vehicle lists. I mean it's clear that DICE has done some exhaustive research with the the equipment and weapons, using some really obscure prototype shit - which is the direction I always felt a AAA WWI gane would go in, and is something that makes me very happy.

I'm just excited that WWI is getting attention at all and i'm glad at least DICE is doing it over someone like Infinity Ward. Imagine a current CoD:WW1? In light of that, i'm gonna take what i'm getting and not throw a shitfit because i'm not sitting in a trench for five hours a match, cleaning my gun and getting trench foot.

I'm honestly fine with the 6 factions atm. It's quite a lot already.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50516074]would you come off it already? We get it, you're mad that a Battlefield game (((arcadey by nature))) isn't Trench Foot Simulator 2016. jesus christ I fuckin collect and research WW1 history if anyone should be mad about this it should be collectors and historians like me, just take a deep breath and play Verdun if you want a more authentic experience. It's a battlefield game lol, they've always been theme-park arcade shooters. I expect a realism mode just because it'd be easy to add but even if there isn't one you know what I'll do? I'll fuckin get over it[/QUOTE] I'm not asking for trench foot simulator. I'm literally just asking for better choices in weaponry with less of a focus on automatics. I don't get what's so bad about that. I'm not asking them to turn it into Red Orchestra, I'm just asking them to not force me into a sniper role so I don't get dominated by chucklefucks running around with MP18s and LMGs if I want to have a more authentic WWI experience for myself by using a bolt action rifle. I'm probably still going to buy the game and have fun with it, even if it means turning off my brain for a couple hours which is what I do when I play BF4 anyway. [editline]13th June 2016[/editline] I'll stop my bitching and moaning until a full weapon list is reveled. And to be honest, there's some weird and wacky prototypes I actually want to see in the game like the Fedorov Avtomat.