This year's Battlefield is rumored to be set during World War 2 - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=milktree;53171030]Just give me fully pilotable destroyers, battleships, subs, aircraft carriers. None of this on-rails crap. Please. ..It's never going to happen.[/QUOTE] Well it happened with the latest DLC for BF1, so anything's possible. Well, some of that happened, and a sub was planned at some point, so i wouldn't be surprised.

I'm going to be absurdly disappointed if it's a WW2 shooter. "But the over-saturation has died down." Doesn't mean that we're going to be getting the same exact shit again. Oh boy I cannot just fucking wait to fly a P51,Spit Fire,Zero,Messerschmidt,or a Yak while using a bazook or panzerfaust against a Sherman,T34, or Panzer tanks. Or fighting with a thompson or Mp44 for again, riveting. Going back to 2142 would be fucking breathe of fresh air because we at the very least will get to see some inventive shit from DICE. I'd much rather be pod assaulting titans or trying to destroy the Goliath with my team rather than having to go destroy random ammo dump in France or capture some beach in the pacific. I'd rather have the ability to have people from on me from sub orbit while using my walker to provide air defense for the titan once the shields drop or use the hover tank's mobility to kite a less mobile but harder hitting vehicle. I don't want to go back to 1940's Europe and watch tanks shoot at each other when I can have an APC,Walker, and Tank all be shooting at a massive hovering mobile spawn point with the ability to ground pound, or have to be wary of motion activated mines or the recon class that went invisible to get a good spot to harass us from. If it's a WW2 shooter it's going to be boring as fuck, the only thing that it have innovative is that it'll look slightly prettier. There is genuinely so much more room for fun gameplay with a setting that touched only once and still is considered one of the best gamemodes that DICE cannot willingly seem to recreate.

[QUOTE=milktree;53171030]Just give me fully pilotable destroyers, battleships, subs, aircraft carriers. None of this on-rails crap. Please. ..It's never going to happen.[/QUOTE] I miss the days of Wake Island when someone would hijack the aircraft carrier and you'd find it teetering on one of the beaches destroying everyone's FPS

As a long time Battlefield fan who played Battlefield 1942 for dozens if not hundreds of hours when it first came out, I'm pretty excited. If they do as good a job with this as they did with Battlefield 1 it could be one of the best they've made in years.

[url]https://kotaku.com/after-the-loot-box-fury-the-people-behind-the-next-bat-1823475844[/url] [quote]“No one’s gonna do any pay-to-win stuff anymore,” one person close to the next Battlefield told me recently. “We didn’t take any of the loot box controversy lightly.”[/quote] [quote]A series of reports this week, starting with VentureBeat, have pegged the next Battlefield as a World War II game. In most years, the venue of a new big game would be its most newsworthy attribute. That’s not quite the case with a new game from EA, a company whose handling of micropayments has become major news. What may be of more interest to players is that the website US Gamer reported yesterday that the upcoming Battlefield will include cosmetic-only loot boxes, as 2016’s Battlefield 1 did. Two people close to DICE told me that, while microtransaction plans for the next Battlefield have changed before and will no doubt change again before the game is out this fall, the company is indeed hoping to stick to cosmetics. One person added the caveat that US Gamer is “making a conclusion about something that is still inconclusive.”[/quote]

[QUOTE=Swiket;53173256][url]https://kotaku.com/after-the-loot-box-fury-the-people-behind-the-next-bat-1823475844[/url][/QUOTE] Hopefully that's what they're doing to Battlefront 2 with the progression revamp.

[QUOTE=Swiket;53173256][url]https://kotaku.com/after-the-loot-box-fury-the-people-behind-the-next-bat-1823475844[/url][/QUOTE] I can't wait until the only thing I have to buy to win is the game and also the premium pass that's to this day restriction my weaponry in Battlefield 1

[QUOTE=gk99;53173514]I can't wait until the only thing I have to buy to win is the game and also the premium pass that's to this day restriction my weaponry in Battlefield 1[/QUOTE] tbh this. It's pretty disingenuous to say there isn't going to be any p2w in the next Battlefield when guns are locked behind DLC purchases or the season pass. It's very rare that a DLC gun ends up being optimal but taking BF1 as an example the Federov Automat and Parabellum MG were both really good weapons that you couldn't get unless you paid money.

[QUOTE=SKEEA;53171101]Bad Company 3. BF2143. Come on, we don't need another ww2 game.[/QUOTE] BC2 was a WW2 game. Partially.

If it is WW2, the first trailer better damn well be the 1942 opening but with new graphics same music. [editline]3rd March 2018[/editline] Not identical gameplay of course. But just to show they haven't forgotten where this series actually began

2143 when, honestly the current engine that DICE uses could only do the setting justice. Imagine Titans if they were optimised for the new engine, able to manoeuvre around the map and rain hell down upon people. Or fighting your way onboard and tearing them apart from within. You wouldn't need squad spawning (which imo has become a feature that's overused) if you can literally just put a beacon down for drip pods - instead of magically appearing out of thin air you'd literally be dropped into the fight which would make for a hell of a cinematic experience. Campaign options are limitless and same goes for the map - you've got anywhere from North Africa to Eurasia for a backdrop. Of course, it looks more likely we'll get a WWII setting - but at the least I hope we get some of the features and maps that made 1942 great. Controllable aircraft carriers when.

[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;53172461]I'm going to be absurdly disappointed if it's a WW2 shooter. "But the over-saturation has died down." Doesn't mean that we're going to be getting the same exact shit again. Oh boy I cannot just fucking wait to fly a P51,Spit Fire,Zero,Messerschmidt,or a Yak while using a bazook or panzerfaust against a Sherman,T34, or Panzer tanks. Or fighting with a thompson or Mp44 for again, riveting. Going back to 2142 would be fucking breathe of fresh air because we at the very least will get to see some inventive shit from DICE. I'd much rather be pod assaulting titans or trying to destroy the Goliath with my team rather than having to go destroy random ammo dump in France or capture some beach in the pacific. I'd rather have the ability to have people from on me from sub orbit while using my walker to provide air defense for the titan once the shields drop or use the hover tank's mobility to kite a less mobile but harder hitting vehicle. I don't want to go back to 1940's Europe and watch tanks shoot at each other when I can have an APC,Walker, and Tank all be shooting at a massive hovering mobile spawn point with the ability to ground pound, or have to be wary of motion activated mines or the recon class that went invisible to get a good spot to harass us from. If it's a WW2 shooter it's going to be boring as fuck, the only thing that it have innovative is that it'll look slightly prettier. There is genuinely so much more room for fun gameplay with a setting that touched only once and still is considered one of the best gamemodes that DICE cannot willingly seem to recreate.[/QUOTE] Something worth considering is that the last Battlefield game in a WW2 setting, other than 1943, was done at a time when customization and player choice was very limited; there were no choices you could make other than what class. With the series now heavily focusing on giving you multiple options, even when it comes to vehicles, there's likely to be a far greater variety than before even if we will get the most iconic and common equipment used as well. There are all sorts of things that could be included in the game. Even if they just include the vehicle types from BF1942 that's already more vehicle types than usual; Half tracks (various sorts), armoured cars, anti-air, assault guns, tank destroyers, medium/heavy tanks etc. There's the potential for a lot of variety even without going too far beyond what the most used equipment was.

[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;53172461]I'm going to be absurdly disappointed if it's a WW2 shooter. "But the over-saturation has died down." Doesn't mean that we're going to be getting the same exact shit again. Oh boy I cannot just fucking wait to fly a P51,Spit Fire,Zero,Messerschmidt,or a Yak while using a bazook or panzerfaust against a Sherman,T34, or Panzer tanks. Or fighting with a thompson or Mp44 for again, riveting. Going back to 2142 would be fucking breathe of fresh air because we at the very least will get to see some inventive shit from DICE. I'd much rather be pod assaulting titans or trying to destroy the Goliath with my team rather than having to go destroy random ammo dump in France or capture some beach in the pacific. I'd rather have the ability to have people from on me from sub orbit while using my walker to provide air defense for the titan once the shields drop or use the hover tank's mobility to kite a less mobile but harder hitting vehicle. I don't want to go back to 1940's Europe and watch tanks shoot at each other when I can have an APC,Walker, and Tank all be shooting at a massive hovering mobile spawn point with the ability to ground pound, or have to be wary of motion activated mines or the recon class that went invisible to get a good spot to harass us from. If it's a WW2 shooter it's going to be boring as fuck, the only thing that it have innovative is that it'll look slightly prettier. There is genuinely so much more room for fun gameplay with a setting that touched only once and still is considered one of the best gamemodes that DICE cannot willingly seem to recreate.[/QUOTE] I don't think it's the futuristic setting that we're longing for per-se; it's game mechanics that offers a modicum of pacing and room for strategy rather than just high-octane team deathmatch with pretty graphics.

I really really hope they don't call it Battlefield V...

[QUOTE=gk99;53173514]I can't wait until the only thing I have to buy to win is the game and also the premium pass that's to this day restriction my weaponry in Battlefield 1[/QUOTE] Such an annoying change. I paid for the fucking expansion with premium, give me the damn guns and not do some annoying challenge like killing 10 behemoths with an HE tripwire to get a pistol.

Battlefield going “back to their roots”, set in WWII, would be a welcome reprieve. CoD failed horrendously to bring WWII back to its true glory. I am 100 percent confident that a battlefield wwii game will completely eclipse CoD. I welcome them taking a shot at the time period! BF1 is still vastly superior to CoD WWII if you ask me.

Im a bit curious to see how the next battlefield is named,cant go to 2 as there is a battlefield 2 and going to 5 would be a bit confusing,i think it might be named battlefield ww2. Or they could just not care and name it 2 anyways.

[QUOTE=redBadger;53174755]Such an annoying change. I paid for the fucking expansion with premium, give me the damn guns and not do some annoying challenge like killing 10 behemoths with an HE tripwire to get a pistol.[/QUOTE] I haven't bought premium because I looked up why I wasn't getting progression progress on the gun I wanted, only to be told "you need to pay money for this." So I went "oh, really? fuck you then I guess" and just didn't out of pure anger. Stopped playing the game soon after, too. [editline]a[/editline] I got BF4 premium because I came in late as [I]fuck[/I] and it was like $20 for this complete edition, but I got BF1 as a Christmas gift so they already had $60 from this purchase and I refuse to give them more.

Market garden here we come!