BATTLEFIELD 1

I hope there's no spotting period.

In BF1942 you saw friendlies, no enemies IIRC.

For a WW1 game it would make no sense and I hate how most modern fps games have basical ly a built in wall-hack that tells you where all the enemies are. It leads to people having to look at toheir mini-map instiead of focusing on the game and what they see/hear instead. It also stop speople from being able to play stealthily and other things.
 
Rather have a WW1 game than yet another "Modern' one imho.
What i'd REALLY love to see is a Pacific war carrier flight sim done with today's technologies. There was a pretty good one years ago but not much ever since. (And not the arcadey one)
I miss dive bombing the Japanese carriers and ships...hehe
 
I hope there's no spotting period.

In BF1942 you saw friendlies, no enemies IIRC.

For a WW1 game it would make no sense and I hate how most modern fps games have basical ly a built in wall-hack that tells you where all the enemies are. It leads to people having to look at toheir mini-map instiead of focusing on the game and what they see/hear instead. It also stop speople from being able to play stealthily and other things.
I stopped playing Counter-Strike after they added the mini-map. In a modern shooter I think a simple radar is fine, where you can see friendlies and enemies will only show momentarily when they are pinged while shooting. With BF1 I definitely hope they forgo any type of active map or radar.
 
Spotting should always be minimap only. It doesn't break the game and provides good info for teamwork.

I would maybe allow 3d spotting to work on vehicles(and minimap), but they are only 3d spotted while someone is actively ADS'ing on them.

Also, audio spotting is stupid and should never be in any game. There is no reason you should be pinged on the minimap for shooting your gun. Let people actually use their ears and eyes to figure out where the enemy is.
 
And really, do people not know how hard it is to find someone from that? I mean go outside, have someone create a sound from that far away and then try to find their EXACT location with a single sound that lasts .2 seconds.

You might be able to tell a general "direction" but aside from that you aren't going to somehow magically know their exact location.
 
I'm hyped for it. Will hope to get into closed or open beta and then likely pre-order a few days before release.

Is there any incentive to pre-order now? Why do people pre-order so far in advance? It's basically an interest free loan to the developer for 5.5 months?
 
I'm hyped for it. Will hope to get into closed or open beta and then likely pre-order a few days before release.

Is there any incentive to pre-order now? Why do people pre-order so far in advance? It's basically an interest free loan to the developer for 5.5 months?
.... its just common.

I only buy on day 1. Since im an EA access member, i at least get to try it out for a couple weeks before its officially released (10 hours tho). Then actually pull the trigger on the game. Never pre ordered in my life.
 
I don't the idea of preordering either especially this far out. It does make sense for the benefits if you order from Origin, but only if you preorder a day or two before launch or when preload starts since you can always refund it. BF always goes on sale for Black Friday so it is less than 2 months after release.
 
Pre-ordering this far out only ever made sense when there was physical media and the amount could be limited (first come, first served).

With digital distribution it makes zero sense.
 
Pre-ordering this far out only ever made sense when there was physical media and the amount could be limited (first come, first served).

With digital distribution it makes zero sense.

I think the last game that i pre orderd that actually needed it due to high demand was Grand Theft Auto 4 on Xbox 360, the line was crazy long at gamestop.
 
I hope there's no spotting period.

In BF1942 you saw friendlies, no enemies IIRC.

For a WW1 game it would make no sense and I hate how most modern fps games have basical ly a built in wall-hack that tells you where all the enemies are. It leads to people having to look at toheir mini-map instiead of focusing on the game and what they see/hear instead. It also stop speople from being able to play stealthily and other things.

I always play BF on "hardcore". Where you hit a guy in the head with a rifle and they actually die and none of that spotting nonsense.

I hated normal BF4, loved hardcore BF4.
 
I hate hardcore bf4, mainly its more camping/sniping with suppressors and other tools like MAVS and TUGS are rendered useless. I know many people play and love hardcore, but my philosophy still stands, i game to have fun. And i see no fun in playing hardcore, where most people hide inside of building or under brushes. I do like the face that it forces you to play as a team which you must have a medic by your side, since your health dont regenerate, but ill pass.

More action playing on regular settings.
 
part of the reason i never liked recent BF games was from the 3d spotting, classic 1942 style where you could make effective sneaks around the map to flank was great.

you can't really sneak around in BF4 when you are constantly spotted from across the map.
 
I always play BF on "hardcore". Where you hit a guy in the head with a rifle and they actually die and none of that spotting nonsense.

I hated normal BF4, loved hardcore BF4.

Only way to play the game.

Really happy going back to WWI, started getting really tired of BF3/4 thermal vision on everything, auto lock on Javelins (yeah, put that in the game and then let's make the attackers start the game in boats with nowhere to dodge!). Oh and XM25 airburst. Bah humbug.
 
Nobody reallly seen any Gameplay besides the trailer basically the Gameplay videos the last two major FPS from Origin and EA were Battlefront and Hardline so if it's anything like those games I'm not going to hold my breath or waste my time.
 
We've seen virtually nothing of this game so far. No real gameplay, no PC footage, etc.

FAR too early to pre-order, and even then I wouldn't pre-order an EA title anymore.

Definitely! Much, much too early to make that decision... And I am hesitant to reward EA for anything, given their current DLC model. I was just noting that this is the first game that has interested me enough to make me question myself. I've got five months to wait for game play videos and beta before I decide if it's worth pre-ordering. If it ends up being what I've been waiting for I'll for damn sure be pre-ordering it a few days before it comes out to get a headstart on downloading the game though.

You have to wonder whether people who make these statements are professional shills, they have a "no pre-order" rule but will happily make an exception based on a heavily scripted bombastic trailer which mostly focuses on snippets from the SP campaign (which in DICE's case have been generally shit). I can understand if they are taking advantage of an exceptionally good pre-order discount, but at full RRP there is literally no good reason to pre-order especially when there are going to be multiple opportunities to play the game beforehand so one can judge for themselves whether it is actually worth buying.

Oh please. I've been here for five years and 99% of my posts are either about hardware or classifieds.
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one NOT excited for this game? Like, I want to be... but it looks... boring?
 
If they totally ramped up the Graphics to where it doesn't look like WWI it will be good. But if it's a vacant Farm Field with Stones and Horses.
 
Am I the only one NOT excited for this game? Like, I want to be... but it looks... boring?

Of course you're not...but most of those of us who aren't excited about it probably just aren't really talking about it. I'm not convinced WWI could be fun if it's faithful to the time period, and so far no gameplay details have been released. I've never cared about cinematic trailers, so there you go - very little to talk about, from my point of view.
 
Why do you think it couldn't be fun?

WWI wasn't simply trench warfare. The ENTIRE eastern front never really devolved into trench warfare, the lines on the eastern front were constantly shifting and moving, there was no stalemate there.

WWI saw a far greater leap in technology compared to WWII in terms of what they started with and where technology went by the end of the war. WWII may have had "more" but the leap wasn't nearly as great.

The fighting was across a huge area, you had deserts, mountains, urban areas, valleys, trenches, etc. So there's no shortage of varied maps that they can make .
 
Why do you think it couldn't be fun?

I don't think the tank combat could be all that interesting unless they take some creative liberties with what WWI tanks were capable of. The same is true of the air vehicles - no helicopters, the only air vehicles that are interesting for both ground and air forces, and biplanes that *should* be(but probably won't be) vulnerable to basically any form of fire from the ground.

The infantry combat could probably be okay, but what sets Battlefield games apart for me is the meshing of infantry and vehicle gameplay, and I just don't see the vehicle gameplay being any good if they're period-faithful.

But eventually there will be an open beta and I'll play it and then I'll know for sure. For now they haven't shown anything at all that could give any clue as to how the game actually plays, so like I said...I just don't think there's much to say at this point.
 
Well tanks in that era were built mainly for supporting infantry and such.

Mostly with a cannon and then some mg's. Which at the time could be terrifying to encounter on the battlefield. Especially as an infantryman as you usually had no way to fight them.

They were however quite vulnerable to artillery fire and some large caliber rifles (and then later on with T-Gewehr ) the earlier ones quite prone to breaking down and getting stuck, some were quite slow (IE 2mph....sheesh I'd hate to be stuck in one of those).

However later in he war with the likes of the Renault FT (the most produced tank of the war) a lot of these design flaws were fixed. They even saw combat in WWII and laid the groundwork for the normal tank designs that are still used to this day.

I think for gameplay sake DIce will likely make the tanks available to all areas rather then limiting them basedon year of the battle or anything, and likely with no tanks breaking down or those kinds of issues that plagued some early tank designs.

As far as air vehicles go, there were quite a lot of different plane types.

I mean you had the "pusher" type aircraft (propeller behind the pilot so an mg or such could be mounted in front), like the F.E.2's,


Which were actually pretty damn good even later in the war. Though the tractor types eclipsed them once they had a synch gear (so you could fire a front gun through the propeller without hitting it) becuase they were faster. The pusher types could still be useful, one almost took out Manfred von Richthofen (aka the Red Baron).

There's quite a lot of aircraft they can use of many different designs:
World War 1 Aircraft (1914-1918)

Also as far as roles go they had quite a lot to do, from recon to fighting each other to strafing and dropping things on trenches.

Also really hope that zeppelins are player controlled as that will give us another type of thing to deal with. Especially if they give airplanes things like Ranken darts and such to combat them.
 
At the very least, there won't be lasers and auto-detectors and thermal/IR scopes. That right there is enough for me to get excited about the game.
 
Pre-ordered because I don't give a fuck what some random forum member tells me about how I spend a measly $60....
 
Pre-ordered because I don't give a fuck what some random forum member tells me about how I spend a measly $60....

CoolStoryBroHouse.jpg
 
Pre-ordered because I don't give a fuck what some random forum member tells me about how I spend a measly $60....

Agreed, personally I like to click threads related to an upcoming or new game specifically so I can not receive opinions about it. Fuck forums and member experiences or opinions. Bunch of Illuminati bs. They can't control me.

tumblr_mjt6hsvwjI1s0x8bxo1_500.gif
 
Agreed, personally I like to click threads related to an upcoming or new game specifically so I can not receive opinions about it. Fuck forums and member experiences or opinions. Bunch of Illuminati bs. They can't control me.

tumblr_mjt6hsvwjI1s0x8bxo1_500.gif


It's not opinions though here in the gaming forums. It's more of "Someone is doing something I don't like or agree with so I feel the need to bitch and moan instead of minding my own business!!!" If someone has already made up their mind about pre-ordering, bitching about it isn't going to magically change their mind.
 
It's not opinions though here in the gaming forums. It's more of "Someone is doing something I don't like or agree with so I feel the need to bitch and moan instead of minding my own business!!!" If someone has already made up their mind about pre-ordering, bitching about it isn't going to magically change their mind.

Well, EA has an established history of fucking over gamers (PC gamers in particular) and by pre-ordering you are just feeding into that system. But you are an individual and are free to do what you want.

IMO (and it would seem, many others' opinions) pre-ordering from companies like EA hurts gamers and the industry in general because there is no negative feedback for shenanigans in the only form that these companies understand - monetary.

Pre-ordering this game at this time is especially heinous to me because of how little we actually know about the game, as I have previously stated.

You don't have to listen to anyone on here but there's no reason to be intentionally hostile, either. Your first post was basically just flamebait.
 
Well tanks in that era were built mainly for supporting infantry and such.

Mostly with a cannon and then some mg's. Which at the time could be terrifying to encounter on the battlefield. Especially as an infantryman as you usually had no way to fight them.

They were however quite vulnerable to artillery fire and some large caliber rifles (and then later on with T-Gewehr ) the earlier ones quite prone to breaking down and getting stuck, some were quite slow (IE 2mph....sheesh I'd hate to be stuck in one of those).

However later in he war with the likes of the Renault FT (the most produced tank of the war) a lot of these design flaws were fixed. They even saw combat in WWII and laid the groundwork for the normal tank designs that are still used to this day.

I think for gameplay sake DIce will likely make the tanks available to all areas rather then limiting them basedon year of the battle or anything, and likely with no tanks breaking down or those kinds of issues that plagued some early tank designs.

As far as air vehicles go, there were quite a lot of different plane types.

I mean you had the "pusher" type aircraft (propeller behind the pilot so an mg or such could be mounted in front), like the F.E.2's,


Which were actually pretty damn good even later in the war. Though the tractor types eclipsed them once they had a synch gear (so you could fire a front gun through the propeller without hitting it) becuase they were faster. The pusher types could still be useful, one almost took out Manfred von Richthofen (aka the Red Baron).

There's quite a lot of aircraft they can use of many different designs:
World War 1 Aircraft (1914-1918)

Also as far as roles go they had quite a lot to do, from recon to fighting each other to strafing and dropping things on trenches.

Also really hope that zeppelins are player controlled as that will give us another type of thing to deal with. Especially if they give airplanes things like Ranken darts and such to combat them.


I like your enthusiasm but that is certainly taking a liberal interpretation of vehicles capabilities, although this is exactly what DICE claimed they will do. Tank on tank battles never really happened, the first being in 1918. They mainly assaulted trenches and mud was one of the biggest causes for losses. They're slow as hell and ground based vehicular combat will honestly be pretty boring unless they radically alter the performance of them. Stop/acceleration time and mobility is simply atrocious. As you mentioned, few anti tank weapons existed (but DICE will likely place an abundance of them) and they're kind of dull anyways. Essentially you have a few large caliber rifles.

There were bi planes, tri planes, single wing planes - all of which matters nothing in a BF game. Aside from visual looks they will all perform the same. You're essentially limited to machine guns and trashy bombs. The MGs themselves have a slow rate of fire which makes strafing a pain. Again, this will be radically altered in BF's case.

Zeppelins and battleships? Think of the BF4 bombers, or the AC-130 in BF3. A poorly done gimmick. People are going crazy over those terms which shows how well marketing does and I suppose the overall low standards of many gamers. I'd rather have the main vehicles fleshed out than having some poor handling, poorly thought out vehicles designed simply for marketing purposes.
 
That's what I fear, just another Battlefront with the zeppelins done like the AT-AT's, where you can't control their movement or anything.

Zeppelins would be far more fun if you could have multiple people controlling it with a pilot and then people dropping things and the zeppelins being vulnerable to AA and airplanes, thus make a need for your own airplanes to protect them.

There are many ways to balance it out but I expect, like you say, it'll be a gimmick vehicle that you can't control really.
 
That's what I fear, just another Battlefront with the zeppelins done like the AT-AT's, where you can't control their movement or anything.

Zeppelins would be far more fun if you could have multiple people controlling it with a pilot and then people dropping things and the zeppelins being vulnerable to AA and airplanes, thus make a need for your own airplanes to protect them.

There are many ways to balance it out but I expect, like you say, it'll be a gimmick vehicle that you can't control really.

The impression I get is that Battlefront was essentially done by a different group and did not follow the same mechanical path as the Battlefield games. They built it for a different audience or so that was their thought. It may just be fanciful thinking, but I'd like to believe this will not be another departure, that they've found a way make WWI fun and the vehicles will follow battlefield design. My gut tells me we're looking at an alternate telling of WWI with changes to the vehicles to make it work as a MFPS.
 
That's what I fear, just another Battlefront with the zeppelins done like the AT-AT's, where you can't control their movement or anything.

Zeppelins would be far more fun if you could have multiple people controlling it with a pilot and then people dropping things and the zeppelins being vulnerable to AA and airplanes, thus make a need for your own airplanes to protect them.

There are many ways to balance it out but I expect, like you say, it'll be a gimmick vehicle that you can't control really.
I wouldnt mind the zeppelins being like the bombers in bf4. Control a flag, your team has access to it, someone can be a gunner, another can drop things, while its also a mobile spawn point. That would be quite boring to control a slow moving air vehicle. Now have others doing the same task, more people being bored. Battlefield is still about action.
 
Personally Im looking forward to this. I have some great memories of BF42 and think the slower pace could offer a bit of relief and some cool opportunities for game play and use of gadgets and tactics over run and gun.

That's what I fear, just another Battlefront with the zeppelins done like the AT-AT's, where you can't control their movement or anything.

Zeppelins would be far more fun if you could have multiple people controlling it with a pilot and then people dropping things and the zeppelins being vulnerable to AA and airplanes, thus make a need for your own airplanes to protect them.

There are many ways to balance it out but I expect, like you say, it'll be a gimmick vehicle that you can't control really.

Loved that in BF42 you could cruise around in the freaking battleship. Hated the dbags that used it as a taxi or beached it cuz the lulz. Balance is a tricky thing when trolls are involved. Anyone else recall the AC-130 from PoE?

Here is to hoping they start where BF4 ended up in terms of net code and performance and not starting over...

I have played all of the BF series very thoroughly in the MP (SP, not so much) and only 2 of the COD series, but I quite enjoyed CoD World at War. Cool feel and liked the vibe. With what DICE has in their portfolio, I cant imagine that they will come up with some spectacular maps and gear, even if its historical integrity is slightly compromised.
 
Back
Top