BATTLEFIELD 1

Blackstone said:
I would much prefer to fight a historical battle, and possibly learn or experience something of some historical significance, than a fictional one. I suggest everyone who is upset about this game setting stop for a moment and realize that DICE might be giving us something we didn't know we wanted.

It was a very adult and sophisticated decision on their part, and a risky one. I like it. I also think this will probably be a lot more like Battlefield 1942 than anything we have had since.
Click to expand...
Bolded for emphasis.

I will admit I was quite skeptical when I heard the rumor about it being WWI the first time around. I'm still a bit skeptical on how they will work some of the very limited battlefields of WWI. When I say "limited" I don't mean the different environments, because obviously they fought from sandy Turkey to frozen Russia to muddy France. I'm referring to mid-war when they got in the trenches, the stuff we know WWI for. One of the bloodiest battles of the war was fought over a few square miles of land. I bet they take a "Battle of Jakku" approach to the Trench warfare map design. Jakku in SW:Battlefront was a desert...wide open but they still pulled it off. Litter the battlefield with junk for cover. Craters so big they create hills for cover. We won't see too many flat open lands for your soldier to run the gauntlet of machine gun fire.

The aircraft and zeppelins will kick ass that's for sure. No missiles and very few flak guns.

Many of the community have been begging for the less is more approach of BF1942. I wonder how this is going to work and how they are going to appease both sides. I suspect we will see less gun attachments (maybe a low power scope for rifles or better iron sight). They will likely focus more on loadouts instead. Do I carry a shovel or spiked club? Do I fix a bayonet, carry an extra grenade or medpack, etc.?

I just now started think about all the gear they had back then and it's not as limited as I originally thought. Brass knuckles, trench knives, shovels, swords, poison gas and gas masks... HOLEEE SHIT there was a full suit of armor at 31 seconds in that video.
 
Last edited:
looks like a lot of fun...holds a lot of potential...please don't screw it up DICE/EA...I love that EA decided to name it Battlefield 1...very clever...
 
Blackstone said:
Actually, World War I was pretty big and involved a lot more than trench warfare.
Click to expand...

But the majority of the battles were fought much like that. Yes, there is the insurgency of Belgium but it isn't fun to play. Especially if there are no civilians for the Germans to line up an execute en-mass for each German killed.

And lets not forget how equipment was used. Tanks were used to assault trenches. No trenches and there is essentially zero need for the tanks. They move exceptionally slow and got destroyed by mud in most instances. Tanks essentially never fought other tanks in the entire war. It wasn't their role in any case.

Of course, they will take the easy way out and will copy/paste modern style gameplay into the game hence the alternative timeline aspect. They're literally ripping a page out of the CoD playbook. Just change the 3D models and textures a bit but leave the gameplay exactly the same. If the maps aren't artillery based then what is the point in making it set in WWI? If they wanted to take a risk they could have had half of each team control artillery while the other half played as infantry. Not exactly realistic, but closer to how WWI was fought.

If they can at least get the feel of the first RO game in which artillery commanders deemed which team won/lost the match on most maps it would at least be a step in the right direction.
 
Flogger23m said:
If they can at least get the feel of the first RO game in which artillery commanders deemed which team won/lost the match on most maps it would at least be a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...
Well, they did bring back the commander in BF4. So I doubt they would remove it for this game. I imagine it will be a helluva lot simpler here, but they could still send troops to objectives, call in spotter planes or balloons, call artillery strikes, and maybe instead of airdrop of supplies they get some sort of "reinforcements" in the form of quicker re-spawns or something.

As far as tanks usage... a Rush map that was strictly assaulting a trench might work real well. One side has artillery, the other a couple tanks and a shit load of infantry sprinting from crater to crater or using a nearby forest to outflank the trench.

On a plus side, I did catch boats. Naval warfare from BF1942 might be back...
 
Just watched the trailer/teaser.

This excited people?

Just looked....bleh to me. I more enjoyed the Seven Nation Army remix.

But I'm sure people will shell the $80 to get the game three days early nonetheless, I guess.
 
$20 says this is one of the maps:

19EAerialHoldingHands.jpg


The Lochnagar mine was a mine dug by the Tunnelling Companies of the Royal Engineers under a German field fortification known as Schwabenhöhe, in the front line, south of the village of La Boisselle in the Sommedépartement ofFrance. The mine was named after Lochnagar Street, the British trench from which the gallery was driven. It was one of eight large and eleven small mines that were placed beneath the German lines on the British section of the Somme front. The Lochnagar mine was sprung at 7:28 a.m. on 1 July 1916, the First day on the Somme. The crater was captured and held by British troops but the attack on either flank was defeated by German small-arms and artillery fire, except on the extreme right flank and just south of La Boisselle, north of the new crater. The crater has been preserved as a memorial, where a service is held on 1 July each year.

The mine was loaded with 60,000 pounds (27,000 kg) of Ammonal, divided in two charges of 36,000 pounds (16,000 kg) and 24,000 pounds (11,000 kg).[7] As the chambers were not big enough to hold all the explosives, the tunnels that branched to form the 'Y' were also filled with explosives. The longer branch was 60 feet (18 m) long, the shorter was 40 feet (12 m) long. The tunnels did not quite reach the German front line but the blast dislodged enough material to form a 15 feet (4.6 m) high rim and bury nearby trenches.[4]

The two charges of the Lochnagar mine created a vast, smooth sided, flat bottom crater about 220 feet (67 m) in diameter excluding the lip and 450 feet (140 m) across. It obliterated 300–400 feet (91–122 m) of German dug-outs.
Click to expand...

Thats some epic shit right there........

You will have air maps, sea maps (they pretty much admitted to ships ARE driveable), trench maps, desert maps. I think there is plenty to pick from.

Dont forget mustard gas and chem warefare. As said above - I think kits will be the rule of the day. Do I bring a gas mask or not will be a question at all times.

Im more excited about this than any BF game in a LONG time.
 
Pringle said:
Just watched the trailer/teaser.

This excited people?

Just looked....bleh to me. I more enjoyed the Seven Nation Army remix.

But I'm sure people will shell the $80 to get the game three days early nonetheless, I guess.
Click to expand...

I'm not excited yet but I am tantalized. The concept has a lot of potential.
 
Looks fucking awesome.

Can't wait to take the fights to the trenches. This is going to be brutal! Ahaha.
Plowing players over with a horse>Knifing... ahaha
 
More info dug up across the net. Sources listed at bottom.

Vehicles:
The one new aspect: Vehicle classes. “Tank Officer” and “Pilot” were both listed, though what advantages those vehicle-specific classes entail I’m not certain.

JF: Dedicated vehicle classes: so if you want to be a tank driver, you're dedicated to that role if you spawn in a tank or if you want to be a pilot. So that's kind of different than BF3 and BF4.

...new visual appearances for three large vehicles -- the Frontline Camouflage Train, the Night Raid Airship, and the Dazzle Camouflage Dreadnought.

...Tanks, planes, machine guns, artillery

JF: Yes, biplanes are in the game...a much slower pace of aerial combat with no lock-ons and it's gonna involve lots of skill.

Battlefield 1 will include dogfighting in biplanes and airships with external manned guns...

Biplanes can drop bombs. Tanks can escort infantry. Planes can have dogfights in the air. And there’s definitely going to be a lot of hand-to-hand fighting.

Biplanes, horses, battleships and zeppelins all make an appearance, with the developers noting that the game includes some of the largest vehicles they have ever built

"This was the first time ever that people saw light tanks, heavy tanks, armored trucks," he said. "If you pop your head up from a trench and see a tank about to roll over you--you should get out of there."

Battlefield 1's air combat will be just as nuanced, with dogfights, bombing raids, and strafing runs.

"We have bombers to clear the way for your troops," he said. "If you're in a bomber, you might want to have a buddy scouting, covering you from the ground.

"You can have these dogfights, with multiple people in planes--your buddy is in the rear seat shooting back at that guy while you fly alongside a bomber clearing the way for your troops."

Battleships are also entirely controllable. You can "demolish an entire shoreline" in one, Berlin said. Battlefield 1 will also include lighter, more agile ships to reflect the dynamism present in the infantry combat and air battles.

JF: Battleships were also mentioned, as well as zeppelins. So, I imagine you'd gonna be able get inside those and rain down fire. And hopefully we can take them out, as well.
Click to expand...

Weapons/Gadgets:
Gas masks, trench guns, and bayonets were present—the latter in the form of a soldier burying his gun in someone’s chest.

...as well as the World War I staples you'd expect like trench warfare, French tanks, mustard gas, and gas masks.

Melee combat will be more of a focus, with weapons including a spiked baton, trench shovel, rapier, and more.

JF: So behind the scenes we also saw stuff like dynamite

It features the history of World War I, without any modernized “alternate history” weaponry, according to EA. But there will be some license on the historical accuracy when it comes to having fun.

JF: No lock-ons in the game.

JF: The weapons in this are very analog. So it's bringing back the skill, like nothing is locking on for you or doing things for you. You've got to be the one who's aiming and shooting the weapons.

JF: Emplacement guns for infantry--so I'm thinking that's going to be really powerful machine guns or anti-air emplacements on the ground

JF: They had pistols, SMGs, shotguns, sniper rifles, semi-auto rifles, lots of different melee weapons, as well, apparently. Apparently different stats.

JF: In terms of weapon customization: obviously, they're kind of limited with it being WWI. But the developers said that there are some unique flavors to the weapons and they do have a lot of interesting stuff that maybe wasn't used that often in WWI, but it was actually real and in that time period, so we're gonna see some elements of weapon customization.

Berlin said there will be more meaning to the hand-to-hand combat, and depth. You can beat an enemy to death with a shovel or stab them with a knife or bayonet.

Melee with prove more brutal and gritty than previous games, clear with the shovel and mace bashing in the trailer.

"There's this common misconception that World War I was just muskets or something," Berlin said, laughing. "But it wasn't. It was a time of new weapons--bolt-action rifles, automatic rifles, semi-automatic rifles. The freedom we have is massive."

In fact, DICE designed the hand-to-hand combat from the ground up for Battlefield 1, complete with a bayonet-charge ability, sabers, trench clubs, and even shovels

JF: There were also flamethowers and what looks like a guy in a suit of armor, kind of like an armor suit, maybe that's some sort of a hero pickup in the game. I doubt that's gonna be like a class you can spawn in with. We'll see what happens with that.
Click to expand...

Single Player:
There's a campaign. We didn't see any of it today, but DICE said it "revolves around multiple people" and stressed they want to "Bring more Battlefield into the singleplayer," meaning larger environments and more vehicular warfare

Battlefield's campaigns have mostly been set in tight corridors with close-quarters combat, lacking the openness and variety that the multiplayer provides. That doesn't seem to be the case with the newly announced Battlefield 1, however, as lead designer Danny Berlin told GameSpot at an event that the campaign "will more accurately reflect Battlefield's open sandboxes."

Berlin continued, saying DICE's World War I game will feature "much more choice and variety than [it's] done before." He also said the upcoming Battlefield's story will be about a multifarious group of people "dealing with the changing world in their own ways," and it'll allow players to take various, more open approaches.

JF: In terms of Single-player: they didn't show us any single-player. But they actually touch on what it's gonna be: so apparently the SP is designed around battlefield moments. And it's gonna focus on the density of several different people involved in WWI. And how their world kind of changes and comes together and it's kind of like old versus new. You've got horses v. tanks, you've got swords, you've got all this new technology like tanks were pretty new back.
Click to expand...

Maps:
We watched a short pre-alpha video of game footage, slim on info but full of big explosions. Arabia, the Alps, and “the fields of France” were mentioned as key locales for the game.

Locations confirmed so far include France, Italy, and the Arabian Desert.

Settings include the Italian Alps, the Argonne Forest in France (the site of the Allies’ final push of the war), and Saudi Arabia. These landscapes were beautiful.

DICE plans to incorporate new frontlines beyond the familiar western front, including Italian alps, undersea fortresses, and the deserts of Arabia. These settings provide new gameplay opportunities both in multiplayer and campaign modes, they shared.

JF: It's got all the stuff in the game that made, like, Battlefront look awesome: like the photogrammetry, it's got physically-based rendering--it looks absolutely insane.

JF: In terms of destruction, that just looks like it's been turned up to #10; there was buildings falling over, holes in walls, it looked crazy. And it kind of feels like they went a lot further than they did in BF3 and BF4. And maybe taking it back to the BC2-level. It didn't look like you could level every building in the game because, obviously, you're gonna forsake the map design if you end up doing that. But, it looked like a lot of stuff could be destroyed and the developers actually spoke about that.
Click to expand...

Mechanics:
We watched a short pre-alpha video of game footage, slim on info but full of big explosions. Arabia, the Alps, and “the fields of France” were mentioned as key locales for the game.

Locations confirmed so far include France, Italy, and the Arabian Desert.

Settings include the Italian Alps, the Argonne Forest in France (the site of the Allies’ final push of the war), and Saudi Arabia. These landscapes were beautiful.

DICE plans to incorporate new frontlines beyond the familiar western front, including Italian alps, undersea fortresses, and the deserts of Arabia. These settings provide new gameplay opportunities both in multiplayer and campaign modes, they shared.

JF: It's got all the stuff in the game that made, like, Battlefront look awesome: like the photogrammetry, it's got physically-based rendering--it looks absolutely insane.

JF: In terms of destruction, that just looks like it's been turned up to #10; there was buildings falling over, holes in walls, it looked crazy. And it kind of feels like they went a lot further than they did in BF3 and BF4. And maybe taking it back to the BC2-level. It didn't look like you could level every building in the game because, obviously, you're gonna forsake the map design if you end up doing that. But, it looked like a lot of stuff could be destroyed and the developers actually spoke about that.
Click to expand...

Choice of Name:
DICE had this to say: “It’s important to stress that this is the next big milestone in the Battlefield franchise. Why we chose the name...we’re kind of going back to the true dawn of all-out warfare. This is the genesis of what modern warfare is today.”
Click to expand...

DLC:
Pre-orders will receive the Harlem Hellfighter Pack and seven day early access to a free map this year.

...will include extra vehicles, weapons and emblems including the Red Baron Pack, the Lawrence of Arabia Pack.

Red Baron Pack containing:
Vehicle: Red Baron’s Triplane
Sidearm: Red Baron’s P08
Emblem: Red Baron’s Flyer Pin
Lawrence of Arabia Pack containing:
Horse: Lawrence of Arabia’s Black Stallion
Weapon: Lawrence of Arabia’s SMLE
Melee: Lawrence of Arabia’s Jambiya
Emblem: Lawrence of Arabia’s Emblem
Harlem Hellfighter Pack containing:
Weapon: Hellfighter Trench Shotgun
Sidearm: Hellfighter M1911
Melee: Hellfighter Bolo Knife
Emblem: Hellfighter Insignia
Click to expand...


Sources:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/30672...rld-war-i.html
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/05/...tails-revealed
http://www.cnet.com/news/electronic-...o-world-war-i/
http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/06/ba...f-world-war-i/
http://twinfinite.net/2016/05/battle...ts-epic-scale/
http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2016/05...mestop/205807/
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bat.../1100-6439576/
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bat.../1100-6439577/



-Edit- Jack Frags mentioned "sub machine guns" twice in that video. That can't be right. :confused:
 
Pretty much what I feared. "Lets be cool and edgy and do a different era!", and then turn around and throw SMGs and semi auto rifles all over the place. Talk about taking risks in one breathe, but then admitting they've given in the next sentence. I have a feeling the battleships will be as lame as the bombers were in BF4. And pretty much all of the gimmick vehicles in the history of the series. Rather than doing something interesting they just swap to a new era and add in more crap quality vehicles. I'd love to be proven wrong, but DICE has consistently shown they're lazy as hell when it comes to vehicles. And it seems like only vehicle crew members can operate vehicles like in RO1. Wonder if they will be faction specific only to. Not too sure how I'd like that in a BF game.

As for historical accuracy there were few SMGs in WWI. Were they used? Of course. But the number of decent ones that were actually procured in a decent number is limited. The vast majority of infantrymen used bolt action rifles. If they're going to do WWI I'd prefer if 90%+ of the players were stuck with bolt actions. Would bring back that RO nostalgia for me. :p Needless to say, accuracy was never a concern for DICE. The USMC doesn't use the F/A-18E or M1A2 either, yet BF3/4 featured them.
 
No ultra douche nozzle edition with included season pass for sale? Maybe EA/DICE have finally come to their senses about how counterproductive season passes are.
 
Eshelmen said:
Thanks for sourcing.

As for your last quote. What do you mean it can't be right? In terms of historcial accuracies?


There were a solid amount of sub machine guns in WW1, for both axis and allies.

Click to expand...


The reason I said "it can't be right" was more of confusion than anything else. The way he worded it sounded like they would be standard loadout to a couple classes of characters which doesn't necessarily seem right for a class of weapon in its infancy given the time period. I knew submachine guns were being developed during WWI, but I was unaware they were even mass distributed amongst troops (relatively speaking). They obviously weren't given to the average grunt, but they did seem to make it into hands of certain units. This was the part I didn't know, but you made me go out and research it.

Thanks for the history lesson. :cool:
 
Last edited:
I hope it won't end up being boring as Farcry Primal because of the lack of cool stuff in ww1 compare to modern warfare.
 
Love him or hate him... I think Matimi0 brings up some very valid criticisms regarding the emphasis on close quarters combat in this game. Knifing and other melee mechanics have sucked in just about every DICE game. The few notable exceptions being some of the moves you could do in Mirror's Edge and some of the Hero mechanics in Battlefront. BF4 had some great finishing moves if you could ever pull them off. This is one thing DICE has a high probability of fucking up, at least at launch.




-edit-

Just found an amazing video from someone who breaks down every weapon in the trailer:


Some interesting things he points out...

Wow... they had the T-Gewehr ANTI TANK RIFLE. That's going to be a beast.
He also showed how it was entirely possible to hip fire those old heavy ass machine guns.
 
Last edited:
My personal problem with the setting is that going by current trends ADS (aim down sights) will likely be required and I really dislike iron sights in a MP setting. With how BF3/BF4 unlocks work I really found out how much issues I have with those, my accuracy goes up by like 50%+ and KDR by 3x or something for a weapon as soon as I unlock something like RDS.

Although I actually like the idea (or possibility) of more bolt action type firearms versus full auto.

I'll also have to see how well vehicles actually work in this. What I like about BF is the combined arms warfare game play, even if it's very asymmetric like trying to figure out how to take out that well supported tank on foot.

But I really dunno if I'd actually get this due to the ADS issue for me.
 
Sprayingmango said:
Are you drunk????

Really??

Comparing Farcry garbage to Battlefield..... ok I'm done here...
Click to expand...

I never drink.

Get a brain.

Good bye!

Just to say that Farcry 4 is garbage I don't talk to you.

I don't see the problem to compare the situation of both games. One that goes back in prehistoric and one that goes back 100 years ago. Both era suck cock theoretically compare to modern era.

Just no custom ADS for example or no automatic guns. Horse instead of chopper.
 
Last edited:
CaptNumbNutz said:
More info dug up across the net. Sources listed at bottom.

Vehicles:


Weapons/Gadgets:


Single Player:


Maps:


Mechanics:


Choice of Name:


DLC:



Sources:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/30672...rld-war-i.html
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/05/...tails-revealed
http://www.cnet.com/news/electronic-...o-world-war-i/
http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/06/ba...f-world-war-i/
http://twinfinite.net/2016/05/battle...ts-epic-scale/
http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2016/05...mestop/205807/
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bat.../1100-6439576/
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bat.../1100-6439577/



-Edit- Jack Frags mentioned "sub machine guns" twice in that video. That can't be right. :confused:
Click to expand...


That makes it sound good. The emphasis on "no lock-on" and skill based play are good. I'm also glad the "alternate history" was cleared up. So it's not a Wolfenstein style redrafting of history, it's just to give them more freedom in game design.

I also like that they're going back to the BC2 style single player. That had wide open maps versus the linear corridor stuff we got in BF3/4. It's hard to script, but plays better.

Almost seems like a reboot away from the "appeal to the COD crowd".

Btw, if there's any era that needs terrain deformation, it's this one. Can you imagine the maps before and after a battle?
 
Last edited:
limitedaccess said:
Although I actually like the idea (or possibility) of more bolt action type firearms versus full auto.

I'll also have to see how well vehicles actually work in this. What I like about BF is the combined arms warfare game play, even if it's very asymmetric like trying to figure out how to take out that well supported tank on foot.
Click to expand...

It depends. With their liberal interpretation I'm sure everyone will have an SMG. I wouldn't mind if the majority had bolt action rifles. And I hope there is a manual bolt option. My main concern is the vehicles though. Horses and WWI tanks are dull. Bi planes are also lame, but to be honest BF3/4 dog fights were essentially the same with some added missiles that were essentially useless. Not much will change really. In fact it might be better since they will be slower. In BF3/4 you're flying in a shoebox and have to turn around after 4 seconds of flight anyways.

Mak54291 said:
Horse instead of chopper.
Click to expand...

Those two things do suck indeed. If they wanted to go back in time a bit, I think a Cold War circa 1960-70s would have been interesting. T-64s, M60s, AH-1s and whatnot.
 
I think in regards to the prevalence of smg's/semi-auto's etc there are two things that they could do that would greatly help in this regard.

1. Limit their number. Not by classes, but by drops. When a round starts you could have "x" number of smg's and things and then as the people that have those die or get wounded, the weapons drop where they die and anyone can pick them up, or if no one does after a set time it gives people a chance to equip one at the next respawn. Thi swould allow people to use them but keep numbers limited.

2. Make bolt action rifles actually useful. Instead of them being the usual "cheap" weapons or taking an unrealistic number of hits, make them realistic. One-shot head / chest. So people actually like them and are not simply wanting to get rid of them or throw them away.

I loved using them in Red Orchestra and even though the SVT-40/Gewehr 43's were nicer it never felt like being stuck with a bolt action was "bad" because they functioned well and were still powerful.
 
Brules said:
They will redo 2142 style maybe then WW II or Vietnam?
Click to expand...
doesnt matter whenthe game takes place, BF has sucked after 2142.

i see this one being no different than any of the other shovleware bf games they have come out with since.
 
I think this looks fun as hell. Though I will miss my no-aim noob missiles I normally rely on :(
 
Flogger23m said:
But the majority of the battles were fought much like that. Yes, there is the insurgency of Belgium but it isn't fun to play. Especially if there are no civilians for the Germans to line up an execute en-mass for each German killed.

And lets not forget how equipment was used. Tanks were used to assault trenches. No trenches and there is essentially zero need for the tanks. They move exceptionally slow and got destroyed by mud in most instances. Tanks essentially never fought other tanks in the entire war. It wasn't their role in any case.

Of course, they will take the easy way out and will copy/paste modern style gameplay into the game hence the alternative timeline aspect. They're literally ripping a page out of the CoD playbook. Just change the 3D models and textures a bit but leave the gameplay exactly the same. If the maps aren't artillery based then what is the point in making it set in WWI? If they wanted to take a risk they could have had half of each team control artillery while the other half played as infantry. Not exactly realistic, but closer to how WWI was fought.

If they can at least get the feel of the first RO game in which artillery commanders deemed which team won/lost the match on most maps it would at least be a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...

What? The entire eastern front never really went the way of trench warfare like the western front did, are you saying that none of the battles/capaigns on that side were large or important?

Battle of Tannenberg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brusilov Offensive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Serbian Campaign of World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Even though I think both CoD and BF have become as derpy as each other in many respects, I did laugh at this....

 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this
Stiler said:
I loved using them in Red Orchestra and even though the SVT-40/Gewehr 43's were nicer it never felt like being stuck with a bolt action was "bad" because they functioned well and were still powerful.
Click to expand...

That depends on if they are one hit to kill in most instances. I don't think the player base will like that. I to liked using the bolt actions and was fairly accurate with them. It was easy to pick off the Germans running up behind the castle in that one map.
 
I wasn't excited for the prospect of WW1 stuff -- after that trailer though, looks damn good. Looks to be exactly the case of EA /Dice giving us something we didn't even know we wanted.

If it's fun, it's fun that's all that matters. Hopefully we get some nice engine enhancements and it will stretch my new 1080 card (by then) at 1440p :)
 
I told myself "no more preorders" after being initially disappointed with Star Wars: The Old Republic (great game now)... But I think I'm going to make an exception here. I really want to show my support for taking the risk to go back to WW1. This is looking like the FPS I've been waiting for since BF2.
 
I have not been interested in a BF game since the Desert Combat Mod for 1942. This looks interesting but we'll see how it actually turns out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top