Battlefield 5 Reportedly Set in World War 1,

If done properly, this could be very fun. Makes me think of all the good times I had playing Day of Defeat back in the day.
 
If they have those Huge Tanks it would be great....

WWI-Lesson-Plans-WWI-Tank.jpg
 
That won't happen. Maybe part of the story line somehow, but not actual large scale MP. They might aswell do Mongol Conquests (1206-1368).
 
I think its a cool idea.........bi and tri planes.......trench warefare......massive artillery barrages. Big ass slow tanks....slower less frantic game play. Maybe it will be a WWI/II mix? I miss the old BF1942 gameplay where you had to get a lot closer to kill people, rates of fire were slower and there was no chopper rape etc. Has me intrigued!
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Almost every battle in WW1 right up until the last year of the war would be a total campfest. Until the mass production of tanks every WWI battle consisted of 3 things: 1. Artillery Barrage 2. Send 10,000+ men to charge the enemy and guaranteed death 3. Massacre.

Cross No-Man's land? Hmmm. Snipers and mounted machine guns everywhere. Almost zero vehicles. You just can't dress up WWI into anything remotely interesting on the infantry side. Aerial battles could be interesting. The few battles near the end of the war that didn't involve trenches would be the only thing you might be able get any decent gameplay out of.

If they do it, I'm betting its a single throwback level as DLC or part of the campaign like the WW2 mission in BC2 singleplayer campaign.
 
Agreed. WWI would be boring. Not that Battlefield was ever realistic, but if they took such massive liberties to make it fun it wouldn't be like WWI anyways. 95% of everyone would be using a 5 shot bolt action rifle. Late war a handful of SMGs entered the field. Essentially zero sniper rifles and the few that are there have scopes so terrible people would prefer not to use them. Tanks would be slow with horrible angles of firing. Biplanes useless against anything aside from other planes and maybe strafing infantry a bit.

Now you can go the CoD route and throw red dot sights on WWI weapons, give the planes missiles and make the tanks turn on a dime and give every other soldier an SMG... but then it wouldn't even be WWI so why bother.

For the type of game BF is, modern just fits the best. For those looking for something less modern Rising Storm 2: Vietnam (RO2/RS sequel) and In Country: Vietnam (UE4 based Vietnam War game by an RO mod team) is coming up.

Recent screen shot of In Country:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbwZoZ_UsAAz2-g.jpg

There are some trailers up for Rising Storm 2 and some rough animation videos. I think In Country may turn out better.
 
Not happening. As a mid-main release (like Hardline was), but not as a number. There's not enough cool war areas to play. It all became trench warfare.

BF4 was the completion of the BF3 beta. I'm guessing BF5 will be more of the same, or possible a different era that involves vehicles. I wouldn't mind a return to WW2. Their new tech could do some really cool battlefields for that and the return to less high-tech skill based weapons would be cool.
 
No one and I mean no one, would NOT buy this.

This is beyond awesome.
 
Can't see this happening, DICE isn't capable of making an MP game anymore which omits hundreds of useless unlocks/gadgets and lock-on weaponry.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Can't see this happening, DICE isn't capable of making an MP game anymore which omits hundreds of useless unlocks/gadgets and lock-on weaponry.
Click to expand...

And EA is incapable of setting realistic deadlines, which in turn (usually) causes unfinished, bug-ridden, pieces of shite software that fall far below the bar as set.

Not buying another DICE title again...Sorry, it's the only way EA will ever possibly listen - Vote with the (lack of money going into their) wallet.

FUCK EA.
 
The next Battlefield or COD game should be set in Desert Storm. That war only lasted two weeks anyways so the single player experience would make sense. Eh? EH? Come on guys...
 
Bf1942 was so much fun back in the day. For aforementioned reasons a ww1 game, if accurate, could be a bit of a bore and if not accurate then.. Ww2 much better environment for a game like that...I've been waiting for a good ww2 game for a while.
 
N4CR said:
Bf1942 was so much fun back in the day. For aforementioned reasons a ww1 game, if accurate, could be a bit of a bore and if not accurate then.. Ww2 much better environment for a game like that...I've been waiting for a good ww2 game for a while.
Click to expand...

Yea a ww1 game would be sitting in a trench 3/4 the time and dieing to dease or a suicide charge
 
The funny thing about this rumor is
A: IGN is reporting but B: the source of the rumor is a German retailer...

Why the hell would these guys have the secret?
 
Last edited:
I'd probably rather have WWII but I'd consider this depending on what the gameplay looked like.

Biplane combat could be rad.
 
I don't remember ever playing a WWI game though I think it might be cool. Mustard gas !!!!
It's kind of weird to think that exactly 100 years ago to this day, WWI was still going on.
 
Wildace said:
meh ww1?

ww2 or bust.
Click to expand...

It would be kinda funny to have horseback cavalry right up until campers on machine guns start mowing everyone down.

I have to agree with you though. WW2 is a much better time frame for a shooter. You have semi auto rifles and machineguns. WW1 is mostly bolt actions and stationary machine guns.
 
*meh* if they pick WWI, I'll gladly skip BF for a year or two... loved BF3, BF4, but I have no interest in trench warfare, single shot weapons, and waiting to get hit by artillery.
 
Satyrist said:
And EA is incapable of setting realistic deadlines, which in turn (usually) causes unfinished, bug-ridden, pieces of shite software that fall far below the bar as set.

Not buying another DICE title again...Sorry, it's the only way EA will ever possibly listen - Vote with the (lack of money going into their) wallet.

FUCK EA.
Click to expand...

doubt EA would learn from that either, they'll just can the BF series and find another game developer making the next hyped game, buy them out and milk that for 5 more years til that fails, rinse and repeat.. they've done with every game series.
 
WW1 is too static so it would either be a total hack job game to make it fun or just not fun.

Not that it would be any good anyway. After BF2142 the whole franchise has gone to complete shit.
 
Bigbacon said:
WW1 is too static so it would either be a total hack job game to make it fun or just not fun.

Not that it would be any good anyway. After BF2142 the whole franchise has gone to complete shit.
Click to expand...

I'm the complete opposite. I thought 2142 was terrible. Put a lot of hours into Bad Company 2 with my friend online and thoroughly enjoyed 3 and 4.
 
Already been debunked. And EA would never greenlight something as niche as WW1. And certainly not when the studio needs a huge win after Battlefront selling mediocre at best.

You can be sure it's going to be modern warfare again, like it or not. MAYBE something slightly more futuristic, 2143 would be an incredible longshot. But not WW1.
 
DPI said:
Already been debunked. And EA would never greenlight something as niche as WW1. And certainly not when the studio needs a huge win after Battlefront selling mediocre at best.

You can be sure it's going to be modern warfare again, like it or not. MAYBE something slightly more futuristic, 2143 would be an incredible longshot. But not WW1.
Click to expand...

BF:Falkland Islands?
 
didn't buy BF4 though I'm a big fan but I'll get this 3-6 months after release after they cut the bugs and price just to enjoy the graphics.
 
Tired of WWI and WWII games, as well as the whole futuristic combat scenario. Give me another Battlefield Vietnam or a Gulf War type game, not something that has been done over and over again.
 
LoL Since when has WWI even been done well or at all? WWI Biplanes FTMFW. Red Baron?
 
  • Like
Reactions: atom
like this
wwii or vietnam would be awesome. every game out there has been modern or futuristic for past 10 years.
 
I remember playing an old PC game called "Seal Team" which was a Nam squad level simulator. Was awesome:
 
Huge fan of the BF games -- but if they do WW1 -- they won't be getting any of my money.

Sorry - I just don't get excited about the idea of piloting a Biplane at 120mph, when I've flown the F35 600mph

The nice thing about BF is the increasing scale and map size and options for war. If they expect people to be happy going back to a scaled down size... nuts to that.

If they release 2143 -- that would be amazing, and perfect timing. It will be exactly 10 years since 2142 was released, I think it would be a huge hit. And I'd jump on board and buy it pretty much instantly.
 
Well here are my thoughts.... Definitely do not see them going WW1.

1.) They go "Advanced Battlefield". Pull another BF2142 maneuver or blatantly following CoD at this point. Really liked 2142 but I'm not sure if I'm really interested in future combat again.

2.) Make BF 5 smaller with teams of only 12v12, but make the environments much more destroyable

3.) Keep the same formula and just make different maps/weapons/vehicles.
 
Not a fan of the WWI idea, but I've enjoyed every BF game I've played since I started with BC2. I did skip Hardline though. BF is one of the few games I am comfortable buying on release day (yes BF4 release was bungled a bit, but still fun!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top