Battlefield 5 Set During World War I, Releasing October?

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
According to a retail listing, the Battlefield franchise is revisiting history and will take place during the Great War. I am not sure if I can believe this, since a large part of the appeal with these games seems to be fancy, modern weaponry.

Rectifying slow-firing weapons and excruciating trench warfare with the fast-paced, vehicle-focused Battlefield model sounds nearly impossible, so I would be very surprised if this listing turns out to be accurate. Have you seen what tanks looked like back then? You'd have a tough time launching off a ramp and shooting down a helicopter with one of these, I'll tell you that much.
 
Lot's of chemical warfare and thousands of people dying after going over the top. Good times await us.
 
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
 
I have to scratch my head at some of the people (not here, but other forums I visit) talking about this like BF can't do it or that it'd be "boring" or wouldn't work with BF's type of gameplay.

I'd like to point out how diverse and different WWI was, especially this notion that it was simply people sitting in trenches and that sums up the entirety of the war. WWI was not simply trench warfare, heck trenches were not even a big thing on the Eastern front.

WWI also saw a huge leap in technology and advances in tactics. I mean heck, from using horses to tanks, from early bi-planes used for simple spotting to the classic wwI planes (Where do people think the Red Baron fought? WWII???).

You had MG's, light mg's, all kinds of other things. Heck in the western front trenches they even made use of MACES, brass knuckles, spades, just about anything they could in close quarters.

The battlefields were also quite varied, from your stereotypical trenches/no-mans land to fighting in the bloody snow-covered mountains like the Carpathian Mountains and Alps, where they even used AVALANCHES against other troops.

I think a good WWI BF game would be great if they don't focus on the stereotypical "trench" warfare only and give the entire thing the variety and breadth that it encompassed.
 
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...

This is inaccurate. WW1 weapons included the 1903 Springfield which actually was used as a sniper rifle into the Vietnam era and the Colt 1911 handgun which is still popular today. The German Mauser '98 was used throughout both World Wars in some variant and into the Cold War era.
 
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...

Umm, they had snipers in WWI.
Snipers in the First World War

They even used "fake" trees and other things to hide in, all day long just looking for people to peek out or come into view.
 
the British army actually had distinct rifle units specializing in long range work as early as the Napoleonic wars
 
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...
Yes, there were snipers on all sides in WW1. But there was also cavalry and seige mortars and artillery barrages like you have never seen. I have difficulty believing this story.
 
I could see it as a mod or a map, but not the whole game. WWII as a section would be good. I always found the technology of that era made for interesting game. Good enough to be fun to use, but you still have to get in close to mix it up.
 
That sounds good. Once thing is certain, this generation needs to be taught to remember the World Wars as more than just a distant memory.
 
HockeyJon said:
I could see it as a mod or a map, but not the whole game. WWII as a section would be good. I always found the technology of that era made for interesting game. Good enough to be fun to use, but you still have to get in close to mix it up.
Click to expand...

Why would it not work for the whole game?

Here's a small quick video that shows the scope of the War in the first year:


(second and third year if you are interested)



Last two years aren't released yet, but those videos should give you an idea of how different the pace was on each front.

Now keep in mind "trench" warfare was mainly a western front thing (France) and the majority of fighting on the Eastern front was not really much trench fighting at all.

You can see how different the speed is at which ground was gained and lost, with the western front being no where near like it was compared to a lot of the other areas fought during the war.

You had planes, Zepplins, Naval ships, u-boats, every-single thing that you find in BF games with land/air/sea options.

You can also see from the video the great variety and scope in where it was fought, you could have maps from all over the place and it doesn't have to be focused just on one area or "look" the same.
 
Last edited:
Give me another mid-future like BF 2142: No jets, fast transports, anti-tank mecha and small arms that can actually take on vehicles. The balance and team-focus of BF2142 is still unbeaten today.
 
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...

Sniper rifles were around in WWI and they saw extremely heavy use. Actually most of the fighting was done at long range, trench to trench with bolt action rifles, machine guns, and artillery. If anything there was more of an emphasis on long range fighting, and those bolt action rifles like the mauser, springfield, and lee enfield were generally quite accurate, and made great sniping weapons. Also while swords were used in WWI, they weren't used that heavily. Pistols like Colt 1911 and Mauser C96 along with bayonettes were generally used at close range. Sounds like you need to crack a history book, because your impression of WWI isn't really accurate at all.

The problem I see with a WWI shooter is that it would be almost entirely about sniping enemies at long range, or mowing them down with a maxim machine gun when they rush your trench.
 
Last edited:
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...

Snipers have been in use sense Revolutionary times, with colonists using yearly model rifles effectively up to 400 yards. The first "Sniper Rifles" were made in the 1850's, with accuracy up to 2,500 yards.
 
This is too complicated. Who were the bad guys in WWI? I don't get it! Is it still Arabs and Russians?
 
dr_drift said:
This is too complicated. Who were the bad guys in WWI? I don't get it! Is it still Arabs and Russians?
Click to expand...

WW1 is the prequel that led to the redrawing of boundaries based on the winners agenda and not the logical lines of common people - it's why Iraq has the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites all in one place - thus influencing the bad guys we have today (Middle East hating the West). It also inspires Hitler to become a twisted version of Bob Ross, instead of trees he opts to paint Western Europe in blood red.

Russia would be considered a good guy until they do a heel turn towards the end of WW2. They do a face turn in the 90's, but get stuck in the mid card until another heel turn more recently, with their manager Putin trying to bring them back to Main Event relevance.

I really think what Battlefield is, WW2 is the perfect war. The equipment isn't so technology advanced that it doesn't mesh well with multiplayer tech. The killing power, range, and speed of modern tech has to be condensed so much that it doesn't play as well imho.
 
Spidey329 said:
WW1 is the prequel that led to the redrawing of boundaries based on the winners agenda and not the logical lines of common people - it's why Iraq has the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites all in one place - thus influencing the bad guys we have today (Middle East hating the West). It also inspires Hitler to become a twisted version of Bob Ross, instead of trees he opts to paint Western Europe in blood red.

Russia would be considered a good guy until they do a heel turn towards the end of WW2. They do a face turn in the 90's, but get stuck in the mid card until another heel turn more recently, with their manager Putin trying to bring them back to Main Event relevance.

I really think what Battlefield is, WW2 is the perfect war. The equipment isn't so technology advanced that it doesn't mesh well with multiplayer tech. The killing power, range, and speed of modern tech has to be condensed so much that it doesn't play as well imho.
Click to expand...

The Great War makes for a great strategic game, but I don't know how you can make it exciting when it's so pointless on the side of the soldiers. It's much worse than even Vietnam in terms of futility.
The bad guys being none other than all the powers that be. The class hierarchy, the fervent public believing that the next war will be short, the rampant nationalism with the great powers flexing their muscles manifested in the dreadnought race, and then the complicated alliance system dominoes that just begs to be toppled and let loose the dogs of war.

That's not what I am worry about. You yanks might not find talking about Pershing's Doughboys particularly exciting. Only your hat of a neighbor, then a 'lapdog' of the empire would have actual bloodletting to speak of worthy of a game, or those ANZACs from down under at that.
 
Makes me want to reinstall Medal of Honor and give it another go around. WWI makes for some great game play as well as remembrance of history.
 
R83d018.png
 
Before BF5 there was BF4, then BF3, then BF2, then Desert Combat, then, BF1942 - they are going back to their roots! BF1942 was awesome, I cannot wait for a modern take on WW1 from them.
 
Sounds good to me! Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there have been many games based in WWI. To me, the history of WWI is far more interesting than WWII.
AK0tA said:
Makes me want to reinstall Medal of Honor and give it another go around. WWI makes for some great game play as well as remembrance of history.
Click to expand...
There was a MOH game set in WWI? As far as I'm aware, all the games prior to 2010 were set during WWII.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AK0tA
like this
Hmmm will they acknowledge the Brits, French, Russians, Australians, Canadians etc. actually fought 90% of that war and not limit them to just 10% of the game.
 
Playing BF4 a couple of days ago and someone posted in chat that BF5 would be WWI, I thought he was just trolling. Guess not. Might be good, might not.
 
Sikkyu said:
Give us 2143 you fucks.
Click to expand...
Titan assault was such a good format.

It be interesting to see how they try to incorporate trench and early artillery/machine-gun/chem and armored warfare into the game. It's hard to imagine they'd slow the pace back to old days, maybe bring back the old command position that was loved/hated in BF2/2142
 
If Dice can make a WW1 multiplayer as interesting and engaging as BF3/4 I would not be opposed, but I'm quite skeptical this can be done. It's going to take some real vision to pull this off given the weapons and combat tactics of WW1. While I too tire a bit of a modern warfare setting, I've become a custom to the vast weapon/vehicle choices and customization's BF3 and BF4 offer. Going back to early 1900's military tech and making it tactical and engaging, fast paced, diverse, and lasting addictive multiplayer gameplay seems a difficult at best thing to accomplish in a WW1 setting.

I was a big fan of 2142 and would love to see a sequel (2143). In closing, I hope Dice will go back to a BF3 combat pacing. In my observation, combat in BF4 is roughly 30% slower and feels "dumbed down" in many subtle (and some not so subtle) ways compared to BF3. Twitch skill mattered a lot more in BF3 and I hope BF5 in whatever form it takes, returns to a faster more challenging gameplay.
 
evilsofa said:
In modern warfare, everything is at such long range that your enemies are a few pixels on the screen, unless you use sniper rifles, scopes on the guns mounted on your tanks, etc. Since WW1 predates sniper rifles and guns are significantly less accurate, virtually all fighting will be much more up close and personal. It'll be Star Wars Battlefront with real swords instead of lightsabers.
Click to expand...

As noted earlier, the majority of combatants were carrying bolt action long rifles. The only thing preventing them from being 'sniper rifles' was that so few had scopes.

I look forward to this. I just hope it's not a random rumor. ...and am looking for my dry erase marker to put a hip fire crosshair on my monitor for the Karabiner 98. Ah the good old days!

Bayonets?

/tired of spray and pray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top