Battlefield 1

[Captured Joe]

In MP: British, German, Austro-Hungarian, Italian, Ottoman, and American.

(https://twitter.com/Battlefield/status/742475469140824064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

They literally admitted doing a ww1 game that does not include the two most important Allied countries  Please, make next battlefield a Napoleonic game with France v. Britain + Prussia only (and US DLC).

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Oh well, at least there's Austro-Hungary...

 

[F.F.C._fritz]

I understand the absence of Russia and the Eastern Front. The early AAA WWII shooters ('till 2003 Call of Duty) gave to the player absolutely no idea the eastern front ever existed. So, maybe it will be the same with the WWI shooters.

(I.E. take a look at the still awesome Medal of Honor intro



think they missed something? )

But the absence of France? In a western front based game? They even got Austria-Hungary, which to non expert is uniform-wise the same with the Germans, but no France? I understand they had to include the US, but COME ON! In the trailer, the Italians use French tanks, so maybe it's possible that France will be merged in a single faction? Or maybe in the alternative WWII plot Schlieffen plan succeeded and France fell before the beginning of the game? Who knows...

I'm happy they included Italy, again, but I wonder why since it's not really the most well known part of the war. There must be some very American reason. Maybe the player will meet young Hemingway?

 

[Beny]

So no Verdun? Surely those forts would have made for an interesting map?

 

[BenKenobi]

Medal of Honor Spearhead from 2002 did have the Soviets 

 

[Adorno]

In MP: British, German, Austro-Hungarian, Italian, Ottoman, and American.

(https://twitter.com/Battlefield/status/742475469140824064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

They literally admitted doing a ww1 game that does not include the two most important Allied countries  Please, make next battlefield a Napoleonic game with France v. Britain + Prussia only (and US DLC).

It says: "@Battlefield Confirmed, there is no French army at launch."
I hope that means we'll see them in future.
I'm also guessing British encompasses their colonial allies (Indian, anzac etc.) otherwise the Ottomans have no enemies.

 

[Beny]

otherwise the Ottomans have no enemies.

The majority of the forces at Gallipoli were British. Plus British troops were the majority in the Levant campaign.

 

[Adorno]

You're right.
The video showed a train in dessert terrain, so that could be their Arab allies;
and Indian and Australian/New Zealand troops were deployed on the Arabian peninsula/Middle East.
Still, the British were in majority, yes.

 

[The Bowman]

Did watch the gameplay video.
Basically, just another run 'n gun with all the possible opportunities for 420 no scopes and constant dancing in MP. When I saw a guy switch to his grenade and throw it in just a fraction of a second, I felt like pulling my hair. And the omnipresent submachineguns, pistols, scoped rifles used for point blank...I know they could have done it the other way, but how can they disappoint the kids, eh?
I'll just move on.

 

[Rigadoon]

It looks like you can use any weapon as any faction. I'm guessing nations will have no differences other than cosmetics and what maps they appear on.

 

[Wulfburk]

Ugh

 

[Radalan]

I find it weird that it comes as a shock to some people. It's the exact same way guns and factions were handled in Battlefield 3 and 4.   

 

[Beny]

Battlefield 3/4 were set in future or present day though so who cares? But this is historical and its going to be all wrong reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[Radalan]

Battlefield 3/4 were set in future or present day though so who cares? But this is historical and its going to be all wrong reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Sure, I find it equally weird that they didn't just pull the alternative universe card. Which would have allowed them to do basically anything they wanted.

 

[Krik]

They've already said it's alternate timeline.

 

[Age of Empires ¶ Densetsu]

But it's set in the past so it has to follow historical history!!!

 

[Areze]

They've already said it's alternate timeline.

So just an excuse to have the exact same gameplay as usual with the setting adding virtually nothing new. How surprising.

 

[Age of Empires ¶ Densetsu]

Why would they change something that makes a lot of money?

 

[F.F.C._fritz]

Early COD and Battlefield multiplayer were funny as hell, but did not really resembled history. I remember jumping around in Stalingrad Pavlov's house spamming with Panzerfaust and spraying with ma Sturmgewehr. I can't see the big deal.

This game was never meant to be Verdun. Which in all honesty, BTW, is not really much more successfull at recreating the feeling of a WWI battle (even if it's very good for a game made by three people!)...

 

[Age of Empires ¶ Densetsu]

Verdun isn't realistic at all, but it's fun. I always thought of Verdun as very arcadey.

 

[Beny]

Its not realistic but it is authentic. As in the weapons, terrains and uniforms are accurate(ish).