Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Battlefield 1 - set in World War 1

Sam Ecorners

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
1,302
Location
Gallbladder of Western Civilization
I was hoping they'd do the risky thing and make Battlefield 1 a real First World War game

Ok, skipping over everything else, I want to ask about this. Why? Why would anyone hope that EA's Battlefield game would be anything more than an arcady shoot shoot? It's the same as expecting Bethesda to develop a good RPG, or of Bioware to have good writing.

Because it is possible for a big nasty company to get a developer to make something good.

Bethesda, for all we hate them, did it with Dishonored and Wolfenstein: The New Order.

Sony did it with Uncharted and The Last of Us.

Why isn't it possible for EA to get someone to make a great WW1 game?

EA could get someone to make a good WW1 game, but it's not going to be DICE and it's not going to be a Battlefield game. I'm talking about established developers, making games they are known for, and players thinking that a new title in an established series can be drastically different from established patterns.

Dishonored was made by Arkane, Wolfenstein -- by, essentially, Starbreeze and Naughty Dog has been at the forefront of well done cinematic console popamole for years. So, personally, I see nothing surprising with these games. Look all I'm saying is, frame your expectations according to the developers. DICE are not ones to make a realistic shooter. They make fun arcady team based shooters, and this time they managed to make a good, cinematic popamolish SP experience.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,869
I usually think TotalBiscuit is a twat, but that BF1 video was pretty great, he sounds lucid and sincere (as opposed to his usual contrived and stuffy) and his points are all valid - and something that is completely dissonant from everything 'big media' and the rest of the big shittubers are saying.
 
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
399
Modern military shooters and the WWII shooters that dominated the FPS market before them are largely arcadey in their gameplay and cinematic in their presentation but they maintain a serious tone by spreading a thin layer of popularly conceived realism over the whole package. I would say that the issue with BF1 campaign is that the popular conception of how WWI was fought is completely incompatible with its presentation.

It is a war mostly commonly known for things like bolt-action rifles, trench warfare and the futile expenditure of large numbers of soldiers. Therefore features like the abundant availability of rare weapons of the period, relatively small scale military operations and that bloody mary sue power armour sequence are far more dissonant than they would be otherwise (that power armour sequence would be equally ridiculous in a modern military or WWII FPS mind). It makes it impossible to take the campaign as seriously as it wants to be taken when it completely lacks the scraps of popularly conceived realism necessary to maintain a degree of verisimilitude.
 
Last edited:

Daedalos

Arcane
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
5,559
Location
Denmark
100+ hours into this, still not tired of it. It's fucking great.

Can't wait for DLC's too :D
 

Spectacle

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
8,363
:necro:

Is the multiplayer better and more fun than Battlefield 4? Also are the maps well designed?
That depends entirely on what you like.

The main practical differnce between BF4 and BF1 is that classes matter more in firefights. Each class tends to have guns that excel at particular ranges but such at others, so positioning is important if you want to play to your class's strenghts. Vechicles are the same, they have specific roles and need to be used carefully.

Map design is consistently good. Some players complain that the maps are too open and give too much room for snipers and tanks, but that is a matter of taste.
 

---

Arcane
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Messages
1,724
Location
Italy
Hop!

source.gif


At least, hitboxes are decent enough.
 
Last edited:

DJOGamer PT

Arcane
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
7,348
Location
Lusitânia
Bough it on my birthday, and been playing since (when my internet allows me to). And it is really much more fun and addicting than BF4 (wich is my favourite until now).

The gunplay and the gun porn in this game are so satisfying.

The operations and war pigeons mode (specially this one) are a very pleasent surprise.

Changing the way you unlock weapons by buying them (and level up the class) is much better than the predifined way you unlocked them in BF3/4.

And the maps are also very good, although they need more urban maps and definitivly more trenches (the lack of trenches in this game is so fucking strange). Something like this is sorely missed:

ElAlameinB.jpg


It's a multiplayer map from CoD 2, and besides what you see in here there's also a underground section in this map (that is the bunker tunels). Pretty fun map to play (specially shogun or rifles), be it full of players online or just 1 to 4 friends in a LAN Party.

Speaking of wich, even though I am happy with the decision of implementing dedicated servers, I can't understand why they force someone to pay 80€ a month to rent a server. Can't I just create a tempory server like there used to do in games that had dedicated servers or make a LAN match? No? Thanks EA.
 

Sentinel

Arcane
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Messages
6,632
Location
Ommadawn
Lmao females in the russian army. 50% of the men will probably be niggers as well.

Glad I didn't buy this garbage. I played it in the EA Trial shit and the game was complete shit, it even had some very impressive grind just to unlock weapons/equipment. Fuck DICE.
 

Doctor Sbaitso

SO, TELL ME ABOUT YOUR PROBLEMS.
Patron
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
3,348
Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Grab the Codex by the pussy Serpent in the Staglands
Actually BF1 weapons are all balanced, even the starter weapons. Only COD reserves the best weapons for lifers only.
 

Hoaxmetal

Arcane
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
9,157
That numale music :nocountryforshitposters: Felt like I was still watching the Sims4 expansion video.
 
Last edited:

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,778
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
I've been curious with a WWI shooter for a long time now ans decided to get this in the current sell.

LOL and people call Rainbow 6 Siege popamole.

Full-auto guns, suppressed pistols, scoped anti-material sniper rifles. This shit is WWI in apparel only. What a bummer.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,778
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
I've been curious with a WWI shooter for a long time now ans decided to get this in the current sell.

LOL and people call Rainbow 6 Siege popamole.

Full-auto guns, suppressed pistols, scoped anti-material sniper rifles. This shit is WWI in apparel only. What a bummer.
Oh boy, but this Operations mode is fun as hell.

:shredder:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom