Honestly, I'm excited for the game, but why are they making it WW1?
>automatic SMGs
>semi-automatic LMGs
>no France or Russia
>tanks aren't broken pieces of shit
There is LITERALLY no fucking point to this being anything but a WW2 shooter.
It's for people other than you, fag cakes
>>343961478
Its historically inaccurate though.
Who is it for, retards?
>>343961596
why did you ask a question you already know the answer to
>>343961771
Fair enough
>>343961351
Fucking 100 year commemoration, you dingus.
>>343961596
They're making it for an audience that enjoys ADHD games, and just want action within 5 seconds of playing.
>>343962520
So they are making it for people who like fun, as opposed to making it for masochistic autists?
Oh hey, a BF thread! Just what I was looking for. I'm wondering what BF game I should get for the ps3. I realized how cheap ps3 games are on amazon, and I'm buying a shit ton of them. What's one that has active players?
>>343962162
It's a pretty insulting commemoration then.
>>343961596
>Its historically inaccurate though.
So is every Battlefield game, have you played them before?
People didn't run around in circles raising flags on Wake Island while their mates crashed carrier ships onto land.
>>343962716
For some people ADD rushing isn't fun. Battlefield's not for them sure. But a WW1 Battlefield is like the worst mix of both. The terrible weapons restrict traditional Battlefield gameplay but it still tries to emulate Battlefield so it drives off the people looking for a WW1 game. I guarantee this game will die almost as quick as Battlefront.
>>343962895
No it isn't. This is the first big Great War title. It's coming exactly 100 years after the actual war. I'm going to play the shit out of this while watching The Great War series on YouTube. It's going to be great.
>>343963141
There is a difference between "running around rasing flags" and "using guns that weren't even used, dropping factions of a war"
On the one hand I'm impressed they managed to find so many semi and fully automatic weapons from the time and they're bringing in some pretty obscure firearms.
On the other hand the idea of making WWI into an action sequence just doesn't sit right with me. The Somme Offensive lasted from July to November and almost 1.5 MILLION people died on either side. I just don't feel like it should be a Battlefield game, y'know?
>>343962716
>if you want some skill and tactics in a Battlefield game your a masochist
Well can't say I didn't expect this from /v/
>>343963683
The average platoon doesn't carry around half of the diversity of weapons the typical team on Battlefield does.
Can't you use jets and shit that the enemies use in the current BFs?
of course it's fictionalized
this was their thought process
>hey CoD isn't doing well with it's future settings
>and we can't keep doing this modern day stuff, people are getting sick of it
>and WW2 was done to death already
>so how about WW1?
>I mean, I know it was lame and boring as shit but maybe we can make it our own donut steal version of WW1 where there's tons of cool guns and gear instead of boring shit like bolt action rifles and grandpa grenades
they needed a setting. WW1 hasn't really been done before. they pick that. realize WW1 sucks ass gameplay wise so they spruced it up with their make believe bullshit.
>>343963825
This guy has a point. Last I checked, not everyone in the military runs around with sniper rifles...
>>343963825
1. Most platoons at the minimum mass ship a majority of those weapons, not all together but some this and some that. BF1 has weapons that were so undershipped and underused that they might as well have not existed.
2. BF takes place in a fictional war with no historical place or timeline. BF1 advertises itself as a WW1 game set in history itself. Thats not how it fucking works
>>343963974
>Jets that existed and mass sold vs weapons that did not exist and were not sold en masse
Okay
>>343963337
Just play Verdun then.
Not this SJW swedish cuck porn
