It doesn't look to bad

Really, I expected them to fuck up harder.
If you hated the last Battlefield games then you will hate this one

Wow the "it's not so bad" threads have already started.

DAMAGE CONTROL WALKS INTO THE RING

MUH SHILLING

gameplay video makes it clear that it's just like every battleshit

battlefield 4 sucked though.

I mean, who's idea was it to take away loadouts and put in restricted class builds.

I tried battlefield 4 once.

and then I gave up on battlefield forever. I played 2 and bad company for literally hundreds of hours. oh well.

Why do you want to dissapoint yourself user?
You are speaking of EA the killers of all the good things that are vidya I tell you they will fuck it up just like they did with dead space 3, battlefield 3 and the titles after that, ultima 8 and 9, command and conquer red alert 3 etc. etc.
These greedy bastards will take your money and fuck you in the ass after beating you up for even having good expectations.

If they don't use Denuvo or shove it full of DLC I'd consider buying it after a price drop
if they go with the DLC route I'd consider the "ultimate edition" after a more significant price drop

yes I know I'm a cuck for liking these games, no need to remind me.

But if one can look at it for what it is like an alternate WW1 game.
Also the map did not look huge because of destruction and that weather system, plus it was funny they said look at the fog you can't see anything even tough you saw the names n shit.

Overall it looks like a triple-A vidya, what one could expects when it came to making a WW1 game, if this gets popular my bet is CoD would go the same route.
Overall if one is not butthurt over there is a nigger in it, and one is not butthurt that they have butchered WW1. I guess one could have fun with the game, if they really try.

The problem with DICE games since 3 even the SW battlefront game, it will be rushed so expect allot of bugs n glitches. Also battlefront was a shallow game, so don't understand what EA is making content for that SW game since from my understanding is most modern FPSfags have moved over to something else.

/thread

I felt the same with RO2 (thank dick I didn't buy it though) but then the glamour went away by how CoD-like it was, you just need a push away from shit and find better ways to spend your time cuck.

If you were normal white men then maybe, but you are just fucking retard normalfags with shit taste masquerading as men of class

NOW DIE

This game is trash and you know it. You don't know SHIT about WW1

Why the fuck are you ranting about white men, you faggot?

...

I am triggered. Also it still looks like BF3 and 4 which weren't so good.

You know the worst part of this? All the kiddies thinking this is realistic for WW1. Now we're gonna have a flood of COD-weapon tier 'experts' trying to talk about WW1.

If this was realistic there would be alot more crying in trenches.

...

...

I saw someone refer to the MP 18 as a Sten gun.

Truly, we live in the best of times.

I don't think I've seen a single trench in that presentation though.

Personally, I can't wait for /k/ to raid the Battlefield wiki.

Literally the World War 1 experience.

The problem isn't that it "doesn't look bad" (Is that how we judge games now, them not being bad is considered an achievement?), the problem is that it has nothing to do with what it says it's about, i.e. World War One.

AFTER DUST SETTLED

Considering the current state of the industry games being just half bad is an achievement.

How To Make A WW1 Game

But all of this would require actual effort on EAs side so…

It's not often that something on the internet will make me feel sick, but somehow, this has done it.

Aye, I think that's my main problem with the game as well. I really like WW1 as a setting, but if you're going to use it you should at least try to be somewhat faithful. 99% of your soldiers are not walking around with sidearms, SMGs, or LMGs. And they aren't running around the battlefield at random, they're mostly just hiding in trenches or going over the top and charging the enemy.

I think it would work fine if they just made you one person in a large squad of AI, so that when you die to random mortar or bullets it's not annoying because you just take control of the next ranking member of the squad, and each player would have a different squad.

I also don't see how they plan on having tank variety given that there were pretty much just 3 or 4 types of tanks throughout the whole war, and they seem to think that you can have a light/medium/heavy tank in each faction (and a single person can fit in the light one? what?)

The footage of the other participants in the Battlefield Squad event is even worse. There even is quick scoping and all that fancy call of duty stuff.
General consensus is that it's Battlefield 3 with a World War 1 skin where every soldier is in the possession of high tech experimental weapons.

Dont tell that to BF fanboys look at the comments of this video.

The merits of Battlefield 1 as a game isn't what really bothers, although it certainly does.

The idea that people can take one of the most brutal, disgusting, and all-around horrifying wars to be ever fought by man, and reduce it to this, all in the pursuit of money… It sickens me to the core.

This sounds like some article on a clickbait website

...

Its a Battlefield game and plays like a Battlefield game. The people complaining about it dont even play Battlefield so I dont get the point here. If you want trench warfare go play Verdun. Im glad this is pretty much BF4 with a ww1 skin because otherwise it would suck.

...

Look at these fucking shills, look at them.
Hes saying people didnt play the Refractor Battlefield and didnt see the gameplay changes they made to fit the setting.
Hes saying Vietnam didnt have a tunnel system, Helicopter lifts or traps.
Hes saying Battlefield 2 wasnt changed to be have a more slow paced tactical approach.

Hes saying most of the people here havent played all the Battlefield and think 3 and 4 are mediocre Call of Duty trash with Had Company being an ok spin off that had better gameplay mechanics

Look at this fucking shill

faggot

Nice opinion.

...

Fuck me.
It looks as boring and slow like battlefield 4.
Also, did the retards at DICE decided to just reuse the same UI effects from Battlefront?

Nice ID.

The game already falls flat on its face due to the 32vs32 maximum players. But that is the price you pay for having it on consoles.

How much are they paying you?

...

wait what? bf2 was way more faster than bf1942

Holy shit nice id

WE

Before they can cart all of us off to fight and get slaughtered in World War Three, they have to make all the previous wars look cool in games to get the normalfags liking and even wanting to fight in one.

...

It's the asshurt nog from the other thread

He is canadian he is shitposting on /k/ now

Yeah every battlefield game is broken promises, bfv didn't have a tunnel system or towing field guns, they lied about that shit

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.


I agree. Though that could be said about almost all wars and games based on them.

I bought it
I had fun

...

ITT: People don't realize that another 2 battlefield 3 clones, hardline and battlefront were released before they announced this one

ITT shills and MordorHQ retards.

...

Oh look, the shills are already here trying to use the slippery slope and the retards not saging.
Holla Forums is a white board.

You know what else didn't look bad? Hardline. When that shit got announced I totally wanted to buy it. Turns out that it was good thing I didn't, but it was really hard to keep myself from buying it.

In the end it doesn't matter what the trailer looks like, it will always be the same casual shit.

So it's still shit then, good to know

Eat shit, OP

I sure am glad I'm not a whiney bitch who refuses to like a single thing. You faggots all sound miserable. The game looks good, the game looks fun, I don't give a fuck if it's not historically accurate. I'm not playing it to pass some history test or something.

Have fun crying about everything while you wait with baited breath for some fan made 8bit Steins;Gate remake. Your lives sound miserable.

I think you need to re-evaluate your life if you think the only deciding factor that could determine if someone can be happy is a Battlefield game.

Please stop and put little more effort into it than your parent put into your parenting

And to think i was finally getting my hopes up for a ww1 game. But this shit doesn't even try to take into account what made ww1 "The Great War" or how absolutely hellish it was for everybody.

Damn it's hard to type this on a phone.

What about all the niggers in a WW1 setting? Thats just disrespectful to the real veterans, who were white.

Initially they had no armament (forcing pilots to duel each other with pistols they brought on their own initiative).

Once they figure out how to make a machinegun fire through a propeller they did get armed, and later on could carry bombs too.

That being said, their primary job was scouting the enemy positions, since they didn't have the payload capacity to engage in tactical, let alone strategic, bombing.

It wasn't inaccurate you faggot, they just didn't have much of an ability to report back where the shots had landed, leaving the guns to guess whether they had hit or missed.

Tanks came very late in the war, and only the Allies really bothered using them. When they did get used, en mass, they did a wonderful job breaking through No Man's Land and letting the infantry storm the trenches.

In fact, the Mark V had guns on the side specifically so it could cross one trench, turn parallel to it and then fire into said trench, and the one opposite to it.

That's an unfair assessment. They had no viable method of breaking the deadlock on the Western front.

They kept experimenting with combined arms (mostly infantry and artillery), how to effectively use massed artillery, how to storm trenches, chemical weapons, and this did work wonders when it worked. Problem was that it could only work for short periods of times because they lacked the proper technology to quickly communicate back and forth, so if the infantry hit a snag somewhere the artillery "wall of steel" would leave them behind, and any surviving enemy soldiers would quickly be able to reman the trench and push the back.

WW1 is what happens when defensive technology so thoroughly overwhelms offensive technology.

They had vehicles 100 years ago? This is news to me.

The first tanks were used in September 1916, so yes exactly 100 years ago

...

ITT

Fuck off, shill

I'm more annoyed at all the fucking shills liking BF1 because LOL FUK COD xDDDDDDDDDD as if both series aren't pure cancer.

Which is exactly what OP said