Battlefield 1916

Danielos

Emperor
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
1,034
So we have hundreds of WW2-games but almost no WW1-game at all. Why hasn´t a WW1 FPS been developed yet?? Sure, WW1 was a gruesome, bloody, terrible war, but WW2 was certainly no catfight, so why??

The staticness of the fronts, the primitive weapons and the limited air power would give a completely original setting and atmosphere for a FPS. Sure, you might have to fiddle a bit with historical accuracy to make it balanced and playable, but it would be something new and fresh....

:(
 
World War II is far more popular because of what appear to be more sharply drawn lines of good and evil. Thus more people know about it, thus it gets more exposure, thus more people know about it, etc. Plus there are a lot more WWII than I veterans around these days.
 
Trench warfare isn't as much fun to re-create. WWI airplanes would be fun though.
 
What would it be? Sitting in a trench for a week, hoping you don't get hit by an artillery shell, then going over the top and getting mowed down by a machine gun?

Cleo
 
What would it be? Sitting in a trench for a week, hoping you don't get hit by an artillery shell, then going over the top and getting mowed down by a machine gun?

There's something that isn't possible in real life: respawn.

With that, breakthroughs can happen fairly quickly in a game ;)
 
WWI naval warfare would have been fun to play...but of course it never happened in real life.

Unless you want to make a video game about the Italy v. Austria-Hungary naval war!
 
So we have hundreds of WW2-games but almost no WW1-game at all. Why hasn´t a WW1 FPS been developed yet?? Sure, WW1 was a gruesome, bloody, terrible war, but WW2 was certainly no catfight, so why??

The staticness of the fronts, the primitive weapons and the limited air power would give a completely original setting and atmosphere for a FPS. Sure, you might have to fiddle a bit with historical accuracy to make it balanced and playable, but it would be something new and fresh....

:(

I'm fairly sure Battlefield 1942 has a WW I variant. (But I fear I'm suffering from the same ailment of thinking WW II more 'fun'.)
 
MataniaF09.jpg



hell yeah!
 
What is that picture? I want to see it in larger size.
 
Ah, nice. Thanks!
 
the reasons I see:
-WW1 was ugly and boring. Trench warfare + gas attacks... not fun
-WW1 did not have Nazis in it.
-Weapons were kinda lame (take a look at WW1 tanks... meh. Awesome retro design, but not as cool to use as a Panzer)(mostly because nothing is cooler to use than a Panzer, true, true)
- The French actually fought and this will fly in the face of 90% of the US market stereotypes
 
- The French actually fought and this will fly in the face of 90% of the US market stereotypes

The way the average American is likely to see it, the Germans occupied a good chunk of France until we showed up and kicked them out. Accurate? No, but what can you do . . .
 
Yeah, the gas attacks! At random times, all the players on one half of the map just die. Good times.

Cleo
 
What would it be? Sitting in a trench for a week, hoping you don't get hit by an artillery shell, then going over the top and getting mowed down by a machine gun?

Cleo

Lots of World War 2 was like that too. War usually is just sitting around waiting for something to happen.
 
* It would be a supreme challenge to make a conquest for an opponent´s flag in a trench warfare.

* The less advanced weapons would require greater skill to kill and conquer...

* More focus on infantry and less on vehicles is nice for a change
 
Yeah, the gas attacks! At random times, all the players on one half of the map just die. Good times.

Cleo

we'd need a superb wind engine.

Verdammt, das Gas kommt nach uns! Argle! :lol:

oh and we need very young models, the youngest infrantrymen in the british army was like, what 14?

Get a kid on yer bayonit! (horrible and flawed pun, i know :blush:)
 
Back
Top Bottom