This surfaced today thanks to a resourceful NeoGaf user....
http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1190630
Battlefield 5 for PS4/XB1/PC. Lists October 25 as a release date. It includes the description "Mehrspieler Taktik Shooter im 1. Weltkrieg" which translates to "Multiplayer tactical shooter in WW1".
The dude abides.
If it's true, I'm actually cool with it! With Call of Duty in an arms race for Modern or Future based shooters in the past however many years, I'm actually starting to miss the World War I/II based shooters.
I was just talking about that with a friend on Xbox One Saturday night as we were playing The Division beta. We miss the weapons, the tanks, the different strategies. Everything now is super power weapons, wall running, robot based abilities, etc.
A friend and I both went and dug out our buried copies of Call of Duty: World at War last summer just so we could co-op through the campaign because we both wanted to playing something World War II based instead of the future based CODs.
Agree completely.Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
Would love to see a game that was 100% WWII Eastern Front.
I can't wait for this game if true!! Getting back to the basics is going to be great!
Yeah, the Russian side missions of World at War were fun. It would be great to see a game focused entirely on the Eastern Front. So much that could be done there!
COD World at War was one of my favorites online because the antique guns actually took skill to use. Hopefully BF5 will be the same! Really looking forward to this one!
insert generic sig
Has Call of Duty gone back to WWI though? World At War was still WWII.
I can't really remember a game that has gone back to WWI, which has me VERY excited for BF5 if that is true.
Last edited by JBHuskers; 02-29-2016 at 10:02 AM.
The dude abides.
No, I think they were only ever World War II. So World War I would he essentially unexplored territory, which has me really intrigued.
I could have sworn one of the two big shooters touched on WWI but they have not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._I_video_games
Have not played a Battlefield game in forever but this does pique my interest.
Last edited by bdoughty; 02-29-2016 at 11:52 AM.
See the future of @Battlefield.
— Electronic Arts (@EA) April 29, 2016
The #Battlefield World Premiere is on May 6 at 4PM ET. https://t.co/TyaipZ4Tzp pic.twitter.com/Lm1S2X73Oq
Can't wait!
The dude abides.
Your official title is Battlefield 1, taking place during World War 1.
Here's the official trailer. I tried to get the video of the live stream from earlier this afternoon, but it doesn't seem to be available yet.
Looks good to me. I'd still rather have a game based solely on WWII's Eastern Front but anything that is old is good in my book.
War was just more personal back then. It was brutal, it was hand-to-hand and it was fought in the trenches. That is much more interesting to me.
Can't wait for this!
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
The dude abides.
What's the big difference between COD and Battlefield?
October can't come soon enough. I keep watching the trailer, I want to fucking shovel smack some bastard in the face!
I haven't played much COD other than the older titles in single player campaign mode.
I have played quite a bit of BF4 and BFH online with multiplayer. I don't know if COD has these options but multiplayer battlefield allows you to work in a squad with different players using different loadouts. So, on person will be a medic and can revive you if you die, another can be a support person that can drop ammo boxed, there is a sniper, an engineer, etc...If you can get a group of people to work together it's a lot of fun. A good medic can keep the squad alive.
From what I've seen of COD, there is a lot of running around and shooting, seems like battlefield on team death match mode. Battlefield has a lot more multiplayer modes, like capture the flag, large and small conquest, rush, etc...battlefield also has a single player campaign mode so in my opinion it has more options than COD. I'm not saying it's better but it does seem to have more options and ways to play the game.
That and Battlefield is bigger. If I remember, isn't it 64 player? So 32 on 32 on massive maps, equals more to do in games, grander detail and scope of battle, nearly always vehicles present to use, etc.
COD has, at best I have ever seen, been 18 on 18 in either Ghosts or Advanced Warfare. Everything else always seems to top out at 6 vs 6 or 9 vs 9 on really small maps and almost never vehicles.
COD is more chicken with your head cut off, as Battlefield is a little more tactical.
COD has better leveling up and progression on guns as well compared to Battlefield in the past.
As said before Battlefield is on a larger scale if you want to play it that way, but you can play 16 v. 16 too.
The dude abides.
This is a sweet breakdown...
The dude abides.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks