Who asked for a WW2 game?

Comments

  • oof14346
    954 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Wixxzblu wrote: »
    So who asked for a WW2 game? seriously?

    Not me. But, I'm still gonna play it.
  • LEMSDK
    43 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    x-GUTB-x wrote: »
    Here;s what happened. BF4 was a giant success, but EA didn’t like how much they spent on the game with hundreds of guns, gadgets, knives, dog tags, web based game browser, commander app, etc and so on. They wanted to streamline the game. So we’ve had dumbed down arcade BF1 with a fraction of the guns and content — the reason why they called it One was because they wanted to distance this BF-lite from the main BF line.
    EA knows BF1 flopped compared to BF4 — but they REFUSE to just give us what we want, the next generation of BF with more guns, more modes, more content, etc. Literally no one asked for a WW1 shooter...we just don’t want jet packs and wall-running.
    Could going back to 1942 with bigger maps, more vehicles, more modes, more guns and better graphics work? Maybe. But BFV isn’t that I gaurentee you. I liked some of the features mentioned but EA had to bring the content or it’s going to be another flop. How much longer can we play BF4?

    I bet you also beleive that the X-files tv series are based of real events... don't spew out all those 100% wrong statements to support your theory about evil coporate EA is out to get you xD
    every single "fact" you have in there is wrong!
  • oof14346
    954 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    x-GUTB-x wrote: »
    EA knows BF1 flopped compared to BF4

    Not by the sales numbers.
  • Papscal
    21 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Possibly the most clueless post to date about BFv. Stellar work mr op sir.
  • FritzCT
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    OP, lots of people were wanting a WW2 theme rather than modern so I don't know why you find it so surprising.

    From what I've read (not a lot) EA/ DICE want BF V to be a progressive title as in a journey through time through WW2. The release maps are North Africa (1940); Netherlands (1940); Fall of Europe (1939); Norway (1940).

    So pretty much from the start of WW2.

    Now OP concentrate carefully.

    WW1 1914-1918
    WW2 1939-1945 Starts 21 years after WW1 ended
    Korean War 1950-1953 Starts 5 years after WW2 ended
    Vietnam 1955-1975 Starts 2 years after Korean War ended

    If they are running chronologically then WW2 seems to bridge the gap between historical & modern nicely. If I had to bet on it I would have my money on the BF after 5 being Korea/ Vietnam related. Maybe a BFBC3 Vietnam even?

    BF hasn't visited WW2 for 16(?) years.

    So basically players were asking for WW2; it's the obvious choice chronologically (and IF the title after is Korea/ Vietnam it bridges that gap); it's a return for BF to its roots.

    Now there are lots of ifs and buts in there but even so what's so hard to understand?

    I think its a great choice of era so well done EA/ DICE...

    Of course we've yet to see how it actually plays.
  • MogwaiWarrior
    967 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    GRIZZ11283 wrote: »
    I wanted WW2.
    If I want to play a modern shooter with customization that all does the same thing, I'll go play BF4.

    This. I've already had around 10 straight years of modern shooters. WW1 and WW2 is just the kind of change of pace we need.
  • CHAMMOND1992
    1367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    How oblivious do you have to be to ask this question?
  • Ronin9572
    1050 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    GRIZZ11283 wrote: »
    I wanted WW2.
    If I want to play a modern shooter with customization that all does the same thing, I'll go play BF4.

    This. I've already had around 10 straight years of modern shooters. WW1 and WW2 is just the kind of change of pace we need.

    Exactly, spot on. I really hope the next BF title is Vietnam, or Korea, or some sort of Cold War theme. Yes I know WWII was a very popular themed shooter for a very long time, than modern day shooters had their run. I for one get tired of modern shooters. Sure some of them are nice to go back and visit once and awhile. But for some reason I never get tired of WWII games, I just have such an interest in that time period.
  • snavelaer
    1148 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 2018
    :) Very glad it goes back to ww2! :)

    Although I am one of the few people that wish we would go back to familiar battles like D - Day. On the other hand I can understand DICE their decision to explore new grounds which I also appriciate. All in all I look forward to the game and the changes what I heard about the game are music to my ears.

    On a side note I am concerned that we will NOT see any drivable aircraftcarriers, submarines, destroyers, battleships etc.
  • disposalist
    8764 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    I saw multiple polls before BF1 came out and the vast majority wanted WW2. They gave us WW1, which I was fine with (it was done awesomely well) but they were bound to give us WW2 this time.

    /thread?
  • Turban_Legend80
    4736 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    snavelaer wrote: »
    :) Very glad it goes back to ww2! :)

    On a side note I am concerned that we will NOT see any drivable aircraftcarriers...
    Agreed on the first bit.
    Why would you want to drive an aircraft carrier?
  • CH1R0N83
    709 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Well, if these forums are to be believed, about 9 people out of every 10 wanted it. Myself included. And I have some bad news OP. If the leak I heard turns out to be true ( and considering that this guy has totally nailed everything so far, there’s no reason to believe it isn’t) the next game will be historical too. Happy days.
  • MHbluey
    739 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    /thread?

    why because your opinion is god mode? smh
    people are allowed to disagree, maybe not on here but whatever
    BFV looks very good, nudging towards a buy, but need to play it or see much more multi gameplay, not blindly support it
    it will be a success though
  • HardAimedKid
    11386 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Wixxzblu wrote: »
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Wixxzblu wrote: »
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Dice wanted ww2. Since bf2 they were itching to make another ww2 title; and at the end of the day they are the people deciding what to make. You the consumer have the free decision to buy their work or not. I mean bf1 nearly didn't happen because of higher up management in EA and it bit em on the rear didn't it?

    Plus the battlefield community. RNGesus does no one remember the amount of people that were disappointed with bf1 revealed to not be ww2?

    We've had modern BATTLEFIELD for over a decade now. It's been 16 years since 1942.

    No one else does a conflict like Dice does with Battlefield.

    Edits in quotation.

    Its not that i dont like ww2 games or that era. But you cant seriously say that everyone now wants a ww2 after they got fed up with ww1/ww2 for the last couple years. As ive mentioned a few times before in this thread, IF we didnt have a BF1 'or cod WW2' before this reveal it would have been a much different story.

    Yet Over a decade of modern is totally fine but two years of ww1 is just too much and doesn't allow ww2 to be made?

    I'm sorry but I'm struggling to understand your logic.

    Name a title that does all out war with combined in a team based way on massive maps with impressive destruction and physics with photo realistic graphics in ww2.

    Last I checked Wolfestein 2 wasn't ww2; it was alternate 60s and the only ww2 aspect of New Order was the "Germans".

    Cod WW2 was cod going back to ww2 which was their 5th ww2 title and it's reception is all you need to know about it.

    Sniper Elite is a "sniper sim" in a ww2 theme. Really the uniforms and weapons are the only indicator it's ww2 because it's so detached from the conflict.

    And the rest are only available on steam and have either been going for years or are in alpha development and are indie games.

    Two of those titles listed are SP only so really they are automatically void; cod is cod and apparantly according to the battlefield doesn't matter so by their word it doesn't matter. Now left with just the PC only indie titles.

    So Dice should've had made a ww2 because an apparent oversaturation of ww2 again but it's limited to Steam on PC with indie titles that see around 2000 people play it?

    It's WW2. It's not changing.

    Yes.

    Lets disregard every other game, because battlefield doesnt exist in the same realm that humans do, you must be some kind of alien where battlefield is the only game.

    How hard is it for you to understand the logic that we already had BF1 and cod WW2, im done with that **** era, it doesnt translate to the same kind of gameplay as it did back when BF1942 and COD2 were new. Maybe DICE makes a good WW2 game, it doesnt matter, ive been playing BF1 for almost 2 years now, im done with this era, the novelty and nostalgia lost its charm very fast.

    And you completely miss the point.

    None of those mentioned games share anything with BFV expect being fps games and being set in ww2.

    Not everyone that plays battlefield plays other games; not everyone that plays battlefield and other games gets sick of one thing in one game and cries when battlefield does it (e.g. Setting)

    HOW HARD IS IT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT ITS YOU that is done for some asinine reason whilst others aren't.

    I didn't play cod ww2 and so didn't many others; some also played it an have zero issue with BFV being ww2.

    WW1 does not equal WW2. By that logic every war since Vietnam is just copy past with new skins. That's your logic.

    YOU for some reason are done with an era not see in BF since 2002 over 16 years ago. By all means don't get the game and just ignore the forum and all the internet regarding its existance. Does us all and yourself a favour

    Tl;dr
  • disposalist
    8764 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    MHbluey wrote: »
    /thread?
    why because your opinion is god mode? smh
    people are allowed to disagree, maybe not on here but whatever
    BFV looks very good, nudging towards a buy, but need to play it or see much more multi gameplay, not blindly support it
    it will be a success though
    Lol, no because there were literally multiple BF fan polls and in every one a large majority of fans voted for WW2. The question I answered (the OP) was "who asked for WW2?" not "will BF5 be a success".
  • MHbluey
    739 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    MHbluey wrote: »
    /thread?
    why because your opinion is god mode? smh
    people are allowed to disagree, maybe not on here but whatever
    BFV looks very good, nudging towards a buy, but need to play it or see much more multi gameplay, not blindly support it
    it will be a success though
    Lol, no because there were literally multiple BF fan polls and in every one a large majority of fans voted for WW2. The question I answered (the OP) was "who asked for WW2?" not "will BF5 be a success".

    "/thread" posts always come across as big headed, just saying
  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I wanted this battlefield to be WW2
  • James-MII
    894 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Wixxzblu wrote: »
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Wixxzblu wrote: »
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Dice wanted ww2. Since bf2 they were itching to make another ww2 title; and at the end of the day they are the people deciding what to make. You the consumer have the free decision to buy their work or not. I mean bf1 nearly didn't happen because of higher up management in EA and it bit em on the rear didn't it?

    Plus the battlefield community. RNGesus does no one remember the amount of people that were disappointed with bf1 revealed to not be ww2?

    We've had modern BATTLEFIELD for over a decade now. It's been 16 years since 1942.

    No one else does a conflict like Dice does with Battlefield.

    Edits in quotation.

    Its not that i dont like ww2 games or that era. But you cant seriously say that everyone now wants a ww2 after they got fed up with ww1/ww2 for the last couple years. As ive mentioned a few times before in this thread, IF we didnt have a BF1 'or cod WW2' before this reveal it would have been a much different story.

    Yet Over a decade of modern is totally fine but two years of ww1 is just too much and doesn't allow ww2 to be made?

    I'm sorry but I'm struggling to understand your logic.

    Name a title that does all out war with combined in a team based way on massive maps with impressive destruction and physics with photo realistic graphics in ww2.

    Last I checked Wolfestein 2 wasn't ww2; it was alternate 60s and the only ww2 aspect of New Order was the "Germans".

    Cod WW2 was cod going back to ww2 which was their 5th ww2 title and it's reception is all you need to know about it.

    Sniper Elite is a "sniper sim" in a ww2 theme. Really the uniforms and weapons are the only indicator it's ww2 because it's so detached from the conflict.

    And the rest are only available on steam and have either been going for years or are in alpha development and are indie games.

    Two of those titles listed are SP only so really they are automatically void; cod is cod and apparantly according to the battlefield doesn't matter so by their word it doesn't matter. Now left with just the PC only indie titles.

    So Dice should've had made a ww2 because an apparent oversaturation of ww2 again but it's limited to Steam on PC with indie titles that see around 2000 people play it?

    It's WW2. It's not changing.

    Yes.

    Lets disregard every other game, because battlefield doesnt exist in the same realm that humans do, you must be some kind of alien where battlefield is the only game.

    How hard is it for you to understand the logic that we already had BF1 and cod WW2, im done with that **** era, it doesnt translate to the same kind of gameplay as it did back when BF1942 and COD2 were new. Maybe DICE makes a good WW2 game, it doesnt matter, ive been playing BF1 for almost 2 years now, im done with this era, the novelty and nostalgia lost its charm very fast.

    And you completely miss the point.

    None of those mentioned games share anything with BFV expect being fps games and being set in ww2.

    Not everyone that plays battlefield plays other games; not everyone that plays battlefield and other games gets sick of one thing in one game and cries when battlefield does it (e.g. Setting)

    HOW HARD IS IT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT ITS YOU that is done for some asinine reason whilst others aren't.

    I didn't play cod ww2 and so didn't many others; some also played it an have zero issue with BFV being ww2.

    WW1 does not equal WW2. By that logic every war since Vietnam is just copy past with new skins. That's your logic.

    YOU for some reason are done with an era not see in BF since 2002 over 16 years ago. By all means don't get the game and just ignore the forum and all the internet regarding its existance. Does us all and yourself a favour

    I got banned for naming you for being.. ‘that guy’ and my point is proven.

    He’s allowed his opinion, your word is NOT final.
  • R1ckyDaMan19
    533 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I was looking forward to a ww2 game, we kinda got one...
  • HANSGRUBER30
    3030 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I did
Sign In or Register to comment.