WAR STORIES Pros Cons Solutions

«13
Cpt_McRon
75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
edited September 2018
Hi everyone.

After a lot of discussions with single stories players, i want to share our point of view about what will be war stories in BFV based on what was reveal and what was done in BF1.

First I will begin with the good points of war stories and why it's a good way to play campaign.
But what makes war stories good makes it bad in the same way, so i will be discussing it in the second point.
Finally in the third and last point, I will propose real solutions to satisfy the demands of the community.

Let's start:

  • Advantages of war stories mode over traditionnal campaign:
1.1) One thing we can't ignore about war stories is the fact that you can play in different locations, through differents characters. 1 player want to have single player about SAS raids in Africa and Crete (like me); another one want to see Landings of the Marines in the pacific and ferocious combat in the jungle and finally a third wants to see big tanks battle in the vast countryside of east europe between USSR & Axis factions. War stories is the way to satisfy everybody and it's really really a good point here !!

1.2) War stories by this way, increase the number of opportunites about the single players mode. It's absolutely a good to have multiples stories inside the game instead of only one. (yeah you know maths: 2 is better than 1, and 3 is better than 2 right ^^).
We (campaign's players) really want to have more and more content. And war stories could be what we're waiting for but... (see 2nd point).

1.3) Campaign mode is the way you can show you know what's historically accurate. Players complained a lot since the first trailer because of women, bionic hard and so on (you know the chorus). Here is the way to show that you know which country allowed women to fight (Nordly's resistance...), which allowed blacks to fights (Tirailleur story, i'm expecting a colonial french soldier here)... You can demonstrate you know which weapons and vehicles belong to which nation and make a single player truly accurate.

1.4) Battlefield started with no campaign mode at all back in BF1942. Years after years you gave us campaigns better and better through your games. At that time you had a lot of concurrence about single players history mode. Today a lot of companies don't even do an history mode or made it very badly in their last games (yeah you know who's i'm targeting here). But DICE didn't forget about this part of the game they implemented and upgraded game after game. You can definitely grab more and more players with that.

1.5) Tides of war implementing new content for war stories and for for free with no more premium pass. THIS POINT IS THE BIGGEST IMPROVEMENT SINCE YEARS ABOUT A SINGLE PLAYER MODE !!! Campaign's players were always abandonned by the DLCs and never had new content, it always showed a disrespect towards those players who don't touch multiplayer mode (yeah because it exist). Here you have a f*ck*ng good point. Combining 1.4 and 1.5 points together, you will definitely interest more players.

  • Inconvenients of war stories against traditionnal campaign mode:
2.1) In contrast of point 1.1; the biggest problem of war stories mode as it was in BF1 is the TRUE LACK OF DEEP EXPERIENCE with our character... One war story is done in 1 Hour in maximum difficulty !!!
We can't even have the time to discover the life of our character because the story is already finished... What we want and what you need to re-implement is a great and long story with characters we can be attached just like in BF3 and BF4. We will discuss solutions after but a campaign player no matter who play this, can't fully experience the thing if he's not attached to the different characters nor if the missions aren't going to immersive the player...

2.2) It's quite the same cons as 2.1. If war stories are so short, what's the point of adding them ??? It's even more a disadvantage than a pro... If every mission last 15-20min instead of 40-50 mins in max difficulty, why doing multiples missions where we can't attach to the characters ???
Let's come back to the math example, it's like you're giving us 0.25+0.25+0.25+0.25 and not 1 +1 +1 +1 ... It's like promising a bottle to a mate and offering him 4 empty bottles... (Personnally i prefer 1 good bottle instead of 4 emptys, up to you ^^).
Finally this is not more content that you gave us in BF1, but more splitted content... We hope you're not making the same mistake on BFV...

2.3) For instance you didn't show anything historically inaccurate in your trailers about war stories (or i didn't saw it), so nothing to say here, that's good =)

2.4) With BF1 you definitely went down regarding campaign modes because of the reasons above; please take it in considerations so you can keep evolving your single plyaer mode to a better level for BFV and then for the following BF and so on.

2.5) Well there's no cons at having new stories for free, it's even more a big and good surprise to have more single player content, it's all good here !!!
[/color]

  • Solutions to implement to make war stories the best thing you can do about campaign mode
3.1) It's simple, you need to show true sentimental history, something you remember again after you ended the game, something you'll be discussing with the other ones who made the mode but also telling this story to your pals that never played the game. It need to be something you truely loved, with feelings towards the characters, after ending a war story you should want to tell everyone what was that story.
I think you're not bad on this point but it need to be improved. The real problems come from 2.2 point.

Another good way is to implement connections between war stories (not for all) but if some stories could be connected to others with commun character or objectives or locations... You know what I mean it's just like between BF3 and BF4 where Kovic and Dima made the connection between the 2 games, it made these games so cool and exciting.

War stories shouldn't be so independant from each other, they sould complete each other !

3.2) Just add more and more missions to a war story. It should take AT LEAST 3-4 hours to be completed in max difficulty, not 40-50 min for an entire war story. Make more missions, more cinematic, make the story bigger and bigger again !!! We need to have a real experience as i said in 3.1. We need more content inside a war story, not an empty bottle as i said before as an example. Instead of 3 x 20 mins missions it should be 5 x 40 mins missions to make a war story really interesting.

3.3) Keep stuff historically accurate, it's really important that you do it in a single player mode. If you could add this point in multiplayer it would be even better, you have already vehicles attached to their original factions (like MP40, MG42, STG44, Tiger, Stuka and BF109 for Axis and Sten, Bren, Lee Enfield, Churchill and Spitfire for Allied). Restrict weapons to their original faction just like in BF1942 !!!

3.4) /

3.5) You can perhaps make big war stories with long story but only give us all the story except the last mission and end the pre-last mission with a big suspense. Then you gave us the final mission of the war story in the next tide of war update, so it will interest people and have them keep an eye on the next tide of war event.
Let's say you have a 5 missions war story (around 5x40min) : you gave us the first 4 missions and the 4th end with a very big suspense at the end. Then you add the 5th mission along the new war story in the next tides of war event.


If you take this points into consideration you will make the best single player battlefield of all time for sure !!!!
I'm looking for any further information from you and I keep an eye on your new cooperation too in addition of the multiplayer.

Battlefield V has for sure a huge potential !!! Just follow the different points of the community and it will be a true masterpiece !!!

Comments

  • Cpt_McRon
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I'm not agree at all, games can have both Single player and Multiplayer and I can say a 3rd mode for cooperation against AI. A triple A game should have at least a verygood single player and a verygood MP too.

    There's not only multiplayer in life, and we're talking about WW2 here, there's plenty and plenty histories !!!

    If it doesn't interest you, you're free to play only multiplayer but less campaign's players free to play single player too
  • buckeyefan26x
    41 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    You thought bad company Single player was great? Lol the best campaign was BF3 military missions. They were exciting. BF1 war stories were good too!
  • xXCA_RageXx
    1038 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Cpt_McRon wrote: »
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I'm not agree at all, games can have both Single player and Multiplayer and I can say a 3rd mode for cooperation against AI. A triple A game should have at least a verygood single player and a verygood MP too.

    There's not only multiplayer in life, and we're talking about WW2 here, there's plenty and plenty histories !!!

    If it doesn't interest you, you're free to play only multiplayer but less campaign's players free to play single player too

    Why does a game have to have a singleplayer? The battlefied series did not get as big as it has because of singleplayer. Why waste resources for a 6 hour forgettable campaign? The only interesting campaign was bad company, but in my opinion the multiplayer was overrated.
  • lorenzburg
    63 postsMember Member
    Cpt_McRon wrote: »
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I'm not agree at all, games can have both Single player and Multiplayer and I can say a 3rd mode for cooperation against AI. A triple A game should have at least a verygood single player and a verygood MP too.

    There's not only multiplayer in life, and we're talking about WW2 here, there's plenty and plenty histories !!!

    If it doesn't interest you, you're free to play only multiplayer but less campaign's players free to play single player too

    Why does a game have to have a singleplayer? The battlefied series did not get as big as it has because of singleplayer. Why waste resources for a 6 hour forgettable campaign? The only interesting campaign was bad company, but in my opinion the multiplayer was overrated.

    You're right if DICE is really going to make an "easy" campaign, I mean just some missions and then nothing else. And probably that's what is going to happen in BF5.
    And also, I'm not really keen on commando and pilot missions, in BF1 only 2 campaigns on 6 focused on that, in BF5 probably 3 on 5 will be so, I think that only Tirailleurs and The Last Tiger could be the kind of campaigns I like to play.
    As far as I know now about SP, this time the SP could be forgettable.
  • xXCA_RageXx
    1038 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    lorenzburg wrote: »
    Cpt_McRon wrote: »
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I'm not agree at all, games can have both Single player and Multiplayer and I can say a 3rd mode for cooperation against AI. A triple A game should have at least a verygood single player and a verygood MP too.

    There's not only multiplayer in life, and we're talking about WW2 here, there's plenty and plenty histories !!!

    If it doesn't interest you, you're free to play only multiplayer but less campaign's players free to play single player too

    Why does a game have to have a singleplayer? The battlefied series did not get as big as it has because of singleplayer. Why waste resources for a 6 hour forgettable campaign? The only interesting campaign was bad company, but in my opinion the multiplayer was overrated.

    You're right if DICE is really going to make an "easy" campaign, I mean just some missions and then nothing else. And probably that's what is going to happen in BF5.
    And also, I'm not really keen on commando and pilot missions, in BF1 only 2 campaigns on 6 focused on that, in BF5 probably 3 on 5 will be so, I think that only Tirailleurs and The Last Tiger could be the kind of campaigns I like to play.
    As far as I know now about SP, this time the SP could be forgettable.

    I didnt even play the BF1" campaign". Even Cod is going the way of no single player campaign. The whole it has to have a singleplayer mindset is starting to disappear. Unless the game is known for having a both good multiplayer and single player, we are going to continually see less campaigns in multiplayer focused games.
  • barnesalmighty2
    1480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I really enjoyed playing co op missions in bf3, drop 'em like liquid was a favourite. War stories should be 2 to 4 player co op missions. It would be a good way to introduce new mechanics and gadgets to beginners.
  • Cpt_McRon
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Can developpers takes information from here and explain how they see war stories in the current and future state of the game ?

    Will you focus on larger stories, longer missions with deeper feelings towards the characters ?
    Or will it stay with shorter missions and scenario than usual (talking about older BF) ?

    Can you also details how much (approximatly) war stories you want to implement by the end of the 2 years live service ?
  • DarkestHour138
    992 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I've enjoyed the campaign's of all the BF games since Bad Company (with the exception of BF4, it was forgettable). The BC campaign's brought a lot of action and was able to successfully mix in some humor without it feeling forced. BF3 campaign was fun with memorable set pieces and missions, the story felt too much like it was copying Black Ops with the interrogation and all, but still a fun campaign.

    I enjoyed War Stories but like many others have said you don't have enough time to build the character enough to care about. They should tell multiple stories but with a common thread throughout them. For example, if we borrow from Saving Private Ryan, have the stories follow a bloodline through multiple theaters.

    To OP, the math makes your suggestion difficult. You're asking for more when it's very obvious that they didn't have enough resources to get MP where it needs to be, let alone include even more campaign (which isn't what BF is known for).
  • mcRen98
    349 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I personally think it would be nice if war stories followed a single storyline that included multiple protagonists that culminates in a climax sequence like in Valiant Hearts.
  • MrCrecer13
    54 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I don't really think MP focused games should have SP mode at all. It's just waste of time for both developers and players. And let's be honest here bf didn't have an enjoyable SP since Bad Company.

    I really liked Bad Company 2 (all) and BF3 (especially the two Russian missions - they were great) single campaign's.
  • BURGERKRIEG
    887 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Leave single player narratives to titles that are designed specifically for them.

    They are just tiresome short shooting galleries with cinematics bookending them when built from assets designed to be utilised in multi player games like BF.




  • SirSpectacle
    771 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Single player isn't really a waste of resources. There are a lot of gamers who mainly care about SP so no single player means fewer sales and less money for developing the game. A lot of assets can be used in both SP and MP.
  • TropicPoison
    2388 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I like the campaigns in BF games and idc who says otherwise, I want more for my money aka a campaign included along with the mp.

    I would call their scramble to get into the BR crap a waste of resources, I was pretty disappointed that BO4 didn't even have a campaign.
  • Sixclicks
    5073 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    I'd just like the war stories to be a little longer than what we had in BF1 and for them to add more over the life of the game. I personally like the war stories campaign method.

    I've always played the campaign of every game first before playing multiplayer.
    Post edited by Sixclicks on
  • Callahan44er
    5062 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Bad company(especially the first) storymode was really good,everything that followed was just the average shooter experience. Some good missions but overall i wouldnt miss it. Bf1 was much better then bf4 and hardline at least.
    Coop games are pretty rare compared to singeplayer games and it fits much better to bf with squad/teamplay,i hope bfvs coop will be good and imo it would be good if future bfs get coop in all missions.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1811 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Single player isn't really a waste of resources. There are a lot of gamers who mainly care about SP so no single player means fewer sales and less money for developing the game. A lot of assets can be used in both SP and MP.

    People dont buy Battlefield games for the single player experience as they are MP games. SP missions have always just been a bolt on to BF games. This is fine as long as they arent diluting resources to single player modes at the detriment of their core MP game
  • Bluemoon2393
    166 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Single player is where they are allowed to be a little more realistic compared to multiplayer. I think its going to be a good story about how the local people (Resistance) stood to the Germans. Im hoping that we see the raid where the Norweigan resistance and the British. Destroyed the heavy water plant that could have made the Germans nuclear weapons.

    I've got a feeling that we might be doing some skiing in the game which would be awesome.
  • Cpt_McRon
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Single player is where they are allowed to be a little more realistic compared to multiplayer. I think its going to be a good story about how the local people (Resistance) stood to the Germans. Im hoping that we see the raid where the Norweigan resistance and the British. Destroyed the heavy water plant that could have made the Germans nuclear weapons.

    I've got a feeling that we might be doing some skiing in the game which would be awesome.

    You mean the Telemark factory battle ? It was part of the Secret weapons of WW2 DLC for BF1942. Even if it wasn't a campaign, just a MP map, it was awesome !!!
    Assault conquest with no uncapable flag and a Paraplane spawnpoint for british commando !!!
  • TFBisquit
    1536 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sp campaigns are meant to give players an idea about the characters ingame and to create some atmosphere. GTAV was a good example of this, the sp created alot of hype and encouraged players to go online. Now ofcourse Battlefield was never good in the sp part, but I found warstories highly entertaining.
    So lets hope this one is entertaining also.
Sign In or Register to comment.