We talk about things in depth that relate to a game, and often we bring these things in that relate to realism and relation.


Truly the 2nd best gaming forums I've been a part of (#1 public gaming forums).


------------------------------------


So I wonder if there is a single player campaign and how it will stack?


Two great World War games come to mind with incredible single player narratives: Treyarch's Call of Duty: World at War and Ubisoft's Valient Hearts: The Great War

I think there will be a couple of campaigns per region (france, arabia, ect).

That would be awesome. I hope there is an option to do each one individually and altogether in a series. Benefit being you should focus on a single character or storyline or just follow the general timeline (there later being that like World at War where you would switch between the European-Russian Eastern front or the U.S. Pacific front)

Good heavens that was so hot heheh (sorry I will go stand in the corner)

And this Man I am going to miss here, Because of my nature I tend not to believe till I do a little research on my own,and not surprisingly this place (in particular) is full of well people with a bit more on there neck than a lump of bone and meat. With the added bonus that there from EVERYWHERE so you get some insight you might not get just moaning about the world where you are

I just hope it won't have some silly good vs bad mentallity.

It's been said that if Ze Germans had continued to focus their bombing on manufacturing, rather than getting distracted with civilian targets, they may well have taken the island (and not just because bombed civilians are much more likely to rally together and commit to the war machine).

We're just discussing the canon of the game (and touching on cannon in the process ).

Yeah, that would be lazy and svck; while there were events which caused the war, the war had no cause. If there is no cause to anolyse, one can only judge the sides by their actions... which were pretty much the same all round.

I'll also note that, technically, the war was between Austria-Hungary and Serbia. The catch being that they each had powerful allies...

Exactly. I think a (shortened) quote from the 80's movie Red Dawn is appropriate when discussing motivations for the world powers to get involved: "Biggest kids on the block. Eventually, they gonna fight.", or something like that. They all had these empires and war machines that they were just itching to utilize, and if they grabbed some land from the other empires in the process, it's a win/win. So, really, there wasn't any "good" reason for the war. In the end it was basically all a big dike measuring contest. Too bad nearly an entire generation of young men had to die for that.

There was actually quite a bit of equivocating and several attempts at peaceful resolutions to the situation. Ironically, the war might have been a minor thing if Austria had taken more of a kneejerk action; the delays meant their casus belli (the assassination of their crown prince) had faded somewhat, so there was less international support for the invasion, and the other powers had time to get their armies organised. And even with that addition, we're still simplifying it a lot.

Sorry I haven't posted back yet. I've been hooked by the Overwatch Beta tbh, and I figured my post would have a knock-on effect.

A bit surprised to see the discussion mostly revolve around the US involvement in WW1, rather than the tasteless profiteering off of the worst war in human history that the new Battlefield game represents.

Personally, it's bad enough IF the main focus is on the US involvement (and a shocking lack of respect to the sacrifices of the other Allied nations), but more importantly, I find any game that seriously tries to replicate WW1 and use that as a backdrop for a game that glorifies the horrendous acts that transpired there, as shameless and thoroughly insulting.

No WW2 game focuses on the Holocaust because it'd be in exceptionally poor taste to do so. The entirety of WW1 was a massacre, and arguably the single greatest war crime ever stumbled into thanks to hubris and naivety. It's called "The Great War" or "The War to end all Wars" for a reason, and it hasn't even been a century since it ended (or since the US got involved in the war either). It will forever be "too soon" for this particular topic, and I truly believe the only reason why anyone would choose this as "the next Battlefield game" is if they had no appreciation or understanding or respect of just how gut-wrenchingly appalling the entire war was.

MMM I think I have to agree a bit with this.... The real shame I think is it truly shows in almost every nations case the actual value of treatise and conduct of war papers (as in yep just a piece of paper that in the end dont mean squat unless you get caught or are on the loosing side cause damage control is so much harder then) nasty stuff that the game wont show.

Then again I do give some credit to the youth of today (SOME) might be surprised bout the number that look beyond a game, and take an interest in what really was going on. I well really have no sacred cows so everything tasteful or not is open to me, And I am hoping if the game is well fantasy people do call it out on it. (just like me man I am full of it and most people just let me spew and thats not cool).

...........

That was a bit heavy mmmm OK lighten, Before I begin my search........ What was the deal with Helmet's does it strike anyone else really odd that most nations did not really have them at the start??? ( Think about it I mean near everyone had Helms at some point in there history why the heck would this go out of fashion seems damn odd...... same thing with parachutes not well being a thing (I think that will be my next look up) I wonder if it is a case of gear out weighing the value of the man.....(think those divine wind pilots of WW2 ohh they had them in torpedo's as well......again not cool)

Glad someone's doing this(other than Verdun), especially since we're living in the 100th anniversary of WW1.

Okay I need to stop you right there and take you down off your soapbox. First and foremost, these games are not specifically about the politics and horrendous war crimes that have occurred during those Wars or any war to be exact. This game like Call of Duty and like Medal of Honor, is about combat. And it is not true realistic combat, not off all of it anyways. I mentioned before that it's a game focused solely on the trench warfare that was occurring mostly on the Western Front in between Germany and France it would be a rather boring game because frankly those people that actually dug the thousands miles of hole that they would probably die in from artillery shells. Though most remember that as the most horrific part of World War 1 and associate with the combat that went on that is not the only form that went on. This war feature combatants from almost every continent on the globe, with varying terrains and tactics, and by the looks of it this game will incorporate those various types.


Now you mention WWII, and while no game fully embraces it, there have been some that touched in it. Combat didn't really occur at the camps, the only time they saw Allied troops was when they were free from Nazi control. WWI though didn't have a holocaust, bit it did involve a lot of old war mentality. Which brings me to that saying "War to End All Wars". Obviously it didn't but it did showcase the biggest change in war tactics (due to technology) and also changed the perception of war. Prior to WWI, war was seen by many as a necessary part of the world and fighting in one was glorious. Because of WWI and it's horrific nature because of humanity not ready to deal with the technology present, that all changed. There might be moments of glory in war since then, but we don't visualize war as a whole anymore that way. Believe it or not, this concept has been boosted in games indirectly. Just look at combat games whose timeframe was pre-WWI and those afterwards. The mentality is different on each side. Then look at Valiant Hearts: The Great War: three is game that really dug deep into the horrors of war and WWI through it's story as well as it's historical accuracy and factoids. It had an artistic style but that didn't detract from the emotional impact of the game.


Remember what games are: an artistic depitction of a specific viewpoint. Your average soldier in the Pacific theater in WWII probably didn't give a damn about the holocaust when he was in combat; they were focused on staying alive.