GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Battlefield 1: Why DICE Ignored Science-Fiction and Returned to the Past

Retroactive progress.

61 Comments

In the grand scheme of things, Battlefield 1is a bold direction for developer DICE. While many modern shooters seem obsessed with science fiction--from the dystopian cityscapes of Overwatch to the spacefaring skirmishes of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare--Battlefield 1 seems content to bring us back, to the antiquity of World War I. As design director Lars Gustavsson tells it, though, this adherence to history is proving fruitful.

"Every time we open the research books, we find a new weapon or technique we didn't know was used during World War I," he told GameSpot at Gamescom 2016. "The misconception is that it was all trenches and slow-paced combat--but this was a war of 'firsts.' These empires were experimenting every chance they had."

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

This has given DICE the chance to experiment as well. Judging by Battlefield 1's closed alpha and a recent demo with the shooter's new Sinai Desert map, surprising combat methods abound: airship assaults, cavalry charges, and even armored-train attacks. There are numerous nuances to multiplayer matches, from the bullet-drop of semi-automatic rifles to the explosive radius of bomber planes’ payloads.

Even the weapons commonly associated with the Great War, such as bayonets, mustard gas, and water-cooled machine guns, add new wrinkles to the classic sandbox combat of past Battlefield games. There's a older feel to Battlefield 1's arsenal that, ironically, feels fresh.

"It's an era we've been wanting to explore for a while," Gustavsson said. "We've all learned about World War II, Vietnam, and the Cold War. But World War I often goes unnoticed, despite how huge it was. It's an older time, but in this case, it feels new."

Returning to the early 20th century also allows DICE the opportunity to explore cultural and geopolitical issues that created massive ripples in the 100 years since. Aside from the fact that Battlefield 1 will shed light on the unsung heroes and battlegrounds of World War I, DICE has yet to mention many specifics when it comes to the single-player campaign. However, Gustavsson said the studio is going to make use of the turbulent era here as well.

"Our research isn't confined to weapons and vehicles," he said. "We've sat down to watch movies, talk with experts, page through books as we tried to figure out which story to tell from this time period. The empires involved in World War I were massive, and in a way, each of them was greedy, trying to gain something more as the war continued. There were a lot of different motives we want to explore. It was a complicated time."

It's a sign of the times that a game set in the 20th century is something of a novelty. 10 years ago, you couldn't throw a stone without hitting a World War II game. But now, the past seems new again--shooters might be taking to the stars these days, but Gustavsson and his team seem confident down here.

Mike Mahardy on Google+

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 61 comments about this story
61 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for tarheelsforever
tarheelsforever

716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By tarheelsforever

if the game is fun, which i expect it to be, then ill be playing it. its as simple as that. all this historic accuracy gibberish people keep talking about is irrelevant really.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for itchyflop
itchyflop

3687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 68

User Lists: 0

Would gamers get bored of real life reload times or real life experiences or do we crave the fictional fast paced half truth on ww1 reality that is bf 1?

3 • 
Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By R4gn4r0k

@itchyflop: Well you've got more arcade shooters, which I like.
Then there are more realistic games like: Red Orchestra, Rising Storm, Insurgency, Day of Infamy.
Those are online FPS I also really like.

But the most realistic among them: Op Flashpoint, ARMA, simulators as it where... are not games for me.

I would like to try out Verdun, it's a WW1 online FPS that is more realistic like Red Orchestra.

2 • 
Avatar image for jhamilton226
jhamilton226

35

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Bolt action rifles most certainly should have been the feature weapons in this game...

Anyone remember the very first COD on PC?? It was mixed pretty well between both bolt action/semi auto and automatic platforms, but I distinctly remember enjoying the pace that the bolt action/semi auto layouts demanded in that game...can't just go running head long into a nest of combatants run n gun style, but also wasn't a sniper load out that forced you to remain static for a time to place an accurate shot...that with a solid side arm like the Luger or 1911 made for a great combination of limited capacity with good stopping power that kept players on an even plain for the most part...it was great fun to fire off 5 shots while moving across the field towards an enemy only to switch to your side arm once you got closer, all the while knowing you only have 10-15 shots at max to stop your foe before you have to reload...

Hopefully like others have mentioned they will offer specific modes in MP that will allow for only bolt action/semi auto matches because I think that is where the true fun will be after the game has been out for awhile...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jhamilton226: Yeah COD1 and UO multiplayer was very enjoyable.

Some sides in WW2 had semi auto rifles: M1 garand, Carbine, G43.

But a lot of main infantry had bolt action rifles.

Battlefield 1 should definitely include a mode that has the infantry wielding bolt action rifles.

2 • 
Avatar image for normanislost
normanislost

1748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

because they already made battlefront?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for cyboricarus
CyborIcarus

173

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

i would love to play a grounded sci fi battlefield game in the future but without jetbacks and double jumping.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DETfaninATL
DETfaninATL

604

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

I can sum up this article and answer the question implied by the title in 2 words : 'market demand'.

2 • 
Avatar image for Karmazyn
Karmazyn

994

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

"Battlefield 1: Why DICE Ignored Science-Fiction" LMFAO - I do not know what WW 1 source material DICE is basing this game on but it sure still S-F game but set in WW 1.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for vanquishre
VanquishRE

330

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The true reason is that sci-fi shooters have been beaten to death by COD. Thanks Activision. BF1 definitely gives off a different impression.

2 • 
Avatar image for jessie82
jessie82

632

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

wonder if theyll redo bf2 as a ww2 game then maybe a vietnam war game?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DARREN636
DARREN636

958

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

Seems like only yesterday people were crying out for a contemporary shooter and to leave the past behind....

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for calstatebadboy
calstatebadboy

275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That's why I am passing on call of fruity

5 • 
Avatar image for bluebird08
bluebird08

733

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

I'm so glad that DICE had the balls to go back in time, instead of going with futuristic bull crap.

7 • 
Avatar image for th3soldier
Th3Soldier

105

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@bluebird08:

They had no balls to abandon the modern warfare design in their "WWI" game.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tarheelsforever
tarheelsforever

716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@th3soldier: you mean they had no balls to abandon the fun right? and this is bad how?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for pnova
PNOVA

153

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By PNOVA

They should of went the other way around but they probably was scared and wanted to stay safe and do a game in the past. It's more easy, when you do a game in the future you taking a risk, that's more hard. Either way, I'm not interested in this game or do I want to think about the past. They tell black people to forget about the past but it's ok for them to keep bringing it up. I hope it stop being a problem to celebrate black history month and remembering racism. It's not ok for us to remember because all lives matter hypocrite.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jobs
jobs

155

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@pnova Uhm....what?:

Upvote • 
Avatar image for z00vara
z00vara

21

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@pnova: lol

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5bd1e31726b43
deactivated-5bd1e31726b43

1081

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

I feel that the move back to WWI is the best move battlefield could have made. It seems to me that a lot of the older gamers are very happy about this decision. I also believe that younger gamers that have not played WW games will really be surprised how much they enjoy the older setting. I'm very excited about this game and can't wait to see how Lawrence of Arabia ties into the single player campaign, which was hinted at in the most recent trailer.

5 • 
Avatar image for Rufus_the_rat
Rufus_the_rat

853

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Rufus_the_rat

Most of what I've seen of this game is science fiction:

-Medic class is also the class specialized in repairing vehicles

-WW1 tanks going 60 kph and armored cars going 90 kph

-WW1 tanks that can power over terrain like a modern M1 Abrams

-Red Baron Fokker Dr.1 in the desert

-Russian armored train in the desert

-Body armored juggernauts (capable of deflecting bullets) in the desert

-Everyone and their uncle carrying portable automatic weapons when these were exceedingly rare in real life compared to bolt action rifles

-Oversized airships that are bigger than something in a Final Fantasy game

-Fantasy Arab female feminist freedom fighter characters

3 • 
Avatar image for StingrayX5
StingrayX5

634

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 0

This is where Battlefield belongs...pure skill with no more lock on weapons.

4 • 
Avatar image for Rufus_the_rat
Rufus_the_rat

853

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@StingrayX5:

Except the game is loaded to the hilt with automatic weapons (rare in real life) which can be reloaded ultra fast...

I hope anyone championing skill in this game restricts themselves to Bolt-action rifle only servers. That's what I'll be playing.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for koopabros64
koopabros64

95

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

"The misconception is that it was all trenches and slow-paced combat--but this was a war of 'firsts.'"

It kind of was though. I'm not an expert, but from what I've read a lot of the bigger combat heavy situations took place early on in the war, and then people realized that the head on approach absolutely did not work anymore so it evolved into trench warfare. For example, the game features horse riding combatants, but those were only used early on by stubborn leaders who wanted to stick to the old ways of war. Horses were extremely ineffective as the battleground was filled with holes caused by artillery making movement impossible, and they'd just get moved down by guns. At that point a lot of it was people taking pot shots at each other while soldiers waited around hoping not to die from artillery, disease, poor resources etc. Every now and then someone would make it over to the enemy trenches and hell would break loose (Or they just get killed immediately) but not much else.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Rufus_the_rat
Rufus_the_rat

853

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@koopabros64:

At the end of the war as well, there was a German spring offensive followed by 100 days of allied victories with massive troop movements, open ground combat and encirclement as dramatic as blitzkrieg in WW2.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for CaptainKickass_
CaptainKickass_

26

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@koopabros64: Trench warfare was only prevalent on the western front and there was more than just the western front.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dnsfw_jamus
dnsfw_jamus

421

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

i'm guessing because they already did a future battlefield to mixed success, and they felt that the heart of battlefield was in the battles themselves, and this lent itself to more of an actual battle setting (even if most of the battles in world war 1 were done using trench warfare)

2 • 
Avatar image for skrilla99
skrilla99

438

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The future is so overdone these days. The past is where it's at man!

7 • 
Avatar image for conroy316
conroy316

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@skrilla99: You could have said the same about WWII games a few years back.

2 • 
Avatar image for openmind23
OpenMind23

748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By OpenMind23

"Battlefield 1: Why DICE Ignored Science-Fiction and Returned to the Past"

Because they are sensible and knew what fans / consumers wanted and would relate to :-)

10 • 
Avatar image for slypher9
Slypher9

947

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@openmind23: "Because they are sensible and knew what fans / consumers wanted and would relate to"... maybe but COD sales would say otherwise...

I just think they themselves know they aren't good at future stuff so they go back to there strengths, nothing wrong with that..

When it comes to games, money talks over fan service and BF is going back to what made it the most $$$$$...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jobs
jobs

155

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@slypher9 There is no heart and soul in futuristic shooters. Old school settings, where you have to actually face your enemy. Thats where the money is.:

Upvote • 
Avatar image for muzza93
muzza93

1182

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@slypher9: everyone was screaming that we're sick of the ultra modern shooter. Battlefield 1 is giving us what we are begging for and will be rewarded for listening with many dollars.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Stiler
Stiler

701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Also I wish this game was actually more like WW1 and less like Bf4/Battlefront.

In the past Dice took the settings and built games AROUND those settings. Bf1942/3, BF Vietnam, BF2, and BF:BC2 all played quite different from each other with things built around their settings and gameplay. They each felt "different" from one another.

This game however looks like instead of building the game from the ground up around the WW1 setting they instead tried EVERYTHING to shove BF4/Battlefront gameplay into it. Complete with instantly spawning airplanes (no runways/takeoff) and "Hero" units (Flamethrower soldier, etc).

There were so many things they could have done.

1. Engineer class, not only do they NOT have it anymore, but the engineers played a huge role in WW1. It was their job to set up barb wire, dismantle the enemies barb wire, set up outposts and other things. They could have EASILY made the engineer that was suited to this time period, allowed them to be the class to set up barb wire (to cut off enemy paths/provide choke points) and allow only engineers to dismantle it (instead of everyone with a bloody shovel...you try dismantling barb wire with a shovel, doesn't work...) Also could have allowed them to set up MG nest and things to provide mounted MG's for their team (with a limit of course).

2. Faction specific weapons/planes. Not only does it seem like the classes share weapons but also vehicles. There are plenty of faction specific things to go around (except tanks) but they just got rid of the whole thing. Makes each faction feel "the same."

3. Classes are not built toward the setting. The Bolt action rifle was the de-facto main weapon used in every-single-army of the era. Not only is the non-scoped bolt action not featured heavily, but it's not the default weapon for ANY class. The scouts get scoped versions (which you can take off the scope, but who'd do that?) So non-scoped bolt actions are likely going to be the LEAST used/seen weapon in the game, which is absurd. I'm not saying they should have made them all-class, but at least give us one class with the bloody primary weapon being a bolt action (non scoped), would have been perfect for an engineer class.

For those saying it wouldn't be fun, This is eixactly what BF1942 did....The "rifleman" had their countries rifle (Germany had Kar98, US had M1 garands) and the snipers had scoped versions of bolt actions and things. It worked perfectly fine.

I'm not saying the game should be realistic (come on, it's battlefield) but they surely could have made the game more "suited" for WW1 and built gameplay and systems AROUND the setting rather then shoving Bf4/Battlefront into a new skin.

5 • 
Avatar image for jagdedge124
jagdedge124

1194

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

Edited By jagdedge124

@Stiler:

Good stuff. Going to point 3, that's a big reason they went wrong. They can fix that though, in doing what they did in BF4, where every class got access to a Rifle (a Carbine i think). They seem to be saying the opposite this time, and i think that's a huge mistake.

I mean i understand you don't want the whole game being bolt actions, but all classes should have access to one. I mean, it is supposed to be WW1 after all lol. It doesn' tmean you have to use it. But to have be Sniper Class to get access to a bolt action in a WW1 game, is non sensical.

They can also add a "Historical Mode Team Deathmatch", where ALL you get is the non scoped Bolt Action if you want to play that way in all the Classes.

2 • 
Avatar image for Stiler
Stiler

701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Stiler

"The empires involved in World War I were massive, and in a way, each of them was greedy, trying to gain something more as the war continued."

What a load of bollocks....most of the countries were pulled into the war because of a domino affect of their alliances.

Some of them were simply acting in defense and lost so many lives trying to fight off people.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ethario
Ethario

196

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Why ? Because money thats fucking why.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for asneakypoptart
ASneakyPoptart

451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

It's a move that will definitely pay off financially for EA. I have friends that don't even play first person shooters that have heard of this game and will be getting it for the fact that it's set in WW1. I'm a huge BF fan and if they set it in the future I would have skipped it - which is saying something.

3 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5b83539e5acf8
deactivated-5b83539e5acf8

87

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@asneakypoptart: Me too. I would have skipped this game if they'd set in the future or in space like CoD.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for aegis_kleais
Aegis_Kleais

499

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 5

All EA has to do is offer the game through another digital distributor than itself, and I'll buy it. But til then, it's an Origin title, so I'll do without, just like the last 7+ titles I wanted that were Origin-only. Save the heavy handing for marketing efforts. Props to DICE, I'm sure it'll be a great game.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5b83539e5acf8
deactivated-5b83539e5acf8

87

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@aegis_kleais: I completely agree. They need to offer this game on Steam and GOG. My only major criticism of the game so far.

2 • 
Avatar image for heiven
heiven

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

"Battlefield 1: Why DICE Ignored Science-Fiction and Returned to the Past"

Probably because people are very sick of the COD where its all about sci-fi and so having a game in the ww1 era would make them come over from COD but still a ww1?Back in a day where ww2 games were all over the place there weren't much ww1 games because people didn't like them at all.But a 2142 game would probably change that but who knows.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jagdedge124
jagdedge124

1194

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

Edited By jagdedge124

I don't understand. This game has nothing to do with WW1. I would applaud them if they did. That's the "skin" of the game, but it's all Alternative History (all machine guns and the like). So it's not "science fiction", but fiction nonetheless. Verdun is the WW1 game. That comes out on the 30th.

4 • 
Avatar image for wretch1d
Wretch1d

977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 5

Edited By Wretch1d

@jagdedge124: I agree they have taken liberties but this game has everything to do with WW1 yes machine gun were only carried by troops at the very end and even then in the prototype stages, but also while there were metal armor there were no hulking human tanks out there either, they have taken the technology of WW1 across its entirety and made a BF game, which while not completely historically accurate should make for a fun game. better than a trench warfare sim, having your soldier get dysentery and picking flees out of your coat while sitting for weeks on end taking potshot's across the way doesnt sound very fun.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for scblais
scblais

128

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

@jagdedge124: Yeah, because their were no LMG's in WW1. http://www.historicalfirearms.info/post/119056574863/light-machine-guns-of-the-first-world-war

2 • 
Avatar image for jagdedge124
jagdedge124

1194

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

Edited By jagdedge124

@scblais:

Yeah, not really. They were prototypes many that didn't even see action, maybe some at the tail end of the war. It was most ALL bolt action rifles. It's just not a WW1 game.

I mean i was hyped for this game because of WW1, but now seeing the gameplay, i don't know why they just didn't go to WW2 or Modern, given the gameplay.

It just doesn''t make sense, and given this only has 13 comments (from what used to be about 400), the "hype train" for this game is coming to a close. Even EA had to lower their sales expectations.

It was a great idea, but i think they blew it. You can't have a WW1 game with hardly ANY bolt action rifles. That's just stupid. That's not to say it should ALL be, but i mean cmon lol.

2 • 
Avatar image for WhoIsTheDrizzle
WhoIsTheDrizzle

675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jagdedge124: So the hype train is coming to a close because of one sites comment section? Really? Not the hundred thousand+ people on twitch yesterday during EA's gamescom live event constantly calling for BF1 the whole time anything else was on? On top of the thousands upon thousands of "RIP CoD" seen everywhere? Just because you aren't hyped for it anymore doesn't mean everyone else isn't.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jagdedge124
jagdedge124

1194

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

Edited By jagdedge124

@WhoIsTheDrizzle:

IGN is pretty dead as well on this game. The announcement trailer there must have been several thousand out of all the threads. Now they're lucky to get a few hundred.

The stream you're talking about was ALL the big titles (FIFA, Madden etc), but again, there's always going to be people hyped up for a BF game (hopefully), but even EA, in an article here (or IGN, or both) claimed they're being more "conservative"on their sales estimates of this game.

Look, i was on the forefront here calling this game a "COD Killer" when it was first announced, but i'm not seeing that now, being the game effectively "is" COD in many aspects given the fast paced die/respawn machine gun gameplay of the modern/future genre's. That's where BF1 went wrong in my view.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for repetitiousv2
RepetitiousV2

74

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@jagdedge124: if any game was based purely on non-fiction, It'd be boring as hell.

It's a ww1 game, period.

These sites represent a minority of gamers, if comment sections were in any way a measure of hype or potential sales, then Xbox would have only a couple hundred sales.

Also Your list of what makes games COD is basically the core gameplay of any gunplay game out there. I'll assume space gunfights and EXO suits is more your style tho?

Upvote • 
  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2