The first person shooter genre is running out of fresh scenarios to send digital soldiers off into the threshes of a digital meat grinder, but according to IGN, Battlefield 5 is looking to take the series to the trench warfare of World War I. The evidence was found by an astute fan of the series, who noticed that a German gaming retailer dropped the ball and released some (potential) evidence of the next game’s setting:
The heyday of the FPS was deeply intertwined with the World War II setting, where Battlefield 1 and 2, as well as Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, and a plethora of shooters cut their teeth. After nearly perfecting their gameplay systems in WW2, it was an easy transition into modern warfare, all the way to Star Wars, as we see in Battlefront‘s roots in the most basic FPS gameplay. Even Battlefield: Hardline, in which Battlefield receives a fresh coat of paint and is a glorified game of cops and robbers, felt like the same old song and dance. However, this is going to be a major shift in how we know and play a mainstream shooter.
First off — WW1 was based around trench warfare. As we learned in history class, the front lines moved inches at a time, and when the whistles were blown, then and only then would soldiers leap from their trenches in an effort to gain ground on the enemy. Then it would be rinse, repeat, get trench foot, then die horribly as mustard gas was dropped on you.
Will Battlefield 5 be able to make this slow-paced warfare based on tactics and patience fun for modern gamers?
There’s only one game that has attempted to recreate the WW1 experience, and that’s Verdun, a fun little title that embraces the realism and un-sexy tactics of early 20th century warfare.
I’ve played quite a bit of Verdun and coming from someone who embraces hardcore, tactical shooters like Arma over CoD, I’m wondering if this is the right move for EA. If you trivialize the era in order to garner a playerbase that may or may not even like the tactics involved, it could be a lose/lose.