Top
830°

Battlefield 1 Weapon Classes Revealed

Battlefield 1’s World War I setting is awesome: It’s just the kind of change-up we need when we’re down with the Sci-fi shooter blues. But considering that the game’s set one hundred years ago, you might be wondering just how well the multiplayer weapon loadouts will work out. Well, fear no more.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
JoeMcCallister1350d ago

curious to know how weapon customization will pan out - being that loadouts are on a per-weapon basis and the customization is "more focused" I wonder if it's going to be focused as in limited, or focused as in more detailed.

Fist4achin1349d ago

I wondered that too since weapon s in WW1 were limited.

Kleptic1349d ago (Edited 1349d ago )

6 weapon classes doesn't point to a 'focused' anything, imo...They're notorious for weapon balance issues, and having way too many options in general (that aren't well realized)...WWI should be a rifle, automatic rifle, or more sinister mustard gas/flamethrower type options...there were not any form of traditional LMG's back then...they had some automatic rifles like the Lewis, and some nasty machine guns like the M1917 (water cooled, and in NO WAY a weapon that a single person carried around)...but typical infantry for all armies involved were basic rifles...

sullynathan1349d ago

getting disagrees because this is N4G. Look at how no one could refute your points but just hit downvote? They probably think you're a COD fanboy for criticizing DICE.

Kleptic1349d ago

ha oh well. I'm not worried about where others think my preferences come from...I'm worried about whether or not EA/Dice learned anything from BF3 and BF4...so far it appears doubtful.

kneon1349d ago

Having held an M1917 and M1919 I can confirm you aren't going to be running far carrying one of these 30lb behemoths. But of course that didn't seem to bother the COD developers.

All I need is a pistol and a rifle(scoped), you can keep the rest.

Kleptic1349d ago

^agreed...M1917's were like 50 lbs empty, over 100 w/ water and ammo...usually manned by a crew of 4 or 5...

Worried this game will give one to 32 players per side....

Utalkin2me1348d ago

@kneon

Some are in better shape then others. You mean you, yourself.

kneon1348d ago

@Utalkin2me

I don't care what shape you're in, these weapons just aren't suitable to use as a run and gun weapon as they are too often used in video games. They are large, heavy, unwieldy and have a lot of recoil. There is a reason they are mounted on a bipod/tripod, it's the only way to really use them with any effectiveness.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1348d ago
13lackDeath1348d ago (Edited 1348d ago )

Most likely "More Focused" and "More Detailed" refers to:

-Multiple Iron Sights
-Trigger Assembly
-Wood Type Used for the Stock or Rifle Receiver
-Ammunition Types
-Foliage Camo for the rifles
-Rifle cloth Wraps
-Flash hiders
-Barrel types/length
-Limited scopes
-Custom Grenades/Explosives
-Better Water Cooling for LMG's Upgrades

Basically very minor upgrades for the weapons, nothing serious. It is WWI after all. Although DICE can still make it fun and throw some modern day "improvisation" modifications that could have been made during the time period with the parts and tools at hand, but were not actually used historically.

-Highly Customizable Melee Weapons will most likely be a thing...Since the game is focusing a lot on Melee.

Just play "Heroes and Generals" and you'll see what DICE and EA will most likely do for BF1 in terms of weapons customization. (Yes, I know Heroes and Generals is set during WWII, not WWI).

JoeMcCallister1348d ago

Damn! Well thought out and solid reply - I'd actually welcome a lot of this stuff, part of me hopes that they also have their last DLC pack be just bonkers steampunk stuff that totally breaks it because by the time that comes out they're typically ramping up for whatever the next year's release will be anyway right?

1349d ago Replies(1)
detroitmademe1349d ago

We're good as long as the setting doesn't hold the gameplay back. Don't focus to much on being historically accurate. Remember we're playing a game first

Zorkaz1349d ago

Exactly. I mean in the end, no game is going to ressemble anything like real war in the first place. Soldiers documented the waiting factor being one of the worse things in the trenches, only to be broken up by short bursts of gunfire, bombs, and mustard gas. It was truly miserable, and that's not what they're gonna convey. I think the game's fine for people who understand how horrible it must have been, but it's gonna friekin' get on my nerves if I start hearing kids saying 'Hey wouldn't it be cool if I was in WW1' ...

sullynathan1349d ago

then there is no point in going to a WW1 setting just to ignore it from a gameplay perspective.

sullynathan1348d ago

Reason why the darkness is mediocre

DarthZoolu1349d ago

This is the dumbest idea ever this will be the first Battlefield game that I don't own.

InTheZoneAC1349d ago (Edited 1349d ago )

support weapon: pew
engineer weapon: pew
assault weapon: pew

upgrades include painting on camo during a match, adding a knife to the end of the barrel, cutting the iron sight so it's more open, larger pouches to carry more ammo. I'm also assuming(not trying to insult or offend, seriously) that if you want to play as a black character it will come from unlocking a gold battlepack and it will be an ultra rare drop.

you know the weapons are limited when a flamethrower becomes a viable option...

Show all comments (36)
The story is too old to be commented.