Battlefield 1
DICE has shunned the recent modern-warfare trajectory of its Battlefield series, winding the clock back to a rarely visited era: World War I. Because of the time- travel, the analogue technology of the period has necessitated some changes to the Battlefie
Before the Battlefield series existed – hell, before DICE as we know it existed – there was an ambitious title from Stockholm-based developer Refraction Games called Codename Eagle. This game explored an alternative timeline in 1917, where players could fight as infantry or make use of various vehicles (including planes) to achieve victory throughout the campaign or in multiplayer. Refraction Games was purchased by DICE shortly after the release of Codename Eagle, and the Refraction team was enlisted to help build what would ultimately become Battlefield 1942.
Lars Gustavsson worked on Codename Eagle, and has been involved with the Battlefield series since its inception. He’s now the design director on Battlefield 1, and I had the chance to pick his brain recently in Cologne during Gamescom. I also had a couple of hours of hands-on time with DICE’s next iteration in the Battlefield series, which time-travels away from the modern-warfare focus of the last eight years and returns to where Gustavsson started in a World War I setting.
BACK FROM THE FUTURE
“The biggest challenge, originally, was to root the concept,” said Gustavsson. “I’ve been around since the beginning, and it’s always been so packed with what we do next. Already, in 2008, there were talks around, ‘Should we do the Great War?’ Some guys in the studio did pitch after pitch, ‘Let’s do this,’ and constantly poking me. We were always so busy that it never really came around.”
It wasn’t just busywork that put a World War I-set Battlefield game on the backburner, though, as Gustavsson admitted during our interview. There was also hesitation from DICE and EA that a World War I game would work in a mainstream gaming climate that’s barely looked back from contemporary warfare since Infinity Ward’s Modern Warfare seemingly solidified the modern focus of the shooter space. But while Activision is taking Call of Duty to the futuristic stars, DICE is taking a gamble on throwing players in the muddy trenches of World War I and what was ultimately the birth of modern warfare.
Except it’s not just about muddy trenches. In fact, this was one of the preconceived notions about the First World War that Gustavsson hopes to address in Battlefield 1. “Me and many others, initially, had the preconception of: it’s only trenches. It’s only bolt-action rifles. It’s going to be slow and miserable,” admitted Gustavsson. “But they [the devs championing Battlefield 1] did a good job of pitching the whole idea of, ‘No, this was a global war.’ What we initially saw as challenges, we turned around and saw as possibilities.”
Naturally, it’s still a Battlefield game so there are a certain number of safe expectations when it comes to the gameplay pillars. Unlike Battlefield
Hardline –which was at its weakest when the cops-and-robbers fantasy clashed with the Battlefield gameplay pillars – World War I is the perfect stomping ground for a Battlefield game filled with infantry combat, vehicular battles, enhanced destructibility, and all-out war.
CONTROVERSIES OF WAR
But while it’s most definitely a Battlefield game out of the gate, DICE has made some interesting changes, some of which will likely prove to be controversial with certain players. For instance, citing “accessibility” as a motivating factor, Gustavsson described why DICE has flipped the Conquest ticket-bleed system on its head. Given that Conquest mode is a Battlefield mainstay, this is a big deal. But first, a Battlefield history lesson.
In every Battlefield game, to date, opposing teams have had equal but separate ticket counters that start at a particular value and reduce based on certain factors. Respawning would remove one of your team’s tickets, which is why the medic’s ability to revive was crucial to improving the odds of victory. Similarly, controlling a majority of points on the map would cause enemy tickets to bleed at a faster rate. In terms of the old Battlefield meta, this meant that kill-farming and ignoring objectives could be somewhat justified as a team-oriented tactic alongside players who prioritised the attacking and defending of objectives over their kill-to-death ratio (KDR).
In Battlefield 1, both team scores start at zero in Conquest and count upwards until one team hits a server-determined value, or the time limit expires, in which case the team with the highest score wins. By doing this, DICE has drawn a line in the sand, clearly prioritising map control over
kill-farming, and not just in terms of how you’re rewarded. DICE has done a good job in recent Battlefield titles of rewarding objective-focused players with more points than KDR obsessives, and while this trend continues in Battlefield 1, the new approach to Conquest’s ticketing makes it all the more apparent.
IT’S THE SIZE THAT COUNTS
To mix things up in Battlefield 1’s Conquest mode, at a certain point, the team with the lower score is gifted with the behemoth vehicle. For the E3-showcased Saint Quentin Scar map, this took the form of the monolith airship. For the Gamescom-revealed Sinai Desert map, the behemoth is an armoured train. Given the track layout on Sinai, it’s arguably an advantageous tactic to deliberately be behind on the score initially to access the behemoth, as it’s deadly in the right hands. The armoured train boasts multiple cannons and a path that affords it prime broadside firing opportunities for the three hotly contested points at the top of the map.
Because it’s an armoured train, small-arms fire is useless against it. Even a strafing run in a fighter plane won’t chip the paint. It means that the behemoth is more than a player-controlled replacement buzzword for Battlefield’s 4 cool-the-first-time-butless-impressive-each-subsequent-time ‘levolution’ moments, as behemoths actually have the potential to turn the tide of battle. It also requires the enemy team to reprioritise destroying the armoured train. The behemoth can not only decimate a team on Sinai, it has the potential to lay waste to the abundance of cover in the small town that branches out from the station at the top of the map.
Cover is arguably more important than ever before in Battlefield 1. Aside from improving your chances of survival, it also lets players safely close the distance to engage enemies at optimal weapon range. This is a noticeable focus in Battlefield 1, particularly reflected in how weapons are tied to specific classes. While this was true of older Battlefield games, to a certain extent, Battlefield 4 offered three separate weapon categories (shotguns, designated marksman rifles, and carbines) that existed outside of the class-specific arsenals, so any class could use them. Battlefield 1 does not offer this option.
In practical terms, this means Assault is a close-quarters class armed with SMGs or shotgun primary weapons. Support is the most familiar from previous Battlefield games, and utilises LMGs that are effective at close to medium range. The accuracy on LMGs starts off pretty terrible at medium range, but becomes more accurate the longer you fire. Medics are equipped with rifles that are most effective at medium range and okay beyond, while Scout class is the long-range slowfiring option. Even the pistols quickly lose accuracy and impact beyond short-range engagements.
CLASS DIVISIONS
“For this game, we wanted to make distinct [weapon] differences a bit more clear,” said Gustavsson. “The beauty of going here [to World War I], in one way, it’s a much more analogue war, where Battlefield 4 – I love it, it’s modernwarfare deluxe, with lock-on missiles and everything – but here it’s what you see is what you get. A weapon is a weapon, and it’s created for a purpose. We wanted to have less overlap, for more distinct roles and more distinct distances. That’s something we’re still tuning based on community feedback but, as a whole, classes should have a purpose, not melt into one mega-class, and that’s been the general mindset for everything.”
That said, Gustavsson did hint at the possibility that DICE is open to changing the class-specific weaponry after launch if it isn’t positively received. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a fantastic addition. It means I didn’t encounter an obviously dominant class, with a particular weapon type that worked at all ranges which, once again, reinforces Battlefield 1’s emphasis on teamwork. It also meant that KDRs were a lot flatter, which really showcases how important it is to help and rely upon your teammates based on your or their class specialities, be it equipment or primary weapon range.
Additionally, it meant that it was easier to tell what category
of weapon you were coming up against when you spotted an enemy class, which let you know whether you should engage immediately, close the distance, or avoid combat. This logic carries over more so to the distinct elite classes that can be collected from certain points of the map, with each one placed in an area where it has the most benefit, and thus motivation, for capturing and holding a particular zone.
LESSONS FROM THE BATTLEFRONT
There are three elite classes in Battlefield 1: the Flametrooper, the Sentry, and the Tank Hunter. Like Star Wars Battlefront, these hero-like pick-ups transform the regular player into a class with a distinct ability and visage. For the Sentry, whose pick-up on the Sinai Desert map is located in a confined mountain crevice, the player is transformed into an armoured hulk who can soak up plenty of damage, and dish it out in equal measures courtesy of a watercooled machine gun.
The Tank Hunter is located on the most distant point of the map, equidistant from each respective spawn area. It’s so out of the way that it encourages vehicles to cap it because of the long slog required to get there on foot. Encouraging vehicles to retake this point is the perfect implicit ruse for the Tank Hunter wielding an M1918 Tankgewehr – an anti-tank rifle whose power is evident in its adult-height length. This rifle is purposebuilt for laying waste to all manner of Battlefield 1 tanks in short fashion.
As for the Flame trooper pick-up, it’s located amid the trio of close-together points at the top of the map, which means the flamethrower can be put to deadly efficient use inside the many buildings that populate the region. The Sentry, in particular, is hard to take down, and his machine gun follows the same principal of prolonged-firing accuracy as the Support class’s LMG. The Tank Hunter is particularly squishy, and Gustavsson offered the skinny on how to play as, and take care of, the pesky Flame trooper.
“For the Flame trooper, it is fully fitted fire-protective gear, with a very powerful flamethrower,” said Gustavsson. “It’s basically the back that is weak, so it’s about avoiding the flames and getting around behind [the Flametrooper]. When you get caught in the flames, go prone, crawl away from the fire, and you’re more likely to survive.”
GETAWAY DRIVERS
On top of the core and elite classes, there are three vehicle-specific classes: the Pilot, the Tanker and – if you’re willing to accept a horse as a vehicle – the Cavalry class. Like the elites, these vehicular classes involve a transformation in terms of loadout. The Pilot and Tanker can repair their respective vehicles, for instance, but at the expense of mobility. For the Cavalry, the primary weapon is a hard-hitting bolt-action rifle, and the secondary a deadly sabre that can one-slash kill enemies with the right timing during a satisfying ride-by slaying.
There’s also a certain degree of customisation for vehicles that lets you switch vehicle configurations to meet the changing needs of your team. “We wanted [Tanker and Pilot] as a dedicated role to fulfil the fantasy, [and] allow you to customise the vehicle,” explained Gustavsson. “Basically, you get this vehicle selection [screen], [then]
you have reserved your vehicle. You can now customise it, and then go into battle. ‘Do I want a team-play focused vehicle? Do I want an anti-tank focused vehicle?’ all in all, to define different roles on the battlefield.
“We also give you the freedom of then choosing. In the old games, we said, ‘ You will have a Tiger tank. You will have an Abrams.’ This time around you choose: ‘Do I want the light, the medium, the heavy, or even the armoured truck?’ We shouldn’t tell Battlefield players how to play; it’s a sandbox, after all.”
Outside of initially spawning inside them, vehicles now include entry animations, which offers keen-eyed players a chance to kill players entering stationary vehicles, and provides a risk for people who continuously exit and re-enter vehicles. But that does beg the question as to why an exit animation wasn’t added.
“The enter animation is something we’ve wanted to do for many years,” said Gustavsson. “Since we’re very much focused on a much more physical experience [in Battlefield 1] – you interact with doors, you can barge through doors when you’re sprinting, the melee combat – this became a part of it, as well, to be physically connected to the vehicles. At speed and when the vehicle is blowing up, we felt for the most of it, [players] being stuck, not having that hasty exit, wouldn’t be the right thing to do.”
THE LAST CRUSADE
Because vehicles are a big part of any Battlefield game, DICE has tweaked infantry so that on-foot players can have a hope against lumbering armoured beasts. In the past, classes with fixed anti-vehicle countermeasures were required to attack vehicles, while everyone else had to avoid armoured targets.
In Battlefield 1, every core class has anti-tank potentiality with, at the very least, the option for equipping antitank grenades. Assault and Scout (now upgraded with a limited selection of anti-tank rifle rounds) classes are best suited to anti-armour roles, but a squad of mixed classes all wielding anti-tank grenades can make short work of even the most intimidating heavy tanks.
On top of this, the vehicle logic has changed, too. The heaviest tanks are deadly but, at least in the tank I drove, the driver plays more of a supporting role than in previous Battlefield games. As the driver, I had access to a machine gun, but was utterly reliant on my flanking side cannons (controlled by players) to take out armoured threats. And the difference between tank classes is quite drastic, particularly when it comes to cannon firing arcs: for the heavy tanks, it’s a fast, flat and longrange trajectory; in a light tank, it’s a slower, parabolic and short-range arc.
Oh, and if you’re planning on living out some sort of Indy-versus-tank fantasy, you can do that, too.
“You spawn in with full cavalry gear, slightly armour protected, on your horse, which is a speedy vehicle – fragile, I would argue, very beautiful – and it’s quite manoeuvrable on the battlefield,” explained Gustavsson. “You can [gallop] to become less of a target, as you lie down on the horse. [You can] trample down enemies. You can charge them with your sabre. We wanted to make [the horse] smart, so it will try to avoid obstacles and jump over obstacles, and then also equip you with team-play gadgets like ammo and medical pouches.
“When you see a tank, you can go at it with your [anti-tank] grenades, but you’d better circle it and keep speed up since you are on a horse and they are in armour. It’s yet another of those unique experiences that this era allows us to bring in there, and it’s really the old world meets the new.”
Ace pilots, too, have received a much-needed nerf, thanks mostly to the era. Whether flying in an attack plane, fighter or bomber, the aircraft of the time are significantly slower and less maneuverable than their modern counterparts, which means they’re more vulnerable to ground attacks. It’s a welcome touch, which means an entire team can band together against a particularly dangerous ground-strafing pilot and shoot them down with their basic infantry weapons, without having to worry about switching to an Engineer with an anti-air launcher, as you did in Battlefield 4 (which, obviously, isn’t an option in a World War I setting).
While still undeniably a full-fledged member of the Battlefield franchise, Battlefield 1’s many changes amount to a game that presents itself quite different to its older, modern-warfare siblings. The tweaks to the core gameplay formula afforded by the era have helped to shake things up and keep the series feeling fresh. For this particular long-warring Battlefield fan, it’s a bold and innovative step in the right direction, and I can’t wait to go over the top again when the game releases in October.