Toy Soldiers is criminally underrated. Not only is it a great and more player-active interpretation of the tower defence genre, looking past the "toy diorama" asthetics it's actually a very stirring depiction of the western front. Waves of "creeps" being shelled and machine gunned over and over, maps that start out as farm land gradually become stripped of greenery and buildings from the artillery fire, levels with previous century forts riddled with trenches and bolt-holes... The game really presents a lot of aspects of the Western Front in a grim yet respectfully honest light. It's now one of my favorite games of all time (along with the sequel) yet when I saw the first trailers initially I thought it was a horrible and tacky misuse of the setting.
Toy Soldiers really surprised me in multiple ways. In a certain respect, it can be a bit of a power fantasy, especially if you yourself are controlling your arty and machine guns to rip the enemy to pieces, especially when you get very good at doing that. But that power fantasy is a direct interpretation and extension of...well, what WW1 was actually like. Artillery's incredibly deadly (like the actual thing), the environments are shredded and easily further shredded, there's a lot of troops around all at once, it's very much an endless slog of charging, dying, and people getting messed up in one place repetitively. Obviously, game mechanics are at play to try and spice things up, but the actual nature of WW1 exists here, and, indeed, for the style of game it is...compliments it.
Necrovision is fucking amazing. The moment where you kill an evil scientist in a giant spider robot and he "goes you may have defeated me, but can you defeat THE VAMPIRES AND DEMONS?" and then you get a robo hand with a vampire living inside of it is probably the greatest moment in any video game.
Right thanks, and same here, honestly even if ww1 video games aren't coming out as much as maybe ww2 was _(For a while at least)_, I'm pretty glad that more and more ww1 content is getting put up on youtube. If BF1 does well maybe other companies will hop on that bandwagon.
Yeah, it was neat. A flash troop management game right? I think people keep smashing their heads trying to make a WW1 FPS when the western front works better as a tactical or strategy game
How to make being a machinegunner fun in a WW1 multiplayer FPS? Take a page out of Titanfall's book and introduce NPCs. Let the NPCs be the guys who suffer massive losses as they try to rush across a field with little cover, while the players are the ones given special weapons and equipment. Make the game about trying to get as many NPCs across as possible/prevent the opposing side's NPCs from getting across.
@@10gamer64 Then you're running into two issues: getting matches with 100s on 100s of players, which very few games can, particularly a few months after release, and the fact that being part of a horde of players who just gets massacred by a single machine gunner is not very fun.
I want to be into Viky 2 soooo much but I just can't. I get like, belligerent every time I boot it up. I have already spent hundreds of hours learning 3 other Paradox games and I simply don't want to do it again. Danm you Paradox! Why is you so difficult and awesome at the same time?!
Arma does pretty well. So does Red Orchestra. Battlefields brand name is associated with immersion as well. I don't think it'd be a flop if it angled at being closer to Red Orchestra than Call of Duty.
It looked authentic enough to sell the setting to you, making a WW1 game about Africans running around with SMGs is pretty far of the mark. Don't be glib.
***** is what the propaganda at the time told the troops. What do you think would've happened if we'd never gone to war with Hitler that wouldn't happen if we never go to war with Putin?
+Luciferum Doesn't matter. Were those men who went out into the muddy fields to die nothing more than the toys of the rich and political military class or were they not? Their sacrifice is to be respected, but let's not deny they were still the tools of their superiors.
***** read hitler's second book. the one where he outlined his foreign policy. he was never going to attack the UK. from a UK perspective, it was a bad move to attack him over Poland. He was never going to attack the jews (he was just going to expel them from his land) until WW2 happened. He's no worse than Putin, i'm pretty sure Putin would do worse if we went to war with him. The war was the cause of most of the reasons for the war!
Parabellum Mod, it’s really good, but it has its issues. It’s the only mount and blade game I have ever seen with tanks,airplanes and trucks. The artillery is also invisible and it can reak havoc. The sound design is awesome too with all the booms and cracks you would find in WW1. The raiding is also a full on trench warfare fight over a massive map, it’s really unique and fun. There are a couple issues though. If you don’t have any anti-tank or tanks of your own, it’s impossible to win a fight with tanks or trucks, even if your army is massive and has killed literally everything else. It’s quite annoying being 180 strong and getting chased down by a lord/general with 6 guys just because they killed all your anti-tank. The other big issue is that the AI will not take cities whatsoeve making features like the freelancer mod entirely pointless. Finally You might have to go to the Pirate Bay to find it, since the mod got taken down due to copyright from battlefield 1.
I object to putting Deadly Premonition with David Cage's games or Sonic 2006. Deadly Premonition requires no ironic detachment to enjoy it. It is legitimately a good game. It's clunky, but it's got it where it counts. It is, at the very least, nothing like the hot garbage that is Quantic Dream's oeuvre.
Deadly premonition is a great game but developed by access games. +Luciferum I don't really think a game needs to excel in everything to be a good game. Games are literally just there to invoke an experience, if the experience is positive then they have succeeded. DP excels at story(and some other things) so much that it transcends its flaws.
I would add in Victoria II. It doesn't cover the WW1 era specifically either, but it does represent the grinding, defense-heavy strategy in WW1 on the Western Front through its Great War system that dynamically creates world wars through interlocking systems of alliance networks. Also it has the rise of industrialization, mass migration, and the rise of mass political movements, including socialism, communism, and fascism!
The problem with WW1 as the setting for a game is not that the setting is limited, it's the view of it is narrow. I'm pretty sure that every WW1 game in existence is overridingly obsessed with the Western Front... and to be fair, a lot of other media is, too. But WW1 had other theatres - big battleships, Alpine avalanches, submarine stalking, colonial skirmishing across Africa, even the European Eastern Front had more fluidity and mobility. Even if you made the same regular old FPS but put the character in Tannenberg rather than Verdun it'd be so much more refreshing.
There is a pretty great channel called The Great War that covers WW1 week by week. Been binge watching it lately and anybody that thought WW1 is bad setting is out of their mind.
Nathan Cassidy It’s a bad setting to do realistically if you wanna sell copies, if bf1 like 3 people in your team would have auto weapons and you would sit in a trench waiting until you get hit by artillery or until your commander orders you to charge into the field of rifle and machine gun fire
@@chadthundercock4806 not a bad setting if set on the Eastern front, the trenches were mainly the western front trend. While yes, trenches were on the east, the combat was more sporadic and more like what we think of WW2.
Verdun, to me, remains the best WW1 game. While it's relatively fast paced, it's ultimately futile. You can spend an entire match fighting for one sector. When you die, there's a chance your character will still stay there, writhing in pain, screaming. You can come across models that have holes blown out of their faces, dead horses from past cavalry charges. Gas blinds you, shells slam into the ground around you. Yet, it's still a fun game. It's a great game, and Tannenberg is just as good.
DICE could give 2 fucks about the actual war their game is based on. Its just another setting for them to have people run around shooting each other. Soon their going to run out of settings and everyone will be booing them just like Modern Warfare once they reveal "Battlefield Space"
It's more the publishers holding back innovation than the players. Battlefield 1 was rejected by the boardroom when it was first pitched, for reasons including, "we're not sure gamers even know what World War One is".
Old video I know, but it's cool to watch this after experiencing WW1 survival horror with Amnesia The Bunker. Not quite trench warfare survival horror but it really shows the potential of this setting for horror.
Not only realistic but also providing that same old school instant action at the press of a button with built in mouse look and a really nice looking visuals. Sadly campaigns are very bare bones but you can get what you want out of quick mission stuff.
***** There is a Pat Williams Campaign Generator that tries to turn it into the REd Baron 2 Style click a random PT1 RoF video on my channel and you will see it. Its really giving the game the depth it should have had in the first place
THanks for including Verdun, it's a rough gem but a solid WWI FPS that takes inspiration from the bleak trench warfare for its gameplay. Some of the levels are so bombed-out and muddy they don't even look set on earth
The Archuduke at the time ww2 would seem like good guys vs bad guys but now if you look at it it was actually bad guys vs worse guys. The atomic bombings, allied fire bombings, US internment camps, US payment to war criminals, allied rapes and murders, and soviet rapes and murders show that no side was good. The US caused the war with japan for no reason and the German invasion of Poland was a combined operation but we didn’t see the brits declaring war on the USSR just Germany.
@@maxs1910 WW1 even had easier politics than WW2. Germany wanted to become a global empire, Austria-Hungary wanted to eat up the balkans because Ottomans were weak, Russia didn't want the Balkans eaten, and France and Russia were friends. One guy died, and Austria-Hungary was too slow to take this opportunity to take Serbia, starting WW1. Albeit this is incredibly oversimplified, this was the basic political background of WW1
On a technicality...yeah, you're absolutely right. But three powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) viciously invading and butchering people on their power conquests stirring up your desire to kick their asses makes for a "more fun" story to tell than... ...You know... Sit in a trench and hope chances roll your way. And even the Eastern Front of WW1 (it did actually exist) wasn't a whole lot more fun. It's just slightly fewer trenches and slightly less death.
And then the industry decides to make games set in the vietnam war instead because that’s definitely less politically complex and has easy defined bad guys than ww1
I was excited about Battlefield 1, but when I saw gameplay for it, I said to myself: "I've already played this. Ten years ago. And they were all WW2 multiplayer shooters." That being said, Necrovision is fucking incredible. Honestly one of my favorite Painkiller-esque games. Awesome shit.
Old Ace of Spades (now known as Open Spades) is incredibly fun. My only gripe with it is that it's kinda hard to do the defensive bastions of WW1 considering all the blocks have the same strength. Really wish that could've been finished.
George, play NecrovisioN Lost Squad. Its more of the same, but they realized how dumb the orginal game was, and made it dumber. The first level has you playing the German guy who created the zombies beatdown a bunch of undead with a club at a train station. The end of that level has you flying a biplane shooting a dragon. And some demons.
Both NecroVision games are on Steam. I've played them, they're alright. They kinda feel like big budget B-rate games, you know like Lifeforce was a big budget B-rate movie. They're more janky than the likes of the Metro series, but then again much more bizarre.
I've got about 20 some hours in the BF1 alpha and I can tell you that, despite historical exaggerations, the game is extremely fun. And that is ALL that matters when it comes down to it.
Whoever said, that the first world war does not have enough content to do a fun game has certainly never looked beyond the western front. (And even there is enough content)
That last suggestion about the grand strategy about preventing ww2 is goddamn genius. It flips the entire genre on its head, prioritizing restraint over outright conquest.
Honestly, I don't have a problem with WW1 games - Verdun, while still very much a twitch shooter, is along the lines of what I think a good WW1 game could be. If a video game is going to try doing an accurate take on WW1 (which Battlefield One seemed like it was doing at first), I think making it more tactical and very, VERY team based (as in, pretty much completely reliant on your teammates) could actually make for a fun game. Imagine going through the trenches with a very slow and inaccurate gun, knowing that at any moment in time around a corner the enemy team could be just about to bump into your team. Of course, that would make playing with a general audience a very bad idea (see: the majority of the Overwatch community, from what I've heard at least), so I think this type of game would wind up being limited to maybe a corner of Steam that isn't accessed outside of summer sales, but nonetheless I don't see any problem with it being a game itself. None of this is to say that there can't be an unrealistic yet good WW1 game - however, I don't see any point in making a WW2 game, putting a WW1 skin on it and then calling it a WW1 game.
People dont want quality they want edge, and memes. Video games themselves are great examples of how what people, the majority, say they want and what they actually want are two different things.
Sometimes I think about making a RUclips channel, figuring I am fairly knowledgeable on video games and have a passion for video making. Then I watch your videos, with your dedication and quality. I quickly extinguish my plans.
Now you really got me wishing for a survival horror set in the trenches of the first world war, with supernatural elements (preferably a lovecraftian horror, somehow).
Bloodborne and Ammnesia got close, but it's hard to make going insane from incomprehensible cosmic beings fun, ya know? Don't get me wrong, I'd like it too, but they'd have to really nail that to make it work.
Stanley Bloodborne got some of it right but being a combat based game it was never going to be able to do more than pay lip service. A big part of Lovecraft is being powerless. But I hear you, it is hard to translate into a game.
Joshua John Miles Smith And its hard to make a game about being mostly powerless without turning it into a walking simulator/run from the monster in the dark simulator. If it is possible, I have never seen anything like it.
Now these are the kind of compilation videos I like. Your videos like sonic or dark souls are fantastic but this is more varied so it's much more well paced. Amazing as usual!
As always, a very well thought out and executed video. It's nice to have a reviewer who isn't influenced by their sponsor, or affiliated website, give an honest critique of games. That's why I subscribe!
The real reason why there aren't many WW1 games is a bit simpler. Most big video games are made by or made for americans and the United States didn't play a big role in the Great War. I'm not saying it as a negative, but people tend to empathize more with their contrymen.
The US played a huge role in WW1 2 million men in the AEF fought in the hundred days offensives and played a decisive role in defeating the CP a game could be made about US troops in WWI
Well considering that the Entente was on the verge of bankruptcy and Britain and France were basically damn near tapped out of manpower and the arrival of the AEF freed up Allied forces just in time for the St'Micheals offensives well no US entry Britain loses its collateral and its a coin toss whether the entente can scrape up enough men together to halt the Spring offensives if they don't the German army breaks into the Ententes rear lines and then rushes to paris and boom gameover
For how much I like this video, I realized it might have been 1 minute long. If the goal was demonstrating that "WWI is difficult to game" is an excuse, you coul have just said "Indie made controlling papers interesting! Who are you trying to fool?". Good job, George
17:24 "Why has no one made a survival horror game in the trenches yet?" You'll have to settle for Lovecraftian horror in Call of Cthulhu: The Wasted Land.
If you want a World War I FPS that not only looks beautiful like Battlefield 1 but also keeps a realistic and hardcore experience like Verdun, try out Beyond the Wire. It's far from finished and certainly is in dire need of optimization for weaker hardware, but give it a year or two and it very well could beat Battlefield 1, Verdun, and every other World War I game out there.
I can't believe you had footage of Der Unbekannte Krieg but didn't talk about it at all, it's such a hilariously amazing concept and a wonderful experience, especially if you don't know what you're in for beforehand.
Me and my friend made this mini game in Verdun where we would see how long we could survive by sticking our heads out of the trenches. I won with 4 seconds.
I never got the argument that a WW1 game would be boring. People who play it (at least for the majority) are gamers, who specifically look for ways to break the game. What I mean by that is that the developers might intend for the game to include one side defending while the other charges at them like in history, but there will always be that one group of beta-testers who find a way to turn that meta on it's head. (in a good way). I would love to see a gritty and realistic WW1 game, just to see how modern-day people would break it.
I've put probably over a thousand hours into Darkest Hour, ww1, ww2, and the fallout mod (which is excellently made and redesigns the whole map as well as incorporates loads of unique events). Not to mention the cold war scenarios included in the World in Flames+All in One mod. To make darkest hour shine you really need to get a lot of good mods for it. But I have to say if I had to recommend someone a ww1 strategy game that would be it. I just finished up a WW1 save I played into 1960 where I went U.S., mobilized, declared war on all sides, and took over the planet. The gameplay, unit simulation, tech trees (especially in world in flames), and other gameplay variables are just that good. Amphibious assaults, supply, breakthrough, and other factors feel more satisfying in DH than any other grand strategy game I've played.
in terms of shooters that amazing level in the darkness 1 has always stood out to me, the inescapable bleakness that part of the game holds is unmatched, its soo fucking hark and i love how the games representation of hell was WW1 really awesome and unsettling
A WWI survival horror is well overdue. Set it on the Western Front, have the player take control of a different soldier every time they die, make deaths incredibly common. Also, it's worth checking out The Darkness for a WWI-inspired section of gameplay. About a quarter of the game is set in a Western Front hell world where enemies infinitely respawn and you're dropped in the middle of a vast No Man's Land, looking blindly for your next objective. Very atmospheric.
I think the best WWI FPS game would be one where you get to build the trenches. The goal would be to hide your assets and destroy the enemy's to win. The location of armories, hospitals, barracks, mess halls, and artillery would be extremely important. Even though there would be occasional infantry fights, the vast majority of the fighting would be artillery vs. artillery, as if it were a game of Battleship.
Minecraft made diggging and building fun. WW1 was all about digging. Rainbow6 Seige has a building phase before attacking. WW1 was all about preping for the attack. Why cant we put some Minecraft in Verdun? Span the matches over an hour long lession of frequent attack, build, defend, build, rounds. Have a in match progression unlocking system so games start with two teams of riffleman fighting over hastly dug trenches. then greadulaly teams work to unlock units so by the end of the match theres tanks and cannons.
verdun is the perfect ww1 game. limited ratios of machineguns due to the squad system. the rifles do damage, the pistols can also kill in 1 or 2 shots close up. mp18's are only for the germans and only on one squad type. even back when it was a flash game that you could load up for free in a web browser it was awesome. i just hope it eventually changes the engine which is the major downfall
One thing I always hated about WWI games is that they really don't even mention anything but the Western Front. No Africa, Palestine, the Caucasus, the Eastern Front, the Balkans, all of those are thoroughly unrepresented, except of course in DH, but DH is in itself a masterpiece in my opinion. That said, the modders that created it did start off from a game that's a damn fine base, Hearts of Iron II, which meant that a lot of their time simply went more into game balance and AI coding.
the only bad thing about DH is I can't declare war on germany before the munich agreement ( I just want to sim what would happen if the UK pursed a firmer stance against hitler)
I also find it fun sitting in a single position with a rifle that may or may not get me killed while artillery guns zero in on my position. Yes what a fun and interesting game I hope they make another bleak and boring game with only a couple fun parts every so often. 10/10 I love being pinned down in a solitary position with the only real challenge being trench foot and the Spanish flu.
Loved the video, despite wanting to murder small children whenever you said Verdun. But hey, I'm French, so I'm a hopeless pedant by nature. One thing you made me think about: survival-horror would indeed be a fantastic medium to have a game not only set in WW1, but about WW1 (as in, reproducing the core emotional impact through gameplay features). The key features of WW1 experience were privation, hardship, inhumanity and, I think above all, a sense of "unheimlich"/uncanny. It's the progressive transformation of the countryside, the cities, etc., from familiar places into a living hell, full of mud, corpses, diseases, fire and brimstone. It's soldiers in bright uniforms accompanied by a marching band getting annihilated by machine guns and artillery. It's modern society pushed to its extreme, it's the point when modernity went from the "Electricity Fairy" and the excitement of planes and cars into a whole new nightmarish plane of existence. It's also the point where technology went from an enabler ("look at all the new possibilities progress opened up!") to something oppressive and limiting (the trench where you can sometimes barely stand in fear of sniper and artillery fire, the Western frontlines barely moving in a world that was previously all about maneuvering, etc.). This is where a survival-horror can build gameplay mechanics: around scarcity, privation (both of resources and freedom), fatality (artillery barrages, gas attacks, machine gun fire). The progressive transformation of the landscape is a great source of horror, the long dull moments and the frenzy of the charges and defenses provide a unique kind of pacing (far better than night/day in sandbox/zombie survival games), and the grotesque aesthetics of the trenches (or places like the frozen hell of the Carpathian winter offensives) that movies and books have rendered so well isn't out of reach of tasteful enough game designers. Space and time always seem crucial in design to me, and WW1 seems to open up a whole new design space where survival-horror seems right at home. WW1 as the "death of heroism" is also a boon for survival horror: the same core tension around the place of the protagonist, about individual agency, etc. This is also where a survival horror could explore playing with several characters (say, a bunch of friends from the same village, brothers or just a squad) beyond the kind of obligatory AI sidekicks or co-op buddy thing RE and so forth have played with. Sorry, that was kind of a long-winded restatement of quite banal stuff, but I was quite disappointed with how Battlefield One is turning out, and RUclips is kind enough to abbreviate walls of text like mine. Edit: Line breaks and all, because Jesus Christ that was bad.
The most fun i've ever had with a ww1 setting game was the ww1 levels of Darkest Of Days. Honestly, that game had some interesting ideas behind it. The whole concept of being a soldier who would travel through time to essential points in human belical history to change them in order to prevent the destruction of mankind was kinda cool, plus having some enemies who were important in the future and who couldn't be killed was also a pretty nice touch.
why isn't when I watch these videos it always feels like George is trying to convince himself he's having more fun then he clearly is? a man can only deadpan for so long before you start to worry about him being near sharp objects.
"Simulators felt like fantasy fulfillers than work emulators." Christ, I couldn't have said that better myself. Simulation enthusiasts are an obnoxious bunch. But also you forgot about Rise of Flight is the most modern WWI flight simulator on the market right now.
About 40% of the Darkness 1 took place during WW1. As everytime Jackie Estacado died he had to trek through hell, being represented as WW1, whilst his body was resurecting in the real world. I particularly enjoyed talking to a guy with both his legs, both his arms, and both his eyes missing and seeing the absurd amount of dialogue shoved into a side character like that.
where I live in Ottawa Canada, we say w-awn-t-awn. everybody does. When it comes to languages and accents there truly isn't a right or wrong. Just like how ppl on the uk don't drive on the wrong side of the ride. We drive in the right, while they drive on the wrong side of the road. This applies especially to my spelling. We spell: colour cheques doughnuts etc it aint wrong. its regional. get the point?
Well yeah, but then you'd be playing as "the bad guys", aka Germany and Austria. Which would be interesting, but most developers would not dare going into that direction.
I was put off ever so slightly when I saw all those automatic weapons in bf1 also, it's just going to be like putting a bolt action in an arena against twenty m16 users, again, and not to mention historically inaccurate.
Well, there were plenty of automatic weapons, but it's the semi-automatic weapons I have a problem with tbh. There is only one Support class prototype weapon (Huot automatic), but there are so many medic ones, (1906, General Liu, Howell, Cei-Rigotti) that it just feels so upsetting.
petrallen light machine guns were employed years before WW1 during the russo-japanese war, there were alot more automatic weapons than you think. Only reason they werent deployed as often is because they had no use for them initially which as we all know changed by WW2
True, with a long list of machine-guns such as: Chauchat 1913 (Used by French fighter pilots) Benet-Mercie (Standard-issue for Americans and Brits, and fortification gun for French) Lewis 1914 (British LMG, eventually used in 1918 by Americans) Chauchat 1915 (Standard-issue French LMG, as well as used by the Russians, Italians, Americans, and everywhere else around the world.) Madsen 1902 (Not standard issue for any country, but was used in quantities by Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, and Russia as backup LMG's.) MG-08/15 (German, Austrian, and Turkish beast of an LMG, the most common used by the Central Powers.) MG-15na (Germany and Austria deployed this smaller, lightweight but still effective LMG.) Perino 1910 (Italian heavy machine-gun which was made smaller in 1910 in order to be used for Italian assault troops in limited numbers) MG-14/17 (Infantry version of an aircraft machine gun used a little bit, even comes with a scope.) Browning 1917 (While normally an American heavy machine-gun, you are able to strip it down into a lighter weapon.) Chauchat 1918 (American remodeling of the original French weapon.) Browning Automatic Rifle (Who doesn't love this weapon? And who wouldn't want to see it make it's grand debut in a WW1 game?) And these are only the machine-guns too. I omitted a lot of the shotguns, machine-carbines, semi-auto rifles, automatic rifles, and much more you could use. It's not just bolt-action rifles, trust me.
I've been telling people for the last 8 years that there should be a good World War 1 game made. and when I heard that dice was making this game I nearly creamed. However I realize that dice makes poor decisions and I don't think the blame that EA gets is warranted anymore it's time to wake up guys, stop blaming EA, you should really be blaming Dice. they've lost their magic since 2142 and I don't think they'll be getting it back with this game. I'm sorry, but I'm done defending Dice as the involuntary chattel of EA. This is coming from a BFV veteran of the last decade. I hope this game sets the trend but I'm expecting a WW1 reskin of BF4 where everyone has rare functioning automatics. And everyone blames EA instead of Dice. Dice has been given a free pass for far too long by us veteran gamers. I say it's enough. We need to start throwing shit at the real culprits here.
I honestly don't see any problems with DICE, as I've enjoyed nearly every product they've released. Proclaiming things like "BF1 is just a BF4 reskin" while only having seen a single mode, on a single map, during a single session is really, really stupid. Wait until the general public has access to it, or until there is more information on it before you go making accusations like that. DICE gets free passes because they are almost always being rushed to release by EA. While it's DICE's decision to include or exclude certain mechanics and weapons in their games, they don't get to decide *when* or *how* the game is released. If they need more time to finish a product, they have to approach EA and ask them for it. If they're denied, we get games like Battlefield 4 and SW: Battlefront. Both of these games were extreme opposites when they launched. BF4's launch was plagued by bugs and glitches, but had tons and tons of content. Battlefront, on the other hand, was launched in near perfect condition, but there was a severe lack in content. And guess who fixed those BOTH of those issues? It wasn't EA...
If DICE was independent we very well might see different design decisions but I don't really believe we would, because appealing to the worst of the worst players has been a standard practice to not alienate the greater majority of (bad) players in a ongoing trend which i've only seen become worse since call of duty mw2's antithesis, Black Ops. It's the video game company equivalent to Metallica cutting their hair. Sure, people will still buy the music, but they inherently ruined what made the thing popular in the first place. We see this repeatedly in any games that go from PC to console. We see gun damage being reduced so that bad players who react more slowly can have more chances to be fuck ups. We see weapon balance veering always towards making automatics, and primarily assault rifles and SMG's the best guns in the game and all other high skill high risk weaponry being penalized increasingly. We see repeated trends of adding unfair dumb 'free kill' weaponry to the game to give these bad players a moment to say ME TOO MOMMY LOOK IM WINNING TOO! like claymores, trip mines, etc. It's almost like video game marxism, or maybe that's exactly what it is. Trying to reduce any high skill ceiling to keep anyone spectacular from playing too well, at least without using weapons that anyone can succeed with. We see movement speed increased so that players do not have to make well thought out decisions on their positioning but can instead spastically hop from point to point spraying their automatics. the main problem is that consoles are moneymakers and people who are relegated to relying on consoles for gaming tend to be simpletons. And simpletons can't aim, especially with joysticks, so automatics with big magazines are attractive to them, as is the other console feature auto aim. And so is radar and giant markers to tell you where enemies are because you're dumb, fat and lazy and sitting on a couch trying to shoot people using a joystick so god forbid you stay aware of your surroundings or somebody be rewarded for pulling off a good flank or sneak attack. People repeatedly deny the very obvious reality that games are dumbed down for console users who are seen as bigger casuals and less technically proficient. and we repeatedly see apologists for it like this guy above me. That's why we repeatedly see opportunities for an actually fun challenging game with new ideas that would force players to adapt to new ways of playing shut down by higher ups. They know their consumer base is dumb and gets easily upset at new ideas and having to adapt. That's why Far Cry Primal was a joke rather than a true 'survival' game. That's why UBISOFT repeatedly gets away with selling the same press butan to win! games with nothing but long collection quests and bland rehash combat systems, 12 year olds keep being born and they grow into teenagers with low standards and needing more coddling.
Nastrael Rowe bought the first one on release, got the 2nd one as well. Unfortunately, the movement is still a bit clunky. Frankly my ideal game would be as visceral and realistic as Red Orchestra while bridging the gap in fluidity of movement and aiming that's seen in the call of duty games. In general, i'm not a huge fan of the unreal engine for FPS games.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THAAAAAAAAAAANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW OF NECROVISON!!!!! I cannot believe I never played nor even heard of that literal hidden gem.
+yunikage You could do that by just looking at their distinctive uniforms. Having an icon doing that work for you just doesn't sound like a good idea for me.
Red markers over enemies just turn FPS games into sad shooting galleries. Where's the satisfaction from spotting an enemy yourself before he spots you?
Demonhorse1 Except that when someone comes around a corner they're just a dark blur of mortal danger. You can either shoot at every dark blur or you can take the time to let your brain process the uniform, during which time you get shot. Guess which strategy will be more effective.
all the people that were complaining about making a WW1 game are hypocrites, what makes WW1 worse than WW2 or any other war for that matter? all this uproar was bullshit
If Battlefield 1 is succesful then we'll be seeing WW1 all over the place just like what happened with WW2, modern warfare and Futuristic shooters... Cause every damn publisher is gonna want a piece of that pie.
I think the world war 2 craze had more to do with a) having modern enough wepons and vehicles to be fun to play and b) being the only war with such objective 100% bad guys.
+RoboHoundGames those things just made WWII games easier to develop and market. The public interest in WWII (i.e. the market for WWII video games) blew up (no pun intended) after the release of Saving Private Ryan.
+RoboHoundGames your black and white view of WWII is troubling, if not surprising. I guess you're, perhaps, one of those people that feels that anything can be justified when the enemy kills millions.
Here's a few games you could have included. -Darkest of Days -The Darkness -Valiant Hearts -Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (it had a zombie level so I'm counting it) -NecroVisioN: Lost Company -Call of Cthulu (I never played it, but I understand there's a WW1 segment) Also, there was one where you were getting chased by dinosaurs, but it looks like you included quick clips of it without mentioning it.
![Assassin's Creed Odyssey Delphi Walkthrough [Sanctuary Sites]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-kHiyXO_pZE/mqdefault.jpg)
![Assassin's Creed Odyssey Delphi Walkthrough [Sanctuary Sites]](/img/tr.png)
Toy Soldiers is criminally underrated. Not only is it a great and more player-active interpretation of the tower defence genre, looking past the "toy diorama" asthetics it's actually a very stirring depiction of the western front. Waves of "creeps" being shelled and machine gunned over and over, maps that start out as farm land gradually become stripped of greenery and buildings from the artillery fire, levels with previous century forts riddled with trenches and bolt-holes... The game really presents a lot of aspects of the Western Front in a grim yet respectfully honest light. It's now one of my favorite games of all time (along with the sequel) yet when I saw the first trailers initially I thought it was a horrible and tacky misuse of the setting.
PlasmaDavid Absolutely agree. The first Toy Soldiers was great, and it was pretty accurate.
Toy Soldiers really surprised me in multiple ways. In a certain respect, it can be a bit of a power fantasy, especially if you yourself are controlling your arty and machine guns to rip the enemy to pieces, especially when you get very good at doing that. But that power fantasy is a direct interpretation and extension of...well, what WW1 was actually like. Artillery's incredibly deadly (like the actual thing), the environments are shredded and easily further shredded, there's a lot of troops around all at once, it's very much an endless slog of charging, dying, and people getting messed up in one place repetitively.
Obviously, game mechanics are at play to try and spice things up, but the actual nature of WW1 exists here, and, indeed, for the style of game it is...compliments it.
Necrovision is fucking amazing. The moment where you kill an evil scientist in a giant spider robot and he "goes you may have defeated me, but can you defeat THE VAMPIRES AND DEMONS?" and then you get a robo hand with a vampire living inside of it is probably the greatest moment in any video game.
true dat
that sounds amazing, im gonna check it out
Where the fuck has this game been all my life?!
I might be sold on that alone
souns like a crappy trashy B-movie xD. I have to take a look
I was surprised he didn't mention Valiant Hearts; that seemed like a no-brainer for a modern WWI game.
i think he made a whole video about that game
LordStar Yeah, but I was wondering why he didn't mention it, here.
Irondrone4 Maybe he didnt want to repeat himself idk
Check description of the vid
Thnodiun nvut
Bane-ality
Verdoon
Sid Meers
Wonton
Polly-gonnol
Are we witnessing the emergence of a new form of English?
Banality and wanton can probably be pronounced either way.
hm banality and wanton and polygonal are all technically correct
Grenader
don't forget "aushweets"
Granaders
There was a ww1 flash game I played that was quite fun, "Warfare 1918" I believe.
Warfare 1917
And yeah, it was amazing! Back in the day it was the game that introduced me to WW1 and made me want to learn about it XD
Right thanks, and same here, honestly even if ww1 video games aren't coming out as much as maybe ww2 was _(For a while at least)_, I'm pretty glad that more and more ww1 content is getting put up on youtube.
If BF1 does well maybe other companies will hop on that bandwagon.
Yeah, it was neat. A flash troop management game right? I think people keep smashing their heads trying to make a WW1 FPS when the western front works better as a tactical or strategy game
Played the hell out of that game and its WWII sequel! It too intrigued me on WWI combat. Still one of the best flash games ive played
Sylono LieGuano Warfare 1944 is even better, as there are three lanes of advance and various type of cover.
I also love Sid Meers and Verdoon
And that tasty won-ton destruction.
Glad im not the only one who was losing their shit at him saying 'Verdoon'.
such grandy-oice games
He has to be doing it on purpose at this point.
Is he trolling us? So many funny errors.
Ver-doon?? Mate, it's Ver-Done
more like ver-duh
Alexander de Montfort yes thank you yes
Alexander de Montfort George has a hard time saying quite a few words..
As much as I love George's take on things, his inability to pronounce anything not part of standard English makes my teeth itch.
He pronounces things weird and it hurts my brain.
How to make being a machinegunner fun in a WW1 multiplayer FPS? Take a page out of Titanfall's book and introduce NPCs. Let the NPCs be the guys who suffer massive losses as they try to rush across a field with little cover, while the players are the ones given special weapons and equipment. Make the game about trying to get as many NPCs across as possible/prevent the opposing side's NPCs from getting across.
But that requires a brain and creativity, which most developers don't have anymore
Or have 100s on 100s of players attacking each other
@@10gamer64 Then you're running into two issues: getting matches with 100s on 100s of players, which very few games can, particularly a few months after release, and the fact that being part of a horde of players who just gets massacred by a single machine gunner is not very fun.
@@AFnord Yes, bad idea I had
Grand strategy game about preventing WWI? That's Victoria 2 matey!
Preventing? WW1 in 1884, WW8 by 1920.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
lol yes
Well he said a game about preventing WW2
Victoria: An Empire Under The Sun>Victoria 2
and yes, you can prevent WW1 in Victoria 1
I want to be into Viky 2 soooo much but I just can't. I get like, belligerent every time I boot it up. I have already spent hundreds of hours learning 3 other Paradox games and I simply don't want to do it again. Danm you Paradox! Why is you so difficult and awesome at the same time?!
Tbh as soon as I saw the gameplay for BF 1 I instantly lost all hope that it could properly represent WW1.
Then it would be a sim, and you dont sell millions of copies being a war sim.
Arma does pretty well. So does Red Orchestra.
Battlefields brand name is associated with immersion as well. I don't think it'd be a flop if it angled at being closer to Red Orchestra than Call of Duty.
Did BF 1942 "properly represent" WWII?
Not in the sense you seem to mean. BF games are not attempts at simulation.
It looked authentic enough to sell the setting to you, making a WW1 game about Africans running around with SMGs is pretty far of the mark. Don't be glib.
You're bigotry needs to stop.
WW1 was always a game... to those in power
You could make that point for pretty much every war.
*****
is what the propaganda at the time told the troops. What do you think would've happened if we'd never gone to war with Hitler that wouldn't happen if we never go to war with Putin?
+Luciferum Doesn't matter. Were those men who went out into the muddy fields to die nothing more than the toys of the rich and political military class or were they not? Their sacrifice is to be respected, but let's not deny they were still the tools of their superiors.
*****
read hitler's second book. the one where he outlined his foreign policy. he was never going to attack the UK. from a UK perspective, it was a bad move to attack him over Poland.
He was never going to attack the jews (he was just going to expel them from his land) until WW2 happened. He's no worse than Putin, i'm pretty sure Putin would do worse if we went to war with him. The war was the cause of most of the reasons for the war!
Did that the moment you replied :P
If you thin WW1 was unjust and WW2 was just, you need to read more (unbiased) history.
I could see a mount and blade mod being capable of a good WW1 game.
Feasting may be tough though, and it's not M&B without feasting.
So long as I still get to walk around playing a snare drum.
bit late but try the red wars
Parabellum Mod, it’s really good, but it has its issues. It’s the only mount and blade game I have ever seen with tanks,airplanes and trucks. The artillery is also invisible and it can reak havoc. The sound design is awesome too with all the booms and cracks you would find in WW1. The raiding is also a full on trench warfare fight over a massive map, it’s really unique and fun. There are a couple issues though. If you don’t have any anti-tank or tanks of your own, it’s impossible to win a fight with tanks or trucks, even if your army is massive and has killed literally everything else. It’s quite annoying being 180 strong and getting chased down by a lord/general with 6 guys just because they killed all your anti-tank. The other big issue is that the AI will not take cities whatsoeve making features like the freelancer mod entirely pointless. Finally You might have to go to the Pirate Bay to find it, since the mod got taken down due to copyright from battlefield 1.
@@littleferrhis how the fuck do you copyright a mod that has been out since before the idea of BF1 was event considered
Verdoon?
He pronounces stuff weird. Nothing new.
He says the word "wanton" like he's ordering food in a Chinese restaurant. He doesn't know how to pronounce anything.
Wait how do you pronounce wanton? I always thought it was along the lines of, "want - un"
Well, it is French. They probably pronounce it like that too.
+John G nope
I object to putting Deadly Premonition with David Cage's games or Sonic 2006.
Deadly Premonition requires no ironic detachment to enjoy it. It is legitimately a good game. It's clunky, but it's got it where it counts. It is, at the very least, nothing like the hot garbage that is Quantic Dream's oeuvre.
DP isn't a good game, it's not even a bad game. It's literally just a game.
I dunno man, I really don't know what to think of DP. When I first played through it I thought it was a 0/10, sometimes a 10/10 - it's X/10
+Luciferum I know how shit is, it crashes every session I play it. I barely beat it a month ago. Why are you such a meanie pants?
DP is just like, a thing that exists. I don't know if it's a video game
Deadly premonition is a great game but developed by access games.
+Luciferum I don't really think a game needs to excel in everything to be a good game. Games are literally just there to invoke an experience, if the experience is positive then they have succeeded. DP excels at story(and some other things) so much that it transcends its flaws.
Snoopy: Flying Ace is a genuinely excellent video game and I really wish they would rerelease it on Steam and/or GOG.
It really was a lot of fun.
I've been hoping for it to come to backwards compatibility on Xbox One. I'd love to see the multiplayer active again, it's such a great game.
I remember playing Vs Red Baron on XP.
It was a fucking blast.
@@LeMeccerino that game was awesome
It was pretty naive of us to think that a Battlefield game set in WW1 would be a WW1 game first and a Battlefield game seconed
I would add in Victoria II. It doesn't cover the WW1 era specifically either, but it does represent the grinding, defense-heavy strategy in WW1 on the Western Front through its Great War system that dynamically creates world wars through interlocking systems of alliance networks.
Also it has the rise of industrialization, mass migration, and the rise of mass political movements, including socialism, communism, and fascism!
The problem with WW1 as the setting for a game is not that the setting is limited, it's the view of it is narrow. I'm pretty sure that every WW1 game in existence is overridingly obsessed with the Western Front... and to be fair, a lot of other media is, too. But WW1 had other theatres - big battleships, Alpine avalanches, submarine stalking, colonial skirmishing across Africa, even the European Eastern Front had more fluidity and mobility. Even if you made the same regular old FPS but put the character in Tannenberg rather than Verdun it'd be so much more refreshing.
That is a game. Tannenberg, by the makers of Verdun, i believe.
There is a pretty great channel called The Great War that covers WW1 week by week. Been binge watching it lately and anybody that thought WW1 is bad setting is out of their mind.
Nathan Cassidy It’s a bad setting to do realistically if you wanna sell copies, if bf1 like 3 people in your team would have auto weapons and you would sit in a trench waiting until you get hit by artillery or until your commander orders you to charge into the field of rifle and machine gun fire
@@chadthundercock4806 not a bad setting if set on the Eastern front, the trenches were mainly the western front trend. While yes, trenches were on the east, the combat was more sporadic and more like what we think of WW2.
Veggies I agree, I want the godammed tsar tank.
Verdun, to me, remains the best WW1 game. While it's relatively fast paced, it's ultimately futile. You can spend an entire match fighting for one sector. When you die, there's a chance your character will still stay there, writhing in pain, screaming. You can come across models that have holes blown out of their faces, dead horses from past cavalry charges. Gas blinds you, shells slam into the ground around you. Yet, it's still a fun game. It's a great game, and Tannenberg is just as good.
DICE could give 2 fucks about the actual war their game is based on. Its just another setting for them to have people run around shooting each other.
Soon their going to run out of settings and everyone will be booing them just like Modern Warfare once they reveal "Battlefield Space"
Battlefield Agincourt
Battlefield Waterloo, now with automatic muskets.
Battlefield 5000 bc! With really fast thrown flint daggers!
Modern warfare has the futuristic. DICE is going to go magical. Get ready for semi-auto wands.
Maybe after Battlefield Napoleon where you fight in American Civil War hipfiring cannons.
It's more the publishers holding back innovation than the players. Battlefield 1 was rejected by the boardroom when it was first pitched, for reasons including, "we're not sure gamers even know what World War One is".
Necrovision seems like an inspiration for Nazi Zombies in CoD.
tricky to determine, because Necrovision was released in May 2009, while Modern Warfare 2 in Nov 2009. with World at War in Nov 2008.
**shrugs**
Old video I know, but it's cool to watch this after experiencing WW1 survival horror with Amnesia The Bunker. Not quite trench warfare survival horror but it really shows the potential of this setting for horror.
You forgot about" Rise of Flight" in the flight sim catgory which is right now the most up to date realistic WW1 flight sim :(
Not only realistic but also providing that same old school instant action at the press of a button with built in mouse look and a really nice looking visuals. Sadly campaigns are very bare bones but you can get what you want out of quick mission stuff.
*****
There is a Pat Williams Campaign Generator that tries to turn it into the REd Baron 2 Style click a random PT1 RoF video on my channel and you will see it.
Its really giving the game the depth it should have had in the first place
What's it about?
Pretty good WW1 Flight sim with an active MP community.
3 of the planes are free to play, i guess so you can find out if you like the game at all.
Dwarf-Elvish Diplomacy Cool, I will give it a shot. Thank you :)
THanks for including Verdun, it's a rough gem but a solid WWI FPS that takes inspiration from the bleak trench warfare for its gameplay. Some of the levels are so bombed-out and muddy they don't even look set on earth
"There were no easy bad guy, the politics were too complicated" Honestly to me sounds like every war and conflict ever, yet there are lots of games
The Archuduke at the time ww2 would seem like good guys vs bad guys but now if you look at it it was actually bad guys vs worse guys. The atomic bombings, allied fire bombings, US internment camps, US payment to war criminals, allied rapes and murders, and soviet rapes and murders show that no side was good. The US caused the war with japan for no reason and the German invasion of Poland was a combined operation but we didn’t see the brits declaring war on the USSR just Germany.
@@maxs1910 WW1 even had easier politics than WW2. Germany wanted to become a global empire, Austria-Hungary wanted to eat up the balkans because Ottomans were weak, Russia didn't want the Balkans eaten, and France and Russia were friends. One guy died, and Austria-Hungary was too slow to take this opportunity to take Serbia, starting WW1. Albeit this is incredibly oversimplified, this was the basic political background of WW1
On a technicality...yeah, you're absolutely right.
But three powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) viciously invading and butchering people on their power conquests stirring up your desire to kick their asses makes for a "more fun" story to tell than...
...You know...
Sit in a trench and hope chances roll your way. And even the Eastern Front of WW1 (it did actually exist) wasn't a whole lot more fun. It's just slightly fewer trenches and slightly less death.
And then the industry decides to make games set in the vietnam war instead because that’s definitely less politically complex and has easy defined bad guys than ww1
Remember, the bad guy is always the one that loses
I was excited about Battlefield 1, but when I saw gameplay for it, I said to myself: "I've already played this. Ten years ago. And they were all WW2 multiplayer shooters."
That being said, Necrovision is fucking incredible. Honestly one of my favorite Painkiller-esque games. Awesome shit.
Ace of Spades, while not necessarily WW1, is probably my favorite game that was inspired by it.
Not the Steam version.
Old Ace of Spades (now known as Open Spades) is incredibly fun. My only gripe with it is that it's kinda hard to do the defensive bastions of WW1 considering all the blocks have the same strength. Really wish that could've been finished.
i instantly thought of the ace of spades alpha
There still is a way to play the alpha version?
Don't remind me. It hurts to remember the past.
yeah, there's some servers up in buildandshoot(dot)com still, fuck that game's fun
George, play NecrovisioN Lost Squad. Its more of the same, but they realized how dumb the orginal game was, and made it dumber. The first level has you playing the German guy who created the zombies beatdown a bunch of undead with a club at a train station. The end of that level has you flying a biplane shooting a dragon. And some demons.
Love the conclusion at the end :-) Great stuff!
It's not a conclusion at all. That's the point. People are assholes, from th top to the bottom. There's nothing special or difficult about it.
Hey, I didnt expect you to be here.
Fucking hell..... Necrovision looks AWESOME!
That's because it is. A bit dated now, but still fun as hell and absolutely ridiculously over the top.
Still think it looks good for a seven year old game
Both NecroVision games are on Steam. I've played them, they're alright. They kinda feel like big budget B-rate games, you know like Lifeforce was a big budget B-rate movie.
They're more janky than the likes of the Metro series, but then again much more bizarre.
"Verdoon", "Grenade-ers", you're killing me
I've got about 20 some hours in the BF1 alpha and I can tell you that, despite historical exaggerations, the game is extremely fun. And that is ALL that matters when it comes down to it.
Whoever said, that the first world war does not have enough content to do a fun game has certainly never looked beyond the western front. (And even there is enough content)
That last suggestion about the grand strategy about preventing ww2 is goddamn genius. It flips the entire genre on its head, prioritizing restraint over outright conquest.
Honestly, I don't have a problem with WW1 games - Verdun, while still very much a twitch shooter, is along the lines of what I think a good WW1 game could be. If a video game is going to try doing an accurate take on WW1 (which Battlefield One seemed like it was doing at first), I think making it more tactical and very, VERY team based (as in, pretty much completely reliant on your teammates) could actually make for a fun game. Imagine going through the trenches with a very slow and inaccurate gun, knowing that at any moment in time around a corner the enemy team could be just about to bump into your team. Of course, that would make playing with a general audience a very bad idea (see: the majority of the Overwatch community, from what I've heard at least), so I think this type of game would wind up being limited to maybe a corner of Steam that isn't accessed outside of summer sales, but nonetheless I don't see any problem with it being a game itself.
None of this is to say that there can't be an unrealistic yet good WW1 game - however, I don't see any point in making a WW2 game, putting a WW1 skin on it and then calling it a WW1 game.
No mention of Valiant Hearts: The Great War? Was kinda looking forward to seeing what you had to say about it :/
It's a crappy rip off of the tintin video game (and that game was god awful)
Already reviewed it.
+Strider119119 Woops my bad!
He made a separate video about it a while back. The whole thing is devoted to his thoughts on Valiant Hearts.
YOU HAVE FORSAKEN ME!! WHYYY?!
Why don't you have more subs? You're the best video game reviewer on this site, wtf.
People dont want quality they want edge, and memes. Video games themselves are great examples of how what people, the majority, say they want and what they actually want are two different things.
*tips fedora while praising islam
Hes more than just a reviewer
Sometimes I think about making a RUclips channel, figuring I am fairly knowledgeable on video games and have a passion for video making. Then I watch your videos, with your dedication and quality. I quickly extinguish my plans.
Now you really got me wishing for a survival horror set in the trenches of the first world war, with supernatural elements (preferably a lovecraftian horror, somehow).
Hell a good Lovecraftian game full stop would be nice, so much potential in that mythos.
Joshua John Miles Smith True.
Bloodborne and Ammnesia got close, but it's hard to make going insane from incomprehensible cosmic beings fun, ya know? Don't get me wrong, I'd like it too, but they'd have to really nail that to make it work.
Stanley Bloodborne got some of it right but being a combat based game it was never going to be able to do more than pay lip service. A big part of Lovecraft is being powerless. But I hear you, it is hard to translate into a game.
Joshua John Miles Smith And its hard to make a game about being mostly powerless without turning it into a walking simulator/run from the monster in the dark simulator.
If it is possible, I have never seen anything like it.
Ugh. I hate when you upload while I'm busy. Can't wait to get home and watch this. You're the best, Bunnyhop.
VerDUN not VerDUNE
Father! The Sleeper! Has! Awakened!
The suffix must flow.
It wouldn't be a George Smokeweedman video if there wasn't a mispronunciation somewhere!
I AM VER-DONE WITH THIS
You're going to make George upset, he has just recently gotten over "comparishon"
Now these are the kind of compilation videos I like. Your videos like sonic or dark souls are fantastic but this is more varied so it's much more well paced. Amazing as usual!
How dare you, Deadly Premonition is a flawless masterpiece.
so flawless that the flaws are flawless
Superschokokeks Ye ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Let's stop kidding ourselves
As always, a very well thought out and executed video. It's nice to have a reviewer who isn't influenced by their sponsor, or affiliated website, give an honest critique of games. That's why I subscribe!
The real reason why there aren't many WW1 games is a bit simpler. Most big video games are made by or made for americans and the United States didn't play a big role in the Great War. I'm not saying it as a negative, but people tend to empathize more with their contrymen.
So I guess Indians can't make a game about managing an American city because they don't have these, BS excuse
Indians making games are unlikely to be marketing them at their countrymen. The easiest market would be Americans, so yes, they can.
The US played a huge role in WW1 2 million men in the AEF fought in the hundred days offensives and played a decisive role in defeating the CP a game could be made about US troops in WWI
Eric Lu so america did serve a more important role than france or germany? really? huge role? smh
Well considering that the Entente was on the verge of bankruptcy and Britain and France were basically damn near tapped out of manpower and the arrival of the AEF freed up Allied forces just in time for the St'Micheals offensives well no US entry Britain loses its collateral and its a coin toss whether the entente can scrape up enough men together to halt the Spring offensives if they don't the German army breaks into the Ententes rear lines and then rushes to paris and boom gameover
"team America world police"
fucking hilarious liked and subbed
A Souls-esque game set in the graveyard of a WWI-like conflict would be amazing. Tell me it wouldn't.
I want alt WW1 armoured core, come on just think about it!
Please?
For how much I like this video, I realized it might have been 1 minute long.
If the goal was demonstrating that "WWI is difficult to game" is an excuse, you coul have just said "Indie made controlling papers interesting! Who are you trying to fool?".
Good job, George
And a genre description was born: "George Games."
17:24 "Why has no one made a survival horror game in the trenches yet?" You'll have to settle for Lovecraftian horror in Call of Cthulhu: The Wasted Land.
"You killed An Old Fart" lol
If you want a World War I FPS that not only looks beautiful like Battlefield 1 but also keeps a realistic and hardcore experience like Verdun, try out Beyond the Wire. It's far from finished and certainly is in dire need of optimization for weaker hardware, but give it a year or two and it very well could beat Battlefield 1, Verdun, and every other World War I game out there.
Wonder why he mentioned those ww1 flight sims but forgot to mention rise of flight
I can't believe you had footage of Der Unbekannte Krieg but didn't talk about it at all, it's such a hilariously amazing concept and a wonderful experience, especially if you don't know what you're in for beforehand.
I enjoy vomiting, can you please say "Verdon" again? Yeah, that was hilarious.
Ver-dune. He who controls the trenches, controls the world.
“Can’t make game in ww1. Politics too complicated, no room for heroism”
- makes games on the vietnam war instead
Me and my friend made this mini game in Verdun where we would see how long we could survive by sticking our heads out of the trenches. I won with 4 seconds.
I never got the argument that a WW1 game would be boring.
People who play it (at least for the majority) are gamers, who specifically look for ways to break the game.
What I mean by that is that the developers might intend for the game to include one side defending while the other charges at them like in history, but there will always be that one group of beta-testers who find a way to turn that meta on it's head. (in a good way).
I would love to see a gritty and realistic WW1 game, just to see how modern-day people would break it.
I've put probably over a thousand hours into Darkest Hour, ww1, ww2, and the fallout mod (which is excellently made and redesigns the whole map as well as incorporates loads of unique events). Not to mention the cold war scenarios included in the World in Flames+All in One mod. To make darkest hour shine you really need to get a lot of good mods for it. But I have to say if I had to recommend someone a ww1 strategy game that would be it. I just finished up a WW1 save I played into 1960 where I went U.S., mobilized, declared war on all sides, and took over the planet. The gameplay, unit simulation, tech trees (especially in world in flames), and other gameplay variables are just that good. Amphibious assaults, supply, breakthrough, and other factors feel more satisfying in DH than any other grand strategy game I've played.
in terms of shooters that amazing level in the darkness 1 has always stood out to me, the inescapable bleakness that part of the game holds is unmatched, its soo fucking hark and i love how the games representation of hell was WW1 really awesome and unsettling
It's a way better representation of WW1 than Battlefield even though it's clearly trying to be a fantasy.
A WWI survival horror is well overdue. Set it on the Western Front, have the player take control of a different soldier every time they die, make deaths incredibly common.
Also, it's worth checking out The Darkness for a WWI-inspired section of gameplay. About a quarter of the game is set in a Western Front hell world where enemies infinitely respawn and you're dropped in the middle of a vast No Man's Land, looking blindly for your next objective. Very atmospheric.
2:00 - I saw you, 1916: Der Unbekannte Krieg!
Keith Ballard
Ha I have that game and have never gotten around to playing it.
I think the best WWI FPS game would be one where you get to build the trenches. The goal would be to hide your assets and destroy the enemy's to win. The location of armories, hospitals, barracks, mess halls, and artillery would be extremely important. Even though there would be occasional infantry fights, the vast majority of the fighting would be artillery vs. artillery, as if it were a game of Battleship.
"And the Pizza" xDD
Minecraft made diggging and building fun.
WW1 was all about digging.
Rainbow6 Seige has a building phase before attacking.
WW1 was all about preping for the attack.
Why cant we put some Minecraft in Verdun?
Span the matches over an hour long lession of frequent attack, build, defend, build, rounds.
Have a in match progression unlocking system so games start with two teams of riffleman fighting over hastly dug trenches. then greadulaly teams work to unlock units so by the end of the match theres tanks and cannons.
Isn't Verdun pronounced, "Ver-Done"?
The only WWI flight simulator that I had access to is Wings of War, and it made really into bi-planes.
Rise of Flight is the best WWI game for flying.
verdun is the perfect ww1 game. limited ratios of machineguns due to the squad system. the rifles do damage, the pistols can also kill in 1 or 2 shots close up. mp18's are only for the germans and only on one squad type. even back when it was a flash game that you could load up for free in a web browser it was awesome. i just hope it eventually changes the engine which is the major downfall
One thing I always hated about WWI games is that they really don't even mention anything but the Western Front. No Africa, Palestine, the Caucasus, the Eastern Front, the Balkans, all of those are thoroughly unrepresented, except of course in DH, but DH is in itself a masterpiece in my opinion. That said, the modders that created it did start off from a game that's a damn fine base, Hearts of Iron II, which meant that a lot of their time simply went more into game balance and AI coding.
the only bad thing about DH is I can't declare war on germany before the munich agreement ( I just want to sim what would happen if the UK pursed a firmer stance against hitler)
Well, there's Entente. It was made in Ukraine, so it features both Eastern and Western fronts. Still no Turkey or Africa, though.
2 years later and Verdun is well on its way to being that very genuine, slick & polished WWI FPS that we've been hoping for
Way too many automatics.
Yes, I too would find it fun to play a game where I can only shoot less than 300 rounds a minute, and only shoot 5 or 10 rounds at once.
I also find it fun sitting in a single position with a rifle that may or may not get me killed while artillery guns zero in on my position. Yes what a fun and interesting game I hope they make another bleak and boring game with only a couple fun parts every so often. 10/10 I love being pinned down in a solitary position with the only real challenge being trench foot and the Spanish flu.
@@garfd
You sound like you couldnt make your shots count
Loved the video, despite wanting to murder small children whenever you said Verdun. But hey, I'm French, so I'm a hopeless pedant by nature.
One thing you made me think about: survival-horror would indeed be a fantastic medium to have a game not only set in WW1, but about WW1 (as in, reproducing the core emotional impact through gameplay features).
The key features of WW1 experience were privation, hardship, inhumanity and, I think above all, a sense of "unheimlich"/uncanny. It's the progressive transformation of the countryside, the cities, etc., from familiar places into a living hell, full of mud, corpses, diseases, fire and brimstone.
It's soldiers in bright uniforms accompanied by a marching band getting annihilated by machine guns and artillery. It's modern society pushed to its extreme, it's the point when modernity went from the "Electricity Fairy" and the excitement of planes and cars into a whole new nightmarish plane of existence. It's also the point where technology went from an enabler ("look at all the new possibilities progress opened up!") to something oppressive and limiting (the trench where you can sometimes barely stand in fear of sniper and artillery fire, the Western frontlines barely moving in a world that was previously all about maneuvering, etc.).
This is where a survival-horror can build gameplay mechanics: around scarcity, privation (both of resources and freedom), fatality (artillery barrages, gas attacks, machine gun fire). The progressive transformation of the landscape is a great source of horror, the long dull moments and the frenzy of the charges and defenses provide a unique kind of pacing (far better than night/day in sandbox/zombie survival games), and the grotesque aesthetics of the trenches (or places like the frozen hell of the Carpathian winter offensives) that movies and books have rendered so well isn't out of reach of tasteful enough game designers.
Space and time always seem crucial in design to me, and WW1 seems to open up a whole new design space where survival-horror seems right at home.
WW1 as the "death of heroism" is also a boon for survival horror: the same core tension around the place of the protagonist, about individual agency, etc. This is also where a survival horror could explore playing with several characters (say, a bunch of friends from the same village, brothers or just a squad) beyond the kind of obligatory AI sidekicks or co-op buddy thing RE and so forth have played with.
Sorry, that was kind of a long-winded restatement of quite banal stuff, but I was quite disappointed with how Battlefield One is turning out, and RUclips is kind enough to abbreviate walls of text like mine.
Edit: Line breaks and all, because Jesus Christ that was bad.
Necrovision looks like Dark Messiah of Might and Magic with guns.
"I adore Campy Garbage", that explains his love for Metal Gear Solid.
Verdoon!!!VERDOON!!!!!
its more like Ver-Done
Sid Meer...
The most fun i've ever had with a ww1 setting game was the ww1 levels of Darkest Of Days. Honestly, that game had some interesting ideas behind it. The whole concept of being a soldier who would travel through time to essential points in human belical history to change them in order to prevent the destruction of mankind was kinda cool, plus having some enemies who were important in the future and who couldn't be killed was also a pretty nice touch.
TRIBES!!
TRROOIIIIIIIIBESSSS~
+FLYING OBLIVION Its been a running joke in the podcast for weeks
Wow
+FLYING OBLIVION The Tovg Podcast has been weird these past months. And bush
why isn't when I watch these videos it always feels like George is trying to convince himself he's having more fun then he clearly is? a man can only deadpan for so long before you start to worry about him being near sharp objects.
"Simulators felt like fantasy fulfillers than work emulators."
Christ, I couldn't have said that better myself. Simulation enthusiasts are an obnoxious bunch. But also you forgot about Rise of Flight is the most modern WWI flight simulator on the market right now.
About 40% of the Darkness 1 took place during WW1. As everytime Jackie Estacado died he had to trek through hell, being represented as WW1, whilst his body was resurecting in the real world. I particularly enjoyed talking to a guy with both his legs, both his arms, and both his eyes missing and seeing the absurd amount of dialogue shoved into a side character like that.
Wonton isn't "wawn-TAWN"
It's "WAHN-ten"
I'm so nice.
Nuceeeelr
where I live in Ottawa Canada, we say w-awn-t-awn. everybody does. When it comes to languages and accents there truly isn't a right or wrong. Just like how ppl on the uk don't drive on the wrong side of the ride. We drive in the right, while they drive on the wrong side of the road.
This applies especially to my spelling. We spell:
colour
cheques
doughnuts
etc
it aint wrong. its regional. get the point?
What about wonton soup?
Exactly.
It's Wahn-Tawn when you're talking the food, And Wahn-tun (or Wahn-ten) when you're describing "Wanton violence".
Wanton - rampant
Wonton - delicious
"There don't have to be all these limitations imposed on a game from it's setting, because games can be whatever they want to be"
There is one thing I hate about all this WW1 games... All of them cover only western front...
Yep, exactly. Setting a game in the eastern front solves most of the problems of WWI games.
Well yeah, but then you'd be playing as "the bad guys", aka Germany and Austria. Which would be interesting, but most developers would not dare going into that direction.
"...this is such campy garbage, and I adore campy garbage..." LOL! I love you George.
I was put off ever so slightly when I saw all those automatic weapons in bf1 also, it's just going to be like putting a bolt action in an arena against twenty m16 users, again, and not to mention historically inaccurate.
Well, there were plenty of automatic weapons, but it's the semi-automatic weapons I have a problem with tbh. There is only one Support class prototype weapon (Huot automatic), but there are so many medic ones, (1906, General Liu, Howell, Cei-Rigotti) that it just feels so upsetting.
petrallen light machine guns were employed years before WW1 during the russo-japanese war, there were alot more automatic weapons than you think. Only reason they werent deployed as often is because they had no use for them initially which as we all know changed by WW2
True, with a long list of machine-guns such as:
Chauchat 1913 (Used by French fighter pilots)
Benet-Mercie (Standard-issue for Americans and Brits, and fortification gun for French)
Lewis 1914 (British LMG, eventually used in 1918 by Americans)
Chauchat 1915 (Standard-issue French LMG, as well as used by the Russians, Italians, Americans, and everywhere else around the world.)
Madsen 1902 (Not standard issue for any country, but was used in quantities by Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, and Russia as backup LMG's.)
MG-08/15 (German, Austrian, and Turkish beast of an LMG, the most common used by the Central Powers.)
MG-15na (Germany and Austria deployed this smaller, lightweight but still effective LMG.)
Perino 1910 (Italian heavy machine-gun which was made smaller in 1910 in order to be used for Italian assault troops in limited numbers)
MG-14/17 (Infantry version of an aircraft machine gun used a little bit, even comes with a scope.)
Browning 1917 (While normally an American heavy machine-gun, you are able to strip it down into a lighter weapon.)
Chauchat 1918 (American remodeling of the original French weapon.)
Browning Automatic Rifle (Who doesn't love this weapon? And who wouldn't want to see it make it's grand debut in a WW1 game?)
And these are only the machine-guns too. I omitted a lot of the shotguns, machine-carbines, semi-auto rifles, automatic rifles, and much more you could use. It's not just bolt-action rifles, trust me.
Frenchman here. Please never ever stop saying Verdoune!
Great video as usual!
I've been telling people for the last 8 years that there should be a good World War 1 game made. and when I heard that dice was making this game I nearly creamed.
However I realize that dice makes poor decisions and I don't think the blame that EA gets is warranted anymore
it's time to wake up guys, stop blaming EA, you should really be blaming Dice. they've lost their magic since 2142 and I don't think they'll be getting it back with this game.
I'm sorry, but I'm done defending Dice as the involuntary chattel of EA. This is coming from a BFV veteran of the last decade. I hope this game sets the trend but I'm expecting a WW1 reskin of BF4 where everyone has rare functioning automatics. And everyone blames EA instead of Dice.
Dice has been given a free pass for far too long by us veteran gamers. I say it's enough. We need to start throwing shit at the real culprits here.
An EA producer said outright that he had rejected a ton of pitches for WW1 before accepting this one. Sounds like EA to me.
I honestly don't see any problems with DICE, as I've enjoyed nearly every product they've released. Proclaiming things like "BF1 is just a BF4 reskin" while only having seen a single mode, on a single map, during a single session is really, really stupid. Wait until the general public has access to it, or until there is more information on it before you go making accusations like that.
DICE gets free passes because they are almost always being rushed to release by EA. While it's DICE's decision to include or exclude certain mechanics and weapons in their games, they don't get to decide *when* or *how* the game is released. If they need more time to finish a product, they have to approach EA and ask them for it. If they're denied, we get games like Battlefield 4 and SW: Battlefront. Both of these games were extreme opposites when they launched. BF4's launch was plagued by bugs and glitches, but had tons and tons of content. Battlefront, on the other hand, was launched in near perfect condition, but there was a severe lack in content.
And guess who fixed those BOTH of those issues? It wasn't EA...
If DICE was independent we very well might see different design decisions but I don't really believe we would, because appealing to the worst of the worst players has been a standard practice to not alienate the greater majority of (bad) players in a ongoing trend which i've only seen become worse since call of duty mw2's antithesis, Black Ops. It's the video game company equivalent to Metallica cutting their hair. Sure, people will still buy the music, but they inherently ruined what made the thing popular in the first place. We see this repeatedly in any games that go from PC to console. We see gun damage being reduced so that bad players who react more slowly can have more chances to be fuck ups. We see weapon balance veering always towards making automatics, and primarily assault rifles and SMG's the best guns in the game and all other high skill high risk weaponry being penalized increasingly. We see repeated trends of adding unfair dumb 'free kill' weaponry to the game to give these bad players a moment to say ME TOO MOMMY LOOK IM WINNING TOO! like claymores, trip mines, etc. It's almost like video game marxism, or maybe that's exactly what it is. Trying to reduce any high skill ceiling to keep anyone spectacular from playing too well, at least without using weapons that anyone can succeed with. We see movement speed increased so that players do not have to make well thought out decisions on their positioning but can instead spastically hop from point to point spraying their automatics.
the main problem is that consoles are moneymakers and people who are relegated to relying on consoles for gaming tend to be simpletons. And simpletons can't aim, especially with joysticks, so automatics with big magazines are attractive to them, as is the other console feature auto aim. And so is radar and giant markers to tell you where enemies are because you're dumb, fat and lazy and sitting on a couch trying to shoot people using a joystick so god forbid you stay aware of your surroundings or somebody be rewarded for pulling off a good flank or sneak attack.
People repeatedly deny the very obvious reality that games are dumbed down for console users who are seen as bigger casuals and less technically proficient.
and we repeatedly see apologists for it like this guy above me. That's why we repeatedly see opportunities for an actually fun challenging game with new ideas that would force players to adapt to new ways of playing shut down by higher ups. They know their consumer base is dumb and gets easily upset at new ideas and having to adapt. That's why Far Cry Primal was a joke rather than a true 'survival' game. That's why UBISOFT repeatedly gets away with selling the same press butan to win! games with nothing but long collection quests and bland rehash combat systems, 12 year olds keep being born and they grow into teenagers with low standards and needing more coddling.
+KvltKommando Red Orchestra, dude. Get it and profit.
Nastrael Rowe bought the first one on release, got the 2nd one as well. Unfortunately, the movement is still a bit clunky. Frankly my ideal game would be as visceral and realistic as Red Orchestra while bridging the gap in fluidity of movement and aiming that's seen in the call of duty games. In general, i'm not a huge fan of the unreal engine for FPS games.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THAAAAAAAAAAANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW OF NECROVISON!!!!! I cannot believe I never played nor even heard of that literal hidden gem.
There are red icons on top of the enemies heads? RED ICONS? That's just sad.
Then play on a hardcore server
Why is that sad? Friend-foe differentiation is a pretty core part of making an FPS work.
+yunikage You could do that by just looking at their distinctive uniforms. Having an icon doing that work for you just doesn't sound like a good idea for me.
Red markers over enemies just turn FPS games into sad shooting galleries. Where's the satisfaction from spotting an enemy yourself before he spots you?
Demonhorse1 Except that when someone comes around a corner they're just a dark blur of mortal danger. You can either shoot at every dark blur or you can take the time to let your brain process the uniform, during which time you get shot. Guess which strategy will be more effective.
The hell sequences in The Darkness are probably my favorite depiction of WWI in a video game.
all the people that were complaining about making a WW1 game are hypocrites, what makes WW1 worse than WW2 or any other war for that matter? all this uproar was bullshit
Using "Driver San Fransisco" as a verb is a top tier gamer move
If Battlefield 1 is succesful then we'll be seeing WW1 all over the place just like what happened with WW2, modern warfare and Futuristic shooters... Cause every damn publisher is gonna want a piece of that pie.
The WWII craze wasn't started by a video game though. It was started by a little movie called Saving Private Ryan.
I think the world war 2 craze had more to do with a) having modern enough wepons and vehicles to be fun to play and b) being the only war with such objective 100% bad guys.
+RoboHoundGames those things just made WWII games easier to develop and market. The public interest in WWII (i.e. the market for WWII video games) blew up (no pun intended) after the release of Saving Private Ryan.
It also helped that WWII still had plenty of living veterans to relate to and source from. The last living WWI veteran died in 2012.
+RoboHoundGames your black and white view of WWII is troubling, if not surprising. I guess you're, perhaps, one of those people that feels that anything can be justified when the enemy kills millions.
A game lots of people forget, even though it has a kinda bad business model, is Battle of Empire 1914-1918.
i love toy soldiers!
Here's a few games you could have included.
-Darkest of Days
-The Darkness
-Valiant Hearts
-Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (it had a zombie level so I'm counting it)
-NecroVisioN: Lost Company
-Call of Cthulu (I never played it, but I understand there's a WW1 segment)
Also, there was one where you were getting chased by dinosaurs, but it looks like you included quick clips of it without mentioning it.