Make a game about WW1

...

This game is weird.
> we are making ww1 game!
Oh yeeeaa
> there are no french by the way
Ohhh... ok I guess.
> Americans and British are main heroes
Mmm... why?
> no Russians
What?!
> black hero
Noooo!!! Why?! You were soo close to being good!

Reminder to serve the cause:

change.org/p/russian-empire-and-france-in-battlefield-1?tk=cK1tGi2PRkkwPUkKFeeI9WQKC_fHsV28Mu_YvWI1Zz8&utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature

Why would anyone not be disgruntled at the french being excluded, then get full-on triggered by the Russians missing?

Both had equal contributions, and at least the french held out until the end of the war.

Signed, but it's just standard EA bullshit right here. All about that sweet money not at all about integrity or reputation.

Nobody wants to play as surrender monkeys, deal with it.

Nobody cares about France, they're just annoying and irrelevant.

Trips checked. Going to assume your comment is sarcasm but they were the main player at the start of the war. Surrender monkeys was earned after ww2 which is understandable because of how utterly ruined the country was after ww1

I know but it would've been more plausible if America or Romania or Italy or Bulgaria were DLC faction. Here, France being a DLC somewhat breathes this impression that "erm France didn't do much in WW1, so we can leave them out unless you're a hardcore historian". I don't know. Seems to be betraying the memory of every french veteran in every conceivable way.

Fanks for the signature!

Because French weren't alone on western front soo I thought that you would just play as British soo that players could understand what soldiers around them are saying. But there is no reason to not make Russia playable.

That truly is rude.

The game is coming out in 3 months, nothing major is getting changed at this point.

Just vote with your wallet and don't buy garbage.

You're on a history board and you're thick enough to think the French weren't relevant in the first world war?
How fucking dumb are you?

> not wanting to play as french at Verdun
Why even doing WWI game if you leave all cash parts of the experience out of it?

I know :c but hasn't France earned a far more legitimate pretense at being the ones depicted on the western front? They mobilized twice the men that England fielded, and twice more of their men perished.

Isn't it a slightly hypocritical policy to privilege British troops over french troops?

Doesn't matter. That's the reputation that France is stuck with now, and especially in multiplayer nobody in the Battlefield audience will want to play as a country known only for being cowardly pussies.

And I say Battlefield audience, but in America even educated people don't consider France relevant in WW1. It's just another case of France losing to Germany and having to be bailed out by America (and Britain).

Nobody cares, I'm talking about popular perception here.

You play Brits at the Somme. Brits at the Somme is already how WW1 is portrayed in 99% of popular culture.

What the fuck Americans.

Why did we even allow your country to free themselves from Britain to begin with. At least Britain would've instilled in your civilians some awareness of french prestige, what with the mutual respect France and Britain owe one another.

>the mutual respect France and Britain owe one another.
lmao

Brits don't have an ounce of respect for France and started most of the memes that America amplified in the first place. Brits were the first to erase France from history even before the Americans were doing it.

Dlc bruv

>I'm talking about popular perception here.

You misspelled "pandering to retards like me" but I expect nothing less of EA.

>I'm talking about popular perception here.

So do you think Italy, the Ottomans, and the Austro-Hungarians have some sort of incredible reputation amongst uneducated idiots?

The retards who think the France were useless in WWI probably haven't even heard of the Ottomans or Austria-Hungary. And they'll have the same dipshit WWII association of Italy being completely worthless.

So this "popular perception" argument for the exclusion of France is worthless anyway.

Oh please. That just attests to the fact that you're estranged from how France-Britain operates. The french, and I know this from being one, and british will humor themselves over the battles they've won over the other, and at the end of the day, none of the two side is going to say "we're better than you" because the other will always be able to retort with a historical event in which Britain/France humiliated France/Britain.

That's how our rivalry has always been: keeping each other in check and never letting one the two rising above the other. That's why when inspecting history, you'll find that we're on the same level. And this is why there's never another conclusions to our debates other "you're a pretty good rival pal, glad we built each other up on our bloody wars".

But please, Britain has its instances of disrespecting France but that goes about as far as us mocking them for not having decent food to eat or always having rain.

Jesus christ

The french are in the game the trailer showed dudes running around with adrian helmets on

+1

Those were Italians. The french army borrowed the Adrian designs to the Italians and Romanians.

Those are Italians.

OK let me explain to you the process that led to this.

- So which fronts are we going to include?
- Well we need the Western front obviously, it's what WW1 is known for, but we also want some map variety, so we'll include the mountains in the Alps and the Middle Eastern desert too.
- What about the Eastern front?
- Too much like the West, not worth it. Besides we have to set the game after America joins and by then the Eastern front was over.
- OK so which factions do we put in?
- Obviously we need Britain, America, and Germany, they're the most relevant and famous ones of WW1. We'll also need the Ottomans for the desert, and Italy and Austria-Hungary for Alps.
- What about France?
- Nobody wants to play as surrender monkeys, and the Western front is already covered by Britain and America.

It doesn't matter if you are French or British, you are still soldier on front line. The important thing is that this war is getting attention from some big gaming company. But it's EA, them trying to get as much money as possible is not surprising.
By the way. Does anyone know if there will be German campaign?

Sorry m8 but Britain has zero respect for you. They're the first to joke about France being irrelevant cowards that never even managed to reach high enough to lick Britain's boots.

>Britain, America, and Germany, they're the most relevant
The fug? How was it that Britain and America ever surpassed France in that respect?

You could have alpine warfare between Russia and the Ottomans (Caucasus campaign), which'd let you cut Italy and Austria Hungary. Then you still have all those things you mentioned plus actual relevant powers.

t. American and I sure know how European countries perceive each other

Any time now there'll be a Brit to drop in and confirm my statements. You aren't at the mercy of France for multiple decades to later be able to say "harr what cowards they are!".

See In fact the vast majority of Americans (and probably of non-Americans at this point) believes that France LOST WW1 and then got bailed out by America, just like WW2.

user, you need to realize that not all britons hate France, and likewise not all britons respect France.

I'd imagine it not unlike the relationship between Americans and Brits. Plenty like each other, plenty can't fucking stand each other.

> Too much like the West, not worth it.
You can add glorious winter maps here.

Brit here, he's right and lol at England being "at the mercy of France", good joke lad.

How might I reinstate the truth? Do we have to conquer Europe for the tenth time, to reassert ourselves as the country Europe doesn't screw around with?

You can do that in the West too.

>Do we have to conquer Europe for the tenth time, to reassert ourselves as the country Europe doesn't screw around with?

Good luck. I'll take bets on NATO roasting your ass faster than Germany did.

Because those fucking sucked in WW1 outside of based Kamal Bitch Slapping the Anglos

The French and Russians might steal the spotlight from the Anglos which triggers them

There's going to have to be your passport disclosed on here for me to believe that.

And fair then that brits believe that the french cower at them. But wouldn't it make your decades of being defeated by is a tad more embarrassing if you're going to stress that France is inept at war? I'd say that it's the height of humiliation to have your armies tarnished again and again by a country supposedly inept at war?

Something like that, yes.

Unfortunately European nations are disappearing now, and the last major event before their dissolution happens to have been WW2, so everyone is stuck forever with whatever reputation they have now. For France that reputation is that of surrender monkeys, and it's extremely unlikely that it will ever be sufficiently powerful or relevant again to even be in a position to acquire a new reputation (even if it wanted to, which it clearly doesn't).

Rofl, you're a fucking leaf. France is well known for WW1 so dunno how educated these people you ask are. But w/e American education

"Impossible n'est pas français"
-Napoléon

See me in twenty years boyos when I'm ruling this shit.

>posting battles of the Napoleonic war

We do know how that ended, don't we?
Britain was never at the mercy of France because France couldn't get to Britain. Napoleon had to conquer all of Europe just to try and cut Britain off and that didn't work.

I admire France for their military history but you gotta stop, Pierre.

"It's a game get over it" has to be the worst excuse to ever exist. It's a buzzsentence that can mean whatever you want.

I couldn't care less about this specific game though.

>. Brits at the Somme is already how WW1 is portrayed in 99% of popular culture.

Only in Britain

See But I've already spoken with Americans who clearly studied WW1 and know all kinds of facts about it, and will tell you that France was effectively irrelevant, that Britain supported the entire war effort, and that France was about to be crushed into oblivion by the German spring offensive when America swooped in and saved the day.

So this goes beyond simple ignorance, it's what they're actually teaching each other.

And America.

You know, the only places that produce any internationally popular culture.

>the French are so bad at war that they needed an Italian to lead them to glory

>The Germans were so bad at war that they needed an Austrian to lead them to glory
>The Russians were so bad at war that they needed a Georgian to lead them to glory

History seems full of these awkward circumstances.
All manlets, too.

>We do know how that ended, don't we?
That you bribed mindless Austrians, Prussians, Russians, Spaniards, Portuguese into heaving unto us a constant need to fight them and exhausting the country's manpower until you swooped until to bestow on yourselves the laurels of victory, and then hype up Trafalgar as if it meant anything. I truly can pity the british at times.

The only ever "victory" they strangled away from us was at Waterloo, when Napoleon's strategies were incapacitated by the rain (cannons couldn't be moved) and when he slept through the day, when Ney behaved like drunkard and when the french armies was composed of "Marie-Jeanne" (15 year old soldiers because all other men had already been killed off in the other 7 coalitions). And even then, the Prussians had to spare the brits from utter annihilation.

Sure deserve a pat on the back don't you ;).

Do we really need several threads up bitching about the same *videogame* on Veeky Forums, considering how slow this board is?

The game is what it is because they're trying to sell as many copies as possible of it, it's retarded to expect it to act as a history lesson. If you think that people's opinion and knowledge of WW1 will be shaped based on Battlefield 1 you live in a shithole that have far worse problems that videogames.

>"educated" americans

America doesn't produce anything about the first world war, since they were barely involved.

In reality the battle of Ieper features more prominently in British popular culture.

Dice are a bunch of greedy SJW cunts and their apologists should fuck off back to polygon.

people take video games far too fucking seriously. 40 euro for 100s of entertainment where else can you get that? some developers focus on creating a realistic simulation, others just want to create something fun and accessible. should some form of accuracy institute sit and judge whether a historically inspired should be made or not?

>Michel Ney
>italian

>Louis Davout
>Italian

>Jean Lannes
>italian

>Jacques Soult
>italian

>Joachim Murat
>italian

And yet on those french can be heaved 70% of french victories in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars.

You just don't understand. WW1 is a sacred war with unimaginable horrors that shouldn't be taken lightly. If they wanted a happy war where everything was fun and exciting and sunshine and flowers they should stick to WW2.

What was that Pierre? I can't hear you over the sound of your country losing the Napoleonic wars without ever threatening British soil. Pity you didn't have any friends when you needed them old chap, seems we could afford plenty even with that little 'blockade' you attempted. At least we gave you Napoleon's pickled corpse back a few decades later, eh?

The United Kingdom was so inept that they bequeathed on themselves Norman kings (William's line), french kings (Plantagenet and then Lancasters who originated from France), welsh kings (Tudor line), Scottish kings (Stuart line), Dutch kings (William of Orange and his descendants), and german kings (the Windsor line).

Never have the english been ruled by their own.
Litterally cannot fabricate this.

Yeh WW1 is probably the one event in history that deserves accurate retellings. If humans forget about that war we are doomed to repeat it.

Also fuck EA the could make a full game for 60 bucks and I'd be okay. But no lets make the game 60 and then charge them 60 bucks extra for all dlc

It's just a fucking bummer that EA has to shit all over it, so few people attempt WWI games that it's pretty understandable that some people who are actually interested in the period are disappointed at how hard EA's cocking it all up.

Well known depictions of WW1 in the last years:

- War Horse (American film by Steven Spielberg): Entirely about British troops.
- Sucker Punch (American): British troops vs zombie Germans
- Downton Abbey (British TV show): entirely British perspective
- Parade's End (US/British TV show): entirely British perspective

Face it, in popular culture WW1 is Britain (and sometimes America) vs Germany.

>the rest of the world watches the same films as I do

>Yeh WW1 is probably the one event in history that deserves accurate retellings.
Why? It's not like WW2 was much better. A lot more people died in WW2 than WW1. WW2 also happen during the whole Holocaust thing.

>fuck where have my arguments gone
>ah screw it, let's resort to insults

I cannot believe that you somehow brandish your status as an untouchable island as something from where to derive pride, when litterally every other country on Earth has laughed under their breath that you're cowards for hiding yourselves there.

And anyways who needs France when you can challenge European hegemony by yourselves. Alas, sometimes friends do show themselves to be somewhat useful, regardless how expendable. Because guess what? We did wound british integrity? Can you not recall that we coordinated an Irish uprising that engulfed Ireland into weeks of fighting? How's that integrity for you!

Not him, but American / anglo media has the widest cultural reach. France might have movies about the French, but nobody but the French watch them. People all over the world watch shit from Hollywood.

In the US, we're basically taught "America broke the stalemate"

>War Horse
There's a french officer somewhere to intervene in the movie.

But fuck it, I can concede that the british have wielded their media in a conniving way for the First World War to now only be commemorated as a war confronting valiant brits (forgive the oxymoron) against germans.

At least germans remind themselves that we were apparently their greatest annoyance in WW1 according to some poll I'd once read.

>Implying the holocaust has any business being in a videogame
WW2 wasn't possible without WW1. Honestly WW1 was more horrific because there had never been anything on that scale even imagined.

60,000 french troops died in a day almost right at the start of the war. That kind of devastation was incomprehensible. For reference the British though unmitigated horror was the 8 thousand troops they lost at waterloo.

But yeh lets stick to ww2 because of planes and tanks and shit.

Nobody outside of France watches French shit, Pierre.

Russiabro's

Ironically it wasn't because of anything the troops did specifically. It was more Germany knew they had limited time till the yanks got in, they tried an offensive which exhausted all of their resources, were beaten back and had to come to terms with 3 millions Americans coming over potentially within the next year.

But now you know better I presume? Right?...

Please?

>no arguments

My argument is that France never threatened British sovereignty in the Napoleonic war. The British haven't been "at the mercy of France" for centuries. And after trying to prove your point with a war you LOST your retort was "b-but you didn't fight fair! You're cowards!" and in the same breath admitting that the Brits were responsible for "bribing" the rest of Europe into teaming up on you.

Suck it up and stop moving the goalposts Pierre.

>weeks of fighting in Ireland
kek they're just the irish. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

They were already losing though, the Entente counter-offensive had no brakes.

But yes America joining the war probably played a major role in the German decision to launch the spring offensive, however it didn't play that much of a role in that offensive getting obliterated at the Marne.

I don't see how that's false.

The pressure that the arrival of Fresh American troops put on Germany basically forced their hand to make a gambit for victory, which failed.

>The British haven't been "at the mercy of France" for centuries.
Oh but with that phrasing, I'd have thought you would understand that I meant the era throughout which France forbid England from ever setting foot in continental Europe again, which spans from the end of the Hundred Years' War and culminates in the Seven Years' War where England broke themselves free of those landings by formally landing their armies in Europe again. I'd say that France dictating where England would be free to expand is somewhat akin to being under France's mercy.

Anyways, I certainly didn't mean the Napoleonic era, where you certainly weren't under our heel.

>kek they're just the irish. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel here.
Yeah kinda meant that as a joke. Though to be fair, thrice France sought to land troops to rally those rebels to their command, but thrice were their ships torn away in the storm, Spanish Armada-fashion.

free of those restrictions

Can't speak english for shit today.

>I'd say that France dictating where England would be free to expand is somewhat akin to being under France's mercy.

That's a real stretch of a definition for being at someone's mercy. If "well you couldn't conquer us" counts then sure, but that means France was at Britain's mercy too.

"At France's mercy" gives the impression they had cause to fear for their continued sovereignty, as if France could at any minute crush them. The reality was a history of mutual antagonism. You don't antagonize people you're "at the mercy of". England hasn't been at the mercy of the French since the Norman conquest.

Me again.

Now, I mean this in a genuinely un-haughty manner, but would you say that France has ever been at the mercy of England? Again, this is only something I've only now begun reflecting on, so I don't of you any true precise answer, or the question doesn't even aim for you to be overcome with some sudden realization that "oh noes, France never has been at the mercy of England".

I genuinely mean this. Would the occupation of Paris in 1815 be an example of this, although the occupation was only meagerly british?

England definitely had France on its heels during the Hundred Years war, for a time.
You could make an argument for 1815 as well but that was most of Europe gangbanging France.

Wrong image but Angevin empire was pretty sexy.

If you are going to ignore the fact that 3 kings of England were also the kings of france while the king of france was never the king of England then you need to open a book

Reminder that the minor nations of Romania and Serbia lost more men than the US did.

Ughh that was when the french King negated his marriage with Aliénor d'Aquitaine for another bride, and she was then wedded to the english King, enabling England to hold all those lands in southern France.

Though it somewhat is hilarious for the english King to have to drop to his knees to marry the princess the french King had already wedded, and probably fucked already. Somewhat cuck-worthy behavior in hindsight, though I really shouldn't say that because in the end, it truly did let England bend us over.

Not him but that's not England.

>kings of England were also the kings of france
Wrong way around kiddo.

Must've forgotten my link:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_of_Aquitaine