Battlefield 1's pre-release beta has been data-mined by people with too much time on their hands, so EA and DICE's marketing plans are now more or less in tatters. This isn't any old leak: practically every detail about the first-person shooter has been posted on Reddit, from its list of weapons right the way through to the names of the characters in its single player campaign.
Because this is obviously sensitive information, we're going to dance our way around the details, but you can peruse the intel in its entirety through here. Choice excerpts, however, include the fact that there'll be ten multiplayer maps and seven modes. Familiar favourites like Rush and Conquest will be joined by new playlists, like Possession and Breakthrough.
The story will span six episodes, each divided up into various chapters, and there'll be some 37 weapons for you to use. It sounds like a very comprehensive package, then – and one that's sure to grow substantially post-release. Again, if you want to know more, you can browse the full leak through here – just don't complain about spoilers if you click.
[source reddit.com]
Comments 9
Its all information that I would had have come the release date so its here nor there if this information is out there. Judging by the content its probably not a bad thing your getting a lot of content for your money.
Its not that bad considering the previous Battlefield games. Slightly more modes in the MP and a couple more maps. Its difficult to know if the Campaign is any longer or more worthwhile playing - the previous 2 haven't been great. Don't know if they will add some form of co-op (like BF3 had - although still limited) or not.
I don't want to compare with 'other' big franchises (it can't compete with CoD for 'content' for example (more maps, modes, co-op etc) but the Maps are bigger and offer vehicles, destruction so its hardly fair to compare) so you need to look at what Dice offered before and if they have at least matched or bettered its previous offerings in the franchise. Initially it sound as though they are offering a bit more which is a good sign...
Why can't it compete with COD for content? I've always found battlefield games to have far more interesting, varied and longer term content than that other game.
COD and Battlefield are quite different games with different audiences. I think in terms of support for the product Battlefield is better supported than COD. Battlefield seems to be well supported even a couple of years after release with new maps. I do not play COD so not sure how many new maps etc it gets after the initial year.
Battlefront, Hardline and 4 didn't really wow me, so hopefully this is the one that helps this franchise back on the saddle. It could really go both ways. The material is in order, but I don't know if I like the style. Would've loved if they had chosen a more BF1942 approach, instead of a cinematic Call of Duty approach.
@Dan_ozzzy189 If you go like for like and not consider the significant differences each has, CoD ships with more maps (12-16) and a lot more game modes too (around 10-15 + 6 hardcore modes). Both have a single player campaign but CoD also has a number of Co-op options too. This years for example had Zombies and the entire Campaign (including a version of that Campaign replacing soldiers with Zombies). By the time the 'Season' has ended, CoD can have 30+maps with more game-modes than BF (custom game modes and offline as well) and a LOT of co-op maps/options too - something BF doesn't offer.
Whether you prefer the content that BF offers or not, it can't compare to what CoD offers. I buy and play both and I much prefer CoD's campaigns than the QTE filled, on-rails sections and very boring missions in BF (at least in the last 2 - BF2BC was good). Of course there are differences between the two - BF offers vehicles, bigger maps and destruction so that takes up some of the opportunity to add 'content' but on a 1-1 basis CoD has more 'content' than BF.
'Because this is obviously sensitive information, we're going to dance our way around the details, but you can peruse the intel in its entirety through here.'
Don't want to get a lawsuit like Gawker, ehh? :^)
I'm looking quite forward to this game. If the SP missions are as long as BF4 then we should be set on campaign length.
@BAMozzy The difference though is while you get more maps in COD, they are much, much smaller maps compared to battlefield. As with Battlefield there is much more going on in the maps.
@Kamikaze_Krunch I already stated that in my posts - you aren't telling me anything I don't know. CoD still delivers more Maps and Modes which although the maps are smaller, still gives a bit more variety because its less likely the same maps will crop up and a lot more varied modes to play these on too. The fact all these map can usually be played offline and lets not for get CoD offers extensive Co-op modes too. The point I was making is that overall CoD feels like it offers a lot more than BF - but that it shouldn't be compared to CoD but compared to BF4 which shipped with 10maps, 7 modes too. No indication as to whether the Campaign will be longer or more interesting - Both previous campaigns weren't great at all. No mention of any co-op either - Bf3 had some 'co-op'...
Tap here to load 9 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...