• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

What time period do you think the next Battlefield should go?

strafer said:
WW2.

This level with Frostbite and the DICE sound design.

Orgasms everywhere.

OmahaBeach-HonorandSacrifice.jpg
Click to expand...

I know it's been some time, but that still seems kinda...inappropriate?
 
World War One would be awesome. But it generally lacks automatic weapons so DICE wouldn't go for it, because then battle pacing would be slowr and less like Call of Dootdoot.

WW2. I would like that again.
 
Vietnam for me, never really played any of the shooters from when they briefly went through that phase. plus the soundtrack would be ace.
 
Medieval France might be ok. But Battlefield 2642 would be the shit.

strafer said:
WW2.

This level with Frostbite and the DICE sound design.

Orgasms Everywhere.

OmahaBeach-HonorandSacrifice.jpg
Click to expand...

You mean Metro Map 1944? I'm not sure how popular this would be with the non-console crowd.
 
500+ years in the future. The earth is a burned out husk. Fighting takes place on various planets in our solar system, including destroyed cities of earth. Futuristic weapons and technology. Cyber combat and hacking play a crucial role.
 
Michanical said:
500+ years in the future. The earth is a burned out husk. Fighting takes place on various planets in our solar system, including destroyed cities of earth. Futuristic weapons and technology. Cyber combat and hacking play a crucial role.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you're joking but that sounds fucking awesome.
 
Vietnam or WW2.

If they want to make another modern shooter then they should at least give it to us in the form of Bad Company 3.
 
I think one of the biggest issues for a WWI or WWII setting for BF is the lack of helicopters. I think that would hit it quite hard.
 
Well, seeing as there's a dirth of world war 2 games nowadays... I'd say world war 2. Or maybe we should go further back and do a World War 1 game.
 
World War 2. It would mean less weapons and gadgets. I'm not a fan of having tons of attachments, gadgets, and weapons in a shooter (most of which are completely meaningless). I'd rather have quality instead of quantity when it comes to weapon selection. World War 2 allows them to have that focus.
 
WW2, definitely. I never got tired of it so having it completely replaced with bland modern/futuristic shit has been especially annoying.
 
World War 2 actually. It would be insane with today's possibilities. If not then I'd like to go to the future. If we have to do modern again at least make it bad company 3
 
I'd welcome a modern BF1942, but I don't think they're ever going back in time again. Less gear and stuff and attachments and things to grind for forever and monetize.
And maybe now that Battlefront is a thing, they'd be hesitant to make a Battlefield that's more similar to that.

Anyway, 1943 1/3 or 2143 with Bad Company single-player would probably be my wish. Same characters. Time traveling cloned ancestor grandkids or whatever, who cares.
 
WWII has been done to death, if you want that shit go back and play one of the multitude of games in that setting that have already been releases. There have been so so many wars throughout all periods of history, surely some of them would serve as an adequate setting for battlefield game.
 
Fantastical feudal Japan to say "fuck you" to Assassin's Creed. Ok, imagine this:

Vehicles like: magical giant ninja frog, city wall climbing mobile tower thing, ballista, etc.

Classes like samurai, mystical ninja, stealth ninja


Or just whatever WW2 again. Fuck it.
 
Omega Kirby said:
Nah, WW2 is boring. Its been covered by just soooooo many shooters.

Future is the best cause it allows for more imaginative and creative weapons and vehicles
Click to expand...
TheMan said:
WWII has been done to death, if you want that shit go back and play one of the multitude of games in that setting that have already been releases. There have been so so many wars throughout all periods of history, surely some of them would serve as an adequate setting for battlefield game.
Click to expand...
I have hardly seen any multiplayer WWII FPS's so I am not sure what you guys are talking about. The only ones we got last gen were Battlefield 1943 and CoD: W@W but CoD is CoD.. I want a retail release of a realistic WWII FPS like 1943 with the new Frostbite engine.
JigglesBunny said:
Modern is only acceptable if it's Bad Company 3, otherwise, World War II.

We have enough futuristic shit clogging the shooter genre up with the continuation of Halo, Call of Duty throwing it's marbles into Sci-Fi territory at this point and Titanfall getting a sequel that's almost assured to be successful.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Modern if it is a proper sequel to Bad Company 2. I wouldn't mind future too much but I would rather see WWII in Frostbite.
 
Would be interesting seeing how the dynamic changes in BF if they gave the infantry rocket packs or whatever. You'd think they would be a bit 'zippy' for vehicles to lock onto. I suppose they have the benefit of making new futuristic vehicles though with specialist weapons.....
 
Battlefield: Spanish conquest of the yucatans.

Medieval knights vs. Mayan warriors.

Instead of a frag grenade the knights have the ability to spread disease and famine.
 
AmyS said:
Cold War, mid 1980s - U.S. / NATO vs. Soviet Union / Warsaw Pact in Europe.
Click to expand...

that sounds quite interesting actually and given the time would still grant enough "modern" gadgets to fill all the weapon modifications and customization slots that BF likes to offer
 
WW2 is played out to death, I'm still sick of it and wouldn't like it to come back, although a WW2 BF with modern mechanics could be interesting and make me want to play in that era again.
I miss Titan mode though :(
 
Venom Fox said:
WW2 is played out to death, I'm still sick of it and wouldn't like it to come back, although a WW2 BF with modern mechanics could be interesting and make me want to play in that era again.
I miss Titan mode though :(
Click to expand...

I miss it too. It's the one mode I hope they bring back. Although I can't see how they'd incorporate it into a World War II game.
 
Lord of Castamere said:
Implying that there isn't a fanbase for small maps on PC and nobody likes big maps on console? That's fucking stupid and you know it.
Click to expand...

what is "fucking stupid"? I didn't imply anything.

Metro was the least favorite map for a lot of PC players. And a lot of my console only BF friends absolutely loved Metro.

There are reasons that back this up. Namely player limits and ability to completely omit Metro thanks to the BFserver browser.

But you can get all pissy over yourself over console vs PC wars if you want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What should Nintendo do next?
2
68
741
Windle Poons replied
Legend Of Zelda Rumored Next Game? What Do You Think About This?
2 3
121
620
L*][*N*K replied
What game do you think currently has the most toxic gaming base?
2
99
943
Bradamante3D replied
  • Poll
Do you think Sony will subsidize the base PS6 at launch, if so what's highest you think they'll go?
2
56
1K
nial replied
  • Poll
When do you think the next 3D Mario will release?
Poll 
38
1K
DreamcastSkies replied
Top Bottom