... how?
Because battlefield 1942 wasn't alternate history. Throwing historical accuracy out the window in favor of appealing to the lowest common denominator is loving handicapped.
Beach, throughout this entire thread you have been complaining about a game that hasn't even been really shown yet.
Because I've been wanting a world war 1 game for loving YEARS and I think DICE would do great with it IF they treat it like they treated 1942. I also don't want to get my hopes up (like I did for Battlefront) only for them to be crushed man. Honestly even if this game is stuff I hope a ton of people buy it anyway just to show that we want more games in that timeframe
This is loving DICE, it won't be a "sit in a trench and get mustard gassed" game.
That was more of a joke. I know it's not going to be like that.
I think the most diverse weapons in the game will be melee weapons and pistols, both aligning with how it was irl.
If they follow the period truthfully then thats what most of the weapons will be in general: Semi automatic and bold action guns, again thats not a bad thing but judging from the trailer it looks like they might mess with that. I just hope the machine guns that are mobile are EXTREMELY rare and not a common class thing.
you're too worried about the game being so boring
It's the opposite. I want the game to be intense and nerve racking while your in the trenches. Not "HURR HERES A MACHINE GUN DON'T WORRY ABOUT COVER AND TRENCHES"
stop being an ignorant little cuck.
You're the only person who's being a cuck here since your letting EA forget you in the ass.
Poll