Release Date: 21/10/2016
Played On: Win
Available On: PS4 / Win / XBO
Time Played: 7h 55m
Progress: Completed Campaign
Developer: EA DICE
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Okay, it's fair to start off with a statement: the last Battlefield game I actually enjoyed was the first Bad Company. I even spent many hours playing the Bad Company multiplayer, thanks to the novelty of its destruction system that seemed incredibly "next-gen" for me at the time. I'm not about to say that Battlefield 1 is better than Bad Company, but at this point it probably gets the silver medal.
The thing that really endeared me to Bad Company over every other Battlefield game, was the aforementioned "next-gen" novelty, and the interesting campaign. Every campaign since then has been a linear dredge through corridors of scripted enemies and waiting for AI team mates to open doors as slowly as possible. Bad Company had the large open maps, and AI team members who actually had character and were fun to be around.
Although, the real gem in the crown was the destructions systems built into the game's engine. It's why I wanted to keep playing after the campaign was over and ended up spending more time in Bad Company's multiplayer than any other. There was something enchanting about starting a match with all that cover, only to have it slowly eroded as time went on. Finding little nooks to hide in and peer through holes in walls brought on a different pace to the gameplay than I'd experienced elsewhere.
Fast forward to the recent Battlefield games, and all of that is boring and stale to the point I don't even bother with one minute of multiplayer anymore. My interest in Battlefield is so low that I tend to pick them up when they're really cheap, just to play through the campaign. Despite all of the flaws inherent in big studio games, I still enjoy witnessing the spectacle of high budget/heavily scripted productions.
So when I noticed that Battlefield 1 was available as part of my Origin Access subscription, it was a no brainer. Special note has to be given as well, that it seems EA have done some work on how they present the Origin Access games since my frustrating experience with Battlefield 4. Now it's pretty clear when a full game is available without limitations, as opposed to rolling the dice on whether you'd get a trial version or the whole thing. With that in mind, I figured it would be nice to see what Battlefield 1 had to offer, and I was pleasantly surprised.
In case you're unaware, Battlefield 1 takes us back to World War One, which makes the numbering a little more acceptable. However, this is a loose interpretation of the era, which is a little disappointing. It would be cool for such a big budget game to tackle the harsh realities of trench warfare and the terrible conditions soldiers faced.
Instead, the focus is on the soldiers themselves and their individual experiences within the wider scope of madness that was the war. Plus, there's only ever so much that a big studio will want to risk, and most of the inaccuracies are there to enhance the gameplay experience. I suppose most players don't want to hide in a muddy hole covered in shit, only to push the attack and be shot and killed within seconds.
Hence, the moment to moment gameplay is essentially the same as every other Battlefield game. Of course the weapons are appropriate for the period, with some exceptions that feel completely out of place. Although, I concede that even with the imaginative concepts that have been included, the guns are a boring mix of different rifles, pistols, shotguns, and a bunch of machine guns that all feel the same.
In this way, it's almost a bit disappointing that the authenticity (or lack of) ended up landing where it did. It's not authentic enough to only use actual technology of the era, but it's not loose enough to include wacky concepts that are super fun to play with. For what it's worth, this is the kind of grey-area safety that I expect from a Battlefield game, so it's no surprise either way. Unfortunately that's precisely why big budget games are so unappealing most of the time.
Having said that though, if you're into the modern shooter template and happy to ride the middle ground, then this is probably a lot of fun for you. I guess that's another thing I find interesting about these big mass market titles; it provides a little insight into what a large percentage of my fellow gamers are interested in. There's no denying that Battlefield sells a butt-tonne of copies every time a new game comes out, which is worth remembering.
The gameplay mechanics and systems may be from the cookie cutter template academy of triple A game production, but thankfully Battlefield 1 has more going for it than usual. In fact, I mentioned at the top of the page that this might be a contender to be one of the best Battlefield games I've played. So it might be nice to think about how that could possibly be the case.
It's clear that more time and attention has been focused on the Battlefield 1's campaign than previous titles. In fact, it's as if they remembered that campaigns can actually be compelling experiences with their own value. When they finally stop making single player campaigns altogether, I'll stop even thinking about playing their games, so it's nice to see the campaign improve instead of fade away.
The story is told as a series of chapters that focus on a particular soldier or group of soldiers at different locations and times throughout the war. The emphasis is firmly placed on the fact that there were real human beings who fought and died in the war, instead of fancy tech and super heroes taking on the world.
This is highlighted beautifully in the opening prologue, that plants you in the middle of an open battlefield littered with rubble, barbed wire, trenches, and all manner of destruction. As heavy handed as it is, the sequence does a good job of focusing on the sheer amount of lives that were lost in such battles, as you jump from random soldier to random soldier. Every time you're killed (and you're not meant to win) the name of your soldier and their birth to death dates are displayed, before you're whisked off to inhabit another body fighting elsewhere.
It's a nice way to show a bit of the madness of way, which is often missing from these games. There's no celebration of heroism, or success over insurmountable odds. Instead, you feel quite weak and confused as action is happening all around you and you will be killed within moments if you're not careful. Switching between soldiers actually works well, but I would have liked it to go further.
There are sections where you can survive quite a while and take out a bunch of enemies if you pray to the gaming gods. This makes it feel a bit disjointed when you eventually run out of ammo and get pipped by a random bullet, only to jump into another body and get cut down immediately. The system shows some potential for an elegant depiction of war, but once again the need to have fun and be a "video game" gets in the way and you end up being Rambo most of the time.
Unfortunately, it doesn't get much better throughout the rest of the campaign. Each chapter has you playing one or two characters at most and focusing on the heroic things they do on their own. So most of the campaign ends up being another power fantasy about how unstoppable a single hero is amidst countless deaths and defeats.
This is where Battlefield 1 really drops the ball and moves as far away from facing the horrors of war as it can. One chapter even has you pulling a Poe Dameron (of Star Wars note) where you steal a plane from the "good guys" and take out a bunch of "bad guys" which is meant to make up for the fact you got people killed along the way for no reason.
I got a little excited when they introduced a chapter based on the ANZACs landing at Gallipoli. This is something I could actually relate to, as the ANZACs are already considered heroes to the collective consciousness of Australia. Sadly though, it ends up being a kamikaze mission where a single hero saves the day by sacrificing himself for the big payoff. Gallipoli's story should have been one about the pointless sacrifice of human life, thanks to the heartless actions of those in power.
Plus, I'm pretty sure you could apply this thinking to every front in the war, as the death toll was abhorrently high. It's in these moments that Battlefield 1 managed to lose me, as it seemed to forget that it was making a point in the prologue, in favour of power fantasy heroism. Sure it might be standard for the style of game, but perhaps it wouldn't be so disgustingly obvious if they hadn't teased a nuanced interpretation of the war in the prologue.
I don't know if it would be better or worse to ignore the real tragedy of the first world war, but it would have been nice for the developers to make a decision. This tempered position of fence-sitting when it comes to anything interesting really kills any potential the series has for telling a decent story. By comparison., Wolfenstein has always taken an outlandish "what if?" path when telling stories about war, but it works. You don't have to be all serious Battlefield, but picking a side would go a long way to actually making something worth paying attention to.
At this point you might think that I didn't like the campaign very much, but this is a case of potential creating disappointment. There were regular moments throughout each chapter where my interest was piqued by something potentially different, but let down quickly by a predictable and safe outcome. However, when compared to other Battlefield games that I've played, this was definitely one of the more enjoyable editions.
Part of the skill required to play a Battlefield game, is to suspend any cynicism you might have for the tropes of big budget first-person-shooters. I often try to just accept the game for what it is, otherwise there'd be no hope of enjoyment. So there were moments I really liked, which can be reduce to two particular scenarios.
The first is the plane missions, which were as easy as they were fun to execute. Flying over London dog-fighting bi-planes and tri-planes, while weaving between zeppelins and blimps is a lot of fun. The mechanics are basic and you don't have to think a whole lot, but I can handle switching off my brain when I'm signing up for a blockbuster of spectacle.
Alternatively, there are a couple of missions here and there that focus more on stealth, as you are alone behind enemy lines. These missions are a personal favourite of mine, as I always enjoy sneaking up towers and sniping enemies in the dead of night. Once again though, the mechanics aren't anything special and it's a paint-by-numbers affair most of the time, but it's fun if you manage to turn the rational part of your brain off.
Speaking of turning your brain off, why is there always something about big budget games that makes you wonder where all the money went? No matter how large the studio or budget is, something comes up that makes you wonder if anyone was paying attention at all. Maybe it speaks to the fact that huge teams are broken in to sections and none know what the others are doing, but it's a weird aspect of big budget games that always furrows my brow. I mean, you'd think that a simple system of taking out binoculars to tag enemies would be straight forward by now, but it's not.
At key points in the campaign, a prompt appears on screen telling you to hold the Q key to pull out your binoculars and scout enemy camps. Like in every other game, this lets you tag enemies to keep track of them as you approach their area. Seems simple enough and the Battlefield 1 map features key locations with a little binoculars icon that are set up perfectly for scouting. Sounds pretty banal and standard, but it's broken beyond belief in what is otherwise a fairly polished game.
Most of the time when you get in a scouting position and the prompt appears, holding down Q does absolutely nothing at all. I spent too long looking at key bindings in menus to try and figure out what I was doing wrong, but no matter what I tried those bloody binoculars would never appear.
Eventually I gave up even trying, until the final chapter where scouting areas is essential and suddenly, they worked! I stood up on that mountain scouting and tagging enemies with some very useful binoculars until my heart was content. Although, as soon as I changed to my weapon, the binoculars became inaccessible again.
After a lot of trial and error and a bit of internet searching, I learned that this is a common problem that many people have with the game. In fact, it seems like it's just "the way" for binoculars in the single player campaign, with no solution or fixed. It seems like the developers just forgot to implement that part of the game. To make things worse, the only "solution" I found from actual developers was to reinstall the game and/or "press Q to use binoculars".
You may be thinking "who cares about such a small thing", but it legitimately changed the way that I experienced (and enjoyed) the game. It's not like a funky animation that looks weird, but ultimately has little impact. This is an entire gameplay mechanic that does not function and changes the way you play. I ended up running into a bunch of trouble in the final chapter, because I had to go into situations without scouting them out first. It might seem like a little thing to complain about so much, but it baffles me how such a huge production can mess something up so badly.
Then again, this is a Battlefield game, isn't it?
At least I could finish this game, as it never became completely unplayable thanks to frequent crashing and memory leaks. I suppose I didn't have to restart missions thanks to game breaking bugs that halt all progress because enemy spawns failed to trigger. Oh, and I didn't spend ages running around the same empty area wondering where to go next because my AI partner forgot to open the one door blocking progression. With that in mind, Battlefield 1 is a shiny masterpiece in the series, because it actually functions (most of the time).
Sure it's sad that big blockbusters like this can be applauded because things actually work, but that's the way it goes these days. It's why my expectations are already as low as they can go whenever I launch a new war game. As I mentioned earlier, you need to turn off your brain and forget that sushi exists if you want to enjoy a cheap bowl of dried noodles.
Thus, I can forgive an entire mechanic being broken, because the overall experience was mindless fun. It doesn't matter that there was a good game with some real commentary on the horrors of war hidden somewhere, because I never expected anything with depth in the first place. The only thing Battlefield games have going for them is the spectacle of a big budget, which every game in the series has.
Battlefield 1 scores extra points for showing some potential and being a little more interesting than its predecessors. However, it still suffers from sitting on the fence and being broken despite the size of its studio. If you're like me and enjoy the spectacle every now and then of the mass-market blockbusters, there are worse ways to spend a few hours of mindless escapism.