Ww1

[Abokasee]

Can anyone tell me any WW1 games at all! not mods games! Cause I havnt seen any at all I know WW0 but thats not really a WW1 game!

[Csargo]

I don't think there is any. Or none that I know of.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

There was a Red Baron flight simulator a long time ago, but at the moment all I can recall is the BF1918 mod (Yes, I know what was said about mods).

They're both worth playing though.

[Pindar]

Can anyone tell me any WW1 games at all! not mods games! Cause I havnt seen any at all I know WW0 but thats not really a WW1 game!

Paradox's Victoria includes a scenario on WWI. The game spans 1835 to 1920. One scenario begins in August 1914. There is another sceanario the begins in 1881 where the stage is moving toward the Great War and, depending on the actions of the player, either comes about much earlier or not at all.

[lars573]

There is a WW1 RTS game from a Russian dev. called Buka. The great war, WW1 the entiente, maybe another title.

[Kekvit Irae]

I'd love to see a Call of Duty game based around 1916-1918. Oh man, trench warfare in a first person shooter would seriously make me want to preorder it.

[Zenicetus]

Yeah, I'm having a hard time imagining the appeal of a WWI sim, especially a COD-type first person shooter. Those games are bad enough, with the player as superman who survives against impossible odds, but at least the terrain and urban combat is interesting.

Walking over a flat, muddy no-man's-land through artillery barrage and into machine gun fire with no cover at all, just doesn't have the same appeal. It would be like the Normandy cliffs mission in COD2, and that only works because the game includes many other types of terrain and missions... it's not just that same mission over and over. I think that's why we don't see any WWI infantry-based games. The excitement and glamour of combat was all in the air, and yes... I enjoyed both Red Baron games. I wish someone would do a modern version.

[Abokasee]

A RTS world war 1 would be a turtlers dream

[CountArach]

I know what you said about no mods, but if you have Hearts of Iron 1, there is the Great War mod for it that is WW1 based. Haven't looked into it too much though, so I'm not sure about the quality/completeness.

[Somebody Else]

Entente

[Rodion Romanovich]

It's have to be majorly cinematized. WWI combat doesn't lend itself to drama quite the way WW2 combat does. Instead of: "Go go go, storm that house! Grenade, Grenade! Watch out for that tank!" you get soemthing more like "Man, I got trench foot. This sucks. Oh crap, officer coming this way, look enthusiastic! Time to go over the top? Damn." Followed by a brief charge ending with the player dying.

You kidding me?

WW2: I need two men to flank them Jerries! You and me, we stay in cover. Hopefully we'll receive tank support soon! Throw a grenade too!

WW1: I need 5,000 men to charge that trench over there! Oh wait, get down into the trenches again and get those machineguns going - we have 3,000 incoming enemies! Ready your frag grenades! Wait - get down - they're shelling us! 3,000 fall back to the second line of trenches, try to direct the artillery further left!

[BDC]

WW1 was lots of waiting, followed by being killed by a sniper/mowed down walking towards machine guns/foot falling off.

WW2 was also lots of waiting, followed by much the same, but in a more dramatic and varied way.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

People are focusing on the Western Front of WWI. What about the Eastern Front? There were much more free-flowing and dynamic battles there.

[Rodion Romanovich]

I disagree that a realistic ww2 would be more dramatic than a realistic ww1 game. CoD isn't a very realistic display of ww2 at all - first of all you NEVER fight duels over distances close to the maximum effective range of your weapons - which was usually 500 or more meters - the maximum distance to an enemy in CoD is hardly more than 50 meters, and most commonly 5-25 meters. Therefore, you have a gun accuracy percentage of close to 100% - which is completely unrealistic! There should be more shooting up ammo just to suppress and enemy and more difficult to aim (but I think BIA exaggerates this aspect - especially because BIA like CoD has the player fighting all duels with the enemy only 5-20 meters away ). Secondly, you have no ability to command friendly troops. Thirdly you have only one way to go at all times, so you MUST run over a field covered by enemy machinegun fire, rather than sending some men around a flank, or alternatively the game decides for you that you should flank, but then the option of charging ahead is locked and the game already tells you to flank giving you no choice there either. And then the ridiculous part when running through machinegun fire you can just run from one piece of cover to another, then stay hidden for long enough and the mg will aim for someone else, then you run again to the next cover, and the machinegun again soon forgets about you when you've lied hidden for a while, even though you are the most dangerous threat to the machinegunner as you're the only one advancing closer to him to be able to kill him... And the fact that the enemy tanks seldom have any infantry support at all, and you have all the time in the world to destroy them if you just sneak a bit (and the tanks are equally vulnerable to your AT weapons no matter if you shoot them from behind, the sides or the front). Then the ridiculous part when your squad leader screams orders in a panicked voice even when everything is under your control and there are say 2 enemies alive and completely exposed without any cover.

ww1 would be a lot more dramatic and varied IMO! ww1 simply has EVERYTHING ww2 had, but also another element which ww2 doesn't have - the epic mass charges and trench warfare. The game could pictures the western front trench warfare - during which there were many advances even if the gains were minimal. There could be massive charge and defense-against-charge missions. And there could be missions of sniping, sneaking and scouting between the trench lines here, with skirmishing patrols. There could also be the eastern front highly mobile warfare (only it would feature larger squads and more epic combat than ww2 games), and then finally the German offensives during the late war, where infantry infiltration tacics similar to the ww2 tactics were used.

[Somebody Else]

Surely a WW1 sim would be all about trying to get into the Womens' Auxiliary Balloon Corps?

[cannon_fodder]

I agree with everything LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix said in his post. Might I again say that the Korean War is awesome subject matter for an FPS. More variety than in most 20th century wars.

[Marshal Murat]

I think a more specialized version of WW1 might be best. Sneak attacks in the night. Defending your trench with rifle, then sniper rifle, then machine gun.
A British soldier sneaking into a German trench in the night.
German sniper at the Somme.
French soldier at the Battle of Verdun
Massive artillery barrages, gas attacks, tanks (especially from the recieving end)

[Mithradates]

Imagine a rythm action putting on gas mask game that would rack up the tension. ;)

[TigerVX]

Not everything in WW1 would have to be trenches! I mean, trench level would be awesome. But theres more to it then just that. You could storm the beaches of Gallipoli as ANZAC troops, become a lone machine gunner/grenadier, guarding the hallways and rooms in the Fortress of Verdun. Become a member of the Lost Battalion in the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, having to fend off constant German Counter attack on all sides amidst endless forest. Also, the Eastern front was much more fluid then the western front. Alot less trenches, more mobile armies. I think that WWI would be a great FPS, but there haven't been as many movies about them, and thus alot less appeal to the gernal public.

[CountArach]

I think that the game owuld be awesome if you were merelly "just another man", as in there were tons of AI around you, each reacting to the goings on around them, with the Battle flowing, not always the way it can go. As the battle progresses, so do your objectives. You may have to be a sniper one second, then a machine gunner, etc, etc.

How cool would driving a tank over the trenches be?

[cannon_fodder]

^ Yep, that'd be awesome.

[Kraxis]

I'm thinking of the Alp front between Italy and Austria... Now THAT would be some epic fights.

Starting out in a small cave you have crawl out of, snow everywhere. Mission to go knock out a gun that keep causing avalanches. Meet enemy infantry trying to take your position from the rear, get to the other mountain, go through enemy caves and trenches. Spots enemy infantry lining up for attack, shoot officers, RUN! Hides in snow, moves on to find the gun, stumble upon hidden enemy emplacement of spotters... I could go on.

But that front was just about the greatest ever for FPS games. Most distances were indeed very long, a lot of the combat was crazy enough to defy the imagination of the modern person. So basically anything that happens would be fair enough.

[Papewaio]

A RTS world war 1 would be a turtlers dream

It doesn't always pay to turtle:

Charge of the Light Horse... http://www.lighthorse.org.au/histbatt/beersheba.htm

[Zenicetus]

I'm thinking of the Alp front between Italy and Austria... Now THAT would be some epic fights.

It doesn't always pay to turtle:

Charge of the Light Horse... http://www.lighthorse.org.au/histbatt/beersheba.htm

Sure, a "WWI" game could be made from those scenarios, but it wouldn't be representative of the war as a whole, in most people's minds... the way the COD series (more or less) represents the infantry experience in WWII.

I think most people think of WWI as trench warfare, alternating between total boredom and total terror.... but not the "fun" kind, like the COD series. There's nothing fun (for me, anyway) in mass slaughter by machine gun and artillery, or mustard gas warfare. And I don't know how you could market a "WWI" game without including the Western front trench lines.

I think that's the obvious reason why we've never seen (so far) a WWI FPS game, or even many strategy games based on the war. Horrible as it was, it's just not that interesting on either a strategic or tactical level. The only successful games that have ever been made about WWI (AFAIK) are the two Red Baron combat flight sims (as well as a few other terrible, arcade WWI biplane shooters), which focus on the only really glamorous aspect of the war.... at least for non history buffs who have never heard of things like the Charge of the Light Horse. I just don't think a game company could make any money selling an infantry-based WWI FPS or RTS game, when there are so many other conflicts to choose from.

Just my $.02 opinion...

[Kraxis]

A naval warfare sim in WWI would be better than any for WWII. No carriers worth mentioning, no radar, and plenty battleships to duke it out. I wonder why nobody big has ever tried it.

Of course an FPS would have trenchwarfare. It must! But there would be no need for a purely westernfront game. A lot of other scenarios could be made without compromising the WWI feel. A few maps and scenarios on the western front wouldn't make the game boring at all. As long as it isn't the only thing.

[Zenicetus]

I agree that a naval WWI game would be a blast. I'd love to command a Dreadnaught fleet with the graphics engine and sea/weather effects of Silent Hunter III. Unfortunately naval games just aren't that popular, for some reason. Look at how long it was between the last sub sim and Silent Hunter III.

About the only thing more out-of-vogue than naval games now, is combat helicopter sims.

[Warluster]

You could make a WW1 thing like COD, it doesn't just have to be the western front, I tried making a mod for COD 2 about WW1, i did not get any people helping so it failed!

[CrossLOPER]

The closest thing I've played to a WWI game is Iron Storm. When I first bought it, I thought it was a RTS. Nope. VERY HARD and unforgiving with snipers literally around every corner and machine gun nests where you don't want them. Let's not forget the kennels. Lots of other fun places and ways of being turned into a steaming pile of gibs.

It's not really pure WWI, but it plays out like WWI lasted to the sixties. The early part of the game has trenches, so that should satisfy those who want it. Not a large variety of weapons and the rocket launcher is the most gettho thing you will ever see in a game, but it's that kind of uniqueness that makes me like the game.

Graphics are outdated, but gameplay is very good and quite challenging. Highly recommended.

BEYOND THIS DOOR, YOUR LIFE IS IN GOD'S HANDS.

ÜBER DIESER TÜR HINAUS IST IHR LEBEN IN DEN HÄNDEN DES GOTTES.

[Watchman]

A naval warfare sim in WWI would be better than any for WWII. No carriers worth mentioning, no radar, and plenty battleships to duke it out. I wonder why nobody big has ever tried it.

Probably 'cause there didn't actually happen too much on the seas. The German navy always had the dubious distinction of being pretty much by default against the single biggest, baddest sea power in the whole damn world (based right next door) and duly pretty much stuck to the Baltic like a good "brown water" navy.

It must've kind of rankled those old admirals that their entire arm of service had as its about sole real contribution the sneaky sinking of freighters with subs - hardly the stuff flag-waving hero stories are made of, that, although definitely grueling enough for the poor sods stuck in creaky tin cans underwater.

There were a few major naval engagements - when that one German task force "showing the flag" on the Pacific when the war started tried to fight its way to the Atlantic, and Helgoland - but for the most part the Germans didn't deign to leave the Baltic to get themselves pulverized by the British juggernaut which sort of kept the action down.

I don't think they bothered the Russian Baltic fleet too much either, although there may not have been much of one around to begin with given how long it takes to build a capital ship and the fact the previous ones had been mostly sunk by the Japanese a decade or so earlier.

...did anything interesting happen on the Mediterranean aside from the Gallipoli mess, anyway...?


As for the other fronts, Gallipoli pretty much turned into a modified version of West Front trench attrition almost from the beginning so that'd hardly be a good choice. The East Front was something of a shooting range for the Germans courtesy of appalling levels of unadultered incompetence among the Russian senior brass by what I know of it, and one suspects mowing down hapless peasant soldiers in greatcoats would get old a bit fast.

The Middle East front between the Brits and the Turks was AFAIK relatively fluid and things actually happened there (as in, something else than soldiers perishing by the thousands without meaningful changes in the situation), but given that the whole Israel-Palestine mess partly traces right back to those times one suspects it just might be a wee bit too sensitive a topic to cover.

[Warluster]

Me and some friends statrted a WW1 mod the other week for COD2, I haven't got a lot of people so if you want to join up you will be welcomed. It will have, English at places like the Somme and Underground fights, Germany at (Maybe) Africa, Russia or Asutria at the Eastern Front (Preferbaly Austria because of Serbia) ANZACS or Turkish at the Middle-East, so PM me if you want to join