With Battlefield 1 creeping up on us, it is a bit surprising the amount of effort put into only the multiplayer aspects of the game thus far. We’ve seen almost nothing on the campaign which, to be fair, has a lot to prove.
Battlefieldgames, in general, aren’t remembered for having great campaigns. However, judging by the recently released gameplay, maybe things have finally changed for the better.
Here are twelve minutes of Battlefield 1 gameplay.
The most interesting part of this is how it seems that dying doesn’t yield some arbitrary game-over screen, and instead, swaps you to another named soldier to continue the fight. Whether or not this is representative of the entire game is at the present time, unknown.
What is known, though, is that the Frostbite engine looks utterly phenomenal. It never ceases to amaze me with what is possible right now. Battlefront before this looked breathtakingly beautiful on both PC and consoles, and Battlefield 1 seems to be no exception.
I also find it quite interesting that they’re potentially opting for a more serious, mature version of war. The pure grit of this game is quite fascinating. Especially when you see a tank gunning down enemies that are shellshocked. Few games before this ever attempted to demonstrate that side of these unnecessary conflicts. While we won’t know until launch whether they’re committed to this or not, it seems to be a good sign.
In an interview with WhatCulture, art director Scott Mitchell revealed that there would be no single-player campaign in the upcoming Rainbow Six title.
He attempts to justify this notion with a statement about player vs. AI modes as seen below.
“There is no story mode per se. You go through training, where you get to experience different operators and their devices. You can play against enemy AI in co-op through all the maps. You can customize matches, so that’s what we’re offering on the single-player side of things”
Fear not, however, as he goes on to talk about how this will impact the multiplayer…
“It’s a pretty good training ground, and on top of that you’re unlocking the same content as you would playing in PvP. You’re still gaining stars, renown points, and new operatives”
In other words, repetitively grind out the multiplayer maps against unintelligent AI for hours on end for unlocks if you so desire. This growing trend is becoming a really frustrating prospect.
First Titanfall and Evolve, now Battlefront and Rainbow Six: Siege. Why do developers think that it’s justifiable to charge full price for a game that is lacking a huge component of what makes these games worth purchasing? Titanfall at least attempted to merge a story into the multiplayer, but lazy execution and a lack of focus meant that it was bare-boned at best.
The beta for Rainbow Six is at least promising, but excluding any sort of proper Campaign with a Tom Clancy game is disappointing to say the least.