|
|
03-08-2012, 01:25 AM
|
#1 | ||
      Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,830
|
It isn't just the battles, it is also the weapons. Most of the guns at the time were all single action. The machine guns were mounted not mobile, leading to a much slower game style. Can't waste your shots when you only have one. Making WW1 into a CoD or MoH game would fail, that is why I suggested a better format for it one that takes into account the much slower (to people who play the very fast paced CoD/MoH) gameplay and makes it an advantage.
WW1 also has a less clear bad guy, Germany was attacking other countries but they weren't NAZI's this time around. The evil deeds of the NAZI party is well known and it adds to the WW2 games, the bad guys are BAD and you can enjoy killing them without the guilt of remembering they were just people. For a lazy story writer that presents a problem, or to one on a heavy time line to get a games story finished. |
||
|
|
|
03-08-2012, 01:49 AM
|
#2 | ||
    Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Gdansk, Poland
Posts: 586
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat There are other examples of BAR-like LMGs ...or even early SMGs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergmann_MP18 And are you trying to say we don't use bolt action rifles in MoH/CoD nearly all the time? Those Mausers 98k, Lee-Enfields, Springfields etc.? Guess what, they were the standard rifles of WW1. While I agree that WW1 is less "marketable" than WW2, this doesn't mean you can't use it successfully as a background for an entertainment product. Surely all those American Civil War games should completely fail in sales outside US, right...? Yes, Nazis are used like ...aliens or zombies - "safe" cannon fodder for game developers. A bit boring, don't you agree? |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Hybrid Mode
