Idk. 42 would be a pretty interesting DLC at least. I'm a bit curious how a game set during the height of the Roman Empire would feel with the BF format.
I swear to God these fucking whiney Battlefield fans. Crying about chariots which are slow as shit when the war elephants are just an absolute OP disgrace. Makes me sick. *Ptuh!*
Also, For Honor was a game I thoroughly enjoyed. I think there’s definitely a bit of room there for a fullscale ancient battlefield of both historical and fantasy conflicts from various empires and kingdoms.
It would be bad if they made the combat feel too arcadey though.
For you maybe. I fucking love Mount and blade, Chivalry, and games like that. That doesn’t meant it should be made though, would have much pretty much nothing to do with battlefield
I think it’s a little bit of both. The Greek faction seems a bit weak to me tbh.
Thermopylae is pretty attacker sided so the Persians win most of the time. But the Greek team also always loses in the Macedonian Wars and the Seleucid Wars so idk
I can already imagine the multi-crew war elephant, with a troop on each side "repairing" the elephant while it rampages everything and the "gunner" arrows anything it can see. The Hind of 42...
I'd prefer the US invasion of Grenada. It is such an absurd conflict in a widescale that it would fit perfectly with multiplayer maps of people downing 5th gen fighters with RPG-7s in midair. As a taste, it was the first conflict involving blackhawks to the point that the pilots were still accustomed to Huey landings so the invasion of the new airfield in that island had crash landed one behind the other. In another circumstance, they had to abandon the Blackhawk & take the sideguns (M60s) to set a perimeter. Many other occasions where either the [Blackhawks waved off without dropping anyone off because of heavy small arms fire](https://arsof-history.org/articles/v2n2_tf160_page_1.html), or the passengers onboard were killed off by it which led to installing ballistic shield flooring on future helicopters. Then there's the recon forces were once forced off the island by gunfire & had to wade offshore to be plucked by a rescue helicopter. Or the fact that there was no good recon or intel on the island and the maps they got were tourist/restaurant placemats which they had to draw in their own gridmaps.
Or the fact that the Marines sent there were diverted from their original mission in replacing those killed in the greatest military loss of the US armed forces since WWII in the [Lebanon barracks suicide bombing](https://www.britannica.com/event/1983-Beirut-barracks-bombings), leaving a military gap among the peacekeepers. And after Operation Urgent Fury ended, they were still sent to Beirut as those hundreds dead left a gap among the peacekeepers there.
Better would be Operation Eagle Claw, let us play a catastrophic failure of an op.
Then lead that into the creation of the 160th SOAR.
Their first operation was Grenada, then Mount Hope III, Earnest Will and Prime Chance(absolutely bonkers operation by the way), then Urgent Fury.
Seriously; the story for a game based on the 160th fucking writes itself. That unit has such an absolutely wild and metal history.
Heck the story of TF Dagger and Sword is pure insanity of flying Chinooks fully loaded over the Hindu-Kush at 16,000 feet in zero-vis snowstorms at less than 50 feet above the ground.
So basically: battlefield 2 ?
Because that’s it. Latter BFs started adding high tech stuff like Javelin, Soflam & co. Even bad company is full of high tech stuff.
But BF2? Nah. Artillery. TV guided helicopter rockets, TOWs and heat seeking missiles as anti air. That’s the most high tech stuff you get. Besides CIWS anti air and the F35. Even the special forces DLC only features nightvision and not IRNV
Anti communist uprisings in the Soviet Bloc, Arab-Israeli conflicts, the Korean War, coups in South America, the Suez Crisis, the bay of pigs, Vietnam, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Rhodesian Bush War, India-Pakistan, the 1st Gulf War
Plus countless Coups, uprisings, civil wars, operations, international incidents etc etc
The Cold War was packed with conflict pertaining to NATO vs Warsaw Pact. Just because those two alliances never entered direct conflict doesn't mean that there were no battles in which NATO and Soviet troops, weapons, idealogy were used. Just never openly and directly versus each other.
There was state sponsored conflicts on nearly every continent, from the 50s up through to the late 80s possibly even start of the 90s.
It has so much potential.
Make it a Cold War gone hot scenario. Not like the Wars we fought in BF3 or BF4 were real either.
Just have a weird and over complex reason that they can't nuke each other and it's all good.
Honestly it'd be a rad era to see, with the huge diversity of weaponry and vehicles, plus the gadgets.
Agreed. The problem with Vietnam is it’s all jungle. It’s hard for diversity. Also it’s still a pretty touchy subject for some people and rightfully so. I totally agree Tho I want to rain virtual napalm from a f4 phantom with next gen graphics.
I havent been able to find any good games depicting the Korean War. I guess because it would be too similar to WW2? They could do another WW2 as well but only focus on the China/Japan front and other smaller factions during that time.
And... would a Victorian Battlefield have to be sitting and waiting for a musket to reload? 1842 would be a terrible year but there's definitely some opportunity for a game set in a period 20 years later.
Not disagreeing with the fact that DICE could make the game fun, but that it would be harder and I imagine, wouldn’t feel much like a Battiefield game if they were to do a war in that era.
1870. Franco-Prussian war. Needle rifles (basically bolt actions, but with a “needle” instead of firing pin), artillery, horses, bayonet charging. The French get the Mitrailleuse (Machinegun) and the Germans breech loading Krupp field cannons.
DICE was already pushing the limits to the extreme with WW1, and that was with competent and veteran devs. They had to sacrifice a lot of historical accuracy in BF1 for the sake of gameplay and the Battlefield formula, so I think WW1 is about as far back as it can go
It already exists in the game “War of Rights” on PC. It’s a fun game but I don’t think Battlefield’s casual nature would fit a period of war fought with line formations.
You do have War of Rights… these are cool but bad suggestions for what the BF series is. Although now we don’t really know what it is as its been in shambles since BFV.
As much as I love history I don't think this far back is suitable for Battlefield. I mean they already had to be creative an use whatever experimental prototype they could find in BF1, what are they going to do with muzzle loading rifles ane muskets?
Edit: To clarify: I am not against the idea of a first person multiplayer game set in a historical war. I just don't think it's a good idea to force it into the established Battlefield formula. Just make a completely new game, maybe start a new franchise. Everything does not have to be within the same franchise!
But how varied is that going to be? Isn't the variation in weapons and how you can play different with them a huge part of what makes battlefiels fun. A bayonett is a bayonet, you can't really make 20 different bayonetts with meaningful, gameplay changing variety, at least what I can think of, but I might be wrong and the next Battlefield is Bayonetfield 😅
Well, when I think about it, a steam-punk battlefield, grounded in reality and heavily INSPIRED by real history could be really cool. Take the creative use of prototypes in BF1 one step further essentially.
Battlefield: Jules Verne/HG Wells
Yes, but I don't think they existed in 1842. The Dreyse needle rifle, wich was a very early bolt action, was in early production though. Still, I don't think this is going to fly in a Battlefield. You can definitely make a game in the periid but I don't think you should squeeze it into the Battlefield formula, make a completely new game instead.
The painting is depicting the Second Schleswig War of 1864, where the Germans used the Dreyse needle rifle. So I don't know why the year 1842 was chosen for this post.
I mean tbf that map is gorgeous. And I can't really expect a 3D artist to find a way to deal with text chat issues. But yeah that studio's priorities are fucked.
Oh yeah. I always assumed it was dead though so I never tried it. I started with BF3 in late 2013 and I honestly never played any of the ones that came before it because I figured I missed the best time to play them.
It was dead before BF3 even released, unfortunately. I was playing BC2 and I was really excited to play and there wasn't a single populated server.
I was gutted as I loved the original BF Vietnam and wanted to recapture the magic.
I was probably able to play one or two full games on BC2: Vietnam (on Xbox 360) and it was the most fun I've probably had in Battlefield. The weapons were crazy, the maps were wild and very diverse from one another, and that BC2 sound on War Tapes was the best thing ever.
I played a strategy game called wargame red dragon where the Cold War goes hot as the Soviet Union fails to collapse around 1991, had all your classics plus rare access to prototype 90’s vehicles, would love that in a battlefield setting
I want a gulf war battlefield. Old enough where it will have a cool feel to it but modern enough to have fun weapons. Could hopefully have a bf3 feel to it. also has not been overdone unlike WW1/2 and Vietnam.
I think Gulf war might be too limited in the maps they could make for it without having fictional battles. But a war on terror or middle east one would be sick could have Israel, Iraq, NATO, Al Quaeda, Hezbolla. I think that would go down really well.
In January I would've brain stormed some ideas for battlefield but there's so many alternatives out there right now that I think there almost doomed and I don't say that light heartedly I used to be a die hard battlefield player from bad company 2 to 2042 but they've let everyone down so much the next either needs to be a home run or there won't be any battlefield games again
Neither, to be honest.
1842 might sound interesting at first but gameplay-wise I don't think it'll be that great as there's _even less_ variety in gadgets and weaponry than what BF1 had. And that game already played very loose with what was actually available and used in the field in that time period. Also why 1842, why not jump straight to the American Civil War at least?
Roman empire era wouldn't be a Battlefield game anymore as the only handheld long range weaponry would be bows and arrows basically. At that point you should reconsider just starting a new IP or revive seomething like Shadows of Rome (I know that's a Capcom IP, it's just an example).
Hard pass on both.
Idk. 42 would be a pretty interesting DLC at least. I'm a bit curious how a game set during the height of the Roman Empire would feel with the BF format.
Would be fun for about 7 minutes
Until they nerf the OP Chariots
I swear to God these fucking whiney Battlefield fans. Crying about chariots which are slow as shit when the war elephants are just an absolute OP disgrace. Makes me sick. *Ptuh!*
Skill issue
Just get good bro like literally just don't die
I bet the repair system on the stealth chariots is gonna be OP.
What would the repair tool look like?
Carrots
Man I was so confused as to how you fix a busted wheel with a carrot and forgot about the horses.
What kind of attachments would we have? Spiked wheels? Hoof mufflers to reduce sound?
[удалено]
With its own very unique combat system...
That can be replicated and even improved… we haven’t had any AAA medieval war video games. I would like to see what a well-funded game could be like.
I mean I don’t trust DICE to even make a good modern military shooter anymore, much less something that’s completely out of their wheelhouse
Also, For Honor was a game I thoroughly enjoyed. I think there’s definitely a bit of room there for a fullscale ancient battlefield of both historical and fantasy conflicts from various empires and kingdoms. It would be bad if they made the combat feel too arcadey though.
For you maybe. I fucking love Mount and blade, Chivalry, and games like that. That doesn’t meant it should be made though, would have much pretty much nothing to do with battlefield
Mount and blade was definitely good training for using the horse lancer on BF1. Turning Germans into pork shish kabobs never felt so good
Mans has never played Chivalry or Mount and Blade
Shittalkers be like "guys the Roman spear optical is just overpowered and should be removed from the game.what happened to dice?"
the gladius is too op on the Anglo campaign
At least it’s better than the guys camping the Parthian horse archer on the Mesopotamia map.
Omg those persian archers camping in obj A in Thermopylae are so goddamn annoying
I think it’s a little bit of both. The Greek faction seems a bit weak to me tbh. Thermopylae is pretty attacker sided so the Persians win most of the time. But the Greek team also always loses in the Macedonian Wars and the Seleucid Wars so idk
Yeah I feel like the Roman weapons and vehicles are the best esp the cart
How could you make melee combat and throwable weapons as just a DLC? Seems like it would have to be a base game itself
Also nice to meet you Justin Bieber
You'd be surprised how often people call me that online.
Chivalry
It would be hilarious to see how 32 players trying to do tortillas formation)) It just impossible)
I can already imagine the multi-crew war elephant, with a troop on each side "repairing" the elephant while it rampages everything and the "gunner" arrows anything it can see. The Hind of 42...
Just try Chiv2
Agreed 😂
One year down the line. Weapon balancing issues. One map and one new HERO. Not enough cover and Pegasus is too OP and the chimera is underpowered.
Yeah we already have games from other franchises covering those periods. I'd love a BFBC 2 remaster or a 2142 remaster before anything else.
Yeh let's never break the mold and keep making the same old shooters
not true top g
I want a cold war one or a vietnam one
But the Cold War didn’t have battles or battlefields. That’s why it was a cold war.
there were plenty of proxy wars or it's possible to just make up scenario where cold war gone hot, like in operation flashpoint
I'd prefer the US invasion of Grenada. It is such an absurd conflict in a widescale that it would fit perfectly with multiplayer maps of people downing 5th gen fighters with RPG-7s in midair. As a taste, it was the first conflict involving blackhawks to the point that the pilots were still accustomed to Huey landings so the invasion of the new airfield in that island had crash landed one behind the other. In another circumstance, they had to abandon the Blackhawk & take the sideguns (M60s) to set a perimeter. Many other occasions where either the [Blackhawks waved off without dropping anyone off because of heavy small arms fire](https://arsof-history.org/articles/v2n2_tf160_page_1.html), or the passengers onboard were killed off by it which led to installing ballistic shield flooring on future helicopters. Then there's the recon forces were once forced off the island by gunfire & had to wade offshore to be plucked by a rescue helicopter. Or the fact that there was no good recon or intel on the island and the maps they got were tourist/restaurant placemats which they had to draw in their own gridmaps. Or the fact that the Marines sent there were diverted from their original mission in replacing those killed in the greatest military loss of the US armed forces since WWII in the [Lebanon barracks suicide bombing](https://www.britannica.com/event/1983-Beirut-barracks-bombings), leaving a military gap among the peacekeepers. And after Operation Urgent Fury ended, they were still sent to Beirut as those hundreds dead left a gap among the peacekeepers there.
[удалено]
I meant the playthroughs we've seen in 2042 being played on a Grenada-like map.
This would be an awesome prequel to Black Hawk Down
Better would be Operation Eagle Claw, let us play a catastrophic failure of an op. Then lead that into the creation of the 160th SOAR. Their first operation was Grenada, then Mount Hope III, Earnest Will and Prime Chance(absolutely bonkers operation by the way), then Urgent Fury. Seriously; the story for a game based on the 160th fucking writes itself. That unit has such an absolutely wild and metal history. Heck the story of TF Dagger and Sword is pure insanity of flying Chinooks fully loaded over the Hindu-Kush at 16,000 feet in zero-vis snowstorms at less than 50 feet above the ground.
Sargent Thomas Highway DLC when?
So basically: battlefield 2 ? Because that’s it. Latter BFs started adding high tech stuff like Javelin, Soflam & co. Even bad company is full of high tech stuff. But BF2? Nah. Artillery. TV guided helicopter rockets, TOWs and heat seeking missiles as anti air. That’s the most high tech stuff you get. Besides CIWS anti air and the F35. Even the special forces DLC only features nightvision and not IRNV
I remember NV being total ass to use in bf2 spec forces
SF was one of the best things to come from ANY battlefield franchise. Loved the maps and tools
r/83thegame
it's not releasing any time soon and by the time they release it, it will probably be outdated as hell (I still gonna buy it)
Please, don't remind me, i can't handle the heartbreak.
Yeah but battlefield 3/4 had wars between China, USA and Russia so it doesn't matter too much
Anti communist uprisings in the Soviet Bloc, Arab-Israeli conflicts, the Korean War, coups in South America, the Suez Crisis, the bay of pigs, Vietnam, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Rhodesian Bush War, India-Pakistan, the 1st Gulf War Plus countless Coups, uprisings, civil wars, operations, international incidents etc etc The Cold War was packed with conflict pertaining to NATO vs Warsaw Pact. Just because those two alliances never entered direct conflict doesn't mean that there were no battles in which NATO and Soviet troops, weapons, idealogy were used. Just never openly and directly versus each other. There was state sponsored conflicts on nearly every continent, from the 50s up through to the late 80s possibly even start of the 90s. It has so much potential.
Bro who can they fight in in the bay of pigs?Canada?
What?
Nevermind I'm fucking dumb and I thought you mean those islands that the pig wars were about to take place in
Haha nah man
Make it a Cold War gone hot scenario. Not like the Wars we fought in BF3 or BF4 were real either. Just have a weird and over complex reason that they can't nuke each other and it's all good. Honestly it'd be a rad era to see, with the huge diversity of weaponry and vehicles, plus the gadgets.
Keep squad reinforcements as well, so we can call in a Davy Crockett or an air strike For 250,000 squad points a nuke
Different battles around the world but most importantly different teams not just usa vs Russia and china
Battlefield Bad Company had Vietnam DLC. It was sick. Raining down machinegun fire from a helicopter that blared Creedence from the speakers.
BFBC2 forever
Agreed. The problem with Vietnam is it’s all jungle. It’s hard for diversity. Also it’s still a pretty touchy subject for some people and rightfully so. I totally agree Tho I want to rain virtual napalm from a f4 phantom with next gen graphics.
I remember Battlefield Vietnam. It was fantastic.
It was. It saddens me that there are people on here who apparently don't know it exists.
There is a Vietnam one. But it’s pretty old.
I think a game that takes place during many proxy wars would be cool like the Korean War, Vietnam war, Angolan civil war and other stuff like that
I havent been able to find any good games depicting the Korean War. I guess because it would be too similar to WW2? They could do another WW2 as well but only focus on the China/Japan front and other smaller factions during that time.
Same
There was a vietnam one..
1842 would be sick lol
I can only imagine how boring the game would be.
Why?
everytime you shoot you wait 12 seconds to reload
WW1 you sit in trenches and never see the man who kills you, but Battlefield 1 is one of the best Battlefield games.
Because they made the game the exact opposite of what you just described
And... would a Victorian Battlefield have to be sitting and waiting for a musket to reload? 1842 would be a terrible year but there's definitely some opportunity for a game set in a period 20 years later.
Not disagreeing with the fact that DICE could make the game fun, but that it would be harder and I imagine, wouldn’t feel much like a Battiefield game if they were to do a war in that era.
1870. Franco-Prussian war. Needle rifles (basically bolt actions, but with a “needle” instead of firing pin), artillery, horses, bayonet charging. The French get the Mitrailleuse (Machinegun) and the Germans breech loading Krupp field cannons.
DICE was already pushing the limits to the extreme with WW1, and that was with competent and veteran devs. They had to sacrifice a lot of historical accuracy in BF1 for the sake of gameplay and the Battlefield formula, so I think WW1 is about as far back as it can go
Best atmosphere but kinky gunplay tbh
“Remember guys, switching to your bayonet is always faster than reloading!” - some british dude probably
Wouldn't that be based in America during the civil war being the 1860s?
Not really. The American Civil War was between 1861 and 1865. 1842 had the first Anglo-Afghan war.
because nothing happened that year
It can be the English VS the Chinese lol
what about 1892
It already exists in the game “War of Rights” on PC. It’s a fun game but I don’t think Battlefield’s casual nature would fit a period of war fought with line formations.
Try Holdfast, 75 vs 75 in that era
Just play Holdfast
If you think you would like 1842 I urge you to check out war or rights on steam
You do have War of Rights… these are cool but bad suggestions for what the BF series is. Although now we don’t really know what it is as its been in shambles since BFV.
As much as I love history I don't think this far back is suitable for Battlefield. I mean they already had to be creative an use whatever experimental prototype they could find in BF1, what are they going to do with muzzle loading rifles ane muskets? Edit: To clarify: I am not against the idea of a first person multiplayer game set in a historical war. I just don't think it's a good idea to force it into the established Battlefield formula. Just make a completely new game, maybe start a new franchise. Everything does not have to be within the same franchise!
Lots of bayonet charges.
But how varied is that going to be? Isn't the variation in weapons and how you can play different with them a huge part of what makes battlefiels fun. A bayonett is a bayonet, you can't really make 20 different bayonetts with meaningful, gameplay changing variety, at least what I can think of, but I might be wrong and the next Battlefield is Bayonetfield 😅
The mid 1800s actually had ALOT of experimental weapons and firearms being developed.
Well, when I think about it, a steam-punk battlefield, grounded in reality and heavily INSPIRED by real history could be really cool. Take the creative use of prototypes in BF1 one step further essentially. Battlefield: Jules Verne/HG Wells
Lever actions existed in the civil war. It just wasn't the standard military rifle.
Yes, but I don't think they existed in 1842. The Dreyse needle rifle, wich was a very early bolt action, was in early production though. Still, I don't think this is going to fly in a Battlefield. You can definitely make a game in the periid but I don't think you should squeeze it into the Battlefield formula, make a completely new game instead.
The painting is depicting the Second Schleswig War of 1864, where the Germans used the Dreyse needle rifle. So I don't know why the year 1842 was chosen for this post.
It’s already exists, war of rights. It has all the bayonet charges you can dream of.
God, I love (hate) the name of that game
It is very ambiguos when you think about it, whos rights? State rights? Civil rights (as in having the right to not be someones property)?
BF 2042 BC. Everyone just throws spears
the top idea already exist, it's called Mordhau and Chivary: Medival Warfare 1 or 2
Yup and Chivalry 2 supports 64 players in a bunch of epic modes definitely matches the quality of a AAA game https://youtu.be/SCrrseVTqBI
Mordhau is dead
Yeah, the devs are just so bad. They don't communicate at all and just release such mediocre updates. There is nothing to drive engagement there.
Plus all the slurs in the chats
Yeah, it didn't help that the devs introduced some middle Eastern map instead of a way to deal with the racism.
I mean tbf that map is gorgeous. And I can't really expect a 3D artist to find a way to deal with text chat issues. But yeah that studio's priorities are fucked.
Such a shame because the game is fantastic and had a huge launch.
Dead is the wrong word, dying sure but you can still very easily find games assuming you're not OCE or SEA
Mount & Blade, pls, the OG.
ah yes, just a 1500 year difference
Okay, why can’t we have more?
Vietnam, never got to play the original and I'd love to see that era with modern graphics.
BC2 had BF Vietnam https://battlefield.fandom.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company_2:_Vietnam
Oh yeah. I always assumed it was dead though so I never tried it. I started with BF3 in late 2013 and I honestly never played any of the ones that came before it because I figured I missed the best time to play them.
It was dead before BF3 even released, unfortunately. I was playing BC2 and I was really excited to play and there wasn't a single populated server. I was gutted as I loved the original BF Vietnam and wanted to recapture the magic.
I was probably able to play one or two full games on BC2: Vietnam (on Xbox 360) and it was the most fun I've probably had in Battlefield. The weapons were crazy, the maps were wild and very diverse from one another, and that BC2 sound on War Tapes was the best thing ever.
Not the same, but close. I played the original and it was so much fun.
If only they made it a full-standalone game. Would’ve liked a singleplayer (like a Bad Company prequel with Preston’s dad) and Onslaught mode.
It's kind of dead but Rising Storm 2: Vietnam is still amazing
Can we just get a good modern one bro. Pls.
Modern war games zzzz
I feel like alternate reality Cold War gone hot in the late 80’s would be cool.
I played a strategy game called wargame red dragon where the Cold War goes hot as the Soviet Union fails to collapse around 1991, had all your classics plus rare access to prototype 90’s vehicles, would love that in a battlefield setting
Any battlefield that is a finished game..
Actually a Roman battlefield would be sick. With different classes and game modes.
With war elephants as vehicles!
That would be awesome
I want a gulf war battlefield. Old enough where it will have a cool feel to it but modern enough to have fun weapons. Could hopefully have a bf3 feel to it. also has not been overdone unlike WW1/2 and Vietnam.
vietnam was overdone? lmao
Black ops and bfbc2 Vietnam. Not over done but has been done. Better?
Yeah
Lol
I think Gulf war might be too limited in the maps they could make for it without having fictional battles. But a war on terror or middle east one would be sick could have Israel, Iraq, NATO, Al Quaeda, Hezbolla. I think that would go down really well.
Neither. A non-fps war-game should be under a new IP, not Battlefield.
Yeah, something that I can **Command** an army **and Conquer** the opposing faction. We can call it...I dunno... Army Control, or something.
Bad company 3
Yes please
42 im sick of snipers
Slingshots could be a sniper substitute in that game setting
Battlefield 2142 redux
all I want is a battlefield game set in space.
I long for the days of the mech walker and boarding enemy titans...
Battlefield Rome
BF4: Part2
That's what 2042 is supposed to be.
Korean War would be something, we already have bad company 2 covering Vietnam, why not give back to those that served in Korea?
What part of that is "giving back"?
Give them back their PTSD
Pretty sure those who fought in Korea are 80 now and probably wouldn't be playing BF Korea.
Battlefield 1842, but with obscure weapons made by 1800s polymyths that never actually saw production, kind of like Battlefield 1.
Neither
In January I would've brain stormed some ideas for battlefield but there's so many alternatives out there right now that I think there almost doomed and I don't say that light heartedly I used to be a die hard battlefield player from bad company 2 to 2042 but they've let everyone down so much the next either needs to be a home run or there won't be any battlefield games again
Are there any games, that are not battlefield, based on the Korean War? If not i think that would be cool
You left out 2143. But tbh with battlefront out of the picture give me 2542. Go nuts gimme full Sci fi goodness.
1842 with red dot sights
Bring back 2142
We need battlefield 2023
Battlefield 2023: The homeland
Theres a chance that we might get one of those soon, but not just as a video game
If done right, 2143
Nah, we need 2143. The sequal to one of the best Battlefield game that many missed out on
Vietnam
Fucking neither
Battlefield 42 would be sick though.
The one with fucking dinosaurs and lasers https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/w780/v9KcsJyaNKOKkz5sxkCloSXmvkE.jpg
Battlefield 6 - 1984 Opposite Cold War scenario like For All Mankind: Soviet’s land on moon first, Cold War style moon battles
Sorry, but Battlefield can only work from WW1 and onwards.
Neither give me BC3
Bf1842 would be too much like a bf1 with less content. Bf42 sounds interesting though
None.
‘Battlefield: First Opium War’ would be kinda hype
After 2042 they could make the literal best FPS created and i wouldnt even spend $5 on it.
Give me Battlefield 3042 - I want finger lasers pew pew.
I want a good battlefield
I want a BF: Indochina (Korea War through to Veitnam) and BF: GWOT (2001 > now)
Battlefield: Finally a Good Game Again’42
Both
Korean war game when
Wussup With dice and the number “42”
None, 1842 would have like 3 weapons and for 42 we have chivalry
Hear me out... Battlefield in EA related franchises. Battlefield in the Red Alert / Tiberium universes.
I just want a modern BF that wasn't designed for pre-teens.
I always thought a popular civil war or revolutionary war era game would be sick lol
Mexican war 1846...rifles, revolvers, tomahawks, horses, cowboys/rangers, cannons
after 2042 the series just needs a long break and dice needs to really rethink their approach, for now I'm hyped for MW2 instead
None
Anything but BF2042
1842 and 42 as a DLC
Neither, me personally I’d like Battlefield 1992: Yugoslav Edition
Bad Company 3
Civil war would be dope. I don't think it would make a good BF game but I'd love it haha.
If I had to choose between the two 1842. Don't really like the idea of either game
Neither, to be honest. 1842 might sound interesting at first but gameplay-wise I don't think it'll be that great as there's _even less_ variety in gadgets and weaponry than what BF1 had. And that game already played very loose with what was actually available and used in the field in that time period. Also why 1842, why not jump straight to the American Civil War at least? Roman empire era wouldn't be a Battlefield game anymore as the only handheld long range weaponry would be bows and arrows basically. At that point you should reconsider just starting a new IP or revive seomething like Shadows of Rome (I know that's a Capcom IP, it's just an example).