Gamerchief's Battlefield 1 Game Review

So, this is EAs big one for this year, and while I had my doubts about how good the game would be surrounding the pre-release hype, and the disappointments that were Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline and of course Star Wars Battlefront, I must say, I was pleasantly surprised. So does the game live up to the hype? Does it redefine the FPS genre and finally end the COD curse? Is it the second wind that will revive this slowly decaying genre? Well, lets find out...

Story and Plot:

Of course, lets begin with the Single Player. The Single Player takes place across a variety of theaters of war and essentially puts you in the shoes of a front-line soldier and does an impressive job unfolding the events as viewed by the player character. Now, I have my doubts about historical accuracy about these characters but the game does a splendid job as it reveals major events in very articulate fashion, and maintains a great, immersive atmosphere with its grand set pieces of war and its portrayal of the futility of war is done well(albeit not without cliches). The Single Player Campaign should take you, yes, wait for it: 5-7 hours complete, (7 if you're brutally lazy, and even then playing on the hard difficulty). Like what? This campaign had so much more potential, in the end I was just left high and dry.

Single-player Campaign Rating: 7.5/10

Gameplay:

So, how does the game play? It should come as no surprise that the FPS genre is fairly simple to play. FInd your target and kill them while minimizing the damage you take (multiplayer experience differs vastly, which I will explain in a bit), and BF1 doesn't deviate from the genre one bit. It doesn't reinvent the wheel and it definitely isn't a genre defining game, but it accomplishes what it sets out to do as a competent shooter( by competent I mean not broken). But the guns, which look spectacular by the way, are way to overpowered to feel like a WW1 weapon, no seriously, they're just reskins of the BF4 weapons and will rip anything into shreds. And, that's my only gripe here, it sort of breaks immersion, I mean if you look at the trench warfare scenario

And compared to charging across battlefield like Rambo in power armor, it kinda breaks the grim and hopeless atmosphere of the war of attrition.

Now I'm not saying its a bad thing, but its an experience just too familiar with, as in common with almost all FPS games. And BF1 genuinely had a chance to enhance this atmosphere of tension with its excellent visuals and audio quality.

Gameplay Rating: 9/10 (Because Multiplayer is a whole different beast)

Them Technical Aspects (Visuals, Sound Design, Production Design blah blah blah blah blah)

The game is, ahem, a technological masterpiece and that's saying something, It is possibly the best looking FPS game all year (yep better than Mankind Divided and even DOOM). Which is also helped by the fact how well optimized it is, the Frostbite engine is offers some of the most vivid visuals in recent memory, from the character models to the environment effects to the almost completely destructible gameworld (yes, you can destroy buildings so don't expect to turtle out). I mean just take a look at this screenshot (1080p Very High Settings):

Just Beautiful.

Even the obsessive level of detail can be observed in minor things.

KABOOOOOM!

I've only played on the PC, with my Nvidia 750ti, and the visual fidelity the game offers for my humble GPU is quite impressive. With zero crashes and game breaking bugs, its one of the most solid releases in recent memory. I can't speak for the console versions but there have been no major issues reported by the respective XBONE and PS4 communities.

The sound design is spectacular, every gun has a unique sound design, from how it fires to reloading(if you're manually bolt or a magazine, you can hear clink of the bullet loading into the chamber). Its awesome, From the firefights to the explosions to the orchestrated score in the background. The Sound Quality is excellent.

Tech Design: 10/10 (YEP)

Multiplayer:

Multiplayer is the champ of the Battlefield franchise and its easy to see why, but MP of BF1 is especially noteworthy since it was STABLE at release(at least, for me). It carries over everything that's good from the previous games and adds its own little tweaks(in fact there's so much to cover, I could write another whole review) but to keep it short.... It just works, never once will you feel like quitting it, even if the MP is hugely unbalanced when boyfriend veteran enters the field(they will destroy you). Now, all that being said, I would recommend this to anyone who prefers multiplayer over single player. Eighty percent of the games content lies here and the MP is the heart of BF1 (the entire series actually). Just with that being said.

Multiplayer Rating: 9.5/10(not gonna cover the whole thing, but the score should speak for itself)

Verdict:

Now, I know that with such high ratings across the board, BF1 should come across as a great game right? Right? Well... Yeah.... No. Nope. Don't get me wrong, BF1 is a good game, but really, its nowhere near great or outstanding. Its just an extremely polished shooter, which does what it sets out to do. And its a lot of fun, but its generic fun, the kinda fun you've already had if you're FPS gamer. And in that regard, EA plays it safe. Because most BF1 players be like.

And that's what it is, with the game itself priced at fifty dollars and an additional fifty dollars season pass, for extra content in the coming months like the French and Russian army expansions (apparently). It just feels cheap. The game really isn't worth that much and the fifty dollars price of admission is just right and not a cent more.

Essentially what this does is, it encourages game developers to create half baked games for the full price while extorting more money from its gamer base under the name of additional content, dlc, so on and so forth. With that being said on to the final score.

Battlefield 1 Rating: 7.5/10

PROs:

-beautiful visuals and sound design

-engaging SP campaign(albeit very short)

-MULTIPLAYER RAWR!

-great support from DICE so far

CONs:

-generic by FPS standards

-very short SP campaign

-cheap extortion tactics by EA

And if you're still wondering, what's the best shooter all year.

FUUUUUUUUKKKKKKKKK YEAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

Thanks for reading

#BattlefieldReview


1|5
2|12
Chief16 is a GirlsAskGuys Editor
Who are Editors?

Join the discussion

0/2500

Submit

What Girls Said 2

What Guys Said 12

  • 1mo

    Well, first of all, it's a shooter. I don't know why you're expecting some sort of grand gameplay innovation; FPS is FPS and that's that. Change it too much and you lose your core audience; all they really want to do now is continue to refine a winning formula.

    A few notes: Deus Ex is NOT a shooter/FPS. It's an action/RPG in the first-person view, like Fallout 4, but just more story-driven. You can sort of play Deus Ex like a shooter if you want but the franchise was really never designed for that.

    As for visuals, DOOM and Deus Ex are nowhere near the top of my list for 2016. Games like Uncharted 4 are so vastly superior in terms of technical achievement that it's not even funny. :P Battlefield 1 is a lot closer to that level of achievement, however. I was disappointed with how flat and outdated DOOM looked, that's for sure.

    Lastly, the DLC: It isn't extortion. You don't have to buy it. You don't have to spend that $50 if you don't want to. It's not like you have to pay to see the second half of a campaign, or earn multiplayer features that don't exist. It's a full and complete game that will be added to, as all shooters - and most big games these days - are. Now, I certainly don't think it's worth $50 but as these season passes continue to sell extremely well, obviously, there are many who DO think it's worth it. Hence, the market demands it; supply and demand. If everyone hated it, they wouldn't buy it and therefore, it wouldn't exist.

    People keep missing this about DLC and expansions. They keep SELLING. YOU bought it. If you want the practice to stop, that's on YOU, the consumer.

    0|1
    0|0
    • 1mo

      You mustn't play a lot of FPS games huh? Deus Ex is classified as a hybrid FPS but at its very heart it is a FPS, you can't change camera except when you're taking cover.
      Pre-Orders and DLC are extortion, just look at the mess Destiny made in 2014. And Battlefront made in 2015, yep, it is extortion when you don't include a campaign or give a bare bones package, a DLC is supposed to improve the overall game, not actually be new game in itself (when you pay the full prize of the game for a tit bit of content), no company ever makes expansions these days. Ever wonder why?
      Lastly, FPS can be innovative, just look at what Half Life 2 did with gaming physics, which Portal took even further, and even DOOM this year made a small innovation in the form of its visceral combat system.
      Now I get that you're an Uncharted fanboi, and A Thief's End is a good send off, but I still think Rise Of Tomb Raider is even better. Visually at the very least.

    • Show All
    • 1mo

      Unfortunately, what it also means is that these very companies sort of sponsor piracy. Look at what Bethesda's new review policy will do.
      Yep. Deus Ex is a HYBRID shooter. Deus Ex is called a First Person Action RPG. Witcher 3 is called a Third Person Action Adventure RPG. FPS and Third Person represent how the game is played, the rest of the description denotes the elements of gameplay. If I'm not wrong.

    • 1mo

      Yes, there's perspective and gameplay in the title of some genres. Deus Ex is an action/RPG in first-person, as you say. It is NOT a shooter. People make a common mistake, which is thinking that any game played from a first-person perspective is automatically a "first-person shooter." This is a remnant of the days when it was in fact true that just about every video game made in first-person view WAS a shooter. That is no longer the case, obviously. Deus Ex is not a shooter and has never had that label. It's an action/RPG, like Fallout or The Witcher.

      It all falls to the consumer in regards to DLC and ANY marketing tactic like microtransactions. People rewarded EA for producing a less-than-complete product in Battlefront, so it's THEIR fault, not EA's. If people did not reward publishers by simply purchasing extra content at a premium price, the practice wouldn't exist.

      And as for piracy, that's always wrong. No ambiguity from me on that. :)

  • 1mo

    Doom isn't better than BF1.

    BF1 is without a doubt the best FPS of the year.

    0|1
    0|1
  • 1mo

    I'm not gonna get behind it because it looks nothing like WW1. But then again, it's next to impossible to remake that War in to an interesting video game - be it a shooter or strategy.

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    Compared to No Man's Sky its golden XD

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    Everybody is playing BF1 while you are sitting in a dark bedroom reading reviews on the internet at 12:00 AM :/

    0|1
    0|0
    • 1mo

      Awww. Its not something you haven't played before.

    • 1mo

      But still... I want to be that cool guy in the college who has played all the latest shit 😢

    • 1mo

      Thankfully I'm outta college. No pressure for me.

  • 1mo

    Have you played Verdun, the realistic WW1 FPS?

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    Haven't played it yet but how do you like it? I think it looks like a great game. But I was always the fast pace type of player, so call of duty always appealed more to me. Battlefield this year is amazing but it's just a little slow for my taste

    0|1
    0|0
    • 1mo

      It definitely is one of the best looking. And one of the better shooters this year. If you're a multiplayer sort of person, then this is definitely worth a shot.

    • Show All
    • 1mo

      Also very surprised with doom. Looks very fun. They did a good job with that

    • 1mo

      People will either love Doom or hate it. No middle ground here. I loved it because it feels so old school.

  • 1mo

    Nice one.. I'll buy that game soon. I'll play as horseman fo' sure.

    https://youtu.be/Wc_AnrBeUYI

    Ey u better choose Turkish soldiers bruv ha ha ! 😎

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    Battlefield Bad Company 1 & 2 will always remain as my favourite entries in the boyfriend franchise. They still hold up today and I actually prefer to play them over the newer entries.

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    That's pretty cool

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    Was a good take especially since I love bf1 and it's visual fidelity in 4K 70fps.

    But then I saw doom as his pick for best fps. Aw man.

    0|1
    0|0
  • 1mo

    "immersive atmosphere" (SP)

    It's the exact opposite in my opinion. The facepalmrate per minute is so high that it completely breaks the immersion.

    The moments when you wear a massive iron armor which basically makes you invincible (!), you walk up with it a fucking mountain and gun down over a hundred enemies with a weapon which could be a minigun. Or when they tell you in your plane which repairs quicker than enemies can damage it to go take out the anti air defense (totally makes sense lmao). And there is much more than that. I don't expect a realistic campaign, but it should at least be authentic and this one kicks authenticity all the time with its feet. I can't understand how many reviews can call this emotional and immersive. Are we talking about the same game?

    It's a missed opportunity. It also plays only during one year of the war, only shows the allies... they could have done so much more out of it. WW1 changed a lot over time and they show nothing of it. The prologue started promising but that's it. It might be better than most other battlefield campaigns, but that's not difficult because except for maybe Bad Company, they were absolute garbage.

    The multiplayer is nice but feels like a skin for other battlefield games (which, other than with BF:Hardline, works). Because almost every idiot is running around with automatic guns, or snipers which didn't exist like that during that period, it feels much more like WW2 than WW1.

    It's a good game and a must have for fans of multiplayer shooters and the battlefield series, but at the end it's just an other battlefield in a different skin (and for once not riddles with bugs on launch). It's not the big evolution (or even revolution) people thought it would be when they announced it.

    0|1
    0|0
    • 1mo

      Exactly what I covered on my gameplay section.

    • 1mo

      yeah, but you first said it has a great, immersive atmosphere and I wanted to point out how much these things take me out of it. The immersion it tries to build up with it's great presentation instantly fades away when they throw nonsense like this at you all the time. And I'm not the type of gamer who just wants 5 hrs of popcorn action à la CoD where you get drowned in explosions and scripted scenes and just turn your brain off for a couple of hours.

    • 1mo

      Yep, figured someone had to say it.

Loading...