World War 1.

It seems that No one takes interest in world war one games to this date I still haven't seen a actual world war 1 game.

Yes it would be boring sitting in a trench day and night with constant machine gun fire over head and the fear of bombs.

But still I think world war 1 deserves to be recognized like world war 2. I would atleast like to try a game like it.

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

I think it would be pretty cool. Multiplayer component would be great.

You could be the gun in the machine gun turret, one of the guys firing the artillery, a medic, a sniper, or one of the guys getting ready with his mates to run over the top.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

fatzebra

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

[QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

the assassination of the arch duke was just the straw that broke the camels back, the main reason for the war was the growing tensions caused by the arms race etc, plus, the kaiser was jealous of britain's empire and his attempts to get morocco to overthrow their french/british leadership just kinda made it worse...

but as for a game, it would kinda suck, while WW1 should be recognised, that doesnt mean we should make games about it...trench warfare was incredibly stupid and this was due mainly to the fact that before WW1 us brits had been fighting people armed with not much more than a sharpened watermelon...unless they made the game dedicated to say, being a sniper or something, i really cant see how it would work

don't take this post the wrong way. But I believe one of the reasons why there isn't a WWI game is because the Americans joined too late. If you look at most (if not all) WWII games and what not they are centred around the heroics of the Americans. In WWI, most of the heroics were done by Canadians and thus if they released a game around WWI There would be few interests and I don't think alot of people in America would be interested in it.

I have nothing against Americans. I just think alot of the games based around the war theme, America has been the centre of attraction so I guess we have it grained in our heads.

Iron Storm is like an alternate reality WWI game. It's not that great though.

If war games were 100% realistic they'd suck big time. You'd practically never see the enemy. You'd die too often and too randomly. There'd be really long periods of quiet boringness followed by brief moments of pure chaos. It'd be frustrating.

Notice in Call of Duty games, none of the things I mentioned are really true. This is because they did not make them 100% realistic. They made them more fun. I don't see why they couldn't do that with a WWI game. They could somehow change the premise some or just modify the style of combat a little bit (not being 100% true to history) but it'd be more fun.

[QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

Ok then if trenches were such a horrible idea to stop land loss, then you must have a much better way in mind they should've gone about it, lets hear it.

Also, what started the WORLD WAR (key word is WORLD) had nothing to do with the assassination, because it wasn't labled a WORLD war until the U.S. became involved, because of the (legitimate) sinking of the Lusitania, which at the time was viewed as an attack against the American people, but in reality, the Government knew it was going to happen and used it as an excuse to enter the war in Europe. How'd they know it was going to happen? They smuggled ammunitions for Great Britian on the ship, and then sent it through German water, what could go wrong there?

Research is key.

Spawn in trench, run across nomans land, get gunned down by a machine gun, respawn in trench, get hit by artillery shell, respawn in trench, have mustard gas dumped on you, respawn in treach, etc.peeviness

Sounds fun!

It seems that No one takes interest in world war one games to this date I still haven't seen a actual world war 1 game.

Yes it would be boring sitting in a trench day and night with constant machine gun fire over head and the fear of bombs.

But still I think world war 1 deserves to be recognized like world war 2. I would atleast like to try a game like it.

MrKittyCat1234

Well it has many reasons. WW1 first of all had far fewer, and less evolved weaponry, you might disagree but most of those weapons were included or upgraded into WW2, and therefore games based on it. It also had a less interesting story, and America had little to do with it (and most world war games originate from american developers).

First Eagles It's a decent budget title. Out of the box, it's pretty limited but it's got an open source code so the modders have been very, very active. There are hundreds and hundreds of quality additions available over at CombatAce. The only caveat is that installing the mods can be a labourious process.

Over Flanders Fields is a total conversion mod for CFS 3. Phase 2 was great and the upcoming Phase III looks amazing.

Naval Sims:

1914- Shells of Fury. Command a German sub during WWI.

Jutland. Take the role of adminral in one of WWI's most famous naval engagements.

Wargames:

Bit of a dry spell. There's Guns of August which looks interesting enough but it has a terrible interface. There's also Aggression: Europe 1914 but I don't really know too much about this one. The only other one I can think of isn't really WWI. It's based on an actual US War Department contingency plan about a hypothetical battle between the Empire of Japan vs. the UK and US in the Pacific. The game is called War Plan Orange. Interesting game, but it's based on the War in the Pacific game engine and after pounding my way through 3 very lengthy campaigns, was a little burnt out on it.

Iron Storm is like an alternate reality WWI game. It's not that great though.

If war games were 100% realistic they'd suck big time. You'd practically never see the enemy. You'd die too often and too randomly. There'd be really long periods of quiet boringness followed by brief moments of pure chaos. It'd be frustrating.

Notice in Call of Duty games, none of the things I mentioned are really true. This is because they did not make them 100% realistic. They made them more fun. I don't see why they couldn't do that with a WWI game. They could somehow change the premise some or just modify the style of combat a little bit (not being 100% true to history) but it'd be more fun.

df853

Meh, to be perfectly honest, in real "modern" war you practically never see your enemy.

It's mostly about shooting in the direction of the enemy and a few hours later after the shooting stops, you discover a few dead guys a few hundred feet away and nobody knows who or what killed them.

That's the typical modern warfare firefight, it's nothing like Cod4, that's for sure.

[QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

Just because it was a pointless cause does not mean the war should not be recognised you dumbass, look @ the figures of how many died and the amount of technological advancements made during war time such as tanks and gas attacks.

The argument that WW1 would make a boring game is a boring argument. A game can be made about completely mind-numbingly boring things and still be fun and interesting. I used to play hover-bover on the C64 - all you did was mow lawns!

I picked up a book in the bookstore the other day that was like the ultimate WW1 book. It was massive. Lots of pics, big glossy cover. I would of bought it only it was A$75. But it was full of details about particular battles that took place. A lot more than just people sitting in trenches.

Also, arguments about weapons not being advanced enough is silly aswell. Better not play any medieval or Pirate games!!! Infact if highly advanced weapons make a better game then lets have a futuristic game where you have a gun that autotargets and kills everyone instantly - that'll be fun :roll:

a WW1 game doesn't have to be a COD clone.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

fatzebra

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

Ok then if trenches were such a horrible idea to stop land loss, then you must have a much better way in mind they should've gone about it, lets hear it.

Also, what started the WORLD WAR (key word is WORLD) had nothing to do with the assassination, because it wasn't labled a WORLD war until the U.S. became involved, because of the (legitimate) sinking of the Lusitania, which at the time was viewed as an attack against the American people, but in reality, the Government knew it was going to happen and used it as an excuse to enter the war in Europe. How'd they know it was going to happen? They smuggled ammunitions for Great Britian on the ship, and then sent it through German water, what could go wrong there?

Research is key.

Fine, the start of the Great War was the assassination of the Arch Duke, now gtfo

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

Just because it was a pointless cause does not mean the war should not be recognised you dumbass, look @ the figures of how many died and the amount of technological advancements made during war time such as tanks and gas attacks.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

Just because it was a pointless cause does not mean the war should not be recognised you dumbass, look @ the figures of how many died and the amount of technological advancements made during war time such as tanks and gas attacks.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

marriage0

WW1 is/was a concept? That was probably the dumbest post I've seen today, congrats =)

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

death1505921

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

the assassination of the arch duke was just the straw that broke the camels back, the main reason for the war was the growing tensions caused by the arms race etc, plus, the kaiser was jealous of britain's empire and his attempts to get morocco to overthrow their french/british leadership just kinda made it worse...

but as for a game, it would kinda suck, while WW1 should be recognised, that doesnt mean we should make games about it...trench warfare was incredibly stupid and this was due mainly to the fact that before WW1 us brits had been fighting people armed with not much more than a sharpened watermelon...unless they made the game dedicated to say, being a sniper or something, i really cant see how it would work

A FP action/adventure game along the lines of Penumbra set in various battles across Europe (especially Verdun) would kick some serious ass. You could accomplish tasks like delivering messages, repairing things, maybe even planning attacks in a command room, fly a plane, some Zeppelin levels, some operations behind the frontlines... A carefully staged atmosphere and many "things" happening around you, like in COD, would make the game awesome.

Or something like Saboteur (I think it's renamed now, but you know what I'm talking about) set in London, including the night attacks, would be really cool.

Or something like Thief:P

A FP action/adventure game along the lines of Penumbra set in various battles across Europe (especially Verdun) would kick some serious ass. You could accomplish tasks like delivering messages, repairing things, maybe even planning attacks in a command room, fly a plane, some Zeppelin levels, some operations behind the frontlines... A carefully staged atmosphere and many "things" happening around you, like in COD, would make the game awesome.

Or something like Saboteur (I think it's renamed now, but you know what I'm talking about) set in London, including the night attacks, would be really cool.

Or something like Thief:P

Baranga

for all you people who are noobs and dont know what started ww1:

Militarism

Alliances

Nationalism

Imperialism

Assassination

(MANIA)

the thing about a ww1 game isnt the combat, its what side you would play as. there really wasn't an evil nation during ww1(although britain and france played a$$holes to germany after it which led to the rise of hitler and all that crap) because ww1 just started because all the european powers thought they were better than each other, tensions grew, and franz ferdinands assasination lit the whole senario on fire. unless they let you play in campaign for all the countries that were involved, people are gonna get offended. i think it would be cool to make more of an rts out of it rather than an fps.

AGEOD recently released their newest wargame, World War I: La Grande Guerre.

For those of you who don't know, AGEOD is a French company that's been putting out some great wargames.  They've covered The American Rebellion & The French and Indian Wars in Birth of America and Birth of America II; The Napoleonic Wars in Napoleon's Campaigns, and the US Civil War in AGEOD's American Civil War.

WWI was produced by a team of Italian developers and it had some teething problems upon release but the game's been patched and is now stable and much more balanced.  If you're interested in a strategic level WWI game, check it out.

Searching the web for WW1 games I came across this thread. Talk about grave digging. Anyway besides the idiotic notions of some people here who are obviously American (Being a German who lives in America) that WW1 wasn't a real war and doesn't matter; I would love to see a WW1 game.

First and foremost I've been playing a game, World War 1: The Great War by Buka, which is a RTS but it lacks in so many ways. I feel the best WW1 type game would be pretty much if they took Cossacks II and made it set in 1914-1918. Although a WW1 ****FPS would be interesting and not out of the question. I love how people here call the concept boring because of bolt action rifles. Obviously they haven't played CoD where half the time you use bolt action rifles (Kar 98K or Enfield) and those can make the most fun times when you have to make your shots count. Now getting back into the action of the war, I fail to see how a FPS would fail at that. The war progressed in new and better ways to kill each other, as sick as that sounds. Starting off you have the options of Calvary, which in ten minutes in Belgium in 1914 5,000 French riders were slaughtered by the machine gun. Moving on to that fact, machine guns! You have the planes that were making their breakthrough, flamethrowers, tanks even! Have you ever tried to aim a rifle in a gas mask? I can tell you that it is not easy and that would be another way to go. Fighting often resorted to hand to hand trench warfare and besides the artillery strikes and mines planted under the trenches, a lot of warfare was done in villages. One village in France switched hands 14 times in six months during the battle of Verdun. You have raids across No Man's Land and strecher calls from the wounded. You have shell holes that during the third battle of Yrpes many drowned in. A terrible war...

As for the American aspect; in one year of fighting 116,708U.S. soldiers died. We have a plethora of Vietnam games, and no offense to those soldiers, but 57,000 dead in 15 years is nothing compared to about 291 soldiers lost per day. Hell the last person killed during war time was a U.S. soldier, Henry Gunther at 10:59 AM on 11/11/1918.

I know this post is getting long so let me finish it up. You all mentioned CoD games. What are those like? Last time I checkedin CoD1 you played as a Russian in trenches in Stalingrad. Hmm, familiar to WW1. You also played a British soldier stealing intel off ships and taking prisoners. Much like going on a raid across No Man's Land. What about the American fighting street to street in Normandy's villages? Much like the British in Mons? Or Germans at Verdun? How about the maps of Brecourt? Very similar to trench warfare and WW1. Hell even when you are the Russian clearing out bunkers in Berlin, it is the same as clearing a trench line full of bunkers. What about CoD 4 where you were shooting from a plane? The only difference I see from killing AI in trenches in WW2 than in WW1 is in WW2 you seem to be alone against a handfull of guys. In WW1 you have 10,000 guys backing you clearing out 20,000 in the trench. I fail to see how our WW2 and modern warfare games are so mighty compared to WW1 when they are exactly the same. I found all my times on multiplayer CoD more exciting using a bolt action rifle (always used a Kar 98K) then running in and gunning with a Thompson or such. It made for more skill.

Just a few thoughts on the topic. Let me know if I am completely off or not...

PS: If bad games like Beachhead 2000 can sell, why can't a world war 1 game?

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

ON TOP OF THAT, WW1 shouldn't be recognized???? WHAT??? are you serious? A war in which millions of human lives ended shouldn't be recognized? I don't even know how to respond to that......

[QUOTE="fatzebra"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"] the warefare that WW1 was centered around. The concept of WW1 was preventing land loss through trench warefare, thus being stupid. [QUOTE="death1505921"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

You don't think WW1 should be recognised? Somebody needs to re-sit their history.

Entangling and secret alliances ultimately caused Germany to get into the mess they did.

IF you read up on history clearly, World War 1 was of course the cause of World War 2.

Germany was in recession after the war, weimar republic (governing germany because the Kaiser pussied out) were forced to sign the treaty of versailles etc. Then a pissed off austrian comes to power and BAM! theres WW2

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

DivergeUnify

Wow... go to France, Canada, Britain, USA, Germany, Italy, Russia, etc and say to people there that WW1 should not be recognized... especially on Nov 11. Go for it, we'll see what their reaction would be.

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]

The concept of WW1 is incredibly stupid. I don't even think WW1 should be recognized. It was a bunch of accidents with no real enemy as clear as the axis of WW2( you could argue the central powers, but I think Germany was a victim of WW1. Excluding post ww1)

It would be a bunch of arty going off the whole time

bolt action rifles

and an overall setting much more depressing than a WW2 locale

Helbrec

The actual conflict could probably be better described as just the hatred of the European countries to eachother. The French did it before that with Napoleon and so on and so forth. European conflict goes back centuries...

As far as the topic is concerned... the endless amount of WW2 games has made that setting pretty boring for me. WW1 wouldn't be much different, but would certainly be a lot more appealing than yet another WW2 game.

Doing a World War One game would be good if they made it really, really, really intense. That would be hard with all bolt-action rifles though hahatheafiguy

In my opinion, a World War 1 game would be awesome, especially if it showed the acts of the true heroes of both wars - The British, Canadians, French, and even the Central Powers - instead of focusing only on America.

They should make a game set in the world war one time but with coller stuff like humans fighting orks with hammers and what not. Like dawn of war set in 1914duxter1