BATTLEFIELD 1

“We are the Knights of the sky, the ghosts of the desert, and the rats in the mud. We will stand. We will look death in the eye, and we will fight. They will remember us.”

Technically, that was about three different quotes I made into one, but why not?

Battlefield 1, in both it’s brilliantly chaotic multiplayer and surprisingly emotional campaign, tells the story of World War 1, the war to end all wars. Given Dice/EA’s last partnership producing the beautiful yet less than great Star Wars: Battlefront, I was sceptical as to how good Battlefield 1 was going to be. Yes, the graphics looked good in the trailers, but graphics have always been Dice’s strong-point. What was surprising, is that, graphics aside, Battlefield 1 is actually one hell of a game.

Let’s start with the campaign. From the moment you first load up the game, you are thrown into front-line combat, and even the game doesn’t expect you to survive. From there, you play through five other short stories, each detailing the actions of a soldier during the war, whether that's as part of the Italian Army, a volunteer in the Royal Flying Corps, or a warrior in the deserts of Arabia. What’s most striking about the game, perhaps beyond anything else, is that it’s incredibly emotional. It doesn’t paint the war as anything less than a living hell, as well it shouldn’t. The game’s cutscenes show this off best, as the stories of brotherhood and survival are brought to life through Dice’s incredible visuals.

Yes, there are missions in the campaign that aren’t the funnest ever designed, but honestly, I don’t really mind that. Yes there were moments when I wanted to through the controller at the screen, but on the whole, the campaign is more engaging than what most first person shooters would deliver. Hell, Battlefront didn’t even have a campaign. That being said, the campaign could easily be completed within a day if you put your mind to it. It would have been nice to explore more stories from the war, and perhaps even some true-to-life trench combat.

Multiplayer, when you get down to the core of it, is admittedly very similar to Battlefield 4’s. But is that such a bad thing? That multiplayer mixed with Battlefield 1’s incredible visuals and improved map design makes for a lot of fun. Yes, there are weapon balancing issues and everything feels less powerful than it did in the Beta, but multiplayer, whether it’s large scale conflict at the base of the alps or smaller, mission-based games, is still fun, and you can happily pour several hours of your time into it.

Especially when doing stuff like this...

Battlefield 1 was admittedly a strange experience for me. It’s the first game I’ve played in a long time, especially in the shooter genre, where the game’s story is on the same level as it’s visuals. The campaign’s emotive storyline is told perfectly through Dice’s incredible graphics, and the two work hand in hand to make the game as good as it is. Yes, multiplayer is part of the same formula as the previous entries in the series, but this can be said for pretty much any game these days, especially in a genre that’s so multiplayer-heavy. Are there parts I’d change about the game? Yes. I’d happily double the length of the campaign and would even add missions from the point of view of the Central Powers and their side of the war. Just because they were ‘the enemy’, doesn’t mean they don’t have stories to tell. But as Battlefield 1 is right now, out of the box with no DLCs added on to it, I'm happy. It's campaign is far more fulfilling than expected, multiplayer is as fun as ever and it's visuals are nothing short of top of the range.

"Behind every gun-sight, there is a human being."