why are there no WW1 games?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 26 NEXT
 

we all know there are many (many) games set in world war 2, and yet there aren't any set in world war 1, and i wonder why this is!

Trench warfare wouldn't be the most fun thing in a game.

Not sure. While the Western Front was mostly trenches, the Eastern Front was a more open battlefield.

orannis62:
Trench warfare wouldn't be the most fun thing in a game.

This

On a second thought, it could prolly work for an RTS game

suhlEap:
we all know there are many (many) games set in world war 2, and yet there aren't any set in world war 1, and i wonder why this is!

Because there were no heroes in WWI, everybody died horrifically?

Eternal Darkness had a level in a WWI hospital. But a WWI game in the same style as the myriad WWII games wouldn't work. An RPG in the trench quarters that didn't revolve around killing Germans would be cool.

There are a few of them, but it's a war most people would rather forget about.

You'd run out of lives oh so very quickly.
Weapons were pants, generals were incompetent, no one knew what to do and spend half a came sitting in a trench being eaten by disease isnt really the gritty realism wanted nowadays.

I wonder things too!!(exclamation point)

But in all seriousness, World War 1 is pretty much a bleak desert for gaming ideas. Trench warfare would be incredibly boring and i don't think the most interesting thing in WW1, that being the introduction of controlled biological warfare, could be implemented into a game.

Really, the only thing they could do is a WW1 RTS. Which, could very well be fun, if developed by the right company.

Orrrr a WW1 flight sim. But i hate flight sims.

A better question is why arent there any Korean war games? Or for that matter there should be a game set during the "troubles" of ireland and england, it could be like a splinter cell meets COD4.

teisjm:

orannis62:
Trench warfare wouldn't be the most fun thing in a game.

This

this indeed

Though you do raise a very good point. I have seen a civil war game (it was crap) yet no WWI games. think 'bout it

there were other parts to the war than just trenches though. it's not like the entire thing was solely fought in trenches.

Lios:
There are a few of them, but it's a war most people would rather forget about.

and why do people want to forget that when there were so many more atrocities in WW2?

because hanging out in trenchs making full blown charges civil war style and having chemical warfare poured on you doesnt seem like fun

but you would get to drive the first tank ><

the weapons sucked

no-one really known about WW1. well, they know about the war but people know more about WW2 than they do about WW1. something people tend to not know: WW2 was against the Nazis, what was WW1 against?

xmetatr0nx:
A better question is why arent there any Korean war games? Or for that matter there should be a game set during the "troubles" of ireland and england, it could be like a splinter cell meets COD4.

This. The "troubles" of Ireland would be rather awesome. Although I'm not too sure about the Splinter Cell thing.

World War One would be hard to make a game with balance. You have your mine-fields, your trenches, your occasional Gatling guns, mustard gas and chlorine flying every which way, weapons that do diddly-squat, and all the gun play would be pray-and-spray.

Iron Storm (alternate future, WWI never ended):

http://www.ironstorm.com/

Necrovision (A supernatural game, but takes place during WWI):

http://www.necrovision-game.com/

Boring as hell. World War 2 makes for much better gameplay.

All the things that Americans love about war came from WWII.

suhlEap:
there were other parts to the war than just trenches though. it's not like the entire thing was solely fought in trenches.

Lios:
There are a few of them, but it's a war most people would rather forget about.

and why do people want to forget that when there were so many more atrocities in WW2?

But the atrocities in WW2 were committed by an unequivocally evil foe, while WW1 dragged on due to the incompetence of the commanders and the total lack of understanding of new weaponry due to no combat testing before the war itself.

Because it was the most depressing war ever to be fought in the history of the world. Although a game set in the American Revolution/Civil War might be cool.

A WWI game from the Canadian perspective would be interesting.

Because it's a terrible war, not a glorious one. WWII saw heroes of valour while WWI saw people dieing en masse like never before. It was the age where mass genocide was first being developed and the gritty realism that most people either died sitting in a trench from shells, nerve gas or terrible disease was as equally horrific as those that survived these events, forever crippled and unable to function properly in society. Most of the Eastern front would be the Allied Forces moving back into Russia, getting their villages burned to the ground until winter came. Not a terribly heroic saga.

HOWEVER, it should be noted that done properly, some of the battles in WWI would be VERY cool to play out, Vimy Ridge being one of them. I would love to see the shells explode infront of your troups as they slowly advance the hill. Now, properly placed in a game that maybe covered a wide veriaty of wars and it could work.

WW1 was just a bad war. Mostly it was trench fighting, where people just sat around and died in their own waste. There was the other battle, but it was pretty bad. Plus that was when the first tank came out, and it was a horrid piece of trash. Plus the planes we had could barely do any fighting whatsoever.
It was just a slow drawn out war were there was no action. No one would want to play that.

Essentially, WWI really was a giant bloody pile of suck. There was little heroism; it was mostly a bunch of poorly trained teenagers desperately trying to fire off a few shots at the enemy before being exploded by a shell and scraped out of the trenches with a shovel. A WWI game would probably just be depressing. In order to be historically accurate you'd spend most of your time sitting in a muddy pit with shells exploding around you and occasionally run out into the open with hundreds of enemies shooting at you, and then you'd die. Again and again.
There are reasons there are so many WWII games: It happened in living memory for some, the fighting that took place was all over the world, it was the last war where there was clearly a good guy and a bad guy, and the last war where the US was involved and actually did some good. There was no evil Fascism in WWI, no liberation of death camps, just a bunch of frightened grunts blasting the hell out of each other for reasons they couldn't even remember.

(EDIT: and I find that in the time it took me to write this post, a dozen other people have already voiced the same opinion.)

My question is, why do people keep on making World War games? Is it because it has the words "World War" in it? Really people..
I think we should stop crapping those games out, because it's the same thing. Personally, I think a Colonial Era war game would be awesome, or maybe even a Civil War game.

at armorgames.com there is a flash game on WWI, i think its called Warfare 1917. WWI doesnt appeal to big developers because it is basicallly sitting in filth and getting shelled and then rushing out of the trench and running at machine guns, not appealing to the entertainment aspects

Circus Ascendant:

suhlEap:
we all know there are many (many) games set in world war 2, and yet there aren't any set in world war 1, and i wonder why this is!

Because there were no heroes in WWI, everybody died horrifically?

Eternal Darkness had a level in a WWI hospital. But a WWI game in the same style as the myriad WWII games wouldn't work. An RPG in the trench quarters that didn't revolve around killing Germans would be cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_York

Bullshit theres no hero's in WWI

On topic- I think a game were an over the top charge would be cool. If it would not be full of Repetetive dying like the astroid part of Dead Space.

IxionIndustries:
My question is, why do people keep on making World War games? Is it because it has the words "World War" in it? Really people..
I think we should stop crapping those games out, because it's the same thing. Personally, I think a Colonial Era war game would be awesome, or maybe even a Civil War game.

there is a civil war game, called Civil War, and it wasnt very good.

for colonial, try Empire: Total War

What would make an awesome WWI game would be a giant online multiplayer game. I know this impossible at this time, but I'm seeing the entire front being represented and two armies trying and move into the opposing territory. If done correctly, though, it would remain locked in stalemate forever (the U.S could never enter because it would unfairly give one army the advantage needed to win).

brodie21:

IxionIndustries:
My question is, why do people keep on making World War games? Is it because it has the words "World War" in it? Really people..
I think we should stop crapping those games out, because it's the same thing. Personally, I think a Colonial Era war game would be awesome, or maybe even a Civil War game.

there is a civil war game, called Civil War, and it wasnt very good.

for colonial, try Empire: Total War

Empire: Total War is good, but it's a Real-Time-Strategy game. I was talking about first person shooters.

An RTS WW1 game wouldn't be too bad though. But I doubt you could get a good FPS out of WW1.

Learn your history.
Sitting in a hole for weeks at a time being eaten by parasites a game does not make.

Because WW1 sucked. I mean, a good amount of WW2 games are pretty unrealistic... but sitting in trenches, chemical warfare, rinse and repeat is totally fun! Oh, wait. Nevermind.

I can't remember the name of the battle, but a game version of it would go like this.

You fire idly across your trench at the enemy about 30 yards away, this has been going on for several weeks. A while passes and artillery begins to batter the enemy trenches, 6 days later the artillery clears, and now is your chance to take the enemy trench and make it all worth the hell so far!

But wait, what's this? Your commander is telling you to WALK through no-mans land or you'll be shot (As it's improper to run), suddenly the enemies machine guns are back on as you watch yourself get ripped to shreds along with all your nearby allies.

Credits roll saying 150,000 people or so died in that attack, the war dragged on for a few more years and your death was a pointless waste caused by incompetent command. You're also told that the enemy (A respectable sovereign nation much like your own) suffers so massively from their surrender terms that the war indirectly leads to the rise of the most evil power of modern times. Fighting this evil power also happens to destroy your own nations glorious empires rule, and paves the way for the previously isolationist crazies to replace you.

It doesn't quite have the punch of 'Kicking the evil nazi's ass! Fuck yeah!' WW2 had.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 26 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked