Welcome to the New Shacknews

You're currently viewing the beginning of a full site renovation for Shacknews.com. You might find something working oddly. If you do, let us know! More exciting new features to follow.

Game of the Year 2016 #6: Battlefield 1

It turns out going back to the Great War was just the jolt of inspiration needed to make a great Battlefield campaign.

6

The Battlefield series has glorified war for as long as it’s been around, but Battlefield 1 marks the first time EA and DICE have taken a more serious approach to its iconic series. As a result, Battlefield 1 will go down in history as being one of the best titles in the series thanks to its memorable single-player experience and its fine-tuned multiplayer.

While we know the Battlefield series is known for its popular multiplayer game modes, one thing that’s always been lacking is a worthwhile single-player campaign. Battlefield 1 finally ends the streak of delivering skippable campaigns by telling the harrowing stories of a handful of soldiers. As we progressed through each story, the action was intense, the enemies were unforgiving, and the narrative was often heart-breaking. While some stories were better than others, we were quite happy with how DICE delivered them as their memories were treated with the respect they rightfully deserved.

With the single-player campaign completed, players were then able to jump into Battlefield 1’s multiplayer portion. Players can partake in a number of game modes, which include Conquest, Rush, and War Pigeons to name a few. The most impressive is the Operations game mode, which always felt like it was constantly changing no matter how much we tried to predict its outcome. Once players found their preferred game mode, they could play as one of four classes, each with their own strengths and weakness. DICE did a great job making all of the classes feel balanced, that is, as long as the player knew their role on the battlefield.

As you’d expect from a DICE game, the visuals, maps, and gameplay are all top notch in Battlefield 1. While we enjoyed the obvious World War I-era weaponry, some new gameplay mechanics, such as being able to attack enemies on horseback or the use of flamethrowers, kept things fresh. And with regular updates, game modes, and DLC expected in the coming months, we can’t wait to see what else is in store for the future of Battlefield 1.

2016 Game of the Year Countdown: 

Senior Editor

From The Chatty

  • reply
    December 27, 2016 12:00 PM

    Daniel Perez posted a new article, Game of the Year 2016 #6: Battlefield 1

    • reply
      December 27, 2016 12:26 PM

      I didn't see a #7 and thought you guys skipped it for a sec. 3 games for #8 and 1 for #6 but no #7 and I had a mini panic attack in my brain

    • reply
      December 27, 2016 1:10 PM

      Another game that shouldn't be above DS3. :/

    • reply
      December 27, 2016 4:52 PM

      I gotta say, we really need to recognize the reality that the single player and multiplayer sections of games like this are, in practice. two separate games. The only reason they're put in one package is because that's one of the weird expectations of consumers. In reality, expecting a single player campaign with multiplayer game is like expecting a DVD for Lord of the Rings in your Harry Potter book.

      In other words, we need to recognize that these are two separate experiences, and we should stop asking critics to put up a single review encapsulating the two experiences. The really need to be looked at separately, because the only reason they're together in the first place is because of the irrational expectations from the average consumer.

      So when I nominated BF1 for my top spot, I was strictly looking at the multiplayer. I've yet to touch the single player. And even though I know it's better than previous campaigns, I'm pretty sure it won't be in my top ten.

      • reply
        December 27, 2016 9:02 PM

        I highly recommend the campaign. Switching between the five different historical perspectives really made itt a lot funner than Battlefield 4 and Hardline's campaigns. However it still isn't as good as Bad Company 1 and 2's single-player.

        I agree with your thoughts that AAA FPS multiplayer and single-player modes should be reviewed separately as well, but the hard part with that approach is everyone would have to flip to this new way of reviewing at once for it to really work out. Righjt now Metacritic and OpenCritic only crawl for one score, so there's a big chance that we'd end up getting either only one or neither review indexed through them.

        Additionally, I'm not exactly sure how Google would handle microdata when it comes to doing a separate single-player and multiplayer review. One thing we always have to watch out for is making sure content is "SEO-friendly." As annoying as Google's little stipulations and nuances are, it doesn't do any good to write one review, let alone two, if no one gets them in results when they search for "randomgame review."

        The only way to really make this sort of thing happen is if every major games publication makes the simultaneous decision to implement the change, which would force aggregators and search engines to come up with a solution to handle it.

        • reply
          December 27, 2016 9:47 PM

          ugh, you're right. And I guess they're getting reviewed separately within the body anyway

    • reply
      December 28, 2016 12:10 AM

      I expected BF1 to be one of top 3 games