why are there no WW1 games?

[Zedzero]

Listen up Yank. We didn't need nor WANT your "help" in World War I.

Need, maybe not. Want, I think you'd want any help you could get in a World War (especially from a world power).

You only joined because moronic fatass' like you ignored the German U-Boat threat and went on the Lusitania. We were winning without you, and the ONLY major battle you did anything of note in, Meuse-Argonne, you LOST, and that was at the END OF THE WAR.

Well, that and the Zimmerman Note (Which may have even been forged by the British). Also, America did help demoralize the Germans/Austro-Hungarians in WWI by seeing that there were even more people showing up and that they couldn't win, and it helped give the other forces a moral boost instead of there usual 'committing suicide inside their trenches.'

Canadians did a LOT more than any Americunt did in both World War's, and I am sick and tired of the US forcing their "WE SAEVD DAH WURLD!" bullshit ideal from World War II, and it is the fault of American companies that no high-end World War I games have been made. Until someone has the balls to make a historical-accurate (read: US has a MINOR FUCKING ROLE FOR ONCE) World War II game, I'll start having hope. If that games becomes successful and spawns more historically-accurate World War II games, I'll start to believe that America isn't filled with morons. As it stands, it's American self-centered bullshit that prevents any historically-accurate World War II games and ANY World War I games from being made, or being successful.

Well, saying the U.S. didn't have a major role in WWII is a bit too far. The three major countries that fought on the side of the allies were the U.S., Russia, and Britain. Sure America didn't do it single-handedly, but they were one of the major contributors (Also remember that they did pretty much defeat Japan). If you have any doubts of this, see This book. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_in_the_high_castle]

Alright, agree on the last one. I only say that now a day's because I'm sick of American egotism and say that just to be the polar opposite of most Yanks.

On everything else, though:
a. US wasn't a world power during either World War, really. World War I you were isolationist jerks who laughed at what was happening in Europe until you got a torpedo up the ass, and in World War II you were both isolationist AND climbing out of the hole left by the Great Depression (which you caused BTW). It was only after the war and the fracture of Europe between East and West that the US became a world power militarily.
b. Agree with the demoralizing, but by the time America joined the Allies were already forcing them back. The Africa-Palestine front had ended in victory before the US joined, forcing the Ottomans out of the war, and Germany, Austria, and Hungary (being part Hungarian, I refuse to use "Austro-Hungarian") were already crumbling and losing ground on the Western front. Besides, you guys still lost at the friggen Argonne, when Germany was already about to surrender.

Well some one payed attention in history class, damn americans think they are the shitz, only cool thing they have done so far was kill those 3 pirates simaltaniously on a rocking boat.

 

[funksobeefy]

I think if done right a 3rd person shooter for ww1 would be awesome. Sort of on the same line as Gears but with single shot weapons and more tactical skill. not all fighting was trench fighting, there was lots of stuff going on in the war border skirmishes, enemy raids cavalry charges and other stuff.

I think it would be fun

 

[Xelanath]

On everything else, though:
a. US wasn't a world power during either World War, really. World War I you were isolationist jerks who laughed at what was happening in Europe until you got a torpedo up the ass, and in World War II you were both isolationist AND climbing out of the hole left by the Great Depression (which you caused BTW). It was only after the war and the fracture of Europe between East and West that the US became a world power militarily.

The US was arguably more powerful and influential than Britain by WWI.
Just one example, albeit from after the war:
As part of the Washington Naval Conference during 1921-22, the US signed the Five-Power Treaty with the UK, Japan, France and Italy, limiting the US and UK to navies of the same size.
And they certainly worked hard to maintain influence, economically and politically, in the Far East in the inter-war period. Not overly isolationist.
But you're right that the modern idea of a world power didn't really exist until the opposite emergence of the USSR and the US after WWII.

 

[Ghadente]

its because no one can remember who fought in WWI for a long enough time to develope a game based on it...

how about some civil war action or some indepence war games

lets do a What If game about the French going to war ....Boom Roasted! j/k

 

[Ghost]

ww2 is a more eventful fast paced setting for a game

 

[Pimppeter2]

WW1 was a bad experience for all of Europe, mostly because it was just showboating and bad lives

 

[Zhalath]

WW I didn't have Nazis. Those wacky Nazis!

 

[Ima Lemming]

A better question is why arent there any Korean war games?

Does that M*A*S*H game for the Atari 2600 count?

 

[Worr Monger]

I would like to see more on WWI... movies.. game.. etc.

But yeah, it is difficult to make trench warfare diverse and interesting enough to keep you watching or playing.

 

[johnman]

i wasnt denying that the canadians fought in a war, unlike that other guy. and i didnt say that the us was turning the cogs of the war, merely supplying its allies. how about you turn the predjudice machine off for a second and stop misunderstanding me.

Why dont you listen to me? You said you didnt know for sure if canada fought in WW1. I cleared that up for you. By turning the cogs i ment America was turning the cogs of the allied war machines, or supplying them if you want it in basic terms.

 

[Kazturkey]

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.

If you're talking about playing the english you're an oppressive prick, and if you're talking about playing as the IRA you're a terrorist. Congratulations, you just dug yourself a hole you aren't getting out of.

That said, one set in the 1900-1930 era could be fun, blowing up trucks full of british soldiers.

haha, ok well i couldnt get away supporting the british cause since my gf is irish and id like to keep her. While it may be way too soon for a game like that i still think its an interesting concept. I suggest COD4 style play because i like the way they did the SAS/Marine Corp duality which they could apply to the Irish and English points of view in the whole thing, of course in the end there wouldnt be a winner just an example of how a mutual war of fear can be.

Stop stealing our women! :O

Anyway, the english side of things in that war wouldnt make for a very good game because TBH they didn't really do anything apart from drag IRA soldiers up and have them hung, and get blown up by guerilla soldiers. A few cutscenes from the english point of view would work but a quicktime event in which you hang an IRA soldier might not go down so well

(Most of what the English soldiers/black and tans did in the early 1900s was murdering innocents ("Bloody Sunday")and hangings, very few IRA men were killed in combat, apart, of course, from when the english took back dublin in 1916.. now THAT would be a good level.)

 

[suhlEap]

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

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 World War 1 was started pretty much by accident (as in, after Franz Ferdinand was killed, most of Europe started preparing for war, as they all had alliances with each other, so when Germany invaded Belgium to break the stalemate, it could have been easily prevented by a bit of diplomacy).

that doesn't really answer my question though.

 

[ygetoff]

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

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 World War 1 was started pretty much by accident (as in, after Franz Ferdinand was killed, most of Europe started preparing for war, as they all had alliances with each other, so when Germany invaded Belgium to break the stalemate, it could have been easily prevented by a bit of diplomacy).

that doesn't really answer my question though.

At least some of the atrocities in WW2 had some reason behind them. WW1 happened for no reason.

 

[joe51498]

because all the wepons would suck

 

[XJ-0461]

Who cares about World War 1? I want, no, DEMAND a Call of Duty game set in Vietnam (by Infinity Ware for obvious reasons!)

Seconded. I doubt we'll ever get a game like that though. Also, in a World War One game the guns would get stuck all the time and the gameplay would be repetitive.

 

[dukethepcdr]

The "bad guys" of World War I aren't as evil as the Nazis of World War II. You need really evil bad guys to make a compelling war video game. World War I was mostly about politics and one misunderstanding heaped on top of another. Like others have said, a flight game set in WWI would be fun and there have been a few of them. A game where you play a grunt on the ground however would not be very fun which is why you don't see many FPS games set in WWI.

 

[PureChaos]

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?

the germans xD

yes, but what was the reason for it? everyone knows about the concentration camps, invasion of Poland but not many people know the details of WW1 (though someone did say what happened in a previous reply)

 

[Elexia]

I think they had the Red Baron flight simulator game, based on the famous WW1 German flying hero (who was then abruptly shot down by Australian ground troops)... but lives on in hearts and minds of retro gamers as a tri-plane flight simulator back in the days when planes were held together with paper and pilots shot their own propellors to pieces.

EDIT: and for those who call WWI combat 'boring' should probably sit down and read some recollections from Turkey where 6,000 soldiers were slaughtered during two days in a battle ground the size of two tennis courts.