I would love to see a sequel, but of course logically the sequel would take place during WWII. And making a WWII game like Warfare 1917 would be difficult and would probably stray very far from the original. Therefore the game should probably stay at one part.
I find the mechanism and design of this game to be purely WW I, and it would not really work in any other genre. The trench hopping, the primitive weapons of the day, the deadly grinding out of the advance, so many deaths, for five feet of soil is perfect for WW I, but no so for any other genre.
If there was a sequel, I would prefer it to be WW I again, but with modifications. You could have the option to have a unit drop in the dirt perhaps, or have wind for the poison, and masks that need to be donned really quickly. Maybe you could call in air support, slow and primitive enough to be fun to watch, even barrage balloons, to aid in spotting the enemy, for artillery.
And these are just a few ideas, right off the top of my head; so yes, I think there is room for a sequel, but keep it in the time and place that it makes sense.
I agree with mud puddle. WW1 suits the gameplay. Any more modern and it would not be feasible. How would Geran Blitzkreig tactics translate into this design? The levels would be oover in a flash. If there is to be a sequel it could use the modifications mud puddle mentioned. Howvever if it isnt WW1 it could go even earlier to melee combat but i guess that is kind of covered by age of war. It depends really. I would like to see some mention of the RFC and the RNAS if ther is going to be another one.
It will have a sequel. ConArtists did not specify which historical period it will be set in. I do not think it will be set in WWI again.
I find the mechanism and design of this game to be purely WW I, and it would not really work in any other genre. The trench hopping, the primitive weapons of the day, the deadly grinding out of the advance, so many deaths, for five feet of soil is perfect for WW I, but no so for any other genre.
If there was a sequel, I would prefer it to be WW I again, but with modifications. You could have the option to have a unit drop in the dirt perhaps, or have wind for the poison, and masks that need to be donned really quickly. Maybe you could call in air support, slow and primitive enough to be fun to watch, even barrage balloons, to aid in spotting the enemy, for artillery.
And these are just a few ideas, right off the top of my head; so yes, I think there is room for a sequel, but keep it in the time and place that it makes sense.
I do agree, the game suits WWI perfectly. Most importantly because of the trench warfare.
well it could be fought in world war 2 but then again the game mostly goes with ww1 so if there is a sequel there is a 50 50 chance that it will be in ww1.
warfare 1917 only really works in WWI. You would have to completly change the gameplay to have a diferent war. If they wanted to make a sequel it would need to be in WWI to make it a progression of the same title. If they wanted to put it int a different war they may as well make a different game.
warfare 1917 only really works in WWI. You would have to completly change the gameplay to have a diferent war. If they wanted to make a sequel it would need to be in WWI to make it a progression of the same title. If they wanted to put it int a different war they may as well make a different game.
I do agree that a sequel not set in WWI would need gameplay to be changed but I do not mind. Anyway, the title of the game is Warfare not, Trench Warfare or WWI. The only problem with having a game not set in WWI is how to change gameplay to ensure excellent gameplay.
