FunnelVortex Modern battlefield titles seem to use TripAdvisor as a substitute for their art department, over saturated, colorful and with a focus on looking pretty.
Verdun would still work with amazing graphics too , like a verdun with battlefield graphics but it has nothing to do with graphics verdun is simply more realistic, but both games dont take away horror and immersion. Both games get the point across: war is hell , verdun has horrendous gore and battlefiled has screaming and explosions everywhere Both feel like ww1 in the end but verdun really takes the trophy for its realistic slow paced game.
Umer Ahsan lol it’s all good I also agree the player base is pretty small but it works for the type of game it is, I wouldn’t mind more players playing tho
Verdun's awesome, authentic WWI gameplay totally makes up for its lack of graphical polish in my book. One of the most entertaining online shooters I've played in a while. Can't wait to play Tannenberg.
Actually, no, the focus of this video is not graphics, and everyone already knows BF1 is superior graphic wise because verdun had 3 devs at the begining compared to EA and their budget
I cant agree more. I've invested too much time in the Mount & Blade series. All of my friends dont understand why, because it has bad graphics. However, i did convert a friends meaning about the game after letting him play for 30 minutes on my PC. How fun that people can switch opinions on something so quickly
I remember when everyone was excited for trench warfare when battlefield 1 was first announced in 2016 but when the game came out people found out it was a useless feature for players to use well if u still want trench warfare verdun executes this well
battlefield 1 really doesent seem like trench warfare at all but verdun actually looks like world war 1 where you sitting in the trenches and shooting and the maps are way more realistic in verdun
@@thisisgamelord2421 Agreed. If you even stick your head out of a trench in verdun for one sec, you may have your head taken off. I find myself in trenches 90% of the game
I think Verdun's graphical design is much more accurate for the setting. Battlefield seems to romanticise world war one, verdun gives a historic and accurate version of this.
Verdun was made by mostly 3 people and this was their first proper game. It started out as a browser game but evolved into what we got in the end. Thats pretty impressive when compared to all the money and work put into Bf1. Bf1 was really dissapointing to me because of this, I simply expected more detail and if not the same realism as verdun at least someting more ww1 aproppriate then Bf4 with ww1 skins and flashy graphics when such a small game as verdun did so much right.
I didn't expect them to make a hyper-realistic game. Based on the original trailer, i knew they would opt for more action over realism. Battlefield is a massive franchise that never has settled for realistic, and that's fine. The realism stuff is more of a niche market and that's clear from player counts in games like ArmA, Verdun, Day of Infamy, etc.
I never expected Bf1 to be the most realistic thing ever but Bf1942's gameplay was a better and more accurate ww1 game then Bf1. Bf1 was the same modern warfare run and gun arcade shooter which is totally fine and even very enjoyable. I just hoped that they would be more respectfull and tone down the michel bay shenanigans when making a game about the bloodiest and most pointless war in human history. They could have done worse though, at least they didn't portay germans as evil nazis while romanticizing the victors:)
Yes. Bf 1942 which is a ww2 game is a more accurate presentation of ww1 then Bf1 when it comes to gameplay, not the visual part ofc. There are more rifle action and the autoamted weapons are less OP. also the ww2 tanks aren't as OP in rough enviroment as Bf1 tanks. Bf1 is a modern warfare Bf3 or 4 style game with a ww1 skin dlc attatched. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I expected more from a game claiming to be at least somewhat accurate if not 100% historical accurate hardcore dying simulator:)
They have their own perks in their own right and their own targeted audiences. Verdun reflects the majority of the action in WW1 by having the battles in the trenches which is more accurate historically. The damage model forces players to be more careful and defensive. The only thing it’s missing is the marching early in the war. The gameplay is much more immersive. BF1 reflects the exciting and different places and is targeted for the mainstream gamer that’s been playing their formula for years. Damage model encourages the same tactics everybody’s been using in every battlefield game. In summary, play BF1 for a WW1 themed game. Play Verdun for a WW1 game.
Bob Higgins Well, even as a long time battlefield fan going on ten years, battlefield 1 just doesn't flow well with the type if game it wants to be. The weapons to me just don't work for that style. While the movement in battlefield has certainly improved, it feels like the gun play has gotten progressively worse since battlefield 3.
Julian Emir Prawira not really, bf1 has great gameplay, Verdun is a very realistic shooter, where as bf1 is a arcade styled shooter. Different games, different styles.
I'm pretty disappointed that you didn't mention the difference in gore and authenticity in terms of battlefield wounds/deaths... Verdun has just about any other game beat in that department, in my opinion.
i love verdun, not just for its authenticity, but also how the game works. in BF1, its like any other Triple A game, players running amok, no coordination whatsoever, but in Verdun, the unique game play forces you and other players/AI to line up in your trench, form and hold a line, push through no mans land, and rush Machine gun positions. once i was playing, and me and a community group were doing an event. i was to hold the left outer most trench. it was foggy, and i didn't expect any action, so you can imagine my surprise when i saw shapes moving in the fog. had at least 25 kills before i got over run. at first it was just a few burst here and there after we sent a runner down the trench-line to deliver the news of the attack, but soon i was panicking and straight up laying down fire everywhere. but back to the point, in Verdun, being a lone wolf is being a dead wolf, its made for players to line up and fire, not run around willy nillly.
Derpy Pug :P really? I didn't talk about that because I honestly had no idea. None of the 2 servers available seemed to offer this. Is it a client side option?
Nick930 yea sort of. You have to hunt it down but it's worth it. Also if you watch dead players their characters sometimes roll around screaming in pain till they stop and lay still. Pretty disturbing but it's fricken awesome
I feel like verdun is better. It has more muted colors, going along with the bland and drab feeling of a battlefield. The recoil of verdun is weak, but you’re a soldier who’s been trained to fire these guns and you’ve been firing them for awhile, so it makes sense that recoil would be at a minimum.
bingo bongo In my opinion Verdun is still better. Battlefield 1 was a little too "pretty" for my taste. Verdun just has normal everyday lighting and graphics. It felt like WW1 to me
You know that's how grenades are in real life right?, The explosion of battlefield version is intensive and quite excessive for a grenade explosion and do not generally make craters in the ground while the Verdun grenade explosion is realistic and explodes in a small area and to fire shell fragments into small areas.
These are also WW1 grenades, which had a less focus on shrapnel and more so in being able to pack an explosive charge within a containable item. So it makes sense in BF1 that they make such a bang but really only have a very tiny blast radius in comparison with other explosives in video games.
Actually both are too weak compared to real life. Actual grenades, including fragmentation grenades have a large blast, big enough to blow up a small house. But what a huge misconception about grenades is the fireball. Grenades explode incredibly fast and only flashes for a split second. You hardly see a fireball like most videogames or movies portray, but instead you see a bright flash along with a large amount of smoke, and you may see small dirt movement around a 20 yard vicinity do to shrapnel.
Comparing a game made by about seven historical accuracy oriented people to one that is made by a well-established company with a brand that runs for long years now. Obviously, Verdun will look less refined, but they keep touching it up! Give them the team and resources what Dice have and then we can talk.
MacGyver HD No, bf1 definately has its own feel and gameplay, even if they may look similiar from an observers perspective. Verdun ftw, though. I've put hundreds of hours in there :D
Verdun is actually very fun. Idk why people automatically assume that it's a boring game when it's way more intense than most other shooters I've played.
Verdun is actually good because we sometimes go out on the field but sometimes its to risky. And yes you are sometimes in a trench but you can also not sit, you can clear trenches or take cover in them. And the maps are really big. And if you want the authentic experience, you can go to custom mode and play with bots, to have more best experience you can go to chat and type "/Setfillbots (Any number you want" for more men to fight in the battlefield. And Verdun even has some good details like dead horses, and corpses. Also you can also choose your own desired weapon by choosing your role. If you want a game that won't burn your Old PC then Verdun is the right game for that. So I don't see why people don't like verdun. And At least everything is free...except for Supporter edition. Also Verdun Is probably more realistic than Bf1. Probably because of trenches, dead horses, corpses, right weapon, no contrabands, right skin or uniform, better terrain, and before your player dies he screams because he is injured then he dies. And for the price.. well I guess its kinda expensive but bf1 is more expensive though. And Verdun has more better reloads. And don't forget, There are A lot of trenches back in WW1 so dont say Verdun is boring Because Verdun just became realistic. That's why Verdun is Good.
Gaius Studios Verdun is closer to feeling like WW1, but honestly its still way behind Battlefield. Its never gonna be able to shake its PUBG esque old graphics and needs to be updated into a new engine for it to work better.
You should review this again, they had a massive sound and graphics overhaul since this video was made. I think Verdun might actually be up to par (within reason of course) to Battlefield with Verdun's grittier look making it not as "pretty" but more realistic.
Battlefield 1 excels with fast paced combat in open areas making great use of the weapons and vehicles of the time. Verdin excels on the classic feeling off ww1 trench combat and does it almost perfectly. Both are amazing games in their own areas and what they’re trying to go for
I would love it if the guns in Battlefield had realistic 1-2 shot kill damage. Unfortunately, the “community” consists of a bunch of crybabies who constantly complain guns are “overpowered” if they kill you in less than 800 shots. I’m really tired of it... I wish games like Verdun came to PS4.
Verdun is on Ps4, the playerbase is rather small but it is slowly growing back after it was on discount in the PS Store for several times, plus, in february a big console update will come bringing improvements already issued on PC
I know I'm 3 years late, but when you asked about the 1911 weapon model for verdun being more detailed and what details in particular were added, verdun included the extractor part in the weapon model while battlefield its completely missing
Taktyczna Herbatka Oh trust me I’ve done that once. Cleared out a whole goddamn trench in Artois. When you know what you’re doing. You’re a god with that gun.
Just imagine if Verdun was made by a big company. Everything was the same, all the mechanics stayed the same but the graphics were remade and made much more realistic.
Mate, I don’t think you’ve seen or heard a grenade go off, they don’t cause massive explosions or “explosion noises” like in battlefield one, they make a popping/cracking sound. Secondly, they do not make massive fireballs, they just make small flashes then throw up dirt. Last but not least, they don’t leave massive crates like battlefield
I mean, BF1 is a Triple A title. It is prettier, and has a lot more visual polish. BF1 has better optimization, and the interface flows a bit better than Verdun (this has been remedied in large part). Verdun offers much more depth and is ultimately more compelling and interesting than BF1. BF1 is ultimately just another shooter with WWI stylings. Verdun is much more of an experience, and I ultimately consider it the better game.
Doom Guy verdun is just another wannabe simulator. No depth, you shot some one and dead, no question. Clunky af and overall lacking experience. All 3 people who actually enjoy it arent even theyre creators because they truely know its more pain playing it than drinking soap. Gmod with 1 health players is more comparable to this game than this game to ww1
Okay, so "generalization" isn't really an applicable word then. It's fair to say that the game is clunky in comparison to BF1, which is something that I already touched on. To say it lacks depth is silly. Verdun endeavors toward a degree of historical depth, which BF1 only ever attempts superficially. BF1 has the sheen of WW1 but, at its core, is ultimately indifferentiable from other BF titles. This is what makes Verdun more compelling to me, worthy of looking past its clunkiness, and ultimately my preferred choice. This is not to say that BF1 is necessarily a bad game. I've played and enjoyed it. It kind of depends on what you are looking for in a game. If you are looking for a dynamic shooter with WWI aesthetics but are willing to concede on historicity, then by all means, play BF1. You may find the one hit kills in Verdun irritating, but that is more akin to reality, and as such I'm more than willing to accept it. Verdun works differently because it is not a game that is intended to be played like your prototypical shooter. If that's what you are looking for, then don't pick up Verdun.
Doom Guy no i did not address the generalization claim but saying your typical shooter with a ___ coat is by far a great generalization for a game, especially battlefield which steers more from that AAA shooter setup. What historical depth included specifically in verdun that goes beyond good gun model and real maps/ battles? I dont know but you seem too as you enjoy it as much to here. Because beyond what kick you find in it it just seems like a hardcore teamdeath match on a drawn put cod map. Point and click shooters dont seem enticing let alone spot the target dirt edition. Sorry for ragging on.
I just realized this was 3 years ago, Verdun has really good graphics now and its much improved, if only i had the pc to run it at more than medium/low graphics
I think Verdun is more realistic generally, but man do the grenades do a lot better in a destructive environment. I have so many stories from quickly forming my own foxhole to blowing an entry into a previously impassable building. Good stuff
They honestly left out a lot of gun detail in BF1, such as the 1911 being the later production model, and leaving out key points of the pistol like stuff as simple as the plunger in the rear.
The not aiming downsights with a gas mask, both games sort of hit the opposite end of the keel.. BF fully prevents it whereas Verdun allows you to do it with only the aesthetics such as dirt etc to make aiming harder.. I feel there’s a perfect middle ground out there somewhere.
It's a shame I can't afford a proper pc to play verdun, I did however play it on PS4 and love it, the down side is that not many people are playing it. Only on the rarest occasions can I get into a full lobby and play it. More people need to get it. I definitely recommend it to anyone who isnt sure if it's worth it. It's is if more people start playing it
I just found verdun for 5 dollars on the ps store and God I wish more people played it.. literally only a lobby under all the time and that's it.. so sad because it's so much more entertaining then battlefield in my opinion
Gun nut here. While the extra detail in Verdun's Colt 1911 model is more accurate than BF1's, they both have more realistic models than the other and both of them mishandle an animation here and there. One other thing I wanna point out; WW1 scopes really are as good as they are in BF1 and in Verdun it's as though the soldier doesn't allow himself proper eye relief
It is true that this is a m1911a1 as their is a comfort bulge on the back of the m1911's grip*Being a distinctive feature between the two* had not existed in the time of bf1 as the m1911 is or *was* a fairly new firearm in ww1 times but the time gap between ww1 & ww2 was enough to make sleight improvements to the gun thus the *m1911a1* which was used through ww2,korean war & the Vietnam war even still being used today...
I play both bf1 and Verdun I like both. When someone would ask me which one of these they should buy I would answer. It depends on what you want. When you want a less historical accurate game with a lot of action and Pritty graphics. Then Bf1 When you care a lot about historical accuracy then Verdun
the BAR'S animation in Verdun was wrong, the BAR operates from an open bolt, so it couldn't go forward after he pulled it back, he would have to push it forward or just leave it there and the bolt will lock forward automatically when u fire a shot
YaBoi Liikeaboss that’s the point in ww1 when you went over the top you didn’t know if it was your last time you just hoped and prayed the guy next you got the bullet and you lived plus it’s more of a challenge that way
You need to play a lot of 'battlefield simulator' type FPS, where there are dozens of people are trading fires across a rather static frontline. You need to learn to use the bumps on the grounds to limit your visual exposure, and then watch through one small 'window' where you can search for enemy body parts far away. If you are in NCO, rifleman, or MG gunner role, you need to play very 'cowardly' like this. Even if you are in 'raid' roles, you need to use covers very cunningly to make approach to enemy lines without getting picked out.
