Why has the gaming industry largely avoided any world war 1 content since the 1980's?

Question

Seriously WWII has been overdone in the last few years. Lets see some WWI combat.

Answer 1

They should. It would be so fun. Trench warfare would be so cool in a video game.

Answer 2

They did a few Red Baron games but to a large extent they only do WWII because the war moved and was all about how far you could move you army across the battlefield, thanks largely to the invention of the tank, also the large amount of different units used and the 2 or sometimes 3 fronts.(China, Europe, Pacific) A WWI game would have you in a trench in Europe or I should say in France fighting meaningless battles, where the only gains might be yards that could be taken back in a matter of minutes, also sitting in a hole waiting for the hours of bombardment to end would be boring. The only exciting time would be when the armies started using tanks and the war began to move.

Answer 3

Um.... because trench warfare sucks?

I mean seriously dude, you really want a game where you jump up out of a hole, run across a field, get shot or blown up, rinse and repeat?

If you push A-B-B-B-A-Y really fast in combination you can give the other guy trench foot...

Or you can dig a trench really fast and try and get to the end before..... oh wait, that was Dig Dug.

The WWI biplane thing's been done, and frankly the ground war is just downright depressing. Inaccurate artillery, guns that break a lot and steam powered battleships that could spend hours at a time completely missing each other.

Kinda makes the golden age of Atari 2600 "Tank" seem much more entertaining....

Answer 4

I don't know -- WW1 trench warfare games would get to be pretty boring. Life in the trenches was pretty miserable and boring.

At least in WW2 there was mobility and action, and the scenery changed a lot.

Answer 5

That's interesting - perhaps it has to do with relatively few war equipment and stories as compared to those in WWII