Battlefield 1 is undoubtedly unique because it is the first to have a really decent single. This is the tenth Battlefield game. The first ones did great without single player games and story campaigns. Then, however, with the migration of the series to consoles, such modes appeared. And they were bad. Or very average and boring at best. As a big fan of the guys from Bad Company, who were phenomenal, I am saying with a heartache, only playing around them was poor. But that's a thing of the past, because here's DICE ladies and gentlemen, made a campaign that is fun to play. Five campaigns at once. Campaigns basically, because they are played on two, three, up to four maps. Each tells us a different story from World War I, each has different heroes and different basic assumptions. In one, we fight in the trench warfare on the Gallipoli peninsula, in Australian. In another, we breathe alpine air while fighting the imperial-royal soldiers. In yet another, we fly over France in a rogue-like manner, and in another, we soak in the same French mud together with the pride of the British armored corps, the Big Bess.

These little campaigns are not created equal. They are better and worse. But the weakest is still above average. The stories they tell are pretty cool and well run with cutscenes and background narratives. They try to take the heart and weave poignant visions of human dramas. They usually fail, probably through wooden Polish dubbing, but they are emotional enough not to complain. The creators tried to differentiate them, not only generally, one from the other, but also within each story. The pace changes, so does the atmosphere, as do the scenery and even the gameplay itself. It's nice. It's good to play. It does not get boring. Pleasant fun. Battlefield 1 does not throw us to our knees with its stories from World War I, but it is solid, entertaining and you want to pass each story to the end. And that's ten times more than in the previous games in the series. It is a pity that we do not have here, I do not know why, the expected slaughter in the trenches on the Western Front, with gas, artillery and all that, but I suspect that the creators leave for themselves an addition that will introduce French soldiers. Then we'll get some Verduns for sure. For now, we must survive without him. In general, it is a plus for everything, not huge, but decent and clear.

But you know it's Battlefield. The singles campaign doesn't really count at all, whether it's good or bad, or not at all. The most important thing is multiplayer games. Which for the first time in years smell fresh, original and generally something pleasant. No gadgets from outer space, no drones, collimators, rocket launchers and everything that tired us from appearing in every new game in this series. Here we go back to the basics. The men, their rifles, their gas grenades. Well, maybe I went overboard with those rifles. If you remember from history lessons, popular science programs or perhaps independently and spontaneously, horror of horrors, of the book you read, what weapons were used by soldiers in World War I, you will probably be a little surprised while playing Battlefield 1. Nobody runs around here with normal rifles, except for scout snipers. All other players, i.e. the vast majority, carry weapons that are either fully automatic, or at least semi-automatic or semi-automatic. Something that was actually used by about one percent of the soldiers at the time. And it was only at the end of the war. I understand that everyone is used not to aim and shoot, but to hit in series more or less in the general direction of the enemy. I know that the use of a classic rifle would be a horror for console pad owners. It is all obvious. Nevertheless, it is a pity that in terms of personal weapons, the authors made World War I a modern war. On the other hand, however, it should be grateful that at least the rest is fairly faithful to reality. And you can get used to these slots quite quickly. And you even have to.