I don't think ot would make a lot of differences. Many ww2 shooters (call of duty, medal of honor) have multiple trench-based levels, and multiple corridor levels (underground bases, etc). In fact, there is no reason why a ww1 game couldn't be structured the same way as these games. These soldiers weren't dying and killing only in trenches, unfortunately. Fields, towns and villages were devasted as well. Two and a half millions civilian casualties weren't done in trench wars.

EE 1's WW1 was really good.

However, interesting enough, while our image of WW1 is that of a trench war there were many, many aspects of it that were fully modern with heavy use of quick, decisive deployments, usage of the airplane in a more or less effective way, heavy implementation of cavalry and vehicles depending on who and where and while I cannot confirm the only parts that really devolved only into trench warfare was indeed the Western Front. Now, with things like the Waste Land and All Quiet on the Western Front, our image is almost exclusively of men in trenches but in many areas, including the Western Front at times, it was much much more, see, for a famous example, Lawrence of Arabia. Also, one thing people forget is that it was a World War and that it took place in Africa, the Middle East, and if I recall correctly parts of Asia.

Here's a pretty good article for anyone interested:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/WorldWarI?from=Main.WorldWarOne
WW2/MW games have:
Sitting at a machine gun and mowing people down.
Walking/running through narrow corridors.
Sniper missions.
Missions where you man a gun on a plane/helicopter.
Stealth/espionage missions.
Telling artillery/heavy weapons where to fire.

WW1 games could have:
Sitting at a machine gun and mowing people down.
Walking/running through narrow corridors.
Sniper missions.
Missions where you man a gun on a plane/helicopter.
Stealth/espionage missions.
Telling artillery/heavy weapons where to fire.

It may be no more fun, but done right it would be no more boring.

Maybe a lot of people think a WW1 game automatically equals boring game play because they simply haven't played a WW1 game they like due to the lack of WW1 games?

Or maybe because there aren't many shiny glamorous heroic ww1 movies.

I meant to say this. "Maybe a lot of people think a WW1 game automatically equals boring game play because they simply haven't played a WW1 game they like due to the lack of WW1 games?"

But I think you are right too. A lack of WW1 movies probably = a lack of interest in WW1. We need Tom Hanks, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tom Cruise to fight from the trenches in some movies if we want more people interested in The Great War. Maybe have Arnold, go over the top with a machine gun in each hand while making the RARRRGHHH!!!! sound. Then have him shoot down five enemy biplanes and clear out an enemy trench all by himself.

Honestly, I've never played a WWI game that was specifically a WWI game, mostly Empire Earth and Rise of Nations. However, it seems like it'd make perfect sense for flight sim. I'm not aware of any, but it'd probably take thirty seconds to find one. I think one WWI game is called Entente, but I can't find anything on it.

More than a lack of movies (there are quite a few of formidable ones), I think it's a difference of angle. Nobody dares to go all heroic and flaghumping in a WW1 story anymore, most WW1 films are creepy, focused on the absurdity of that war, directly of metaphorically. Not the thrill and mindset that is being associated to videogame shooting fun. WW1 is boring because it has no nazis, no heroes (apart from desertors and mutineers, as far as I'm concerned), and nobody pretends anymore that there are. It doesn't provide much material for the kind of identification that games and action movies demand. It falls into a different category of event, with different thought associations...

Videogames require some amount of popular militaristic culture in the background, and the representations (and productions) associated to WW1 don't have the right tone for that.

__
Edit :

You added And yeah. That's basically that. Hard to motivate the gamers' fantasy with "Capitaine Conan", "Le pantalon", "Paths of Glory", "Joyeux Noël", or Jacques Tardi's comics...

Yeah, you are right. There are a decent amount of WW1 movies but they are nothing like the WW2 movies. And also every time WW1 is presented to us in other kinds of movies or in TV shows, the presentation is very dark and without action. There is just death. No British commandos capturing a bridge and cheering as Allied tanks start crossing and no Audie Murphy. Just bloody corpses in a trench.

What can I say, maybe you are right. Maybe I haven't come across interesting WW1 games, which may or may not have something to do with having so few available. I like history and I would welcome good WW1 games. I'm just skeptical, that's all.

In the middle-east as well: Gallipoli.

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)? War Horse (2011)? Usually WW1 is seen under a bleak light. One that comes to mind is a french movie, Un long dimanche de fiançailles (2004)

Multiplayer, oh well...

http://www.verdungame.com/

While everyone was playing Desert Combat for 1942 I really liked the 1918 mod. Especially the gas attack scenarios were very moody. It's probably pointless to go looking for servers nowadays... But of you can get a few copies of BF1942 and a few friends it could make a nice addition to a LAN party.

I could add two WW1 flight sims:

- over flanders fields (mod - needs MCS3)
- rise of flight

The exception of the rule: Sergeant York/ ,
but otherwise you are right of course, WWI has too little of "coolness factor", except the air dogfights over Western front (and those have been made as video games many times). Also, FPS loves handheld automatic weapons, something not related with WWI.

This one is about a year old, but references quite a few games.

That's the one I was thinking of. Thank you. :D