How many times have you actually witnessed this outside of a youtube video? My guess is zero.
DICE - We will always put fun over authentic (Regarding Battlefield V compliants)
- Thread starter SantaC
- Start date
Officers had them its not that ridiculous for them to appear in a ww2 game.
Last edited:
Your complaint is that women in BFV don't belong because they aren't shown appropriately. So what is appropriate in a game where people perform crazy stunts, like jump from plane to plane mid-flight? Why do women characters have to have such a higher standard for authenticity than male characters? Oh, I know why. But keep acting like a child so you don't have to defend yourself and act like you're the victim while you're gatekeeping.
Things not bothering you personally is completely irrelevant to those who do take issue with things. Saying that people are attacking bf veterans for their dislike of the change does not imply "all bf veterans", it shows that someone who has grown up with and/or played very much of the franchise is not just some random shitposter who has no experience with it to base their opinion on, and as such shouldnt be responded to as if. Obviously playerbases are not monolithic and opinions therein vary vastly.
We all agree being a racist and misogynist is one of the most terrible things a human being can be. By that token anybody accusing somebody of being such without basis deserves to be kicked out of here frankly. I would say report such behaviour, it's simply disgusting.
And the British had bows and swords =P
Sure, it wasn't normal, but how many video game characters that we play as are the average Joe? We play as the interesting characters.
So it's an issue of accuracy and realism in a series that has never prided itself on it's accuracy or realism?
No it's not portrayed in an authentic way. There are tons of artistic liberties taking in order to emphasize the action movie feel. BF is not or has not ever been a documentary.
In terms of cohesion BF1 and BFV are equal in how they liberally use elements that in reality were very rare and have them at the forefront of the experience in the MP both for the sake of aesthetic and for gameplay. The argument does not in anyway shape or form hold up.
What bugs me is, why not just give the Brit the claymore? It would still be absurd because only one soldier did that but it's also still more appropriate than importing a weapon from an entirely different theater of war.And the British had bows and swords =P
Sure, it wasn't normal, but how many video game characters that we play as are the average Joe? We play as the interesting characters.
Because they do. If it had a Russian women sniper doing 180 quick-scopes in the trailer a lot wouldn't mind.
How many soldiers wore a sword in WW2?
And how many women fought?
My guess is not zero.
People are blowing things out of proportions without even playing the game as always, BF was always about fun with all-out warfare. People bitched about Premium and community split and DICE/EA respond with a game with only cosmetic microtransactions, you can never win. These customization options are here to add variety and be inclusive(a good thing), you dont need to use them if you dont want. Seems like the complaints are more based on racism and misogyny, even more when you read the info guys like jackfrags brought. Sad times for the BF community. People should embrace the changes, there are other games to give you the authenticity if thats what you want, dont buy BFV.
Wouldnt mind one bit if it were Japanese or other historically accurate units carrying their respective gear.
Wouldn't care at all if they were apart of the Soviet Union, French Resistance, etc
Because this was a multiplayer reveal, katanas were a melee weapon in use during WW2, and your weapon choices aren't restricted by your "race and faction".
We're using easter eggs to prove discredit a game's authenticity now? LolAuthentic I heard:
Authentic I heard:
Are these from Ken Burns' documentaries? I can't even tell.
"This thing that contradicts my point doesn't count because reasons."
And the British had bows and swords =P
Sure, it wasn't normal, but how many video game characters that we play as are the average Joe? We play as the interesting characters.
Is the dude at the bottom the crazy guy who stormed a beach while playing bagpipes?
I'm gonna buy the hell out of this game, just to support the devs. I'm loving everything I see about this game so far.
He did have bagpipes too, yes =P He's the same guy in both photos, sword and bow.
Why does it being an 'Easter egg' disqualify it given the arguments being made about immersion and historical accuracy? It's in the game isn't it?
Climate has changed drastically with fornite, which is extremely kiddy looking and involves building magical staicases up mountains in thin air. Not surprising changes are being made to big franchises to pull some of that crowd back.
Pretty much, I expect that to be an MTX thing they go after even.
Are you really gonna be this disingenuous? There's quite a difference between a tiny easter egg you have to go out of your way to find versus glaring inaccuracies that are front and center in the game.
"Glorious authentic World War 1 aesthetic that fits the tone of what the war was actually like, not a HUGE reach in terms of accuracy":
"Unauthentic AF!"
-Armchair historian gamers™
"Unauthentic AF!"
-Armchair historian gamers™
I expect this is as futuristic as the game will get via DLC
http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield_1942:_Secret_Weapons_of_WWII
http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield_1942:_Secret_Weapons_of_WWII
In a WW2 game? I'm going to trust you don't really need me to answer that...
All of the complaints stem from DICE not being clear what that reveal trailer actually was showing.
Singleplayer? Co-op? Multiplayer? Entirely CG mix of all of them? Without this clarification the lean into the BF shenanigans (cars landing on people etc) comes off very confusing in terms of tone. The unique characters come off very confusing in terms of what the hell they are (customization? Unique co-op characters? A new alternate WW2 setting and these are just what all the soldiers look like?) Then the very long scripted intro makes it feel like a fake CG trailer with just the HUD pasted on top. Just all sorts of muddled messages in terms of setting, gameplay mechanics and actual gameplay mode.
Just a bad janky trailer. Why does he reload after firing two shots.
After reading all that gameplay stuff I really just want to watch an uncut multiplayer match.
Singleplayer? Co-op? Multiplayer? Entirely CG mix of all of them? Without this clarification the lean into the BF shenanigans (cars landing on people etc) comes off very confusing in terms of tone. The unique characters come off very confusing in terms of what the hell they are (customization? Unique co-op characters? A new alternate WW2 setting and these are just what all the soldiers look like?) Then the very long scripted intro makes it feel like a fake CG trailer with just the HUD pasted on top. Just all sorts of muddled messages in terms of setting, gameplay mechanics and actual gameplay mode.
Just a bad janky trailer. Why does he reload after firing two shots.
After reading all that gameplay stuff I really just want to watch an uncut multiplayer match.
Not disingenuous at all. It just doesn't fit your argument. Especially when people keep saying Battlefield has been this paradigm of authenticity and immersion before this reveal trailer came out. That's disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.
Putting C4 into a bike, launching it into a tank and destroying the tank: OK
Using a Railgun: OK
French soldiers using an Ottoman Kilij on BF1: OK
English soldier using a katana: NOT OK
Women: NOT OK NOT OK.
Yikes, guys. Where you this way when you could use Russian weapons in a France VS Germany map in BF1?
Using a Railgun: OK
French soldiers using an Ottoman Kilij on BF1: OK
English soldier using a katana: NOT OK
Women: NOT OK NOT OK.
Yikes, guys. Where you this way when you could use Russian weapons in a France VS Germany map in BF1?
There a lot of talk about Battlefield never being authentic so why start now right. I just need to understand is it ok to have Aliens in WW2? I fucking love aliens, there nothing more fun than fucking crazy Aliens. At least a DLC drop if not already in there please. Anybody remember Resistance on PS3?...yeah, good times.
As someone who went from playing Medal of honor allied assault and WWII Online to the Bf1942 demo back in the day (Tobruk + Wake island ftw!)
I welcome these changes. The squad I used to play WWII Online with HATED BF 1942 because it was ARCADEY, and you could destroy tanks with 50 cal machine guns (this was all based off the demo, etc)
Hell, in the full game I used to shoot down American planes with the Japanese Type 5 rifle. (A gun that was experimental! A copy of the American M1 Garand)
The Battlefield series has NEVER been realistic or accurate! Hey, if you want that, at least you got Red orchestra and Post scriptum.
I welcome these changes. The squad I used to play WWII Online with HATED BF 1942 because it was ARCADEY, and you could destroy tanks with 50 cal machine guns (this was all based off the demo, etc)
Hell, in the full game I used to shoot down American planes with the Japanese Type 5 rifle. (A gun that was experimental! A copy of the American M1 Garand)
The Battlefield series has NEVER been realistic or accurate! Hey, if you want that, at least you got Red orchestra and Post scriptum.
"Glorious authentic World War 1 aesthetic that fits the tone of what the war was actually like, not a HUGE reach in terms of accuracy":
"Unauthentic AF!"
-Armchair historian gamers™
The Italians did employ armour plated soldiers in WW1...that is based on something that actually happened.
That plate armor actually existed though."Glorious authentic World War 1 aesthetic that fits the tone of what the war was actually like, not a HUGE reach in terms of accuracy":
"Unauthentic AF!"
-Armchair historian gamers™
War elephants were used in WW2, let's ride those into battle on the western front!
It's just a game so fuck authenticity right?
No one is arguing that. But is that armour restricted to Italian soldiers in BF1? No. Hence the katanas not being any different in BFV.
And guess what, some women fought in WW2, some soldiers wore face paint, and some even fought with prosthetics.All based on something that actually happened. So there's no issue with BFV in the context of the Battlefield series. Good talk. :D
Muh authenticity
Megaladon's were real at one point in time... Women are not, and either are prosthetics.
How many american's in WWII were given were given German Ruger's or Mausers to go into combat with? The answer is 0.... Yet, my grandpa left the war with 1 Ruger and 2 Mausers and had 1 of each for over a year in WWII.
Me too, this game is going to be amazing.
Most armies involved used or trialled some form of body armour at some point during the conflict.
Female soldiers with prosthetics fighting for the British army?