• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

EA on the backlash against women in Battlefield V: ‘Accept it or don’t buy the game’

potatohead

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
3,889
Earthbound
Fuck white supremacists, nazis, and misogynists, and all your ilk, just fuck off

I very much appreciated how the Bethesda conference also made it clear: fuck Nazis
 

Ciaran

Banned
Apr 17, 2018
117
The notion that you'd succeed even in your ridiculous hypothetical is naive. People that have lived and breathed far into adulthood thinking a certain way don't just change their beliefs, even when confronted with logic upon logic at long durations.
My "ridiculous hypothetical" is an every day part of my job and there will be similar examples in all of our daily lives. The idea that there's no point in attempting to change the views of others is the most naive thing I have probably heard all year given that now and throughout history people have slaved away to change the views of others to give you the life you're living now.
 

Overture

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,043
Portugal
Cool. All that needs to be said, really. Here's to hoping that everyone that is against the inclusion of women in this game (and ends up buying it) plays against nothing less than teams full of women soldiers.
 

Dhuggs_

Member
Oct 27, 2017
538
New Jersey
I never understood the whole "realism" thing, the fact that the first time I step into a multiplayer match that I can go revive someone who just got shot in the head has realism go right out the window for me. I don't care if an army's uniform color is a shade darker or lighter.
 

PrimeBeef

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,840
User Banned (5 Days): Dismissing gender inclusion and representation. Claims of 'fake outrage'.
Fuck now I gotta buy this game just on principle.
Nah. Eventhough I like the response, I still wont6buy anything from EA. I do think too many people just try to offended. Not everything has to be all inclusive and for everyone. I say good on EA, but I'll still pass.
 

Mr Punished

Member
Oct 27, 2017
301
Collie, WA
Just to be clear, what you're saying is that there is no value in rational debate, that you don't know how to change the views of people with beliefs for find abhorrent but that's fine because it's not your job anyway?

I mean... ok but I really don't know what on earth that attitude is going to achieve for you.
At large, absolutely not, it's an impossible goal and a ridiculous burden to impose on a public forum about videogames of all places. If the moderation is strict and limits exposure to toxic bullshit allowing for a more inclusive community and in general just a friendlier environment, then it's absolutely worth it and not fucking censorship. There are many other forums that allow people with such beliefs to happily post all day long about forced inclusivity of women in games, and if you wanna head over and attempt to rationally debate them go ahead. I admire your crusade, and will be eagerly awaiting the results of your success.
 

Nuclearaddict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
518
Ciaran These people are being met with "but it's just a video game, not a history lesson" still won't lay off about "bionic women" and "Somalian Kratos" and "forced liberal agenda". They've made up their minds and their beliefs are bigotry and sexism. It's being poorly masked by an "outrage about historical accuracy", but when I've dared to enter into the Battlefield subreddit since the first trailer dropped, I've asked these people for examples of historical accuracy from previous entries in the series. I've yet to see anything that made me sympathetic to their point of view. This series was always a joke of a cartoon when it came to representing the war. The uniforms are wrong, the armies are usually wrong, the weaponry is dead wrong, the maps are usually way off and the actual action of what's being represented is so historically inaccurate to any real war they've portrayed. So all their entries that use the settings are real wars are 99% totally inaccurate, that just leaves the bigots with the "historical accuracy" of made-up future wars.
 

oni-link

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,064
UK
Battlefield subreddit is amusing to say the least

Why do they have such an unwavering need for TOTAL HISTORICAL ACCURACY like it's the only thing that matters in a multiplayer shooting game

Literally who cares if a model is female or male, does it matter in any way towards the goal or outcome or your enjoyment of the game
Because the games have a long and storied history of being historically accurate, the multiplayer matches in past games have looked exactly like real warfare, as seen here:



And here:



So women being in a WW2 game just throws the grounded nature of what you can see in the above gifs right out the window
 

Nuclearaddict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
518

Polaroid_64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,884
Well done.

All that segment of the gaming community does is fucking bitch. Just shut the fuck up already and don't buy the game.
 

OrdinaryPrime

Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
11,042
The moderation here is already well down the slippery slope back to how it was in the old place. Really sad and completely unnecessary. We're big boys and girls, we should be able to handle people with different views to us.
Nah it's pretty obvious why people are getting timeouts. They're exhibiting bigotry. If you have an issue and want to put your foot down in defense of them, be my guest. But it certainly isn't a good look.

And describing bigotry as just 'different views' is so stupid, there's really not much more to say.
 

Apocrypha

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,316
Because the games have a long and storied history of being historically accurate, the multiplayer matches in past games have looked exactly like real warfare, as seen here:



And here:



So women being in a WW2 game just throws the grounded nature of what you can see in the above gifs right out the window
Ah yes, who could forget the famous parachuters that won us our wars!
 

Shmunter

Banned
May 28, 2018
377
If the game under performs watch these guys brush all this under the carpet for the next release. The allmight $ will dictate everything. As for me I’m impressed with the destruction and gameplay changes, don’t care about gender or the fruity outfits, so that’s a buy.
 

Mr Punished

Member
Oct 27, 2017
301
Collie, WA
My "ridiculous hypothetical" is an every day part of my job and there will be similar examples in all of our daily lives. The idea that there's no point in attempting to change the views of others is the most naive thing I have probably heard all year given that now and throughout history people have slaved away to change the views of others to give you the life you're living now.
I've never said there's no point in attempting to change the views of others, merely that expecting it to actually work large scale is incredibly unrealistic, and expecting a videogame forum to carry that burden is also unnecessary and would ultimately prove ineffective. Your hypothetical is ridiculous when you're using it as a comparison to what we're actually talking about here, but of course in that situation attempting to change the mind of said hypothetical individual is worth a try, but that situation is life and death, women in fucking Battlefield multiplayer isn't.
 
Last edited:

Nuclearaddict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
518
It's almost as if historical accuracy has never been a key element of the series and that the people whinging about the game just don't like women being in the game for some reason
Seriously. They can easily go back and look at the reviews for BF1942 and almost all of them start off with something along the lines of "inaccuracies aside", because DICE wanted to present an over-the-top, fun filled mayhem sandbox shooter. I've always viewed the series as exactly that. 1942 came out around the time I was 14 years old, I knew then, as a child, that the game wasn't supposed to be accurately representing anything. The historical settings I feel are nothing more than backdrops to the mayhem.

Like I said, if these people complaining knew anything about history they would've been outraged about this series years ago and not when they've suddenly begin to include women and POC.
 

CaviarMeths

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
7,330
Western Canada
Speaking purely from a strategic point of view, if you want to challenge beliefs you feel are wrong then moralising and censorsing is absolutely guaranteed to fail and only strengthen those beliefs and encourage further division in society.

Historical accuracy regarding WWII is extremely important, but FPS video games undermine just about everything about war so including additional women is a drop in an inaccurate ocean. The entire concept of respawning is pretty much an insult to everyone who ever lost their life in war. Also the Norway story involving female characters looks like the most historically accurate part of the game so far.

But you can explain that to people without banning or censoring them, that is completely counterproductive and in fact exactly the kind of thing that traditionalist right wingers do. It's an abject betrayal of progressivism and will only increase the number of people attracted to those views.

The moderation here is already well down the slippery slope back to how it was in the old place. Really sad and completely unnecessary. We're big boys and girls, we should be able to handle people with different views to us.
Your ban duration is pending as of my post and I dunno if you'll ever see this, but god I wish people would stop calling rampant sexism, racism, and homophobia "opposing views." This shit is not just an opinion and no, there's no danger whatsoever in removing people from the community who harbour such an abhorrent worldview. Regressives have no place at the table of "rational discourse" and should be shunned from any mainstream platform. We don't progress as a species by making concessions to people who feel threatened by the very existence of women and minorities.
 

Gaia Lanzer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,889
Knowin' these dipshits angry over the game, they'll probably buy the game, then make it some sorta "event" where they film themselves break the disc (or take a picture of the broken disc), then post it to YouTube or Instagram while writing something like"#SJWfieldV", or "Suck it, SJWs!".
 

Nuclearaddict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
518
Knowin' these dipshits angry over the game, they'll probably buy the game, then make it some sorta "event" where they film themselves break the disc (or take a picture of the broken disc), then post it to YouTube or Instagram while writing something like"#SJWfieldV", or "Suck it, SJWs!".
They're doing one better. They're buying the game, but not reviving anyone that plays as a women or anyone that isn't wearing a historically accurate uniform. So, basically it'll still be Battlefield : D
 

Kyoufu

Member
Oct 26, 2017
10,973
Great response from EA. I hope everyone just tells the bigots to get lost if they don't like it.
 
Oct 28, 2017
7,816
Knowin' these dipshits angry over the game, they'll probably buy the game, then make it some sorta "event" where they film themselves break the disc (or take a picture of the broken disc), then post it to YouTube or Instagram while writing something like"#SJWfieldV", or "Suck it, SJWs!".
This would be awesome. They would still be supporting the game because they bought it, regardless of what they do with the discs afterwards. :)
 

IBLiSTRiGGER

Member
Jun 7, 2018
339
Los Angeles, CA
Just to be clear, what you're saying is that there is no value in rational debate, that you don't know how to change the views of people with beliefs for find abhorrent but that's fine because it's not your job anyway?

I mean... ok but I really don't know what on earth that attitude is going to achieve for you.
man, i feel you, i really do. you want to assume the best out of these people, that you can reach them with common sense. that’s fair. a good chunk of them were probably ordinary joe schmoes, like you and me, who bought into the status quo of racism and sexism — like you and me.

the truth is, extremism doesn’t twist people into monsters from nothing. it digs up what was already there, and sets it ablaze. it comes closes, embraces your deepest, darkest insecurities, gives you a gun, and whispers in your ear to shoot at the target you always believed, secretly, deserved it. extremism doesn’t live outside of society, no matter how much we deny it— it is society’s shadow, its id.

and that’s tragic! i wish we could do something for them, change their minds somehow!

but here’s the thing — once you go past the point of no return, there’s almost no going back. that’s not an opinion, that’s researched fact. thousands has been poured into studying effective deradicalization, to little effect. when it does work, it’s usually because of someone very close, like a lover, or a parent. some rando on the internet isn’t going to reach the guy who’s convinced he’s america’s last stand against the scourge of the sjws. logic holds no sway on him. to him, you’re just another target.

but he knows you pity him. and if there’s one thing extremists love to feed on, it’s good faith. because it’s good faith that lets them spread their beliefs. it doesn’t have to make sense, in fact, it’s better if it makes no sense, because then it becomes inarguable, shutting down any actual ‘debate’. it’s never been about ‘common sense’. the id doesn’t care about ‘common sense’. it just has to ignite the insecurities— and hatred— of the next joe schmoe who happens to be watching.

that’s
why we deplatform them. it’s too late for us to do anything for them. and in return for our kindness, all they’ll do is spread their poison.

EDIT: oh, lol, too late.
 
Last edited:

endlessflood

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,872
Australia (GMT+10)
I never understood the whole "realism" thing, the fact that the first time I step into a multiplayer match that I can go revive someone who just got shot in the head has realism go right out the window for me. I don't care if an army's uniform color is a shade darker or lighter.
The word DICE has used when talking about Battlefield games in the past isn't "realism," or "accuracy," it's "authenticity." Basically, they've always tried to model the guns, uniforms, and vehicles as accurately as possible given constraints at the time. That helps with immersion. Then gameplay then sits outside of that (which is why they don't say realism or accuracy), unlike games like ArmA, Operation Flashpoint, Red Orchestra, Verdun, Post Scriptum, etc.

Then, beyond all of the above, you have the emergent gameplay: shit that DICE never even thought of. The jihad jeeps of 1942 (which DICE initially tried to stop in the series, before relenting), rendezooks, dudes with flamethrowers standing on horses, driving tanks onto the wings of heavy bombers, launch glitches/stunts, etc. To be fair, as someone who's been playing the series since the 1942 Demo I've never even seen any of those things in game, with the exception of jihad jeeps and launch glitches.

And finally you have bugs, like the giraffe necks of BF3, vehicles rebounding off water, invisible people, etc.
 

Crossing Eden

Member
Oct 26, 2017
20,905
This reminds me when people were saying RE5 was racist because you were killing primarily dark skinned people in central Africa. If I remember correctly, they added a whole bunch of very light skinned people to the zombie list. (sorry if I remembered this incorrectly)
RE5 gets very racist or at best tone deaf. From zombies who literally chuck spears:


To giving Sheva a tribal outfit with her exclusive weapon being a crude bow & arrow.



Capcom lost their damn minds in 2009. Speaking of people who lost their damn minds did someone just without a hint of irony try to argue that kids learn about history from video games instead of history books?
 

AYF 001

Member
Oct 28, 2017
636
It's one of the saddest arguments I've seen on any subject. No video game can ever be "historically accurate" to any war, because the horrors of war are not in any way shape or form entertaining. Are we to include concentration camps, the mass rapes of German women and children at the hands of the advancing Russian army, the bombing of German civilian towns with zero strategic military purpose by the U.S. Airforce? What about how soldiers used to see how many rifle butts it would take to cave in a human head? That's the kinda accuracy we need in our outrageously fun online shooter.

I don't usually get "triggered" by much of anything, but for some reason, this stance against women and POC really gets to me. Maybe it's because they're thinly hiding it behind "accuracy" and "they owe it to children to learn history".
I remember back in the old country, I had a similar discussion with someone about the censorship of "historical symbols", and suggested that if they want a game that portrays them "accurately", that it should force you to take part in the scenarios.
I think you could make a real argument that heavily gamified versions of real life, modern conflicts in which millions of people were killed are inappropriate.
The fact that nobody cared until it meant having a female protagonist in a AAA videogame demonstrates pretty conclusively that these complaints are all in extremely bad faith.
I've been kicking around the hypothesis in my head that the lack of proper context in media, specifically games, has helped in some way foster the behavior we're witnessing now. Taking the actions of most selfish and evil ideology to ever exist, watering down their motivations, creating scenarios where you constantly mow down hordes and get to use their fancy tech afterwards, and saturating the market with this narrative, all lend themselves to desensitizing people to the existential threat they posed for so many people.

Even our perception/depiction of the Allies at the time is a revisionist tale: we take for granted the knowledge of the atrocities they committed and were executed for after the war, and as such, we assume stopping this was the intention of everyone who fought against them from the start. The British were willing to appease Hitler until he invaded Poland, and the US only entered because Japan attacked 2 years later. The Axis powers were depicted the same way as every other wartime enemy in the past, and when the camps were discovered by coincidence, Eisenhower specifically ordered the events there be recorded, because he knew people wouldn't believe such barbarity could occur on such a scale.

And on a more personal scale, how many of the soldiers who fought against the Nazis would go back home, only to support the same policies of segregation and bigotry that were the actual templates for the Third Reich's registration laws and camps, where they called themselves heroes for stopping?
 

Baji Boxer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,902
Ciaran These people are being met with "but it's just a video game, not a history lesson" still won't lay off about "bionic women" and "Somalian Kratos" and "forced liberal agenda". They've made up their minds and their beliefs are bigotry and sexism. It's being poorly masked by an "outrage about historical accuracy", but when I've dared to enter into the Battlefield subreddit since the first trailer dropped, I've asked these people for examples of historical accuracy from previous entries in the series. I've yet to see anything that made me sympathetic to their point of view. This series was always a joke of a cartoon when it came to representing the war. The uniforms are wrong, the armies are usually wrong, the weaponry is dead wrong, the maps are usually way off and the actual action of what's being represented is so historically inaccurate to any real war they've portrayed. So all their entries that use the settings are real wars are 99% totally inaccurate, that just leaves the bigots with the "historical accuracy" of made-up future wars.
Basically. These people were never honest about "rational debate", and not interested in education. The lie about mainly "learning history through videogames" is always hilarious to me. How absolutely bonkers would such a person be? They'd make Alex Jones look like a distinguished scholar lol.

As for educating them, I seriously doubt some strangers on a videogame forum are going to be more successful on that front than 13+ years of school, libraries, documentaries, museums, and the rest of the internet.

Not everything is up for debate. As has been shown, any complaint about historical accuracy is partially refuted by real life facts, and completely destroyed by a single gif of the bazooka weilding paratrooper sniper, or the jet jacker. That's it. End of debate. There's zero nuance to discuss. Any continued argument is either an outright lie about intentions, or they're too fucking stupid to interact with.
 

Sigma

Member
Oct 25, 2017
66
Wow for once I can say what a nice ass response. Buy it or don’t lmao. Straight FACTS.
 

ginger ninja

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
1,601
But its actually about realism in video games

/s

It was refreshing to see quite a few games with female leads this E3. Wolfenstein, Assassins creed, Control, BF and prominent parts in Skull and bones. I was gitty during the live shows knowing alt right tears will flow.
 

Echo

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,603
Mt. Whatever
This should honestly be the default response for all media creators.

Don't like our thing? Don't buy it. The world keeps spinning.
 

Zaied

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,720
That this causes any backlash is disconcerting. Then again, it was only two years ago that people were blasting Watch Dogs 2 for having a black protagonist.
 

Kin5290

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,809
Nah. Eventhough I like the response, I still wont6buy anything from EA. I do think too many people just try to offended. Not everything has to be all inclusive and for everyone. I say good on EA, but I'll still pass.
This is kind of dumb, because so much of EA’s approach with Battlefield V seems to have been a direct apology for the anger over Battlefront 2. At the very least you should look at their monetization strategy for yourself instead of writing them off for past sins.
 
I could nitpick a bit about the fact that Hosmer hooks only operate in one fashion per configuration or the fact that it's not really about the force applied so much as the dexterity of the forward hand to assist in aiming and maneuvering (though I won't because that's simply not a hill I was planning to die on, was just making commentary), but...

I'm not google. If you can't be arsed, or can't manage, to do basic research it's not my job to make up for your failings.
Really I just want to know who hurt you this badly.
 
Speaking purely from a strategic point of view, if you want to challenge beliefs you feel are wrong then moralising and censorsing is absolutely guaranteed to fail and only strengthen those beliefs and encourage further division in society.
Keep in mind that most of the beliefs of these people aren't based in reason and logic. They're based in visceral gut feelings. These people don't need to be talked to, they need to be spanked like they children they are.
 
Nov 2, 2017
3,723
Always wondered if there was a dev/publisher out there big enough to say something like this to a fanbase without appreciable repercussion.
 

Bjones

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,557
Is so weird the things people will be outraged by that are really nothing.

Also As a champion of improper humor I am even more appalled that these idiots can’t even put the obvious spin on the name. Battlefield “V“.

I mean the main picture is practically pointing at it!

https://cdn-images-dailystar-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/ii/w1200/s/cdn.images.***************/dynamic/184/photos/657000/620x/Battlefield-5-bosses-hit-out-at-critics-who-blast-inclusion-of-women-soldiers-in-WW2-epic-706367.jpg
 

EmptyWarren

User requested permanent ban
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,203
Some of these fuckin people, good lord. A very sad, misogynistic, bigoted hill to die on.