• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

EdibleKnife

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,723
These tough alpha males complaining about women being in the game, are they the same shit heels screaming about not being able to wear swastikas and shit?

Pretty much. These are the exact same people who accuse "SJW's" like Anita Sarkesian of "censorship".

The people complaining about the historical anachronism of western women soldiers for the sake of "immersion" and "historical accuracy" reveal the true depth of their concern for history: it is only skin deep. Because there are just as egregious leaps from history that many of the complainers would be willing to sweep under the rug under the banner of "gameplay".

Like the proliferation of semiautomatic and automatic weaponry. Or the inaccurately represented use of vehicles that were not fielded by the nation in question. Or the use of armored zeppelins as battlefield superiority platforms rather than as terror devices. Or everything involving the depiction of the Battle of Narvik.

But most people complaining won't care. Because historically accurate gameplay would mean little to no automatics, restricted weapons and vehicles (for example, the Ottomans would not have tanks at all in BF1). It would not be as "fun", so they will forgive these historical transgressions if they are aware of them at all.

But the historical anachronism of women on the frontlines? Now there's a line that for some reason should not be crossed, there is something that shatters their high school-informed suspension of disbelief.

The people focusing on criticism of the inclusion of women for their cries of "historical accuracy" only reveal their own inherent ignorance and bias, more fans of how they believe history should be depicted in a game than how history actually happened.
This is where I stand too. These deafening cries for historical accuracy only seem to pop up in regards to minorities and women being represented rather than the multitude of concessions made to turn these wars into fun games in the first place.
 
Last edited:

VariantX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,890
Columbia, SC
I just don't know why those people don't get that other people want to play as themselves. Its that fucking simple.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 21601

User requested account deletion
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
810
Do you feel the same about people complaining about the lack of swastikas in the game?

This is where I stand too. These deafening cries for historical accuracy only seem to pop up in regards to minorities and women being represented rather than the multitude of concessions made to turn these wars into fun games in the first place.[/QUOTE]
They started this with BF1. Actual WW1 weapons according to them are boring so they modernized them to make them more fun and set the game actualy a year or 2 after WW1. I never liked that aspect of the game. I'm used to having no swastikas in WW2 games since they are illegal here. Wolfenstein replaced them with a Wolfensteinesque logo. Its WW2 afterall. I feel this game is downplaying what actualy happened and kind of whitewashing history to make more profit.
 

duckroll

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,205
Singapore
Remember the times before gamers online were associated with sexist hatemongers and EA could do something like this without anyone batting an eyelid?

12EzpEa.jpg
 

OléGunner

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,277
Airborne Aquarium
The fact that this is still a thing is really blowing my mind.
Who the fuck cares if you can play as a woman?! In a game that's not even 1 to 1 realistic in its multiplayer to actual war or combat...

Its sad that this vocal minority has caused such a stink but good on EA for telling them to do one.
I almost always pick female character in a game if given the option, glad myself and many millions will have the choice.
 

FLCL

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,515
So my Co-Worker and I have played BF together for a long time but I've been out of the office for a while now so only got the chance to talk to him about this titel now and... Apparently he refuses to even watch or read anything about it because EA and Dice put women in it.
Like what, I am shocked because I had no idea he was anti women in games. He started this whole rant about women in gaming and how it destroy any interest he has in games. How this "trend" is sooo bad and he just want gaming to be about men again...

How do I even respond to that? wtf. Told him to stop being so dumb, showed him this topic and asked him if he would say the same to his GF, and he just walked out the door and I haven't seen him for 2 hours now...
 

PrimeBeef

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,840
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.
Look, they haven't made a game in a very long time that I have been interested in. The last one was ME 1 and I found that to be more of a poor man's KotOR in a universe I had a hard time caring about. Anthem looked good until it was announced as more of a team/squad based game. If that changes to be completely playable as a solo experience than maybe I'm in.
 

B-Man

Member
Oct 27, 2017
155
I might actually buy the game down the line just for the sole purpose of supporting them on this stance.
gg EA
 

Rmagnus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,923
So my Co-Worker and I have played BF together for a long time but I've been out of the office for a while now so only got the chance to talk to him about this titel now and... Apparently he refuses to even watch or read anything about it because EA and Dice put women in it.
Like what, I am shocked because I had no idea he was anti women in games. He started this whole rant about women in gaming and how it destroy any interest he has in games. How this "trend" is sooo bad and he just want gaming to be about men again...

How do I even respond to that? wtf. Told him to stop being so dumb, showed him this topic and asked him if he would say the same to his GF, and he just walked out the door and I haven't seen him for 2 hours now...

Seriously where do these idiots come from.... It's so tiring that such a simple thing caused such a big shit storm
 

Murkas

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
615
Good response, but can't help the feeling of it being undermined by the fact that these companies don't ban toxic players and reporting them does nothing.

Wearing LGBT ribbons and speaking out against racism is good and all, but you seem to be fine with players throwing homophobic/racist slurs in your games with 0/little punishment.
 

Potterson

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,416
Awesome response.

I would still like to have an option to turn the customization off and only see default uniforms.
 

ItsBobbyDarin

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,905
Egyptian residing in Denmark
So my Co-Worker and I have played BF together for a long time but I've been out of the office for a while now so only got the chance to talk to him about this titel now and... Apparently he refuses to even watch or read anything about it because EA and Dice put women in it.
Like what, I am shocked because I had no idea he was anti women in games. He started this whole rant about women in gaming and how it destroy any interest he has in games. How this "trend" is sooo bad and he just want gaming to be about men again...

How do I even respond to that? wtf. Told him to stop being so dumb, showed him this topic and asked him if he would say the same to his GF, and he just walked out the door and I haven't seen him for 2 hours now...
Tell him it's fine and you will just find someone else to play with. This will anger him more and may regret his opinion.
 

endlessflood

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,693
Australia (GMT+10)
Here is a gameplay clip from the expansion pack Battlefield 1942, the original BF game.



Yes, that's a fucking jetpack. In a WWII game.

Please, tell me more about how BF used to be "pretty realistic in terms of its historical context". Tell me more about how out of place drones would be in WWII.

The "Secret Weapons of WW2" expansion pack for BF1942, was, as the name implies, about a bunch of over the top stuff that had no place in the original game. They were right to separate it from the main game (I never bought it).
 

FLCL

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,515
Seriously where do these idiots come from.... It's so tiring that such a simple thing caused such a big shit storm
Yeah... I am legit shocked because he is the nicest guy I've met in many years. And he just got back and started to talk about it again saying "What's the next thing, gays in my games?" (he loves The last of us but haven't watched the new scenes from E3 so... yeah... Can't wait for that shitstorm to blow up)...
 

Lucc

Member
Oct 29, 2017
45
User banned (1 Week): Downplaying sexism
This is so stupid. EA changing the narrative and making this issue about sexism.

The main problem ppl have about this game is not that we can play as women. It is about their change in direction. Since a long time Battlefield has been about a more realistic approach to the military shooter genre while CoD was always the more action oriented approach.

Now it seems like EA wants to go after the CoD audience with whacky face paints, edgy prothesis and random samurai swords. It is no wonder that (some) long time fans of the series are upset and make their voice be heard.

This is EAs PR-Team in full throttle and it's sad how many people are eating out of the palm of their hands. I'm 100% sure, if the game was presented differently ppl wouldn't have cared that there are fighting women in the game. Look at battlefront, nobody cared that there are female stormtroopers.


TL/TR: EA are betraying their long term fans to go after the CoD market, long term fans are upset, EA spins the narrative about sexism to discredit those ppl.
 

Deleted member 8166

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,075
This is so stupid. EA changing the narrative and making this issue about sexism.

The main problem ppl have about this game is not that we can play as women. It is about their change in direction. Since a long time Battlefield has been about a more realistic approach to the military shooter genre while CoD was always the more action oriented approach.

Now it seems like EA wants to go after the CoD audience with whacky face paints, edgy prothesis and random samurai swords. It is no wonder that (some) long time fans of the series are upset and make their voice be heard.

This is EAs PR-Team in full throttle and it's sad how many people are eating out of the palm of their hands. I'm 100% sure, if the game was presented differently ppl wouldn't have cared that there are fighting women in the game. Look at battlefront, nobody cared that there are female stormtroopers.


TL/TR: EA are betraying their long term fans to go after the CoD market, long term fans are upset, EA spins the narrative about sexism to discredit those ppl.
edgy prothesis? you mean the prothesis that was in use back then?

ff_prosthetics5_f.jpg

Used to this day, the split hook on these arms is controlled by a simple cable pull. The Hosmer-Dorrance hook, seen on both arms to the right, was invented by David Dorrance, who lost his hand in a sawmill accident in 1909.
https://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_prosthetics/

Edit: I have to edit this post. the article says these were used in the 1960s. Strangly you can find pictures of these when you google 2ww prothesis
 
Last edited:

gesicht

Member
Oct 25, 2017
282
This is so stupid. EA changing the narrative and making this issue about sexism.

The main problem ppl have about this game is not that we can play as women. It is about their change in direction. Since a long time Battlefield has been about a more realistic approach to the military shooter genre while CoD was always the more action oriented approach.

Now it seems like EA wants to go after the CoD audience with whacky face paints, edgy prothesis and random samurai swords. It is no wonder that (some) long time fans of the series are upset and make their voice be heard.

This is EAs PR-Team in full throttle and it's sad how many people are eating out of the palm of their hands. I'm 100% sure, if the game was presented differently ppl wouldn't have cared that there are fighting women in the game. Look at battlefront, nobody cared that there are female stormtroopers.


TL/TR: EA are betraying their long term fans to go after the CoD market, long term fans are upset, EA spins the narrative about sexism to discredit those ppl.

It's about ethics in games journalism, right?
 

SuperSplit

Banned
Nov 16, 2017
523
You'd think they were photoshopping in women soldiers into historical photos, it's a game for Christ sake
 
Oct 27, 2017
977
Battlefield should be kept the way it was - as a realistic war-themed shooter. Anything which deviates from this just ruins the immersion and experience. Women did not fight in WW2 and had absolutely no role so they should not be featured at all! Battlefield should double down on the realism as it is already an ultra-realistic shooter with real life exploits as inspiration. For example, the common tactic of fighter pilots ejecting from their planes to 1080 degree "no-scope" the pilots of pursuing fighter planes, and to then climb into the enemy's plane and pilot it away before it hits the ground is a well known tactic in the RAF and has been used by famous and real pilots such as James Bond. Other tactics, such as the use of UAV drones as fast attack weapons to run-over unsuspecting enemies is also a frequent tactic in the military. Furthermore, the medical and technological marvels of the world are also shown as wonderfully realistic, such as the use of a defriballator to bring back soldiers who were just recently shredded by gunfire and blown up, and the use of the experimental USAF teleportation device which is used to teleport soldiers into battle in close proximity of their squad mates .

I don't know how much you guys know about combat and warfare (I'm an expert) but Battlefield is a perfect simulation of the modern warzone and as no women have ever, nor will ever, be soldiers, they should be completely excluded from the games.
 

Gabora

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,071
Sao Paulo, Brazil
You'd think they were photoshopping in women soldiers into historical photos, it's a game for Christ sake

But its not a game! Its a serious interactive WW2 documentary like something you would catch on the History channel! Totally not a WW2 themed amusement park lol

How can you have women in a game so authentic you can bring soldiers back from fucking head shots with a first aid kit?!
 

SuperSplit

Banned
Nov 16, 2017
523
But its not a game! Its a serious interactive WW2 documentary like something you would catch on the History channel! Totally not a WW2 themed amusement park lol

How can you have women in a game so authentic you can bring soldiers back from fucking head shots with a first aid kit?!


Hitler's not dead!! Hes waiting on the revive!!!
 

FaceHugger

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
13,949
USA
Good for EA. These kinds of criticisms reveal the real character of people. They can suspend their disbelief for all manner of outrageous things, but introduce a woman or a black person, and suddenly they're worried about historical authenticity.
 

dapperbandit

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,162
edgy prothesis? you mean the prothesis that was in use back then?

ff_prosthetics5_f.jpg


https://www.wired.com/2012/03/ff_prosthetics/

Edit: I have to edit this post. the article says these were used in the 1960s. Strangly you can find pictures of these when you google 2ww prothesis

Checkmate, sexists!

Prosthetics existed in the 60's, in the 40's, is the 20's. No one is disputing this.

People did not serve in professional armies with them. Straight 4F, do not collect £200 as you pass go. You would go straight home.

Can you imagine having someone with a crude wooden prosthetic arm serving beside you in combat? They would be ridiculous liability.
 

Ryder9

Alt account
Banned
May 26, 2018
652
r/battlefield is such a pathetic cesspool of sad sexist morons

now they give a fuck about historical accuracy, no such huge outcry in BF1 when they had fuckin automatic submachine guns as a default for the assault
 

Htown

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,320
Checkmate, sexists!

Prosthetics existed in the 60's, in the 40's, is the 20's. No one is disputing this.

People did not serve in professional armies with them. Straight 4F, do not collect £200 as you pass go. You would go straight home.

Can you imagine having someone with a crude wooden prosthetic arm serving beside you in combat? They would be ridiculous liability.
It's a video game. And not even a particularly sim-y video game.

I don't recall people sweating about realism when people were making planes do loops in BF3, jumping out of the cockpit to use rocket launchers and then getting back in the plane before it hit the ground.

Now we are supposed to act like this series is all about historical accuracy and realism? Please.
 

Maximo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,178
This is so stupid. EA changing the narrative and making this issue about sexism.

The main problem ppl have about this game is not that we can play as women. It is about their change in direction. Since a long time Battlefield has been about a more realistic approach to the military shooter genre while CoD was always the more action oriented approach.

Now it seems like EA wants to go after the CoD audience with whacky face paints, edgy prothesis and random samurai swords. It is no wonder that (some) long time fans of the series are upset and make their voice be heard.

This is EAs PR-Team in full throttle and it's sad how many people are eating out of the palm of their hands. I'm 100% sure, if the game was presented differently ppl wouldn't have cared that there are fighting women in the game. Look at battlefront, nobody cared that there are female stormtroopers.


TL/TR: EA are betraying their long term fans to go after the CoD market, long term fans are upset, EA spins the narrative about sexism to discredit those ppl.

If its just about the change in direction Why do people keep mentioning women then.

Checkmate, sexists!

Prosthetics existed in the 60's, in the 40's, is the 20's. No one is disputing this.

People did not serve in professional armies with them. Straight 4F, do not collect £200 as you pass go. You would go straight home.

Can you imagine having someone with a crude wooden prosthetic arm serving beside you in combat? They would be ridiculous liability.

No I can't imagine cause it's a fucking video game and I wouldn't care.
 

endlessflood

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,693
Australia (GMT+10)
Good for EA. These kinds of criticisms reveal the real character of people. They can suspend their disbelief for all manner of outrageous things, but introduce a woman or a black person, and suddenly they're worried about historical authenticity.
That argument just doesn't hold any weight, because BF1 has those types of soldiers already, and there was no uproar. The difference in BF1 is that they were assigned to the factions they actually fought for in WW1: you have the Harlem Hellfighters on the US faction, Indian medics fighting with the British forces, women fighting on the front lines with the Russians. I don't know why DICE couldn't do the same with BF5. It doesn't make sense to have a team of female British paratroopers, black Nazi snipers, Caucasian Japanese soldiers. That didn't happen in World War 2. Every sex/race/ethnicity played a role in WW2, they just played those roles in various forces. So assign them to those forces. Why is that a problem?

You can argue that this is all just a fantasy game, like Battlefield Heroes, so what does it matter? But why are all of the weapons and vehicles modelled with such painstaking attention to the real thing then? Why isn't Washington DC being used as a map for a fight between the British and German forces? Why does the BF5 multiplayer trailer look like something straight out of Band of Brothers, rather than Inglourious Basterds? Why did they choose World War 2 as the setting at all?
 

SofNascimento

cursed
Member
Oct 28, 2017
21,328
São Paulo - Brazil
There is one thing I dislike in all this, The first Battlefield was released in 2002, how many battlefield games have we had since them? And how many of them we had a female protagonist or female characters in multiplayer? For that matter, we could ask that question for any EA shooter.

It's great that EA and DICE and making the changes they are doing, but they are very, very late. And so they were very much responsible in building a gaming world in which women representation was very limited. So it would be interesting to see they acknowledging that.
 
Nov 4, 2017
7,377
Battlefield should be kept the way it was - as a realistic war-themed shooter. Anything which deviates from this just ruins the immersion and experience. Women did not fight in WW2 and had absolutely no role so they should not be featured at all! Battlefield should double down on the realism as it is already an ultra-realistic shooter with real life exploits as inspiration. For example, the common tactic of fighter pilots ejecting from their planes to 1080 degree "no-scope" the pilots of pursuing fighter planes, and to then climb into the enemy's plane and pilot it away before it hits the ground is a well known tactic in the RAF and has been used by famous and real pilots such as James Bond. Other tactics, such as the use of UAV drones as fast attack weapons to run-over unsuspecting enemies is also a frequent tactic in the military. Furthermore, the medical and technological marvels of the world are also shown as wonderfully realistic, such as the use of a defriballator to bring back soldiers who were just recently shredded by gunfire and blown up, and the use of the experimental USAF teleportation device which is used to teleport soldiers into battle in close proximity of their squad mates .

I don't know how much you guys know about combat and warfare (I'm an expert) but Battlefield is a perfect simulation of the modern warzone and as no women have ever, nor will ever, be soldiers, they should be completely excluded from the games.
Haha, oh man, I totally got the wrong idea at first but I'm glad I stuck with that. A+ to you, sir.

Also, Kudos to EA for having the guts to take this stand. Just when I thought I was done with them for good, they go and do this.
 

Vormund

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,504
So my Co-Worker and I have played BF together for a long time but I've been out of the office for a while now so only got the chance to talk to him about this titel now and... Apparently he refuses to even watch or read anything about it because EA and Dice put women in it.
Like what, I am shocked because I had no idea he was anti women in games. He started this whole rant about women in gaming and how it destroy any interest he has in games. How this "trend" is sooo bad and he just want gaming to be about men again...

How do I even respond to that? wtf. Told him to stop being so dumb, showed him this topic and asked him if he would say the same to his GF, and he just walked out the door and I haven't seen him for 2 hours now...

The funny thing, I wouldn't be surprised someone like that is homophobic....but he would rather look at men in a game instead of women. You should ask him.
 

jpbonadio

Member
Nov 8, 2017
895
User Banned (5 Days): Dismissing the existence of misogynistic backlash over the game featuring female characters.
It's stupid how EA and people here keep acting like the backslash is against women when there's women in Battlefield 1 already and nobody complained. A woman is the current background in B1, and it's been like this for months.

The backslash is against the lack of authenticity of BFV. The game is set at WW2 but it doesn't look like a WW2 game. The art style, customization and overall feeling of the game has nothing to do with WW2. If this was a Bad Company 3 Battlefield set in modern era nobody would complain.

Why use the WW2 setting if you want a game with modern aesthetics? I bet this game was designed to be an authentique WW2 game from the start, but at some point during development an asshole with too much power has decided that the game should appeal to the Fortnite crowd, and the result is this mess of a game without identity.
 

N00MKRAD

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,376
I'm an active redditor and agree with the others 95% of the time, but I have absolutely no clue what the hell is up with the people on r/battlefield.
Someone proudly posted a screenshot of him refunding the game and got hundreds of upvotes.

Yes, having >5% women in a WW2 shooter degrades immersion.
Yes, the EA guy comparing BFV with Fortnite was dumb.

But this is a game where you can bring a headshotted guy back to life in 3 seconds with nothing but a syringe, people should worry about other things than customization here.
 

Heraldic

Prophet of Regret
The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
1,633
We need more female representation in games. Glad they aren't backing down. I'm not always in agreement with the members of this forum, but the solidarity on this and gay issues is what keeps me flying resetera.
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,298
The women in BF1 were only included in late premium expansions that were not widely advertised. The reason they are making all DLC free is because they found that premium content split the userbase so much so that barely anyone played it. There's a big difference between putting a woman in a DLC expansion a year after your games comes out and putting them front and center from the start.

That's part one of this. Part two is that whenever a game company makes it a point to show women front and center in what is traditionally a boys club, the before-mentioned boys freak the fuck out. They don't like the idea of a company trying to appeal to people other than them.
 

FaceHugger

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
13,949
USA
That argument just doesn't hold any weight, because BF1 has those types of soldiers already, and there was no uproar. The difference in BF1 is that they were assigned to the factions they actually fought for in WW1: you have the Harlem Hellfighters on the US faction, Indian medics fighting with the British forces, women fighting on the front lines with the Russians. I don't know why DICE couldn't do the same with BF5. It doesn't make sense to have a team of female British paratroopers, black Nazi snipers, Caucasian Japanese soldiers. That didn't happen in World War 2. Every sex/race/ethnicity played a role in WW2, they just played those roles in various forces. So assign them to those forces. Why is that a problem?

You can argue that this is all just a fantasy game, like Battlefield Heroes, so what does it matter? But why are all of the weapons and vehicles modelled with such painstaking attention to the real thing then? Why isn't Washington DC being used as a map for a fight between the British and German forces? Why does the BF5 multiplayer trailer look like something straight out of Band of Brothers, rather than Inglourious Basterds? Why did they choose World War 2 as the setting at all?

There was backlash to BF1. I can log into any active server this minute, and the chances of someone bitching / opining about a black or woman soldier being present is very high. To this day.
 

zoltan

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
167
Lol, robotic.

Wood and metal and 100% fitting btw.
not for aiming a fucking rifle, if she was a campaign character with a pistol and cool use for her arm(like a melee hook or something it would be much better

it doesn't matter, I'll always be for creative freedom over bullshit (political, historical...) correctness, but some things just make no sense in context of the game

the worst thing in this situation is that wrong people are offended, because EA will use prosthetics as a way to milk money from players who will buy it because it looks "cool"
 

Ubiblu

Banned
Dec 20, 2017
399
It's great that EA and DICE and making the changes they are doing, but they are very, very late.

[...]

So it would be interesting to see they acknowledging that.

They are doing something about it now, not retreading transgressions from the past. Why would they bring undue attention to how they (and the gaming industry as a whole) have failed to portray women in gaming over the years?

Some people don't quite understand the concept of positive reinforcement: when someone does something good, don't berate them for not doing it sooner.
 

aerie

wonky
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
8,036
This is so stupid. EA changing the narrative and making this issue about sexism.

The main problem ppl have about this game is not that we can play as women. It is about their change in direction. Since a long time Battlefield has been about a more realistic approach to the military shooter genre while CoD was always the more action oriented approach.

Now it seems like EA wants to go after the CoD audience with whacky face paints, edgy prothesis and random samurai swords. It is no wonder that (some) long time fans of the series are upset and make their voice be heard.

This is EAs PR-Team in full throttle and it's sad how many people are eating out of the palm of their hands. I'm 100% sure, if the game was presented differently ppl wouldn't have cared that there are fighting women in the game. Look at battlefront, nobody cared that there are female stormtroopers.


TL/TR: EA are betraying their long term fans to go after the CoD market, long term fans are upset, EA spins the narrative about sexism to discredit those ppl.

This is an intellectually dishonest argument and you know it. The Battlefield games have never strived for heavy realism from the first entry, its later content had jetpacks, rocket powered fighters dogfighting one another, and secret nuclear bases. A series of games that has taken place in the past, present, in a cartoon universe and in the future, just because in your mind or "long time fans" are upset because they think its "historically accurate", well they are wrong. It has always been a stylized, fictionalized and fun playground-esque recreation of war. This entry leans more on the stylized, sure, but its still well within the franchise roots to do so.

The games have regularly featured weapons that wouldn't be available from certain theatres of war being used in others, where we can repair a tank by knocking it with a wrench, heal someone shot in the head by jabbing them with a syringe, jump out of a plane firing a rocket launcher to land safely back into it, and i mean, its a game where 64 players respawn and play a mock game of war. Its make believe, to say we're drawing the line at women being included (which you are downplaying the amount of misogyny that has been thrown at this title), or some customization options for the characters to give it some personality and progression is absolutely ridiculous, and a DICE developer already confirmed you can disable player customization.

The customization is just a way to fund extra content development, which is a far better alternative than fracturing the playerbase with paid content/season passes that will have the expansions die off faster. This will give the game a healthier life.

EDIT: and for the record, a lot of people complained about female Stormtroopers, and female leads in Star Wars films, and black Stormtroopers, and anytime a new female character is announced for Rainbow Six: Siege. Plenty of parts of gaming culture are pretty awful, and incredibly bigoted, as this reveal has shown.
 
Last edited:

Alpende

Member
Oct 26, 2017
953
I couldn't care less who I shoot in the game. Not a fan off all the customization options though, I prefer normal uniforms