There was a game about Violette called Velvet Assassin.
I know, and I loved that game: dark and gritty, with one of the most credible endings of my videogame career.
-
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.
Battlefield V fans who failed history are mad that the game has women in it
- Thread starter Saya
- Start date
- Status
I know, and I loved that game: dark and gritty, with one of the most credible endings of my videogame career.
Is it going full murica if it's not made by an American dev?
Yes, it's a certain style can be replicated by anyone. And the location of DICE is irrelevant. They are just a proxy of EA, they made games based on their demands. There's nothing swedish in their games.
The last Battlefield invented a female Bedouin warrior who served as TE Lawrence's adjundant.
But nobody ever said that sexist backlashes to video games had to be logical in nature.
Right! I think it's easy to write off all the critics as sexist or bigots, but in reality there's a lot of people that are crying realism because the trailer presented an inaccurate picture of women in the trailer that foregoes realism for inclusion, when that doesn't have to be the case.
There's definitely plenty of ways, especially with the way they break down the campagin into war stories, to tell true stories of women who participated in WWII.
I said this before when this controversy happened in BF1, but if games were realistic, everytime your character was shot you would be banned from playing for 6 months while he recovers in a field hospital away from the front.
When I'm blowing people up, I really don't see why the sex matters.
I really doubt the game is going for authenticity lol.
I really doubt the game is going for authenticity lol.
I get what you're saying. I think the person I was quoting and I were referring to the feel of the game more than it being a direct simulation. Also, in this case players in multiplayer matches either survive or are killed, so no need for shipping off. Adrenaline can do interesting things in a person...
Obviously single player is a different story.
User Warned: Lazy dev rhetoric.
Forgive me, but I've read stuff like this a lot of times and I find it to be an excuse for the lazyness of the game designers. You can have a "realistic" FPS that is respectful to the historical war it wants to portray without sacrificing the fun factor. Take the game Verdun as an example. It has mechanics that are inspired to the actual trench warfare of WW1, with only weapons of that era, and it is fun. Realism is not equal to simulation. The "it's a videogames, it's not supposed to be realistic" cannot be an excuse for game designers to not think about how to implement mechanics in the game that do not denaturalize its own setting.
One rightful argument might be the one of "the over the topness it's a stylistic choice, they have every rights to not portay WW2 in an historical way". I might agree with that, but in that case this is not a game I can take seriously.
The realism topic in videogames is a very interesting subject
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRsqAmuxjNk&ab_channel=MrBtongue
From watching many videos of relations and more in depth videos. I'm more believing that this is just a single player mixture with multiplayer flair to it. Like the characters we see is our teammates in single player mode
God. Reading some of those twitter comments is making my IQ drop. No vibrant colours back then? No women in WW2?
I feel like this basically sums up the thread. "Hohoho but there were women in WW2. And there were swords!"
Not that I give a shit or was ever planning on buying the game. Seems like a "both sides
are dumb
I don't see a problem with women fighting on the frontlines. Last year we had 3 women pass combat standards and went to their respective battalion.
Games are not representations of how war is, looks, or feels. They are fantasies for people wanting to be at war.
The trailer was all over the place though and I found it hard to keep up with and figure out what the game was about, as a whole.
Games are not representations of how war is, looks, or feels. They are fantasies for people wanting to be at war.
The trailer was all over the place though and I found it hard to keep up with and figure out what the game was about, as a whole.
I guess I never saw the BF franchise as one that was particularly beholden to realism, particularly when dolphin diving was basically the primary mode of traversal back in the day. lol
I mean, there are the super simmy WW1/WW2 games on PC that give people a "true" experience, but when AAA shooters are already compromised, I guess I don't understand the commotion. I mean, with the older games, what about the fact that there are only a handful of character models and it's large groups of people who look exactly the same serving in each army? There are so many compromises already made in the face of technological limitations, let alone gameplay constraints.
I totally get that, and there was a time when I was into those types of games too. Hell, even ARMA had its own charm (before that genre died and got replaced by DayZ and now PUBG games), but you're already talking about AAA franchises in CoD and BF and they were never trying to be realistic outside of maybe their very first few games.
No that is an absolute, unless you have been there, you don't know how it feels to be there. Hurting from friends you have lost, thinking of their families, the heat beating down on you, rounds flying around your head, constant incoming horns along with mortars, making sure all your people are good, missing your wife and kids, the feeling of the sand, etc.
No media represents the actual feeling of combat. The person playing or watching will not feel what that military member feels, or sees.
These are video games, they are meant to be fun and make you feel powerful.
There is a lot of seriousness about this game and it shouldn't be that way. It looks like it may be a great game.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/8lupm8/a_girls_take_on_the_battlefield_v_trailer/ this was actually fucking sad to read. Please tell me it is a troll
Was the woman shown in the trailer transgender? That's what the comments on YouTube are leading towards.
Oh yeah, DEFINTELY read Youtube comments for all your information
glad there are people like AngryJoe on youtube that are unapologetic progressives. glad he took some time out of his BF5 segment to address that
at most i hear there are others wanting to "stay out of the political argument" which i just think is cowardly compared to this backlash
at most i hear there are others wanting to "stay out of the political argument" which i just think is cowardly compared to this backlash
My thoughts exactly. Even a virtual character's business is none of my business. Live and let (virtually) live.
Yep, because fighting in a war with a prosthetic arm isn't overcoming adversity. /s
It's interesting how the narrative is changing so the haters can further justify their views.
At first it was a woman, now it's an individual that is transgender. I'm just interested in where this information is coming from.
Is this actually true or just a fictious claim meant to poison the pot further?
Edit: This information was also posted on Twitter as well.
Even if this does end up being a less serious take on WW2, I am down for that. Bad Company 1 is still my favorite game in the series, a lot of it owing to the goofy nature of the story. If they have a similar style going for this story mode, then that just peaks my interest even more.
Also, I love the character on the box art. She has a sick design.
Also, I love the character on the box art. She has a sick design.
COD realistic in first few games? That was the most cartoony shit I've ever played and it was endless hours of fun.
i mean....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln7VBtkMdn8
If there's a silver lining to this, it's that some people (myself included) are learning a lot of history and anecdotes from people on twitter and other social media posting stories of women involved in WWII.
Complaining about historical accuracy in a game where you can actually decide the outcome of battles from the past is ridiculous. To appease these people, DICE should just patch past games and make it impossible for the team who didn't win the actual battle to win! Would it be fun? No, but at least it would be historically accurate. That's what they want, right?!
Oh sure, but they were still riding the MoH "everything is serious" train. Or trying to at least. lol
Alt right girls are real. Looking at their posts history they've been posting some stuff to r/relationships and r/birthcontrol from a year ago, some dedications for a troll account, so I lean toward dumb female neo nazi.
Is it part of DICE's mission statement to really represent WWII though? Or is it just a backdrop? That trailer certainly doesn't go out of its way to be a grounded slice of war, so I don't know where you would get that impression.
War video games, by merely existing, are irreverent, tasteless, and disrespectful to some degree already.
It's not an absolute, at all. There are games, movies, and books that all strive to go toward an authentic and more realistic and mature look on war and the effects it has on the characters. From All Quiet on the Western Front to Band of Brothers, from the Brothers in Arms series to Spec Ops: The Line, etc.
In no way are these types of things on the same level as your Call of Duty/Battlefield series in regards to how they portray war or treat their narratives.
I was Iraq in '05, it is an absolute that no book, media, game, even if they strive for accuracy, can give the reader or player the feeling of being there and what goes through our minds every second of the day.
The people that wrote the books who have been there try their best to give you a look at what it feels like, but the reader unless they have been overseas will not feel the actual effects of combat and what it does to us.
I don't know what you mean by my Call of Duty game.
These are games, they are not meant to make you feel what it is like in combat. What I wrote in my post above is what you can feel in one hour, games are meant to be power fantasies.
Books give you a better understanding, but doesn't make you feel what it is like.
Edit: we may be arguing the same side, if I misread your post, I apologize profusely and I'll take the hit on that one.
Last edited:
Can't wait for when they release a SP trailer showing more historically accurate missions (because this is fucking multiplayer, obviously), and no one caring. It'll be very nice.
To be fair, its a multiplayer trailer, so of course its over the top and fun. Its representing the tone of how the multiplayer should be played
Single player, like in battlefield 1, will focus more on the historiical sode
That's fascinating, the amount of attachments people had in that video in order to do various tasks is quite amazing. The guy gardening at the end would demonstrate that most likely, someone with a prosthetic could have also used a gun if they wanted to. Thanks for that.
Of course none will make you feel the true feeling of having experienced such a thing first hand. My point is that some do strive for giving people a glimpse into what it can be like, the struggles and everything someone goes through when put into that situation with their characters and storylines.
You're basically lumping all forms of war stories into one saying they are "power fantasies" meant to be fun games, disregarding the serious tone and stories that some devs strive for when it comes to researching, writing their characters story arcs, etc.
It's like you're trying to say that Tropic Thunder is on the same level as say Platoon, unless I'm misunderstanding you.
I understand what you are saying, I misunderstood what you were stating. My apologies and you are absolutely correct.
I think that the trailer for Battlefield V looked all sorts of silly, but the female avatars aren't part of the problem. It's more that there's too much of everything so it just all feels too gamey and inauthentic. In any case, World War II isn't World War I; there were tons of women fighting in frontline roles during the war. Sure, this was mostly in the Red Army, but why shouldn't that be enough?
Yeah, I'm looking forward to this a lot more.
Lol I bet each and every one people that complain about this will be there playing MP for this from day one anyways.
I completely agree with you that most of it is bigotry, and man children getting upset. The wiki article for UK women during WW2 states the same thing though, no women allowed for frontline combat.
I wish there was a way gaming culture could publicly distance themselves from these pricks like metal did with the nazi skinheads back in the 80s and 90s. (or maybe I'm failing history as I just said that)
- Status