Yes, that’s why there were factions fighting on some of those maps that didn’t even fight in the actual battles. Or why a ww1 game was riddled with automatic, literally never used, prototype weaponry. Why one of the base game unlock slrs wasn’t even remotely used in the war at all, by any faction whatsoever. We just got the Thompson Annihilator which wasn’t even through prototype development until the last year of the war, near the end of the conflict.
That weapon never saw a day of battle in ww1, but I’m using it as an Anzac on Achi Baba.
It’s hard to say DICE has tried to stay historically accurate when the vast majority of BF games revolve around an entirely fictitious ww2 scenario between the US, China, and Russia, and had nothing to do with history or staying accurate to any semblance of real war.
You act as if the idea for women or people fighting with prosthetic limbs didn’t actually happen, or as if they’re basing it off of nothing. A woman fighting in ww2 is about as unrealistic and historically inaccurate as using the Hellriegel or Cei Rigotti in BF1.
It’s just highly nonsensical to me to expect historical accuracy and realism in a game whose franchise has barely embraced those things over gameplay.
But again, your argument that women break immersion in a ww2 game is based off of the realistic viewing of ww2 as a conflict (which did have women, after all).
And in that respect it is authentic. And no, I’ll save you the hardship of following that up, and point out that authenticism and realism are not remotely the same term, nor do they mean remotely the same thing.
Women in ww2 is about as authentic as having prototype weapons in BF1. Or having police force weaponry in BF4 when it’s a military shooter.
DICE have proven time and time again that it something that interests them is even REMOTELY used in the setting of the game, they’ll add it to the game if they want to.
That’s why the lightsaber and darth Vader example is so ridiculous - because it’s neither realistic, authentic, or historically accurate - whereas the women in the game applies to all 3 of those aspects in SOME facet.
High number of women, some of which are handicaped, fighting on the real frontline in real combat, looking like your everyday women around - where is here anything like realism, authentism or historical accuracy? It goes straightly against all those 3 things and give us no fun or additinao gameplay mechanics or options instead. From all that it can be called “100% pointless”.
“we want customisation!”
here you go
“well this is just silly all these women running round”
you wanted customisation, they want to play as women
“well I dont want them to”
As always, you completely missed the point. Also a lot of what you mentioned there is not true, what encounters did not happen during the war i.e. faction vs faction?
Very few women were in frontline combat during the war, 500 military women died in service most were through illness and accidents, only 16 were killed by enemy fire, most were nurses. If you have no arm you were sent home from combat, a female frontline soldier with a prosthetic limb is made up.
I already mentioned that DICE had to use their imagination with some weapons I do not know why you are giving me examples. You are only confirming what I said.
What are you talking about “a fictitious ww2 scenario” the first part of the game is based on true events surrounding the Germans advance through Europe
If you fail to see how DICE have tried and to the most part, successfully, made the game historically accurate and realistic then go on with that belief, but its wrong
BF1942 had jetpacks and proto helicopters, BF2 is entirely fictitious and was not based on an actual event, and BF Vietnam was packed with unrealistic gameplay mechanics, and was the first BF game with a Spawn beacon.
A high number of women? There was one woman in that trailer. And if you think the majority of players will pick females, you obviously haven’t been reading comments on BF social media. That, or you’re delusional.
Turns out all you have to do to make BF community freak out is put females in the game. It happened with BF1 and this game.
One woman? There was 2 or 3 maybe. Add to that woman on game poster, that makes absolutely 0 sense. Add to that the fact, that producers decided to reveal one of the war stories and it was a war story about female french resistance. Ain’t that too much for WWII game?
Suggestion, that majority of players won’t pick female soldiers as an option in the game doesn’t really solve the stupidity of entire idea of adding that option in the game. It makes it even more stupid, cos why would you, as dev, spend your time and resourses on making something, that almost noone gonna use at all?
No, it was the same woman respawning over and over again. She died two times in the trailer, you can even see her Spawn on the squad list. It was one red-headed female with a prosthetic arm. Or do you think it was multiple females all with the exact same face, hairstyle, clothing, and prosthetic limb?
lol, and adding a war story about a female French resistance fighter, one of the only fronts to actually HAVE female soldiers, makes it even more ridiculous? Really?
Also, your comments about the devs taking creative freedom and wasting resources are just too full of BS to even warrant a response.
I must have missed that part but I don’t mind that. “Female French Resistance” fighter suggests to me more of a spy and a person engaged in guerrilla warfare type tactics, that’s what most female combat soldiers did during the war so is fairly accurate.
Loqtrall what are you hoping to gain from this argument? Because to me, it honestly seems highly nonsensical to invest the time and energy you’re investing into it, for what?
Small reminder - soviet army also had a lot of female troops in different roles. Besides, I didn’t say that existance of that warstory is ridiculous. I just pointed, that producers decided to bring right THAT story to reveal and none other, right with female on the poster and female in trailer. Is that a coincidence?
And before you call any of my comment “BS” you will have to prove it being BS first, okay? Taking creative freedom doesn’t remove from you your responsiblites and limitations, which you working in, and also doesn’t give you any cover from critics.
Time and energy? I’m responding to comments on a forum I post on literally ever day. I’ve been doing it the entire time this forum has existed, and for nearly 5 years on Battlelog before that.
Small reminder - you’re proving my point. So you see ONE female in the trailer, hear of ONE war story with a female lead, and see a picture of a chick on a poster - and that’s too many females to show off at the reveal? Three?
And creative freedom is just that, you’re totally talking out of your rear end. DICE takes creative freedom while keeping the game authentic. Females are authentic to ww2, they existed at the time and fought in battles. No, authentic and realistic are not synonyms and mean two entirely different things.
It absolutely does give them cover from critics because it’s happened in EVER BF GAME THAT EVER EXISTED, and bringing it up makes critics look like jokes.
No. Stop making this ¯_(ツ)_/¯ argument again and again. BF1942 did not have jetpacks and helicopters. Yes, Dice made an expansion pack called “secret weapons of ww2” in which they had those, which is fine. Because they appeared only on those scifi expansion maps, not the regular ones.