Battlefield 5 Developers Wish They'd Included Women in Battlefield 1, Too

readeh

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
313
I really enjoy history and studying but I know of no women that were front line troops in the trenches going over the top during WW1, especially on the western front. Maybe in the capacity of a hospital or such, or the eastern front for a short time there was a unit with the Russian Army and Finnish army during the 1918 Finish Civil war.
Look up Milunka Savic. Fought in 1st and 2nd Balkan War and WW1 on the eastern front. She also got thrown into a concentration camp during WW2.
 

D4hPr0

Gawd
Joined
Aug 17, 2004
Messages
749
Yeah battlefield 1 sucked and it's the first battlefield I actually regret purchasing in full. Them saying they "wish they'd included women" in that game too, is like saying they wish they could have microwaved the turd an extra 5 minutes before serving it to us.

Funny enough I don't actually give a shit what gender you are playing, what I do give a shit about is them shoving it down our throats and making like it's some kind of earth changing decision. Make it so the player can choose male or female and move the fuck on to designing good levels/gunplay/etc.

The way they are trying to spin this load of shit if there's a BF6, we will be reading about how the next iteration makes it so you can play a non binary identifies as a gender neutral toaster type game.

I'm just a dude who likes to play video games, and as a dude, what the hell is wrong with wanting my character to be a dude blowing stuff up on screen? I play video games to get away from the endless and pointless political bullshit flying around today, why drag that stuff into the video game world?

BF1 was not the greatest. Never really flowed like the previous incarnations, but not too bad. The gender neutral stuff is scary TBH. My local school was just discussing what words not to use as to not offend with my 1st grader. She came home really effin confused so its not just in video games and thats a really scary future.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,841
Technically is should be "regardless of sex or race". Until very recently human beings have a sex and inanimate objects have a gender. Gender is assigning a sex to an inanimate object for grammatical purposes i.e. a ship is a "she". Radical feminists are trying to alter our language in order to advance their radical theory. 'If we let them...


I'm a little old school in this regard. I use the worlds "Gender" and "Sex" interchangeably.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against trans people. I feel they should not be discriminated against and should have the same rights as everyone else, it's just difficult to, and I'm not sure I have the desire to change the way I've used language my entire life.

I'm not sure why we have to change language to create a whole sex/gender difference. Why can't they just be a man who feels like a woman? (or vice versa) Nothing wrong with that.
 

Ghoststalker

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2001
Messages
459
I missed when it was that people began to believe battlefield was supposed to be a realistic portrayal of war. Apparently it's women being introduced....and not the clips of people jumping out of a jet, shooting down a helicopter with an rpg, and flying through the air to land back in the same jet.

:rolleyes:
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,563
LOL this cuckolded Swedish beta male soyboy keeps opening his pie-hole and thinks it's making things better.

Sweden is a laughing stock project of native emasculation and simultaneous Islamic insurgence.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,841
LOL this cuckolded Swedish beta male soyboy keeps opening his pie-hole and thinks it's making things better.

Sweden is a laughing stock project of native emasculation and simultaneous Islamic insurgence.

I lived in Sweden for 16 years.

It's a hell of a lot of a better place to live than in the U.S.

I'd go back if I could.

There is a shit ton of misinformation in the U.S. conservative media about problems in Sweden that really aren't big problems at all.

You know, fake news. :p
 

Exavior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
9,700
I'm all for inclusion and diversity. Seriously, I think it is very important. For a contemporary game I think it would be a must to offer people regardless of gender or race to play a character who looks like them.

The historical context makes this difficult though. If I am playing a WWII title, or ancivil war titles, or any other historical title I want the environment and characters to match as closely as possible to what it was like at the time.

We can't present history like we would like it to have been from our contemporary sensibilities. That's how we got those ridiculous German versions of WWII games without any swasticad or characters resembling Hitler.

All that said, I was never going to buy any Call of Modern Battlefield game anyway. I did thoroughly enjoy the Red Orchestra series though. Less so the sequels in the Pacific and Vietnam. There's just something amazingly grim and serious about WWII in Europe, especially on the Eastern front, that always sucks me in.

If Tripwire could expand on that, I'd buy it immediately. I'm thinking a Finnish Winter War expansion. Finns vs Russians with the occasional German support units and Swedish volunteers.

Now THAT would be a game.

how about a game be a little different by showing you something that historically was a little different? Keep in mind a black man who couldn't be a doctor due to the times helped create a way to save blue babies. There is always going to be those few stories that aren't heavily known but show somebody doing something different for thr time. Let's say 15 women served on the front line. If they fought and lived that would be a more impressive story to hear than random guy #124826. How did this women get to fight during a time where that was not normal? How was that different from all the guys? Was it different?

I have no horse in this race since Battlefields interest me as much as watching paint dry, but I think the issue was never strictly about women in WW2. Women did fight in WW2, but they were all in very specialised roles (snipers, spies etc...). Yes BF is very much Hollywood fantasy but they still had some modicum of reality, correct me if I am wrong. Seeing women on front lines is out of place but not unheard of. But then on top of that we have stupid shit like bionic arms and samurai swords! Whats next, Nazi UFOs? Is this Iron Sky the game? (actually that could be awesome!)

And then the developers had balls to jump on the high horse and blame it all on gender issues and white male misogyny like TLJ defenders did and then draw the "dont like it dont buy it". Well said *Sarcastic golf clap*. Dude, don't shit where you eat! Well, the public has spoken and now you reap what you sow.

i don't know. Most people here seem to make it appear that the issue is simply fuck dice because they put a women in my game and women don't belong here. It is hard to disagree with that when that is what people keep attacking. The antiSJW group is just as bad as the SJW group. personally, i play games and watch movies to be entertained. Some people seem to let it destroy their lives.
 

Exavior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
9,700
I missed when it was that people began to believe battlefield was supposed to be a realistic portrayal of war. Apparently it's women being introduced....and not the clips of people jumping out of a jet, shooting down a helicopter with an rpg, and flying through the air to land back in the same jet.

:rolleyes:

you mean that isn't a normal day for a marine?
 

Dead Parrot

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
2,831
This is a thing? Lots of games have included the ability to have a female avatar. A lot of them were from the fantasy genre but still. Diablo 1 had the rogue as female. Wonder when folks will start talking Russian meddling in the decision to include female avatars? Some of their female snipers in WWII were pretty kick ass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shmee
like this

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,563
I lived in Sweden for 16 years.

It's a hell of a lot of a better place to live than in the U.S.

I'd go back if I could.

There is a shit ton of misinformation in the U.S. conservative media about problems in Sweden that really aren't big problems at all.

You know, fake news. :p

And how long ago did you live there? It has gotten much worse in the last 2-3 years. Fake news? All you have to do is watch videos recorded walking down the streets of Malmö, it looks like Mogadishu.
 

SighTurtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
1,410
That's something that confuses me. They want to include women in the game, why not focus on areas where they historically were? I would love a big budget WW2 game focused on the Russian front or a single-player mode where you're fighting in the French resistance. Those would both make for some excellent settings and campaigns. Yet they're all obsessed with showing D-day for the 50 billionth time.

The controversy revolves the inclusion of women as player avatars in multiplayer. I don't think anyone is against single-player having stories that includes women in some capacity. I've seen people opposed to adding women in MP suggest adding them to the single-player to address the argument "Showing women in combat".

In my opinion, DICE and those pro-inclusion, are using a bad argument in stating that women were in World War II, yeah, they participated, but not on the front-line. Instead, DICE should just be truthful and say they wanted to have players customize their avatars any way they wanted.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,452
i don't know. Most people here seem to make it appear that the issue is simply fuck dice because they put a women in my game and women don't belong here. It is hard to disagree with that when that is what people keep attacking. The antiSJW group is just as bad as the SJW group. personally, i play games and watch movies to be entertained. Some people seem to let it destroy their lives.

This. The constant regurgitation of inflammatory buzzwords and labels - on both sides - are useless and toxic, and ultimately an expression of weakness.

We've never seen a time with more videogame choices, and more gamers angry and unhappy over the fact. The default position at almost every new game announcement.. is outrage. "This game doesn't conform to my personal hierarchy of needs! Fuck this developer!". Some gamers seem to be stuck in a bygone era, and are angry over the fact that developers are financially compelled to cater design choices to a different or younger generation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shmee
like this

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,841
And how long ago did you live there? It has gotten much worse in the last 2-3 years. Fake news? All you have to do is watch videos recorded walking down the streets of Malmö, it looks like Mogadishu.

I'm in near daily contact with friends in Sweden, and they don't even recognize their country in some of these clips that get spread around in conservative U.S. circles.

Don't always trust videos and memes on the internet. They are often taken out of context or blow one very small issue on one day way out of proportion when daily life doesn't resemble it at all.

Sweden has been very kind to open itself up to others in need, and yes, there have been some growing pains when it comes to assimilation refugees from the Arab world, but it has been a small footnote, not a major problem.

The islamophobia in you is strong. The overhwelming majority of Muslims immigrants are decent hard-working people escaping from those who would kill them in their home country. They are an asset, not a problem, and Sweden will be stronger long term for having them.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,563
The controversy revolves the inclusion of women as player avatars in multiplayer. I don't think anyone is against single-player having stories that includes women in some capacity. I've seen people opposed to adding women in MP suggest adding them to the single-player to address the argument "Showing women in combat".

In my opinion, DICE and those pro-inclusion, are using a bad argument in stating that women were in World War II, yeah, they participated, but not on the front-line. Instead, DICE should just be truthful and say they wanted to have players customize their avatars any way they wanted.

Exactly. The left loves to totally shit on history, which I cannot stand.


I'm in near daily contact with friends in Sweden, and they don't even recognize their country in some of these clips that get spread around in conservative U.S. circles.

Don't always trust videos and memes on the internet. They are often taken out of context or blow one very small issue on one day way out of proportion when daily life doesn't resemble it at all.

Sweden has been very kind to open itself up to others in need, and yes, there have been some growing pains when it comes to assimilation refugees from the Arab world, but it has been a small footnote, not a major problem.

The islamophobia in you is strong. The overhwelming majority of Muslims immigrants are decent hard-working people escaping from those who would kill them in their home country. They are an asset, not a problem, and Sweden will be stronger long term for having them.

Islamaphobia, ROFL two post in and out comes the cliche leftist labels. So hilarious.

PS: I'm also literally Hitler.


Here's some fake Islamophobia CGI videos:



PS: this sort of stuff doesn't happen in the "shitty" USA.
 
Last edited:

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,872
Keep Calm 2.png
 

Jim Kim

2[H]4U
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
3,786
I like to play female avatars because some guys get really angry when the replay shows a female killing them. Kill them three times and the rage comes out as hackusations start getting tossed around.

MMORPG. Many Men Online Role Playing as Girls.
i am so stealing that!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shmee
like this

P4B

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
336
they made a game for 10% of the fans. sales are as expected
 

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,775
Literally just female player models. The controversy is why people are being such little bitches over it.

The fact that you down play this shows just how ignorant you are to this entire issue. Consider staying out of this argument until you can bring something worthwhile to the table.

Just to make things extremely crystal clear for you, EA themselves as well as other industry watchdogs have stated that sales are weak. Historically weak. This means a vast majority do not want to go up against black disabled women with pink hair in nazi uniforms welding katana's in multi-player. How do you not understand this? I can only assume you're trolling this thread.

In short, this means you're the minority in this argument. Your voice is tiny compared to the roar of everyone else on this issue.

Do you not understand that EA constantly fukks everyone over again and again and again ..... the Battlefield series was basically the last good thing fans had going that were in the evil clutches of EA. Now, apparently, that's over now as well.

Because it seems that you're new to all of this, I will go ahead and point out that EA was voted ... not once, but twice as the worst company in American. This was a national poll. But, you want to defend them? You stand alone.

Bad companies make bad decisions. Really bad decisions. I love this series. I had $60 - $80 dollars ready to spend on this game. How many hundreds of thousands of players willing to spend that kind of money on Battlefield 5 will they now be missing out on?

Further, you calling the, again, majority of fans of this series "little bitches" not only betrays your intellect on this matter but screams how out of touch you are with everyone else.

To put this in context, this would be like them adding dinosaurs and aliens to an F1 or Indy 500 racing game.
 
Last edited:

Taldren

Gawd
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
521
EA: There are 1,000's of wanna-be gamers out there that are too afraid of <enter word>phobic and <enter word>ist gamer community. If we can cater to my strawman beliefs, they will all start playing our game as we push humanity to a new Utopian era! They will more than make up for the loss of those basket of deplorables we have buying our games now!

Reality: Weak sales.

EA: It's all our customers fault!

o_O
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,230
Nope, just requoting what he said. I am just loving that everyone is so upset about something so small. Honestly, though. Adding women makes sense. People generally like to play games as their gender if they have the choice, and the male market is almost completely saturated, so of course they are going to try to appeal the other 50% of the population, but everyone keeps treating it as though they are being attacked.

actually it's the other way around.. there's far more male gamers that prefer to play female characters in games then female gamers that play female characters in games. either way i don't care one way or the other, it's a fucking game and anyone that thinks the battlefield series is even remotely historically accurate either hasn't played the games or they didn't pay attention in their history classes.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
11,473
We've never seen a time with more videogame choices...

Not really. We have a lot less choices than we did in the early 2000s. Everything feels the same these days, few exceptions. Entire sub genres are dead. Essentially we have the play as you feel MP experience with lots of grinding and micro transactions or drawn out open world SP games with no direction that all take place on foot.

Back in the early 2000s there were decent campaign games with mechs, tanks, helicopters, FPS games, ect.

We have a fraction of the choices we had back then. You even imply this in your very post:

Some gamers seem to be stuck in a bygone era, and are angry over the fact that developers are financially compelled to cater design choices to a different or younger generation.

And there it is. They're scrapping the bottom of the barrel fighting over a few cents while ruining the quality of the products they put out. Damn shame. I don't owe them an apology. I'd rather have every developer take a 30% pay cut and deliver a good experience. The amount of fucks I give about EA's profit margins or how much Bobby John takes home is precisely zero.

The controversy revolves the inclusion of women as player avatars in multiplayer. I don't think anyone is against single-player having stories that includes women in some capacity. I've seen people opposed to adding women in MP suggest adding them to the single-player to address the argument "Showing women in combat".

In my opinion, DICE and those pro-inclusion, are using a bad argument in stating that women were in World War II, yeah, they participated, but not on the front-line. Instead, DICE should just be truthful and say they wanted to have players customize their avatars any way they wanted.

Exactly. Remember all the outrage over the female players in BF1? Or that recent Call of Duty game? Or Tomb Raider? Of course you don't, because no one had an issue with proper implementation.

DICE are just being lazy by not putting effort into their setting while trying to shove version 2.0 of their micro-transaction model and idiots everywhere are lapping it up. They stirred up some minor political controversy and the typical low intelligence gamer fell right for it. Now you have fools on Reddit drooling over their keyboard supporting a lazy game and its horrific micro transaction model while screaming at the top of their lungs pretending they're all white knights coming along to save women's rights.
 
Last edited:

_l_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
1,151
EA wishes they had included women in BF 1 because they want max sales for BF 5 ... very boring post
 

Guarana [BAWLS]

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Messages
1,938
This is true, how many of those stories will be told? I'm betting 0%.
Just because they're not being told doesn't mean they don't deserve to be:

Lady Death was a HELL of a woman back in WW2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko

The Night Witches had more balls than damned near anyone around today. Going into combat in WW2 in planes that were already antiques by WW2 standards, and still coming back alive!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Witches
 

Spaceninja

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
2,355
Just because they're not being told doesn't mean they don't deserve to be:

Lady Death was a HELL of a woman back in WW2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko

The Night Witches had more balls than damned near anyone around today. Going into combat in WW2 in planes that were already antiques by WW2 standards, and still coming back alive!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Witches

I was making a point that yes women did contribute in WW2 and the developers argument for including them doesn't match what will happen. They WON'T tell these stories. Probably won't be much of a single player game to begin with.
 

SighTurtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
1,410
The fact that you down play this shows just how ignorant you are to this entire issue. Consider staying out of this argument until you can bring something worthwhile to the table.

Just to make things extremely crystal clear for you, EA themselves as well as other industry watchdogs have stated that sales are weak. Historically weak. This means a vast majority do not want to go up against black disabled women with pink hair in nazi uniforms welding katana's in multi-player. How do you not understand this? I can only assume you're trolling this thread.

In short, this means you're the minority in this argument. Your voice is tiny compared to the roar of everyone else on this issue.

Do you not understand that EA constantly fukks everyone over again and again and again ..... the Battlefield series was basically the last good thing fans had going that were in the evil clutches of EA. Now, apparently, that's over now as well.

Because it seems that you're new to all of this, I will go ahead and point out that EA was voted ... not once, but twice as the worst company in American. This was a national poll. But, you want to defend them? You stand alone.

Bad companies make bad decisions. Really bad decisions. I love this series. I had $60 - $80 dollars ready to spend on this game. How many hundreds of thousands of players willing to spend that kind of money on Battlefield 5 will they now be missing out on?

Further, you calling the, again, majority of fans of this series "little bitches" not only betrays your intellect on this matter but screams how out of touch you are with everyone else.

To put this in context, this would be like them adding dinosaurs and aliens to an F1 or Indy 500 racing game.

Allowing players to select between a female or male avatar is like adding dinosaurs or aliens to a racing game? In what manner? Are these dinosaurs or aliens the drivers in the cars? Is the race track in space? Are they the crowd watching the race? The announcers? Without being specific, I can't really figure out how much it would change the racing game. For BFV, adding a female gender won't change anything, the female soldier will have the same stats as the male soldier. They can equip the same weapons per class, wear the same uniforms most likely, so in my opinion, the addition of women won't change the gameplay of the game at all.

I'll be honest, DICE and EA fucked it up, the marketing and messaging of the game. Not by putting in women, not by the addition of cosmetics, they fucked up cause the trailer didn't generate positive hype. Compare the first BFV trailer to the first BF1 trailer. Entirely fucking different in tone. Notice the lack of background music in 5? BF1 people gushed about the music. If you played the single-player of BF1, you will notice the vast majority of the trailer is littered with portions from the single-player cinematics. What does DICE and EA show off in the BFV trailer? Cosmetics, only instead of the excited trench club talk in 1, we got the fake robot arm on a woman soldier. Now this stuff I pulled from previous comments, but DICE and EA made the decision to emphasize multiplayer and first-person gameplay, probably to highlight the cosmetics. In the 1 trailer, how much first-person ingame footage did we get? About 3 seconds, at 0:28. How much in 5? It started from 1:15 till 2:09, and arguably, the whole fucking trailer was about the multiplayer.

If they had hid the cosmetics away in blog posts, if they had hid the inclusion of women as a option in MP until later, and had they generated positive hype with a good trailer focusing on the single-player angle, I bet that the resounding outcry would have never happened, and any outcry would have been suppressed by the hardcore audience who have been hyped at the new battlefield. All they had to do was essentially do what they did with BF1, and it would have been a success.

I also want to note on BFV's live experience and content updates vs BF1. So far, we have 5 maps, and 1 campaign based on Norway and assuming campaigns are based where the maps are located, another around the Netherlands, one in North Africa. We also know only 2 factions launch at the beginning of the game, British and German. We only have one campaign mission shown off, and tons of multiplayer content and cosmetics. In my opinion, EA is selling us a unfinished game. Instead of BF1's 7 factions, we get two. Instead of 9 maps, we'll get maybe 6, featuring only Germany vs Britain. Instead of 6 single player sections, we get 1? 2? At launch. Combine that with their "Tides of War" model, and I'm thinking EA and DICE are going the next step in stealing our money. Pay $60 for content that should be worth $20. Based on all this on how EA is marketing the game, I'm betting Activision isn't the only company that made the decision to axe single-player. I bet the penny counters wanted to spread out the investment cost of the game as much as possible. Best way of doing that is tossing the expensive one-time played Single-Player into many multiple quarters. And if the game does not do well post-launch? EA can cut their losses and dump it without fully created single-player campaigns.

Damn, I was gonna buy the game but thinking about this has changed my mind. I seriously doubt the game will have the same amount of content as BF1 did. Thats a serious red flag for the company that tossed Mass Effect:A into the wayside rather than try and fix or make dlc for it. A shame, that game had some good systems with it, especially the combat.

Edit: There will be five war stories at launch. Tides of War will not include single-player content, "for now." But only two factions? What kinda war stories can they be without the maps or factions done?
 
Last edited:

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,775
Allowing players to select between a female or male avatar is like adding dinosaurs or aliens to a racing game? In what manner? Are these dinosaurs or aliens the drivers in the cars? Is the race track in space? Are they the crowd watching the race? The announcers? Without being specific, I can't really figure out how much it would change the racing game. For BFV, adding a female gender won't change anything, the female soldier will have the same stats as the male soldier. They can equip the same weapons per class, wear the same uniforms most likely, so in my opinion, the addition of women won't change the gameplay of the game at all.

I'll be honest, DICE and EA fucked it up, the marketing and messaging of the game. Not by putting in women, not by the addition of cosmetics, they fucked up cause the trailer didn't generate positive hype. Compare the first BFV trailer to the first BF1 trailer. Entirely fucking different in tone. Notice the lack of background music in 5? BF1 people gushed about the music. If you played the single-player of BF1, you will notice the vast majority of the trailer is littered with portions from the single-player cinematics. What does DICE and EA show off in the BFV trailer? Cosmetics, only instead of the excited trench club talk in 1, we got the fake robot arm on a woman soldier. Now this stuff I pulled from previous comments, but DICE and EA made the decision to emphasize multiplayer and first-person gameplay, probably to highlight the cosmetics. In the 1 trailer, how much first-person ingame footage did we get? About 3 seconds, at 0:28. How much in 5? It started from 1:15 till 2:09, and arguably, the whole fucking trailer was about the multiplayer.

If they had hid the cosmetics away in blog posts, if they had hid the inclusion of women as a option in MP until later, and had they generated positive hype with a good trailer focusing on the single-player angle, I bet that the resounding outcry would have never happened, and any outcry would have been suppressed by the hardcore audience who have been hyped at the new battlefield. All they had to do was essentially do what they did with BF1, and it would have been a success.

I also want to note on BFV's live experience and content updates vs BF1. So far, we have 5 maps, and 1 campaign based on Norway and assuming campaigns are based where the maps are located, another around the Netherlands, one in North Africa. We also know only 2 factions launch at the beginning of the game, British and German. We only have one campaign mission shown off, and tons of multiplayer content and cosmetics. In my opinion, EA is selling us a unfinished game. Instead of BF1's 7 factions, we get two. Instead of 9 maps, we'll get maybe 6, featuring only Germany vs Britain. Instead of 6 single player sections, we get 1? 2? At launch. Combine that with their "Tides of War" model, and I'm thinking EA and DICE are going the next step in stealing our money. Pay $60 for content that should be worth $20. Based on all this on how EA is marketing the game, I'm betting Activision isn't the only company that made the decision to axe single-player. I bet the penny counters wanted to spread out the investment cost of the game as much as possible. Best way of doing that is tossing the expensive one-time played Single-Player into many multiple quarters. And if the game does not do well post-launch? EA can cut their losses and dump it without fully created single-player campaigns.

Damn, I was gonna buy the game but thinking about this has changed my mind. I seriously doubt the game will have the same amount of content as BF1 did. Thats a serious red flag for the company that tossed Mass Effect:A into the wayside rather than try and fix or make dlc for it. A shame, that game had some good systems with it, especially the combat.

Edit: There will be five war stories at launch. Tides of War will not include single-player content, "for now." But only two factions? What kinda war stories can they be without the maps or factions done?


In what manner? Like allowing you to jump on the back of a dinosaur and race it around the track.

Luckily, cheating and hacks are pretty wide-spread in Battlefield. Hoping the community patches out this crap to where I don't have to stare at this. Also, the game should go down to a discounted $10 fairly quickly, 5 or 6 months if not sooner. If I can patch out this weirdness, I might try it at $9.99.
 

opfreak

Gawd
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
763
Plenty of women fought in WWII. Mostly on the Russian front, and as French freedom fighters, but there are more than enough stories to make a single player episode out of.

more Americans died in WWII then women then served into the entire.

overall 16 million Americans served, of that about 350,000 was women. so about 2.2% of those serving on the US side were women. How many characters are in BF 5? If theres a 100 you should see maybe 3 women. And on the combat side it would be even smaller.

on the Russian side the numbers of serving ranges from 20 million to 34 million. And abut 800,000 women. which if we take the lower number of serving and the 800,000 women, that makes it about 4%.

Overall the amount of women involvement in WW2 was minor, in WW1 it could be considered trivial.

Even in modern times. Operation enduring freedom and Iraqi freedom saw only about 11% female participation
 

SighTurtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
1,410
more Americans die
d in WWII then women then served into the entire.

overall 16 million Americans served, of that about 350,000 was women. so about 2.2% of those serving on the US side were women. How many characters are in BF 5? If theres a 100 you should see maybe 3 women. And on the combat side it would be even smaller.

on the Russian side the numbers of serving ranges from 20 million to 34 million. And abut 800,000 women. which if we take the lower number of serving and the 800,000 women, that makes it about 4%.

Overall the amount of women involvement in WW2 was minor, in WW1 it could be considered trivial.
Even in modern times. Operation enduring freedom and Iraqi freedom saw only about 11% female participation

By that logic, we shouldn't make stories about any minority cause statistically they amounted to trivial amounts. Under that logic, we should have 1/4 of the single-player be of supply lines and driving trucks and shit. Thats a silly reason to exclude making a story mission.

edit: stupid to silly
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shmee
like this

Micas99

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 5, 2017
Messages
92
What will I tell my 13 year old daughter when she realizes she can't play as herself in Madden?
 

Staples

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
7,978
I love threads like this. They get everyone on edge over really dumb non issues.
From what I have seen of this game, it looks good.
Who gives a shit if is there is a woman in the game?


Only repressed virgins could bring us such dumb stuff like gamer gate and now this, this game can't have a woman if I can't mentality.
 

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,775
What will I tell my 13 year old daughter when she realizes she can't play as herself in Madden?


I'm gonna try and have an open mind about this ... I expect the worse but ready for some good feedback. We will have to wait and see.
 
Joined
Jun 17, 2018
Messages
58
I love threads like this. They get everyone on edge over really dumb non issues.
From what I have seen of this game, it looks good.
Who gives a shit if is there is a woman in the game?


Only repressed virgins could bring us such dumb stuff like gamer gate and now this, this game can't have a woman if I can't mentality.

What an ignorant comment. What's the point of even posting if your not going to try adding something?

People's issue is with EA paying lip service to diversity and using it as some sort of wedge to try and open up a market of people that doesn't really exist. I and many others would love to see campaign stories about/based on the women of the WW. There are incredible stories of incredible people that could be told, or could be inspiration for missions etc. And to be honest, personally I don't care if multiplayer avatars are female.

What people take issue with is EA claiming to both take the WWs very seriously and strive for accuracy, but also want to put in front line fighting women (multiplayer) and have people with bionic arms and katanas etc. They want it both ways and it's a shallow attempt at pandering, which I find offensive to both demographics they claim to be catering to.

You want a not strictly accurate portrayal of WW2 with a slant towards diversity? Gladly. Do that. Be proud of that. There definitely are people out there who would appreciate that.

You want to make an accurate (setting-wise, we all know BF falls on the arcadey end of the scale in gameplay) portrayal of WW2, and omit women from the multiplayer because it just didn't happen that way? Go for it. Stick to your convictions and artistic direction. Fuck people who want diversity for diversity's sake. They'd have a point in asking why you couldn't have a campaign featuring (say) female french resistance fighters or any of the other prominent females that featured in World Wars 1 and 2, assuming you don't have.

But what you don't do, is claim to do both, pander to both, and then call the majority of your more core fans uneducated and "on the wrong side of history" for calling you out on it. As well I'm surprised the "SJW" side isn't more offended by the shallow and pandering attitude EA displays towards them.
 
Top