Article from EA's chief creative explaining to either 'accept women are in the game or don't buy it'

Comments

  • NLBartmaN
    1000 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Solid_Kas wrote: »
    Same goes for customization.

    I was against it in Battlefield 1 but if it is for the sake of variety so they can add many and different cosmetics so they can make profit and release more content like maps/weapons etc...the historical part is less important.

    I agree that "extra" money is needed for extra content, but there are other ways to make extra money without killing history.

    Variety can also be "historical accurate".
  • Zviko0
    371 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I haven't seen any dev in my life saying something like "if you don't like it, don't buy it" and I certainly wouldn't like my employees saying something like that. It kind of clashes with advertisement/marketing.
  • NLBartmaN
    1000 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    Video games can also be "historical inaccurate".

    Fixed that for you.

    They sure can be, like Fortnite.

    So why not make a BF Vortnite as seperate game and loose the WW2 theme and put in all of the customizations and BR in it that you want?

    Even limiting the customizations to the BR gamemode within BF V would fix this discussion.

    Everybody happy.
  • TEKNOCODE
    7502 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    Video games can also be "historical inaccurate".

    Fixed that for you.

    They sure can be, like Fortnite.

    So why not make a BF Vortnite as seperate game and loose the WW2 theme and put in all of the customizations and BR in it that you want?

    Even limiting the customizations to the BR gamemode within BF V would fix this discussion.

    Everybody happy.
    Most people are happy. This game isn’t for you. Verdun is available.
  • NLBartmaN
    1000 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    Most people are happy. This game isn’t for you. Verdun is available.

    We will know that after sales numbers have been made public.

    And that guy from EA already said to not buy it and buy something else, so I probably will not buy it, if nothing changes.
  • Loqtrall
    10371 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    Video games can also be "historical inaccurate".

    Fixed that for you.

    They sure can be, like Fortnite.

    So why not make a BF Vortnite as seperate game and loose the WW2 theme and put in all of the customizations and BR in it that you want?

    Even limiting the customizations to the BR gamemode within BF V would fix this discussion.

    Everybody happy.

    Because they wanted to make a ww2 game, and people have been asking for a ww2 BF game for years?

    You're acting as if it's wrong for developers to make the game they want.
  • R1ckyDaMan19
    138 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    He should really ask himself why he would let his 13 year old daughter play a potentially 18/mature rated video game.
    This is actually a very solid point.
    It also openly acknowledges that the age ratings are more often than not excessive
    It would be a solid point if it weren't based in complete fabrication. It was the 13-year-old girl who had the solid point.

    Patrick Soderlund said his daughter plays Fortnite and she asked about the hysteria over BF5 females and not about why she couldn't play BF5 as a girl.

    Embarrassingly, even a 13-year-old girl is aware of BF fans looking like misogynists and pedants in social media and global press. She said, "I can be a girl in Fortnite. Why are people so upset about this?".

    I have friends that don't even play video games asking my WTF is going on.

    Of course, once again though, why let some facts or reason stand in the way of a good old internet tantrum.

    Nobody what so ever gives a damn about playing as a girl in fortnite, he should do the grown up thing and tell her why a ww2 game should not have female characters, instead he wraps her in cotton wool, tells her that everything will be ok and proceeds to butcher history to make her feel better.

    I am not bothered about female characters in this game btw, but the way anyone that does is been treated is out of order tbh.
  • PopsicleStealer
    955 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    Most people are happy. This game isn’t for you. Verdun is available.

    We will know that after sales numbers have been made public.

    And that guy from EA already said to not buy it and buy something else, so I probably will not buy it, if nothing changes.

    Exactly. People on forums like to go into debates about the game. But Outside forums people are much simpler, they will see that devs are acting absolutely anti-consumer and will go like

    [img][/img]BMuobNR.jpg

    And that will be their final decision without going on forums and crying. The're will be a plenty of amazing gaming coming out this fall, they have alot to pick from.
  • Loqtrall
    10371 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member

    Nobody what so ever gives a damn about playing as a girl in fortnite, he should do the grown up thing and tell her why a ww2 game should not have female characters, instead he wraps her in cotton wool, tells her that everything will be ok and proceeds to butcher history to make her feel better.

    I am not bothered about female characters in this game btw, but the way anyone that does is been treated is out of order tbh.

    Maybe you should do the grown up thing and come to the realization that you're talking about a video game, and in regards to that, developers are allowed to make the games they want to make, regardless of setting, and they're allowed to release that game how they wish despite a handful of petty complaints about a single aspect of a game people haven't even played before.

    What's out of order is the way those people are acting toward this situation. What's out of order is those people insisting DICE can't make the game they want to make because THEY don't like a SINGLE SOLE FEATURE shown off in BF5.

    What's out of order is people telling lies about and disrespecting the BF franchise by insisting and claiming that BF games have always been historically accurate, and are using those lies and flawed logic to back up their ridiculous notion that this customization doesn't belong.

    There's a reason why these people are being responded to in the way they are. And lack of moderation is the reason anyone with a logical idea is cussed and gang-shamed off of platforms like Reddit and YouTube where the illogical and ridiculous complaints have taken hold. You come to a BF forum where moderators are putting inane nonsense in the dirt where it belongs, and you can't just get away with saying nonsensical things like "BF has always been historically accurate" without being checked by those who KNOW this franchise in and out.
  • TEKNOCODE
    7502 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    Most people are happy. This game isn’t for you. Verdun is available.

    We will know that after sales numbers have been made public.

    And that guy from EA already said to not buy it and buy something else, so I probably will not buy it, if nothing changes.
    People shouldn’t purchase things that they don’t like.

    I quite liked tf1. I thought that tf2 would expand on the excellent elements of the first one. It didn’t, IMO, so I did not buy it.

  • SumwhatKrazy
    176 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited June 13

    Medics had to be awesome back in WW2 if they could revive people by sticking them with a needle, man.

    History!

    Such an original and clever reply!
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    EA Investor - How did you manage to loose few hundred million dollars.
    Patrick Soderlund - We told our customers not to buy our product.



    I was actually one of those people that used a pic of a cute Japanese girl or anime girl as my avatar before they banned them lol. And i have an anime girl as my emblem currently.
    Not really the same thing as running around as a female in game though , especially in a WW2 game.

    Not sure how you can compare an avatar with an actual character/character model?

    But yeah, really hoping the game play is good.

    .... The avatar is your character model. It's not just a word for the picture beside your name. Have you never seen the movie Avatar, or any media that's referenced that when a character goes into a virtual world/uses a virtual body, etc?
    Maybe a 13 year old girl doesn't know or care much about history?
    It's really the endless argument as to if historical accuracy matters or not as far as for immersion and the like.
    Different people have different opinions. Hers or yours isn't fact.

    Or maybe a 13 year old girl is wiser than most people complaining here and knows how to separate the real world from video games inspired by the real world, and isn't going to have a hissy fit when there's something historically inaccurate in a video game she's gonna be playing alongside other 15 year olds.

    I don't think it's the 13 year old with flawed logic. I think the ones with flawed logic are those that believe BF is supposed to be a historically accurate game in whatever facets THEY specifically want it to be.

    The real question is whether or not a small handful of people's "immersion", based solely on historical accuracy, is important enough to change the entire game before its even released or 99% of those people have even played the game.

    I don't think it is, and apparently neither does EA or DICE.

    The fact is that this is DICE and EA's game and they don't have to bend to the will of people who can't handle the fact that there will be A SINGLE FEATURE in a game that they dislike.

    I know it's hard to understand but, believe it or not, people ARE allowed to dislike games and not have said games explicitly changed to fit their wants and desires.

    You have things like SWBF2 microtransactions, where DICE willingly admitted they screwed up, even on stage at e3 this year - and then you have simple customization options in BF5 that even EA, the big dogs, have insisted is not going anywhere and is not changing solely because of complaints (again, from people who still haven't even touched the game).

    I've actually never seen that movie.

    I mean plenty of people cant separate video games from the real world or reality. Look at the people who complain about video games being too violent and blame video games for violence.
    And people who complain about video games being sexist and containing violence against women and objectification and etc. You cant seem to tell those people that "its just a game".

    Not sure if that makes her wise or ignorant or ? I mean she's only 13 and the world has changed fairly rapidly. I guess for the kids of today everyone having to be included in everything is the norm, which it wasn't always.

    I cant speak for everyone but i think most people want it top be at least somewhat historically accurate, i mean at least enough for it to feel that it fits the time period.
    Not to the point of one shot you're dead game over forever.

    I mean even a fictional game like a fantasy RPG cant have certain things in it as far as for immersion. It would usually have things in the game that seem fitting so its not always about being historically accurate but it being fitting for the type of game that it is. Eh.

    Its not hard to understand actually.

    I mean you say the game doesn't have to be changed to fit peoples wants and desires but that's what they have actually done lol.
    Just not for the people who will actually play the game.

    Eh.

    EDIT:dam it i tried to edit my post before and somehow deleted it, had to retype it ^^;





  • NLBartmaN
    1000 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    People shouldn’t purchase things that they don’t like.

    I quite liked tf1. I thought that tf2 would expand on the excellent elements of the first one. It didn’t, IMO, so I did not buy it.

    Thre is a very big chance I won't purchase it.

    It is just really sad and too bad this "discussion" is not fixed by Dice/EA, because it can be fixedin a way that it will have more happier people, more money and more players on the servers.
  • TEKNOCODE
    7502 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    People shouldn’t purchase things that they don’t like.

    I quite liked tf1. I thought that tf2 would expand on the excellent elements of the first one. It didn’t, IMO, so I did not buy it.

    Thre is a very big chance I won't purchase it.

    It is just really sad and too bad this "discussion" is not fixed by Dice/EA, because it can be fixedin a way that it will have more happier people, more money and more players on the servers.
    There isn’t anything for ea to fix.
  • NLBartmaN
    1000 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    There isn’t anything for ea to fix.

    Denying there is a discussion and loss of money for EA going on can be a strategy/vision.

    If you add to that insulting the people that are critical, you get the current strategy that EA is doing.
  • Loqtrall
    10371 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member

    Medics had to be awesome back in WW2 if they could revive people by sticking them with a needle, man.

    History!

    Such an original and clever reply!
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    EA Investor - How did you manage to loose few hundred million dollars.
    Patrick Soderlund - We told our customers not to buy our product.



    I was actually one of those people that used a pic of a cute Japanese girl or anime girl as my avatar before they banned them lol. And i have an anime girl as my emblem currently.
    Not really the same thing as running around as a female in game though , especially in a WW2 game.

    Not sure how you can compare an avatar with an actual character/character model?

    But yeah, really hoping the game play is good.

    .... The avatar is your character model. It's not just a word for the picture beside your name. Have you never seen the movie Avatar, or any media that's referenced that when a character goes into a virtual world/uses a virtual body, etc?
    Maybe a 13 year old girl doesn't know or care much about history?
    It's really the endless argument as to if historical accuracy matters or not as far as for immersion and the like.
    Different people have different opinions. Hers or yours isn't fact.

    Or maybe a 13 year old girl is wiser than most people complaining here and knows how to separate the real world from video games inspired by the real world, and isn't going to have a hissy fit when there's something historically inaccurate in a video game she's gonna be playing alongside other 15 year olds.

    I don't think it's the 13 year old with flawed logic. I think the ones with flawed logic are those that believe BF is supposed to be a historically accurate game in whatever facets THEY specifically want it to be.

    The real question is whether or not a small handful of people's "immersion", based solely on historical accuracy, is important enough to change the entire game before its even released or 99% of those people have even played the game.

    I don't think it is, and apparently neither does EA or DICE.

    The fact is that this is DICE and EA's game and they don't have to bend to the will of people who can't handle the fact that there will be A SINGLE FEATURE in a game that they dislike.

    I know it's hard to understand but, believe it or not, people ARE allowed to dislike games and not have said games explicitly changed to fit their wants and desires.

    You have things like SWBF2 microtransactions, where DICE willingly admitted they screwed up, even on stage at e3 this year - and then you have simple customization options in BF5 that even EA, the big dogs, have insisted is not going anywhere and is not changing solely because of complaints (again, from people who still haven't even touched the game).

    I've actually never seen that movie.

    I mean plenty of people cant separate video games from the real world or reality. Look at the people who complain about video games being too violent and blame video games for violence.
    And people who complain about video games being sexist and containing violence against women and objectification and etc. You cant seem to tell those people that "its just a game".

    Not sure if that makes her wise or ignorant or ? I mean she's only 13 and the world has changed fairly rapidly. I guess for the kids of today everyone having to be included in everything is the norm, which it wasn't always.

    I cant speak for everyone but i think most people want it top be at least somewhat historically accurate, i mean at least enough for it to feel that it fits the time period.
    Not to the point of one shot you're dead game over forever.

    I mean even a fictional game like a fantasy RPG cant have certain things in it as far as for immersion. It would usually have things in the game that seem fitting so its not always about being historically accurate but it being fitting for the type of game that it is. Eh.

    Its not hard to understand actually.

    I mean you say the game doesn't have to be changed to fit peoples wants and desires but that's what they have actually done lol.
    Just not for the people who will actually play the game.

    Eh.

    EDIT:dam it i tried to edit my post before and somehow deleted it, had to retype it ^^;

    Lol I can seem to tell those people it's just a game, because it is. All those complaints about video game violence, etc never amount to anything because the "it's just a game" argument is brought up every time.

    It makes everyone else ignorant of the fact they're discussing something that doesn't matter as if it has immense meaning. The 13 year old girl is wise because she can come to the realization that having women in a video game based on ww2 is not a major issue. It's a design choice in a game.

    The feature as it stands now stays authentic to the ww2 time period. It represents those authentic aspects in unrealistic and historically inaccurate ways just like EVERYTHING ELSE in these games.

    The nonsensical thing is the notion that this ONE THING needs to be historically accurate among a myriad of other things that are blatantly historically inaccurate and in your face for the majority of the match.

    I'm watching a squad mate revive his teammate by checking his body and picking him up off the ground - and people are seeing a trench coat and saying it's breaking their immersion.

    It's ridiculous. I've watched hours of gameplay so far and in the thick of matches I watched you can't even tell what gender the people you're killing are unless they scream. I was pointing out to my friends that people are complaining about customization, and meanwhile the guys walking in front of Jackfrags in his video don't look outlandish or like they don't belong SOLELY because they're not in a standard issue uniform.
  • TEKNOCODE
    7502 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    There isn’t anything for ea to fix.

    Denying there is a discussion and loss of money for EA going on can be a strategy/vision.

    If you add to that insulting the people that are critical, you get the current strategy that EA is doing.
    The game was made with customization and women. People either purchase it or don’t.

    I didn’t like tf2’s direction. I didn’t buy it. Nor, did I complain on the forum that the dec should “fix” the game to my liking.
  • Dogwoggle11
    2435 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member

    Medics had to be awesome back in WW2 if they could revive people by sticking them with a needle, man.

    History!

    Such an original and clever reply!

    Glad you appreciate my efforts. It was hard to try and put myself in your same level of argumentation skills.

    As far as I know, the devs are the ones who decide what is "historically accurate" enough to put in their game.

    If you come to Battlefield to learn history, you are doing it wrong.
  • VBALL_MVP
    5237 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    There isn’t anything for ea to fix.

    Denying there is a discussion and loss of money for EA going on can be a strategy/vision.

    If you add to that insulting the people that are critical, you get the current strategy that EA is doing.

    Your always going to have someone unhappy and will loose money. Guess they should redo the whole game too since so many people are not happy about WW!!. I mean will make people happy and bring in money.

    You're being really ridiculous.
  • cameldung
    96 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    This all makes me sad, mostly because it will be attached to BFV forever ...

    So, there are certain groups and individuals who found out that it's very useful to weaponize feminism. This has become quite common and everbody can use it now to squash any form of critic.
    The first important part is to reduce everthing to a "i hate woman" issue. Nobody said "I don't want women in my videogames". If it were true nearly all games in history would have had a problem with this. Nevertheless they invent this argument so they can call you sexists.
    Next, in the case of BFV, they say that woman were part of WII. Again, nobody said they weren't. There is enough material like books and movies who tell these stories. Or did anyone think that in WII all woman were sitting calmly at home, cooking diner and going to the supermarket?
    And, in this article he mentions his daughter, his emotional trumpcard, to gather some sympathy. Of course he has to use a child because it would sound very different with an adult: "My wife, 30 years old, won't play Battlefield with me because she can't choose a female character".

    It really annoys me that this problem isn't about woman at all. There is no just cause here. Movies and games have plenty strong women. But thanks to this increased misuse of woman power, now you get women in situation were it doesn't make sense or simply horrible written characters. How is this a step forward?

    Of course, using this method, they can count on all the misguided savoir of woman, who will adapt this tactic and who think that they're actually defending women. Why do women suddenly need defending anyway? Most women I know are perfectly capable of talking for themselves.
    Again, I don't see the progess.

    Back to the statments of this EA spokesperson, who basically said: "If you don't buy this game, you hate women".
    How can anybody here actually believe that this was a personal statement? It's a company who is well known for only caring about money. How can you even put words like "standing up for himself" or "ideology" in the same sentence as "EA" without laughing?
This discussion has been closed.