This Week in Battlefield V

Gameplay Setting to Disable Female Character models???

Comments

  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It's really pretty simple: there were no women who fought for the British and German armies in WWII, specifically in regards to scenarios depicted in Battlefield multiplayer. People just wish it stayed authentic to that. I've seen a lot of those same people say that allowing women to be an option if DICE adds resistance factions, Russians, and so on that letting females be an option wouldn't bother them at all. I think a lot of people were like "wtf" with how obviously DICE pushed women to the front of a setting they played little to no part in (depending on what country they were from).

    At this point my reservations about the game have little to nothing to do with the cosmetics, especially after DICE said they were toning down the more outlandish stuff (wife beaters, fake arms, etc). I have until the end of November to see more information and make my final decision.

    Here we go again.....the problem with this statement is the fact that then there shouldn't be the ability for allies to call in a V1 or everyone able to call in the crocodile tank. While we are at it, can't use weapons outside their factions......heck then all games then need to be decided by historical accuracy...
  • JamieCurnock
    577 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    KamikazeK7 wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    So a two page thread of a handful of people complaining about something in a modern setting is enough for everybody here to blow off the endless number of topics/posts/videos/etc that have been surrounding Battlefield V for the past few months?

    Amazing.

    What’s amazing is that kids are scared of females in a video game.
    I dont think its just kids, looks like old grumpy guys also are terrified of females in a video game. Ive personally never wanted to play as a female in a video game but part of me wants to in this one just to throw on the salt. Imagine seeing the best squad at end of round and its all women! Some people on here would lose their minds! I would be laughing so hard.

    Again, literally nobody is terrified of this. It's a personal preference on how people would like a game based on WWII to look. The attitude on display in this thread towards people who disagree is ridiculous.

    You will be terrified when im playing bf5 as a woman. I will strike fear in to the hearts of men!! Mwahahaha

    But on a serious note obviously no one is terrified, that was clearly an exaggeration not to be taken quite so literally. However there are some people that clearly know nothing about ww2 outfits, guns, vehicles or period accurate 'stuff' that are jumping on the bandwagon. Why? Who knows, maybe the inclusion of women and the rise of equality scares their sensitive little souls as it makes them feel like they are starting to lose grip on being the dominant gender. There is a lot more physchology behind this than purely 'authenticity' for some people whether it wants to be acknowledged or not.

    Please also notice I said some people, not everyone
    Some people just frown upon elements that they consider not fitting in the setting of certain games.

    You would not want laser blasters and machineguns in a classic fantasy game of magic and dragons for example. You would not like a wizard riding a dragon while throwng spells in a cyberpunk city. The same way some people do not find frontline women in historical world wars very fitting.

    On the other hand if there is a fictional story then everything is allowed. For example in a strategy/rpg game called Valkyria chronicles which is set in a fantasy WW2 setting nobody bats an eye about the mixed gender armies or the occasional superwomen firing lazers from their lances and plowing through tank battalions like if they were butter.

    The game series Tomb raider is a series about a woman collecting magical relics while kicking the snot out of humans, animals and monsters with an array of modern and sometimes fantasy weapons. A very successful series that everyone knows.

    Personally I will play any game as long as it ends up being good. But it really irks me to see people one one side of an argument building such a massive strawman out of the argument of the other side.

    Pretty extreme example your using there. I get what your saying but personally I don't agree.

    I appreciate some people really want historical accuracy because it's important to them, that's fair enough, the point I was making is it's clear that some people just jump on the hate bandwagon and there is an interesting phsycology to that. Nothing more.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    KamikazeK7 wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    So a two page thread of a handful of people complaining about something in a modern setting is enough for everybody here to blow off the endless number of topics/posts/videos/etc that have been surrounding Battlefield V for the past few months?

    Amazing.

    What’s amazing is that kids are scared of females in a video game.
    I dont think its just kids, looks like old grumpy guys also are terrified of females in a video game. Ive personally never wanted to play as a female in a video game but part of me wants to in this one just to throw on the salt. Imagine seeing the best squad at end of round and its all women! Some people on here would lose their minds! I would be laughing so hard.

    Again, literally nobody is terrified of this. It's a personal preference on how people would like a game based on WWII to look. The attitude on display in this thread towards people who disagree is ridiculous.

    You will be terrified when im playing bf5 as a woman. I will strike fear in to the hearts of men!! Mwahahaha

    But on a serious note obviously no one is terrified, that was clearly an exaggeration not to be taken quite so literally. However there are some people that clearly know nothing about ww2 outfits, guns, vehicles or period accurate 'stuff' that are jumping on the bandwagon. Why? Who knows, maybe the inclusion of women and the rise of equality scares their sensitive little souls as it makes them feel like they are starting to lose grip on being the dominant gender. There is a lot more physchology behind this than purely 'authenticity' for some people whether it wants to be acknowledged or not.

    Please also notice I said some people, not everyone
    Some people just frown upon elements that they consider not fitting in the setting of certain games.

    You would not want laser blasters and machineguns in a classic fantasy game of magic and dragons for example. You would not like a wizard riding a dragon while throwng spells in a cyberpunk city. The same way some people do not find frontline women in historical world wars very fitting.

    On the other hand if there is a fictional story then everything is allowed. For example in a strategy/rpg game called Valkyria chronicles which is set in a fantasy WW2 setting nobody bats an eye about the mixed gender armies or the occasional superwomen firing lazers from their lances and plowing through tank battalions like if they were butter.

    The game series Tomb raider is a series about a woman collecting magical relics while kicking the snot out of humans, animals and monsters with an array of modern and sometimes fantasy weapons. A very successful series that everyone knows.

    Personally I will play any game as long as it ends up being good. But it really irks me to see people one one side of an argument building such a massive strawman out of the argument of the other side.

    Pretty extreme example your using there. I get what your saying but personally I don't agree.

    I appreciate some people really want historical accuracy because it's important to them, that's fair enough, the point I was making is it's clear that some people just jump on the hate bandwagon and there is an interesting phsycology to that. Nothing more.

    The question is about historical accuracy...is it based on their perception or true experience....we all know that answer on that.
  • Natetendo83
    1022 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    It's really pretty simple: there were no women who fought for the British and German armies in WWII, specifically in regards to scenarios depicted in Battlefield multiplayer. People just wish it stayed authentic to that. I've seen a lot of those same people say that allowing women to be an option if DICE adds resistance factions, Russians, and so on that letting females be an option wouldn't bother them at all. I think a lot of people were like "wtf" with how obviously DICE pushed women to the front of a setting they played little to no part in (depending on what country they were from).

    At this point my reservations about the game have little to nothing to do with the cosmetics, especially after DICE said they were toning down the more outlandish stuff (wife beaters, fake arms, etc). I have until the end of November to see more information and make my final decision.

    Here we go again.....the problem with this statement is the fact that then there shouldn't be the ability for allies to call in a V1 or everyone able to call in the crocodile tank. While we are at it, can't use weapons outside their factions......heck then all games then need to be decided by historical accuracy...

    Regardless, it's obvious at this point that even with all that you said a lot of people's breaking point (for immersion, to be specific) is soldiers not looking the part. V1 rockets and Tanks at least were used in the war to some degree, so people can suspend their disbelief because it doesn't look that out of place. That's the issue people have. Women in a WWII game look so out of place compared to what you just mentioned. DICE are still 100% well within their rights to keep them there, but it's obviously the most glaring thing that looks out of place for most people.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    It's really pretty simple: there were no women who fought for the British and German armies in WWII, specifically in regards to scenarios depicted in Battlefield multiplayer. People just wish it stayed authentic to that. I've seen a lot of those same people say that allowing women to be an option if DICE adds resistance factions, Russians, and so on that letting females be an option wouldn't bother them at all. I think a lot of people were like "wtf" with how obviously DICE pushed women to the front of a setting they played little to no part in (depending on what country they were from).

    At this point my reservations about the game have little to nothing to do with the cosmetics, especially after DICE said they were toning down the more outlandish stuff (wife beaters, fake arms, etc). I have until the end of November to see more information and make my final decision.

    Here we go again.....the problem with this statement is the fact that then there shouldn't be the ability for allies to call in a V1 or everyone able to call in the crocodile tank. While we are at it, can't use weapons outside their factions......heck then all games then need to be decided by historical accuracy...

    Regardless, it's obvious at this point that even with all that you said a lot of people's breaking point (for immersion, to be specific) is soldiers not looking the part. V1 rockets and Tanks at least were used in the war to some degree, so people can suspend their disbelief because it doesn't look that out of place. That's the issue people have. Women in a WWII game look so out of place compared to what you just mentioned. DICE are still 100% well within their rights to keep them there, but it's obviously the most glaring thing that looks out of place for most people.

    Really an ally soldider calling in a precision rocket strike with an inaccurate weapon....please....are you even listening to yourself?

    And women don't look out of place.....everyone things WW2 was fought with the same gentlemen rules as the war of 1812......reality is that it wasn't. There was more to the war than the pictures of clean shaven men posing for political propaganda.
  • ElderwiseSlayer
    36 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Female players are here to stay, period! It's the 21st century even in the gaming world. Women play BFV too so why shouldn't they be able to represent themselves appropriately in a game? It's going to be a fun game to play no matter how close to historical reality it comes.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6177 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    It's really pretty simple: there were no women who fought for the British and German armies in WWII, specifically in regards to scenarios depicted in Battlefield multiplayer. People just wish it stayed authentic to that. I've seen a lot of those same people say that allowing women to be an option if DICE adds resistance factions, Russians, and so on that letting females be an option wouldn't bother them at all. I think a lot of people were like "wtf" with how obviously DICE pushed women to the front of a setting they played little to no part in (depending on what country they were from).

    At this point my reservations about the game have little to nothing to do with the cosmetics, especially after DICE said they were toning down the more outlandish stuff (wife beaters, fake arms, etc). I have until the end of November to see more information and make my final decision.

    Here we go again.....the problem with this statement is the fact that then there shouldn't be the ability for allies to call in a V1 or everyone able to call in the crocodile tank. While we are at it, can't use weapons outside their factions......heck then all games then need to be decided by historical accuracy...

    Regardless, it's obvious at this point that even with all that you said a lot of people's breaking point (for immersion, to be specific) is soldiers not looking the part. V1 rockets and Tanks at least were used in the war to some degree, so people can suspend their disbelief because it doesn't look that out of place. That's the issue people have. Women in a WWII game look so out of place compared to what you just mentioned. DICE are still 100% well within their rights to keep them there, but it's obviously the most glaring thing that looks out of place for most people.

    I can guarantee that more women fought in WW2 than V1"s were used as tactical weapons.

    Your were more likely to be greeted by a woman with a cricket bat than you were being hit by a V1.

    Truth
  • firechickenfan
    468 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I actually run a female character in H1. Their body shape is thinner, and much harder to see.
    I for one will FOR SURE be sporting a female skin.
  • Callahan44er
    5062 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Ermacness wrote: »
    I know this is going to get either locked becasue the mods have been ordered to or flamed but is it really to hard to add a setting like this for people that want an authentic feeling WWII game? I know many of my friends including me have talked about this and would actually give the game a chance if we could turn the game into a more authentic feel. I don't want to play the DICE's version of WWII history but I want to play WWII as it happened in actual history. This isn't about the fans being bigots, sexists, or racists but I want to feel like I'm in actual WWII not an alternate take on the most influential decade in world history.

    If you really want an "authentic" feeling of WW2, then you'll have to do a lot more than just remove females out of the game.


    I find it quite funny actually when people try to use the excuse of female inclusion in this game as a reason why this game doesn't feel authentic, nevermind the health regen, the ability to be revived from a headshot, explosion, ect, having only certain parts of the map with destruction, and a whole lot more "game" stuff.

    All your examples are related to gameplay,not appearance.
  • DeadlyDanDaMan
    615 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Ermacness wrote: »
    I know this is going to get either locked becasue the mods have been ordered to or flamed but is it really to hard to add a setting like this for people that want an authentic feeling WWII game? I know many of my friends including me have talked about this and would actually give the game a chance if we could turn the game into a more authentic feel. I don't want to play the DICE's version of WWII history but I want to play WWII as it happened in actual history. This isn't about the fans being bigots, sexists, or racists but I want to feel like I'm in actual WWII not an alternate take on the most influential decade in world history.

    If you really want an "authentic" feeling of WW2, then you'll have to do a lot more than just remove females out of the game.


    I find it quite funny actually when people try to use the excuse of female inclusion in this game as a reason why this game doesn't feel authentic, nevermind the health regen, the ability to be revived from a headshot, explosion, ect, having only certain parts of the map with destruction, and a whole lot more "game" stuff.

    All your examples are related to gameplay,not appearance.

    You are REALLY grasping for straws now Callahan. Just admit it, your argument is over.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3364 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Different people have different preferences when it comes to 'historical accuracy/authenticity'. For some people, it's seeing women in frontline combat. For others, it is seeing the wrong tanks, the wrong guns, the wrong equipment, the wrong armies, and so on, and so forth. There were a lot of people complaining endlessly about the abundance of SMGs in BF1, saying that it was insanely inaccurate ... to these people, it wasn't about 'gameplay elements not being relevant to historical accuracy'. There are people complaining about there being too many STG-44s in Post-Scriptum, and there was even a contingent of Rising Storm 2 players complaining about the NLF having too many AKs. That complaining led to the NLF losing it's AK platform weapons, so thanks to them, the newly nerfed NLF is pretty much completely useless ...

    I've also seen a lot of people complaining quite heavily about there being no Dutch soldiers in Rotterdam, as well as the use of late-war weapons in early-war battles. I think it's safe to say that 'historical accuracy' has more than just one meaning. Imagine a game like Verdun making SMGs more accessible, in an attempt to increase the pace of the slow-firing-bolt-actions-based gameplay that makes most matches progress at a snail's pace ... the gameplay might be 'better' in some respects, but Verdun players would be livid.
  • Mishkin37
    683 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Here are some other immersion-breaking features you may want to consider:

    - Lock the ability to revive a teammate with a needle to the collarbone, after he/she has their torso eviscerated by enemy bullets.

    - Lock the ability to magically appear behind teammates on respawn, like you just got beamed down from the Enterprise.

    - Lock the ability to run on a dead-sprint for an entire round, while carrying full gear.

    - Lock the ability to fire your rifle, after you just spent the last 3 minutes submerged in the canal on Rotterdam.

    If we want immersion, let's go all-in!






    Or don't, because that version of the game would suck.

  • jayjayff
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    It's called immersion guys.
    "Historical accuracy" implies some scientific way to represent reality of WW2 in which case no game is ever really going to accomplish that. So arguing for it's an inherently illogical thing. It's a strawman.
    "hey but that gun was rarely ever used, how come u can't use lasers!! nos historical accuracy here!"

    If the opposite side actually took a second to listen to the non-customization/women argument. They would realize that the issue is that all the squealing women take away from the immersion. Which is based on how the elements within the game are treated to inform the experience. Strictly about presentation.

    To pretend to over abundance of women in the promotional material is not informed by modern day social progressives' logic is to be facetious. There is one thing to be okay with it. And it's another to understand when an element of a game is not based on immersion but on Dice's perceive mass appeal.

    2 different discussions.
  • JamieCurnock
    577 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Mishkin37 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    jayjayff wrote: »
    It's called immersion guys.
    "Historical accuracy" implies some scientific way to represent reality of WW2 in which case no game is ever really going to accomplish that. So arguing for it's an inherently illogical thing. It's a strawman.
    "hey but that gun was rarely ever used, how come u can't use lasers!! nos historical accuracy here!"

    If the opposite side actually took a second to listen to the non-customization/women argument. They would realize that the issue is that all the squealing women take away from the immersion. Which is based on how the elements within the game are treated to inform the experience. Strictly about presentation.

    To pretend to over abundance of women in the promotional material is not informed by modern day social progressives' logic is to be facetious. There is one thing to be okay with it. And it's another to understand when an element of a game is not based on immersion but on Dice's perceive mass appeal.

    2 different discussions.

    Its not like people didnt hear...its the argument of "accuracy" or lack of "immersion" due to women is very hypocritical. To say that one sole thing is ruining your experience while giving all other inaccuracies a pass is very silly and leads down the question of "what is the true motive of all this crying".

    However, it’s weird that people are totally fine with their soldiers sprinting perpetually through the Norwegian snow, after getting hit with multiple bullets from an LMG, just so they can press “up,” and make their soldier avatars as good as new. That’s fine and logical and historically accurate and immersive.

    Yet if they hear a lady’s voice while doing all of these ridiculously unrealistic things, they can no longer suspend disbelief, and the game is ruined, because a lady shouldn’t have been in that 32 v 32 battle that day.

    Hahaha, great point.
This discussion has been closed.