Battlefield 5 Is A Mess

[FauxFurry]

Just to further clear up this issue using a video game related analogy (appropriate considering that this is a video game related site): This is akin to releasing a Dynasty Warriors game under The Romance of Three Kingdoms label.

 

Maybe I should use an example more relevant to people who use this site? It would be like Bethesda Games Studio releasing Fallout 76 as Fallout 5. Even people who like both forms of gameplay won't be too happy that a mainline title is a co-op survival game rather than an RPG. They weren't too happy when a mainline title was a shooter with RPG elements rather than an RPG with shooter elements, come to think of it.

[Simsexual90]

7 hours ago, Cynical Misanthrope said:

SJW's has complained for a couple of years now that women is never depicted in these kind of games. Which is true, but it's not done because of sexism or hate towards women. It's because, women were never on the front-line. Not like this. And even if there were some women who fought on the front-line there would never ever be any disabled woman with a prosthetic arm and face paint like this there. In fact, there wouldn't even be a man with these things there. And when we try to point this out, all of sudden we hate women?

Get the fuck out of here. That's is just a cop out.

We are pissed off because of the way women are now introduced in these games. We want them to be introduced in a way that feels natural. Battlefield has always been the better game and more realistic if we compared it to CoD for example, due to bullet drop and the ability to destroy buildings. It's still a very unrealistic game in general, but is miles more realistic than CoD. Sometimes you have just to cut out some realism to make space for gameplay. But a game can still be very immerse if it's done right. 

Other than that, it's not wrong to have face paint or any wacky stuff in your game if it fits the setting. I mean, take Overwatch for example. It's just a wacky game with wacky characters and it fits well together. 

But that game has never claimed to be realistic either.

 

This time the developer said that were going back to the roots and we all shouted "HELL YEAH" because we were getting tired of the over saturation of FPS with no story or campaign currently on the market. And then we get this fucking shit once again. 

And Dice is from my country, so I know pretty well what they stand for.

 

You seriously need to use commas and punctuation, because it took me four tries to even remotely understand what you were saying.

 

Anyway, there is a lot of things I don't like in our society. Doesn't mean I should just stop caring about it and sit back and let it happen. People often speak up about something even if it doesn't affect them, because it's about the bigger picture.

For example, I do not support any game who uses loot boxes and other useless crap, but I will still speak up against it because if you don't, soon every fucking game will have them. 

What I a trying to say is, not everything is just in black and white. 

 Do some research before complaining battlefleid has already said no loot boxes no season pass and once again......get over yourself 

[Cynical Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, Simsexual90 said:

 Do some research before complaining battlefleid has already said no loot boxes no season pass and once again......get over yourself 

Ahh, maybe you should read what I wrote again. I never stated Battlefield would had any of these things. I was talking about games in general you fucking idiot.

And I have right to say anything I want. Just as you have. That is called free speech. So either come up with some arguments, and maybe I can take you seriously or shut the fuck up if you have noting of value to say.

If you just tell us to shut up without offering any reasons why, who the fuck are you to say that we should shut up? That is not how it works. 

[Darkening Demise]

On 5/28/2018 at 3:20 PM, Ernest Lemmingway said:

Which is about as likely as peace in the Middle East.

or congress being productive for once.

_____________

Probably wouldn't be such a problem too if they didn't claim and advertise about historical stuff. Kind of hard to take the game serious if you claim historical war yet have women with bionic limbs running around with Kratos war paint. If they claimed it was a work of fiction like BF3 and BF4 then it could've gone better. Yet based in WW2 and claiming history which does not compute. Might as well ask a machine to divide by 0.

[Cynical Misanthrope]

On 6/1/2018 at 10:37 PM, Darkening Demise said:

Probably wouldn't be such a problem too if they didn't claim and advertise about historical stuff. Kind of hard to take the game serious if you claim historical war yet have women with bionic limbs running around with Kratos war paint. If they claimed it was a work of fiction like BF3 and BF4 then it could've gone better. Yet based in WW2 and claiming history which does not compute. Might as well ask a machine to divide by 0.

Exactly. I bet the majority wouldn't had cared one bit if it had been claimed as a fictional story. It's like that WWI game for CoD or BF. Lol, I can't even be bothered to look it up. Anyway, they said they were gonna be historical accurate and promised a slow trench-like warfare, and then they add some heavy armor with a minigun which is equivalent to a iron man suit with it's lazorz, and other more advanced weaponry that wasn't even present at the time. Completely fucking ruining it.

Nothing wrong with such concept in itself, but a fucking WWI game it was not. 

 

And this trailer for BF WWII was also pretty bad in itself. When I watch the railer, WWII is the last thing I think off. I only know it's about WWII because the title says so. It's to Far Cry/Michael Bay-ish.

Doesn't mean the game is this tho, but it's fucking EA and Dice were talking about. So ofc it's gonna be like that.

[skipfmueller]

5 hours ago, Alkpaz said:

 jet craft? If the Nazi's had jets, the Allies would have been doomed. 

The Germans did have jets, they were the first people to build the jet engine, Though the British also developed their own concept for the jet engine. They also did have a jet fighter, it was just introduced so late into the war, and there were so few it didn't make a difference.

 

The Jet Fighter I'm talking about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262

 

The first practical Jet aircraft, also made by the Germans. It's maiden flight happened only days before WW2 started:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_178

[ToJKa]

Before the war? I though jet engines were developed during the war. Well, learn something new indeed.

 

And then there was the insane rocket powered aircraft, that killed more of it's own pilots than enemies ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet

 

The Nazis also had flying aircraft carriers, Zeppelins and other kind. The Japanese had undersea (single) aircraft carriers, the basis of which were used for american nuclear submarines.

 

Like we say in Finland, reality is more unblievable than fiction ?

[skipfmueller]

9 hours ago, ToJKa said:

And then there was the insane rocket powered aircraft, that killed more of it's own pilots than enemies ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet

I completely forgot that thing even existed.

[検閲人生]

Sex content confirmed?  (listen the women voice)

 

 

 

[LinaDoll]

On ‎6‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 7:44 PM, skipfmueller said:

The Germans did have jets, they were the first people to build the jet engine, Though the British also developed their own concept for the jet engine. They also did have a jet fighter, it was just introduced so late into the war, and there were so few it didn't make a difference.

 

The Jet Fighter I'm talking about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262

 

The first practical Jet aircraft, also made by the Germans. It's maiden flight happened only days before WW2 started:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_178

Britain was arguably just as far ahead on jet engines, it's just that they weren't desperate enough to actually use them

[Darkening Demise]

On 5/28/2018 at 3:20 PM, Ernest Lemmingway said:

Which is about as likely as peace in the Middle East.

or congress being productive for once.
_____________

Well the gameplay looks no better than the trailer. Very COD/Rage 2/Bulletstorm/whatever other shootesr gangbanged poor Battlefield 8 months prior.

Oh well sticking with Battlefield 4 till it dies off on PC. Enjoying the Lockerhead and Metro 2014 only servers.

[devacore]

Can you imagine if they had the females run slower, can't carry as much and prone to panic. If you want to add females in.. I'm all for it but lets make it immersive ? Immersive~

[SimpleSpectre]

5 hours ago, devacore said:

Can you imagine if they had the females run slower, can't carry as much and prone to panic. If you want to add females in.. I'm all for it but lets make it immersive ? Immersive~

It would be mostly realistic to do that. But a grand number of people would label you a sexist for lowering a female player's combat effectiveness based on biology. Most would be functioning in second line forces or on the homefront. The Soviets had approximately 3000 female snipers, but their casualty rate was high given the occupation. Would have really hated to be a soviet pilot male or female seeing as how Erich Hartmann was up in the air in a Bf-109 at the time. Not to mention if you look at fighter aces by kills during that war at least the first hundred are Germans. Wouldn't have been fun no matter where you were.

[haanuman]

I just don't understand the fuss. 

[MorePrinniesDood]

On 6/17/2018 at 5:26 AM, haanuman said:

I just don't understand the fuss. 

I think it's people with very 'murican sensibilities in military history thinking woman combatants didn't exist in WWII because 'murica didn't field any. Never mind the numerous other countries on both sides that did have them, especially Russia.

[GrimReaper]

8 hours ago, MorePrinniesDood said:

I think it's people with very 'murican sensibilities in military history thinking woman combatants didn't exist in WWII because 'murica didn't field any. Never mind the numerous other countries on both sides that did have them, especially Russia.

The Soviet Union mobilized women at an early stage of the war, integrating them into the main army units, and not using the "auxiliary" status. More than 800,000 women served in the Soviet Armed Forces during the war, which is roughly 3 percent of total military personnel, mostly as medics.

 

Which basically means that you wouldn't really have seen any women fighting at the frontline regardless. I think the problem is that Dice/EA advertised BF5 as an 'authentic' WW2 experience when in fact it isn't. When I saw the trailer my first thought was if they're making a steampunk game now with all these colorful and diverse characters we saw. A woman with an arm prothesis, some dude with blue face paint and I also saw a katana somewhere. Nobody wore any kind of uniform, they looked like a ragtag team of adventurers instead of soldiers fighting in one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history.

That being said, I do not understand the outrage, but it might be manufactured. The people owning Anti-SJW channels on youtube welcome every new opportunity to spin a new tale about how everything must be a SJW conspiracy that ruins gaming and EA sure as hell welcomes the opportunity to deflect any sort of criticism with accusations of racism and/or sexism, especially after the PR nightmare that were Battlefront 2 and Andromeda.

 

However, some people who already played the game reported that it was very difficult to make out which team other players were on, making teamkills happen more often than usual. Which is understandable because character design is pretty important in multiplayer games, you need  to see at a glance if a player is on team A or team B and what class he's using (if the game features a class system which BF does). If every player looks unique that isn't really possible anymore.

[SimpleSpectre]

8 hours ago, MorePrinniesDood said:

I think it's people with very 'murican sensibilities in military history thinking woman combatants didn't exist in WWII because 'murica didn't field any. Never mind the numerous other countries on both sides that did have them, especially Russia.

As far as the Second World War was concerned the vast majority of women served in auxiliary roles and in the industry related sectors regardless of nation. This was true even for the Soviet Union, even with the sheer number of women serving very few saw frontline combat. Women served as tank crewmen, snipers (approximately 3000), pilots, anti-aircraft crews, etc. But very few even as far as the soviets have on record were infantry. Most of the other countries viewed women as unfit for frontline combat, so they remained in service with secondary combat roles and as medical personnel for the most part.

 

The Red army also had a nasty tendency to mistreat a great number of the female troops as well. Rape and assaults were common. The fact of the matter is that unless the women were part of a resistance group they would not have served with any organized frontline unit. The Soviet Union is an exception, but given the size of the Red Army this would not have been a very large number of female combatants by comparison.

[MorePrinniesDood]

11 minutes ago, Wachtergeist said:

As far as the Second World War was concerned the vast majority of women served in auxiliary roles and in the industry related sectors regardless of nation. This was true even for the Soviet Union, even with the sheer number of women serving very few saw frontline combat. Women served as tank crewmen, snipers (approximately 3000), pilots, anti-aircraft crews, etc. But very few even as far as the soviets have on record were infantry. Most of the other countries viewed women as unfit for frontline combat, so they remained in service with secondary combat roles and as medical personnel for the most part.

If I remember the Battlefield franchise correctly, is is not exclusively an infantry simulator, and at least some of the underlined roles above are likely to be player classes.

[SimpleSpectre]

10 minutes ago, MorePrinniesDood said:

If I remember the Battlefield franchise correctly, is is not exclusively an infantry simulator, and at least some of the underlined roles above are likely to be player classes.

It will be a FPS first and foremost. That will predominately be First line combat. Personally I don't care whether or not there are female combatants in the game, it's pixels on a screen, and battlefield has not been historical by any means for quite a while. But historically speaking there were very few women that were Frontline combatants despite the large number of females in any military service regardless of nation. As for classes the only one that I listed that wasn't a first line role was Anti-aircraft crew, the rest however can be considered first line in a lot of regards. The remainder of those listed would have only been possible in the Red Army, It just really didn't occur in any other military during the time. 

[Darkening Demise]

Battle Royal is confirmed by the devs. ????

[Pantheress]

On 5/28/2018 at 5:57 AM, Cynical Misanthrope said:

What people seem to completely fucking misunderstand is the fact, most people don't care if there is a woman in the trailer. But rather, fans of the series has asked for a authentic historical accurate war game for years (and I use the words "authentic historical accurate" very loosely here because it's Battlefield/Dice/EA after all).

When I watch the trailer, I don't see a Battlefield game. I just see another mindless CoD/Far Cry game.

I'm pretty sure no fan of the Battlefield series ever asked Dice to make a historically authentic game. Because that's never what the BF games have been about.

Just admit it; you're afraid of women.

At least that's the impression you're giving, since you seem to have no problems with all the historically inaccurate weapons and vehicles in the game, or V1 rockets being used against infantry and tanks when they were exclusively used as siege weapons, and that was only against London. What about lack of Norweigian and Dutch soldiers on their respective maps? Nope, gotta shove the British in there.

[SimpleSpectre]

26 minutes ago, Pantheress said:

At least that's the impression you're giving, since you seem to have no problems with all the historically inaccurate weapons and vehicles in the game, or V1 rockets being used against infantry and tanks when they were exclusively used as siege weapons, and that was only against London. What about lack of Norweigian and Dutch soldiers on their respective maps? Nope, gotta shove the British in there.

I agree with you on this point. Most of the weapons in the battlefield games are fairly hard to believe in actual gameplay, not to mention that utilizing a Buzz-Bomb against infantry is incredibly hard to rationalize. Just like expecting someone to be capable of effectively operating an Mg-42 by themselves without some asbestos gloves, a few extra barrels, and the ability to carry all the ammunition for a Machine gun that fires at approximately 1500 rounds per minute. However after some point it becomes difficult for me to suspend my disbelief in the face of a video game that represents a well documented historical conflict. The Michael Bay style trailer didn't really sell for me, but that's just the atmosphere of a trailer. I'm sure it wont be historical in any sense as far as I see, But a woman with a prosthesis fighting amongst British Regulars requires that I suspend that disbelief even further.

 

It was a weird trailer to say the least, Haven't seen any gameplay yet. Not really all that interested in the game enough at this point.

[GrimReaper]

4 hours ago, Pantheress said:

I'm pretty sure no fan of the Battlefield series ever asked Dice to make a historically authentic game. Because that's never what the BF games have been about.

Just admit it; you're afraid of women.

At least that's the impression you're giving, since you seem to have no problems with all the historically inaccurate weapons and vehicles in the game, or V1 rockets being used against infantry and tanks when they were exclusively used as siege weapons, and that was only against London. What about lack of Norweigian and Dutch soldiers on their respective maps? Nope, gotta shove the British in there.

Nobody has an issue with Lara Croft being a woman.

Nobody has an issue with Overwatch featuring female characters.

Nobody has an issue with female characters in RPGs.

Hell, nobody even cared that Unreal Tournament featured female fighters and that was back in 1999.

 

Obviously, BF5 is first and foremost a game and as such has to take make certain compromises because gameplay > realism/authenticity, that's a given. Then it's a multiplayer game and people will obviously do stupid and fancy shit - but the scenario itself should remain somewhat believable, even if there are engineers standing on a plane repairing it constantly when it's flying around carpet bombing everything. Otherwise why not go a step further and introduce jet packs and laser weapons? Why not add aliens as a playable faction in certain maps? After all, Battlefield never was really that accurate to begin with, right?

 

That being said, there's certainly a few people from the MGTOW/incel/whatever you want to call them crowd hijacking the discussion. But blowing this out of proportion and parroting the PR stunt from EA and dice where every criticism of BF5 is met with 'oh you're just a salty racist sexist manchild' is kinda not very smart, you know.

[Cynical Misanthrope]

12 hours ago, Pantheress said:

I'm pretty sure no fan of the Battlefield series ever asked Dice to make a historically authentic game. Because that's never what the BF games have been about.

Just admit it; you're afraid of women.

At least that's the impression you're giving, since you seem to have no problems with all the historically inaccurate weapons and vehicles in the game, or V1 rockets being used against infantry and tanks when they were exclusively used as siege weapons, and that was only against London. What about lack of Norweigian and Dutch soldiers on their respective maps? Nope, gotta shove the British in there.

If you think I'm afraid of women you're a fucking idiot. I actually happens to be one of those who doesn't care for genders. I don't judge people for their reproduction organs. I judge people for their skills.

So with that being said, some of my all time favorite characters are women. Because the ones who created them, did so with great passion and they cared to portray them as life-like as possible.

But this is not a woman exclusive opinion I have. It stretches out to male characters as well. Regardless of their genders, I care more for a well written and well out thought character and if they fit the settings.

Which you then can (hopefully) relate to, no matter what gender you or they might have. 

 

The reboot of Tomb Raider and Lara Croft for example. I absolutely love it. Because you get to follow her story and how she slowly grow as a character. She was just a normal girl doing normal girlish stuff and at first she is clumsy as fuck and she is constantly getting hurt.

She behaves like I would do, because I have no training or that kind of experience either. But the more she expose herself to danger, the more experienced she gets and the more confident she becomes.

This why I love her because you get to grow with her. You get to know her.

 

I never played the early games, just a few but never finished them. So I can't say much about them. I don't really care for the "boob" phenomena people seem to have issue with, but I can understand their concerns.

That would be like taking Master Chief from Halo, a character that never speaks and completely remade him to a none-stopping talking faggot soy boy.

 

I recently saw the new Tomb Raider 2018 movie which at first I actually really liked, because just like the game, she is a walking disaster at first and it was great to see many of the scenes from the game being used. Unfortunately the last 3rd of the movie is fucking garbage, which made the whole fucking movie garbage. So with that being said, I absolutely fucking hate the Angelina Jolie movie of Tom Raider. But I actually really liked the actress of this new movie and she was really believable. To bad about the script tho. 

 

I also absolutely love Ripley from Alien. And I actually also really like Jenette Vasquez from Alien as well, even tho she is very "man-like" because she has trained to be a marine and she has been surrounded by Marines so they way she acts is highly believable. 

So lets say just for fun, these two would had change place, that would had been incredible retarded and not believable at all. So details like that is important.

 

So with that being said, DICE said they were going back to the roots, and this time they were gonna try to be as authentic as possible. And then we get a trailer which have a disabled woman on the front line with a fucking prosthetic arm and BLUE face paint and people running around with Katanas on their backs. This is not only retarded, but also dishonest. What's gonna be next? A midget in a wheelchair with gatling guns?

 

In the end we got nothing more than a pre-rendered mindless CoD clone which already been done 100 times before. Before this trailer I was very excited for this game. I thought we were going to have a game similar to Bad Company where we get to be part of a squad deep behind enemy lines. And instead we got a trailer made by Michael Bay with unbelievable aspects.  

 

And you have clearly not read what I have said numerous times in this thread. I hate to repeat myself but I have said that I would love to play as a female soldier such as Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Roza Georgiyevna Shanina or Tanya Baramzina just to mention a few.

Tanya's story is especially emotional due to how she was captured, tortured and executed by the Germans. Or just any female soldier as long as the back story is believable and her goals based on real events. Having options is good as long as you can immerse yourself in a setting that is believable and as close as accurate as possible. One of my favorite games is called Velvet Assassin, which is based on the real life woman Violette Szabo and her objectives.

Although the game is fucking garbage in many aspects, the game is still incredible realistic in terms of what she did and the journey she had.

 

So the issue is not about women being part of the war. Because their were. Although their numbers were incredible low.

 

It's how they are unrealistically portrayed for the settings. Of course there is nothing wrong with having unrealistic characters or other aspects but that is another topic for another day. 

 

So instead of implementing something unique, they just throw in women because reasons. 

And that is the problem. When you decide to throw in something that is not believable in the settings. I absolutely hated Rey of SW as well, because she came from no where and she is an expert in everything. I don't doubt she can become one, but we never get to see her become one. She just is from the start. At least with Luke, we get so his journey. 

 

And I agree, there should been more soldiers from other countries presented as well, AS LONG AS THEY MAKE SENSE in the settings. But I can only guess DICE/EA choose to streamline this due time and resources needed to make it happen. So it's just gonna be the Allies vs the Axis as usual. 

And I blame this on the consumers because we don't put any pressure on developers/publishers these days. We swallow what they sell hook, line and sinker. We don't care for any standards. Right now for example, Battle Royal games is popular, and all of sudden every fucking game is gonna have these modes. No one has any original idea but instead just follow the stream like a dead fish. 

 

Which is kinda ironic because when all of a sudden we, the "sexists, racists bla bla bla bla" starts to point out things in games that is not only wrong but frankly dishonest, we are the bad guys. When in reality we just want to see a change that is rather more believable.

There is enough of over the top games anyway. We don't need more. What we need is high standards and new proper ideas and representation. 

[NaughtySeranity]

Quote

So with that being said, DICE said they were going back to the roots, and this time they were gonna try to be as authentic as possible. And then we get a trailer which have a disabled woman on the front line with a fucking prosthetic arm and BLUE face paint and people running around with Katanas on their backs. This is not only retarded, but also dishonest. What's gonna be next? A midget in a wheelchair with gatling guns?

They are only showing the possibilities for charakter customisation, you know?