-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Engadget: Why I don't have the stomach for 'Battlefield 1'
- Thread starter BeforeU
- Start date
Broken Joystick
At least you can talk. Who are you?
That's a completely understandable stance to have.
Fried Food
Banned
Fine stance to take. Seems strange to be vocal about it now though. I guess Battlefield 1 is the current clicks and hits hotness.
In real life there are no "bad guys." Look, I know what Nazi Germany and Hitler did was horrible - genocide and starting a war that lead to the deaths of tens of millions. But the average German soldier you're shooting in WWII games isn't a "nazi" - he's likely some kid, who grew up in Germany and had friends, crushes, lovers, parents, hopes and dreams. Sure, he was on the wrong side - but from his perspective, his country (that he had lived in all of his life) called on him to serve, and he did. Now maybe that's not the "moral" choice to make, but don't forget that the allies committed plenty of atrocities too.
TL;DR: WWII games aren't any better than WWI in this regard.
TL;DR: WWII games aren't any better than WWI in this regard.
As if every German soldier in WW2 was a member of the SS or were the incarnation of pure evil.
And WW1 didn't have a good or a bad side. Both parties mutually agreed to wage war, and you could even say that Austria was the first provoked. Ultimately, nobody won that war.
But really, it's a game. And it's not as if Battlefield 1 will be a realistic portrayal of WW1.
And WW1 didn't have a good or a bad side. Both parties mutually agreed to wage war, and you could even say that Austria was the first provoked. Ultimately, nobody won that war.
But really, it's a game. And it's not as if Battlefield 1 will be a realistic portrayal of WW1.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
While yes, World War I was a grey conflict in comparison to World War II, there is no one alive today who fought in the war and barely anyone left who is old enough to remember it. World War I is such a glossed over subject, even if this game stimulates someone to get just some cursory knowledge of the war it will be a good thing.
And I have no problem with soldiers killing soldiers, because they are just that, soldiers. They knew the risks, they knew what they signed up to do. It isn't like you will be participating in the Armenian Genocide in the game.
And I have no problem with soldiers killing soldiers, because they are just that, soldiers. They knew the risks, they knew what they signed up to do. It isn't like you will be participating in the Armenian Genocide in the game.
funkystudent
Member
I think WW1 is a complex war and I really hope DICE dont boil the story stuff down to "shoot shoot, bang bang, America saves the day".
Its kind of unexplored territory for games, especially AAA games so I hope they do try and do it right.
I want a WW1 game. Not a reskined WW2 game.
Its kind of unexplored territory for games, especially AAA games so I hope they do try and do it right.
I want a WW1 game. Not a reskined WW2 game.
Bolivar687
Banned
I completely disagree with that position but I'm glad we're having the conversation.
Captain Smoker
Member
I don't see his point, we had a million World War II games.
Kralamoonard
Member
You're not familiar with the concept of a military draft?
I found the modern desert warfare propaganda much much worse than any Hollywoodian interpretation of a long past conflict.
The real issue I would have with BF1 is if it goes into some heinous history revisionism to put America at the center of a conflict that was majorly fought and won by France.
The real issue I would have with BF1 is if it goes into some heinous history revisionism to put America at the center of a conflict that was majorly fought and won by France.
chronic_archaic
Member
Recently watched this video about the topic of World War I games and one the quotes was "how would something like Call of Duty or Battlefield really work with such a dark tone?" and it's quite interesting - historically the only games from the era are flight sims adventure games or strategy games, with only a few shooters none of which were substantial. You can watch it for better perspective if you fancy or whatever
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJatRwZA_JY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJatRwZA_JY
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
That doesn't change anything. In the US draft for the war at least you could get assigned to non-combat roles if you didn't want to fight.
GrantDaNasty
Member
WW1 is a nasty war, but I only take issue with this article if it implies there was ever a "clear" motivation for killing and harming other human beings in any other setting or conflict.
WW1 is ultimately not a very black & white conflict, but ultimately wars ain't about "good guys" and "bad guys", they're about winners and losers, period.
WW1 is ultimately not a very black & white conflict, but ultimately wars ain't about "good guys" and "bad guys", they're about winners and losers, period.
Perfectly understandable way of looking at it, though it might be a bit too early to say that.
I'm going to have a problem if they are going market the game as an "authentic" ww1 shooter while the actual game is a zany battlefield game with over the top stuff in it. Because at that point i'm sure that some people are going to think that the game somehow reflects reality and the image they get about ww1 is going to be extremely warped. But that is yet to come, maybe they will market the game properly and go so over the top that everybody can tell that this isn't telling about the real thing.
I'm going to have a problem if they are going market the game as an "authentic" ww1 shooter while the actual game is a zany battlefield game with over the top stuff in it. Because at that point i'm sure that some people are going to think that the game somehow reflects reality and the image they get about ww1 is going to be extremely warped. But that is yet to come, maybe they will market the game properly and go so over the top that everybody can tell that this isn't telling about the real thing.
This is where I stand as well. But at least we are having a conversation about WWI. It's something that's legit glossed over a lot at least here in America.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
I can definitely see where he is coming from.
WaterAstro
Member
I'm on the side of "it's just a video game". And also the fact that depiction of the brutality and human condition of WW1 is actually BENEFICIAL for us learning about that war. You don't teach anything by censoring elements or ignoring it entirely.
I doubt the article writer even has a care in the World for WW1. We care more about WW2 and there has been millions of those games. Just really smells like controversy for clicks to me.
I doubt the article writer even has a care in the World for WW1. We care more about WW2 and there has been millions of those games. Just really smells like controversy for clicks to me.
John Kowalski
Banned
I feel the same way about this whole thing really. I've been leaning more and more in this direction as i've grown older. In these instances where death and violence and war are abstractions of actual historical death, violence and war, it's very hard to muster the will to participate unless the game goes to great lengths to diminish that feeling of acting this violence in a self serving way.
BeforeU
Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
You serious?
BattleMonkey
Member
Does the reviewer whine about all war games, cause most have no such thing as "good guys", or you even play as the "bad guys".
Lil'DigiOp
Member
I don't really agree. Nobody feels guilty killing Asian soldiers in Pacific Warfare games. Nobody feels guilty killing Middle Eastern jihadists in Modern Warfare games.
All of these type of games blanket brush one side of the war and call them your "enemies".
Now because your enemy isn't so clearly defined in WW1, you have a conscious about playing video games.
All of these type of games blanket brush one side of the war and call them your "enemies".
Now because your enemy isn't so clearly defined in WW1, you have a conscious about playing video games.
GrantDaNasty
Member
History is written by the winners after all. The definition of who the good guys are changes as a result.
I'm not saying we'd live in a better world if the outcomes were different, or would rather alternates, but that's what I believe, that no conflict was ever truly started or instigated for "the right reasons"
ChoklitCow
Member
I see his point, and have a feeling others share similar difficulties with games such as this.
I personally still don't have the same feelings, however violence in VR might end up changing my perception just as the ability to graphically make violence look more realistic did.
I personally still don't have the same feelings, however violence in VR might end up changing my perception just as the ability to graphically make violence look more realistic did.
Are you serious?
You could refuse to fight and get a non-combat role, sure, but most of those in the WW1 era were things like running out to gather the dead bodies in the trenches, and probably end up getting shot at yourself.
I really think you should do some reading on WW1 era conscription before you make such statements.
Technically there are still a handful of people who are WW1 vets still alive:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_last_surviving_World_War_I_veterans_by_country
Also, the US had a military draft, tons of guys went over to fight without volunteering.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
I look at this no different than any game that has ever been based on a war.
When done well they're extremely enjoyable. It's not about the the tragedy of this being real history or the implications or anything. To me it's an appreciation of the setting. I love old school guns and machinery. I love the locations. I don't think I'm going to be playing this game and rooting for a specific side or even paying much attention to that.
The soldiers to me are just vehicles that allow me to enjoy the vistas and awesome guns and whatnot.
When done well they're extremely enjoyable. It's not about the the tragedy of this being real history or the implications or anything. To me it's an appreciation of the setting. I love old school guns and machinery. I love the locations. I don't think I'm going to be playing this game and rooting for a specific side or even paying much attention to that.
The soldiers to me are just vehicles that allow me to enjoy the vistas and awesome guns and whatnot.
Was it? I didn't watch the whole stream but i remember a part where the dude on the couch said something along the lines of "We wanted to show the unknown side of ww1" which rubbed me the wrong way after seeing the trailer. But if it's alt history then i have no problems with it.
shinobi602
Member
I can understand someone feeling the way he does and won't chastise anyone for it, but it doesn't affect me personally. I'm able to completely detach myself from any real world implications when playing a game so that it doesn't bother me in the slightest. And I've lived through wars.
LostDonkey
Member
WW2 has 16 million Military deaths and 45 million civilian deaths just on the allied side and we've had multiple movies, games etc based on that war.
Why now with WW1? Isn't this like the first AAA WW1 game to be released anyway?
Why now with WW1? Isn't this like the first AAA WW1 game to be released anyway?
WhateverItTakes
Banned
I understand it. It's kinda perverse when you think about it how much of the fun we have in games comes from a source material of absolute tragedy. Why is violence the most universal game mechanic, and how can be justify ignoring the fact that we're, even at the tiniest level, glorifying awful conflict and horror and pain, by turning it into something fun?
It's something to think about. I'm certainly not gonna stop playing my shootbangs because of it, but I can completely see how in our increasingly self-aware society how some might feel uncomfortable in these things.
It's something to think about. I'm certainly not gonna stop playing my shootbangs because of it, but I can completely see how in our increasingly self-aware society how some might feel uncomfortable in these things.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Yeah I would say thats true.
Waldo Lydecker
Member
Interesting to know what the writer of this article actually thought of Valiant Hearts.
By the way, I actually understand his point. Butnas gamers you grew accustommed to things.
The first time I saw a FPS I was shocked at the violence. The first time I saw a FPS based I was even more shocked and questioned some ethical aspects of it.
But now it is so normal to play these kind of games. Strange actually.
By the way, I actually understand his point. Butnas gamers you grew accustommed to things.
The first time I saw a FPS I was shocked at the violence. The first time I saw a FPS based I was even more shocked and questioned some ethical aspects of it.
But now it is so normal to play these kind of games. Strange actually.
Collateral22
Member
None of that stuff bothers me when playing Video Games. If I let it, I wouldn't play half the games I do. It's not real so therefore it doesn't bother me.
BeforeU
Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
I dont see how he can take issue with this and not more modern shooters. There are thousands of people who are still or were a few years ago, in the MIddle East fighting the war we've done countless times in the AAA landscape. WW1 is so far removed, I cant imagine how you cant have the stomach for it specifically. I suspect this is click bait, since BF1 is taking the internet by storm.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
What's with people being so selective about THIS WAR and not that war or those wars or all the other wars
oh
clicks...
...doy
It's not the most unreasonable stance to have but why am I sitting here convinced we aren't going to be seeing very many repeats of this article next time a World of War 2 or Modern Shootbang game drops?
oh
clicks...
...doy
It's not the most unreasonable stance to have but why am I sitting here convinced we aren't going to be seeing very many repeats of this article next time a World of War 2 or Modern Shootbang game drops?
I find it fascinating how this new Battlefield has brought up so many emotions and thoughts about WW1 that apparently no one had a need to talk about until a video game chose it as a setting. It's cool that video games have reached this point of being discussion worthy and discussion starters.
My opinion is, that using events from the past in entertainment is just part of culture. There are novels about WW1, movies about WW1 and now games. That some people don't want to play them is totally fine and understandable. You don't have to play WW1 if you don't want to. But saying EA/DICE are evil for using this conflict just doesn't make much sense to me.
My opinion is, that using events from the past in entertainment is just part of culture. There are novels about WW1, movies about WW1 and now games. That some people don't want to play them is totally fine and understandable. You don't have to play WW1 if you don't want to. But saying EA/DICE are evil for using this conflict just doesn't make much sense to me.
Yeah, it's odd. When WW2 games were popular, there were plenty of people alive who were directly affected by the war, either as soldiers or civilians. WW1 started over a century ago, so it's hard to see how you could be totally OK paying WW2 games 10 years ago but turned off by a WW1 game now.
fabricated backlash
Member
That is just Straight up false. Soldiers back then def. Didn't know what they signed up for, neither did the brass.
WWI had such a devastating Effect on soldiers and survivors that Warfare would never again be fought the same.
WWI was a meatgrinder and nothing else, with soldiers getting inadequate Training and a false idea about what they were about to embark on.
I expect BF1 to be the same Hollywood shlock about heroism and violence with some sprinkles of faux Horror of war vignettes on top. That's fine, as BF is an entertainment Franchise and the settings is just window Dressing just like every other time.