Weird that they're in SP and not MP.
I find that quite strange; in that case they can't really use the "historical accuracy" excuse.
Weird that they're in SP and not MP.
the fuck does it matter. youre just seeing a swinging weapon
Its not like they have to. All they really need to do is change the head and voice. Look at Star Wars Battlefront, the male and female stormtroopers are identical but for head and voice.I mean, let's be honest. They just don't want to make two of every uniform model.
"Let's have players use weapons that were introduced at the very end or even after the conflict in every battle, but having women soldiers in multiplayer? That's just a step too far."This is the easiest answer, but consider that "realism" is not at the top of DICE's priority list when it comes to Battlefield games. I wouldn't describe ANY Battlefield game as realistic, including Battlefield 1.
Maybe "authentic" is a better word?
I find that quite strange; in that case they can't really use the "historical accuracy" excuse.
I find that quite strange; in that case they can't really use the "historical accuracy" excuse.
I find that quite strange; in that case they can't really use the "historical accuracy" excuse.
Weird distinction to make, given their answer to the diversity/authenticity question. Also slightly disappointing after the character roster for shooters like Battlefront and Black Ops 3.
It really doesn't matter. The amount of female soldiers in WW1 was negligible in the grand scale of things anyway.Its not like they have to. All they really need to do is change the head and voice. Look at Star Wars Battlefront, the male and female stormtroopers are identical but for head and voice.
"Let's have players use weapons that were introduced at the very end or even after the conflict in every battle, but having women soldiers in multiplayer? That's just a step too far."
Fuck them. Really sours me on the game right now.
Not really. While playing as a woman in a single player game is a fucking awesome thing the trash communities in FPS games would end up with "haha I raped you" holding a lot more weight than it does today.
People are trash.
"Let's have players use weapons that were introduced at the very end or even after the conflict in every battle, but having women soldiers in multiplayer? That's just a step too far."
Fuck them. Really sours me on the game right now.
the fuck does it matter. youre just seeing a swinging weapon
Yep, probably the real reason.I mean, let's be honest. They just don't want to make two of every uniform model.
It can be accurate that they use a particular female figure. The campaign is going to be the story of 6 people from different nations. But these are particular figures, not the random soldiers you play in the MP and 90% or more of these soldiers who go on the battlefield were men.
It totally makes sense but people who didn't understand how the SP works will continue to complain while not reading. Gaf is gaf.
Yep, probably the real reason.
Two models is hard work!
Stupid they still don't have this, also feels like the excuse is just that an excuse.
Hm... I was thinking that was a weird decision.
Then I realized that this game would presentate women being killed viciouslly.
In Battlefront the violence is tonned down because of the setting (lasers, lack of blood, etc), so there is no much problem.
But show women being dealt with metal maces to the head? This kinda of shit would certainlly trigger some people.
I can understand the decision now. It's a shame nonetheless.
If they are in campaign, why not? Seems to clash with the diversity push EA has got going on and the authenticity in the game (and most war games) is pretty surface level. The guns and equipment look like WWI but they won't be used the same way and their impact will overestimated. The most notable example being zeppelins. Almost non-existent on the battlefield. If you can make zeppelins a big part of WWI then you can have female soldiers.
Yeah exactly, from the first trailer it's clear that it's a Bedouin woman who will be the female PC. The fact of the matter is for the major combatants, there just weren't women fighting en masse. And yes, the gameplay itself is not particularly 'realistic', but they're going for verisimilitude of the time period, and I can definitely see how creating masses of female soldiers for England and Germany would break that.
Hm... I was thinking that was a weird decision.
Then I realized that this game would presentate women being killed viciouslly.
In Battlefront the violence is tonned down because of the setting (lasers, lack of blood, etc), so there is no much problem.
But show women being dealt with metal maces to the head? This kinda of shit would certainlly trigger some people.
I can understand the decision now. It's a shame nonetheless.
If it doesn't matter than they should at least represent the majority of people who play games in their multiplayer.It really doesn't matter. The amount of female soldiers in WW1 was negligible in the grand scale of things anyway.
Hm... I was thinking that was a weird decision.
Then I realized that this game would presentate women being killed viciouslly.
In Battlefront the violence is tonned down because of the setting (lasers, lack of blood, etc), so there is no much problem.
But show women being dealt with metal maces to the head? This kinda of shit would certainlly trigger some people.
I can understand the decision now. It's a shame nonetheless.
I don't understand the "so few women" crowd. Why does that matter? As I understand this game has weapons that were barely in the war and surely maps that aren't modeled exactly after real battles among other non historical accurate things so why not let this " slide" as well.
I played as a female character a lot in CoD games and not once did some asshole made fun of me for it. Nobody cares that I play as a female avatar in Destiny.Not really. While playing as a woman in a single player game is a fucking awesome thing the trash communities in FPS games would end up with "haha I raped you" holding a lot more weight than it does today.
People are trash.
MP is the most sensible place to break historical accuracy for gameplay/etc reasons so...this seems pretty damn stupid frankly. You don't need to be accurate to racism/sexism unless it's part of your message, and MP in a battlefield game doesn't have a message.
More a violence problem than a woman problem. I'd welcome a "no core" option that alters animations client-side if you don't want to see that shit. I'm not really a fan even if it's against dudes.
I'm Black Ops 3 women get eaten alive and dismembered by nanites, blown to pieces by explosives, burned alive, etc. It's no fucking big deal. If anything an aversion to doing that to women only just demonstrates an internalized belief that women need protected and sheltered.Didn't stop Call of Duty from adding females characters almost 4 games ago.
Historical accuracy in...multiplayer.
Okay dice
Hm... I was thinking that was a weird decision.
Then I realized that this game would presentate women being killed viciouslly.
In Battlefront the violence is tonned down because of the setting (lasers, lack of blood, etc), so there is no much problem.
But show women being dealt with metal maces to the head? This kinda of shit would certainlly trigger some people.
I can understand the decision now. It's a shame nonetheless.
I thought this line of thinking was BS, but then look at the X-Men poster outcry... maybe you have a point.
There have been questions about how suitable WW1 is for a game, with the perception is of it being a very nasty war. Are you sensitive about that?
To be brutally honest, 1942, the first demo we did we had some nasty surprises, as blue-eyed Swedes going out into the world and showing a game. From that we've always tried to create it in a respectful way - yes, it's a game about war, but it's a sandbox and the things you do in it that matter. So we've tried to keep it respectful. Yes, we have gas in there - for me as a designer, it's an area of denial, it changes conditions just like the fog does. From that perspective we want to portray it - in the end, Battlefield, it's such a strong game concept that we don't want to go into gore land.
Yes, well said.I'm Black Ops 3 women get eaten alive and dismembered by nanites, blown to pieces by explosives, burned alive, etc. It's no fucking big deal. If anything an aversion to doing that to women only just demonstrates an internalized belief that women need protected and sheltered.
I AM OFFENDED!
edit: No I'm not.
I thought this line of thinking was BS, but then look at the X-Men poster outcry... maybe you have a point.
It's kind of like Assassin's Creed, they use history as a setting full of details as much as possible, but when it doesn't fit their ressources or plans they find other ways. Anyway the gameplay of a FPS like that has to be spectacular so they'll shift a bit the actual history to get the best weapons or vehicles even if they were rare on the actual battlefields. Even the speed of the battles is not accurate at all, but that was true for the other games too. It's not a simulation, and even a simulation wouldn't be 100% accurate because it's always a compromise with multiple factors.
And here they probably didn't think it was "worth" it, it's just one of the hundreds of decisions they made throughout development, just like Assassin's Creed Unity.