Support NeoGAF

[Coffee Dog]

Battlefield 1 in all other areas is sanitized history. If I can play as a black german dude dying for the kaiser and horrific shit like mustard gas gets reduced to a wacky power up, I don't think that female soldiers cross the line.

 

[Tovarisc]

Battlefield 1 in all other areas is sanitized history. If I can play as a black german dude dying for the kaiser and horrific shit like mustard gas gets reduced to a wacky power up, I don't think that female soldiers cross the line.

You can?

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Historical accuracy in...multiplayer.

Okay dice

.

 

[Hassun]

Compared to the game not even having France or Russia as playable factions this is incredibly minor.

 

[CazTGG]

Really surprised to see people talk about historical accuracy in the multiplayer portion of the game where that wouldn't be a factor to begin with, not that the actual reason is particularly discussion worthy since it just makes it sound like they're contributing to making the multiplayer community a boys-only club. This is some Legend of Korra nonsense.

 

[GinoFelino]

Compared to the game not even having France or Russia as playable factions this is incredibly minor.

Why? I think not having playable female soldiers in multiplayer is the more important omission, considering it's a game releasing in 2016 and not a documentary..

 

[pizzasqueeze]

Compared to the game not even having France or Russia as playable factions this is incredibly minor.

This is EXACTLY why the omission is glaring, as saying authenticity or accuracy is the reason clearly has nothing to do with a WW1 game without France(!!!!)

 

[Mr_Irish]

I find it more problematic that the French and Russian factions are gonna be DLC.

 

[Ampsicora]

Why? I think not having playable female soldiers in multiplayer is the more important omission, considering it's a game releasing in 2016 and not a documentary..

I don't get it why. True, the multiplayer is unrealistic because people act like no one during the war but the setting is still the WW1. It's true some Women have actually fought the war, but how many? Let's be honest, the most important infantry composed by women on the WW1 was Russian and it was composed by only 5000 soldiers and only 1/3 actually have fought the war. They deserves a place in the game? I think yes, after all, but I think about that with ALL the infantry who fought the war, but we should remember Russia was not included in the game. For Example, I really want to play with a Sardinian soldier of the Sassari Brigade, because it was the most awarded brigade of all Italian troops and because I'm Sardinian, but I'll face the situation when this won't happen at all. I'm absolutely ok with gender equality in videogames, but there are always some cases when it's hard to see it, specially when we talk about history. And yes, it's a videogame, but it's still a videogame set in an historical situation

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

It's a tough spot. People were losing their shit when you could play as Stormtroopers with no Helmet in Battlefront. It killed authenticity and people wanted to boycot the game because their immersion was ruined.


But I liked it. I like when not all stormtroopers look the same. And I'd like it if you could have female character models in MP. Even if it's not the standard I think there is room for it.


I know if I was a woman it would bother the fuck out of me if I could not play as my own gender.

 

[Krogan]

the salt from all the people complaining about being spawned as a woman would make the lack of choice infinitely superior.

Just for the salt...

 

[Kinyou]

I know if I was a woman it would bother the fuck out of me if I could not play as my own gender.

I wonder if that would apply to every women though when it comes to world war 1. The people on the front line were men, that's just how it was.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

I wonder if that would apply to every women though when it comes to world war 1. The people on the front line were men, that's just how it was.

Talk to women who play games. My wife and her friends at least get really bummed when they can't play as women, especially in multiplayer, because they feel like game companies don't care about them (using the "boys won't like it" excuse is confirmation of that) or think of them as an afterthought when women make up half of the gaming consumer population.


It's a matter of agency and belonging. Minority men usually feel the same. Look at the few examples of women characters before recently and the language used to describe them compared to male characters. The marketing for the Tomb Raider reboot talked about how players "would guide/protect/care for" Lara, not how they'd "step into her shoes/take on the roll of, etc" like they do with male characters. So if you are a majority male it's really hard to understand how minorities and women feel about this kind of thing.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

So women, French forces and Russian forces confirmed DLC?

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

So women confirmed DLC?

Right after that DLC drops on BF4.

 

[horkrux]

Talk to women who play games. My wife and her friends at least get really bummed when they can't play as women, especially in multiplayer, because they feel like game companies don't care about them (using the "boys won't like it" excuse is confirmation of that) or think of them as an afterthought when women make up half of the gaming consumer population.


It's a matter of agency and belonging. Minority men usually feel the same. Look at the few examples of women characters before recently and the language used to describe them compared to male characters. The marketing for the Tomb Raider reboot talked about how players "would guide/protect/care for" Lara, not how they'd "step into her shoes/take on the roll of, etc" like they do with male characters. So if you are a majority male it's really hard to understand how minorities and women feel about this kind of thing.

It's still WW1, though. It's not your modern day shooter or Quake or anything, were there would be 0 reason not to include female skins. I guess in that case I would have been pissed at that, too, were I in their shoes.
But when you know that what you ask for goes against the setting? Not everyone plays those games to 'shoot stuff.' Many want the developers to make the most of that setting. They want to play Battlefield 1 for its setting.

It IS hard to for us to understand, I agree. Hell, I couldn't even come up with an example of a setting where male characters would be totally out of place.

I'm more bewildered that there haven't been any female soldiers in the past few Battlefields. It's the wrong time to ask for them to introduce them now imo.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

It's still WW1, though. It's not your modern day shooter or Quake or anything, were there would be 0 reason not to include female skins. I guess in that case I would have been pissed at that, too, were I in their shoes.
But when you know that what you ask for goes against the setting? Not everyone plays those games to 'shoot stuff.' Many want the developers to make the most of that setting. They want to play Battlefield 1 for its setting.

It IS hard to for us to understand, I agree. Hell, I couldn't even come up with an example of a setting where male characters would be totally out of place.

I'm more bewildered that there haven't been any female soldiers in the past few Battlefields. It's the wrong time to ask for them to introduce them now imo.

If this was Verdun I'd be more inclined to agree, but this is Battlefield. Any use of historical accuracy as an excuse to exclude women is thrown out the window when tanks are zooming back and forth across the battlefield alone like it's WW2 and not being used like cavalry and in armored columns. Or when zeppelins are being used to attack infantry formations during the day. Or when soldiers are using automatic weapons that only a handful were manufactured in the last days of the war.

 

[The Faceless Master]

It's still WW1, though. It's not your modern day shooter or Quake or anything, were there would be 0 reason not to include female skins. I guess in that case I would have been pissed at that, too, were I in their shoes.
But when you know that what you ask for goes against the setting? Not everyone plays those games to 'shoot stuff.' Many want the developers to make the most of that setting. They want to play Battlefield 1 for its setting.

It IS hard to for us to understand, I agree. Hell, I couldn't even come up with an example of a setting where male characters would be totally out of place.

I'm more bewildered that there haven't been any female soldiers in the past few Battlefields. It's the wrong time to ask for them to introduce them now imo.

.

so they have a gun that under 100 of were made in the game

more than 100 women fought in WW1

 

[horkrux]

.

so they have a gun that under 100 of were made in the game

more than 100 women fought in WW1

I don't like this comparison, but this was my reply to that kind of argument:

Why can't you make a distinction in what you perceive as 'immersion-breaking' in regard to the setting? Seeing half the Germans or British running around with female skins would surely be more irritating to me than to be able to use weapons that only existed as drafts or having tanks that are way faster than the reallife counterpart. I haven't studied WW1 weapons technology. I know BF1 is inauthentic in that regard, but I sure as hell haven't seen any pictures or films with female troops.
I know that society back then was not even half as progressive as it is now. Why pretend that it was different? Read the wikipedia article on women in WW1 - even the female Russian battalions, probably the only major side to employ women as combatants at all, were disbanded within a year. Even 1/64 players in a round playing with a female skin would be mind-blowingly unrealistic (and wouldn't really work out, considering that the game doesn't know you).

 

[GinoFelino]

I don't get it why. True, the multiplayer is unrealistic because people act like no one during the war but the setting is still the WW1. It's true some Women have actually fought the war, but how many? Let's be honest, the most important infantry composed by women on the WW1 was Russian and it was composed by only 5000 soldiers and only 1/3 actually have fought the war. They deserves a place in the game? I think yes, after all, but I think about that with ALL the infantry who fought the war, but we should remember Russia was not included in the game. For Example, I really want to play with a Sardinian soldier of the Sassari Brigade, because it was the most awarded brigade of all Italian troops and because I'm Sardinian, but I'll face the situation when this won't happen at all. I'm absolutely ok with gender equality in videogames, but there are always some cases when it's hard to see it, specially when we talk about history. And yes, it's a videogame, but it's still a videogame set in an historical situation

Come now.

The amount of people peddling the accuracy argument is astounding.

Did you see the trailer? Did you see the livestream?

How is any of that historically accurate?

It's a glorious-looking multiplayer blockbuster with a semi-WW1 setting. Accuracy is not its selling point nor its highest priority.

 

[ATOMICJORGE]

Edit: Nevermind wrong thread

 

[The1Ski]

Russia had women soldiers in WWI.

In what capacity, though?

Not every soldier is infantry or armor or other "combat" jobs. I know there were women's battalions but they could have been communications, transportation, supply, medical units....

But to be honest, WWI was so long ago and so chaotic that it's tough to say exactly what happened "on the line."

 

[Ampsicora]

Come now.

The amount of people peddling the accuracy argument is astounding.

Did you see the trailer? Did you see the livestream?

How is any of that historically accurate?

It's a glorious-looking multiplayer blockbuster with a semi-WW1 setting. Accuracy is not its selling point nor its highest priority.

It's not a matter of historically accuracy, but of context. We always forget how much the context is important.
Let's make an example. When I've played Valkyria Chronicles (yeah I know, anime characters doing anime things), female soldiers not bothered me at all, because the original context was an original rewrite of the WW1 setting. It was fine because the game made believable the context because there's not any information the game gave to me for lose the credibility of it. Battlefield 1 however, It's set on the "real WW1", a place in history when women had lot less rights than now, and one of this was the possibility to joining the army on the western front. even if this is a videogame with many things out of place like the futuristic GUI, it has a credible context inside, based on our historically knowing. If Dice said "this is not the real WW1 context, but a rewrited one" your argument would be absolutely right.

I hope, I've not bothered you with this argument.

 

[Camp Freddie]

I don't really have a problem with the lack of female soldiers in MP.

I don't think Dice are obliged to add an extra 'sex' choice somewhere in their UI, especially since only the Russians used female soldiers, and only in a few cases at the end of the war (by the way, are Russian's even in the game? I've only noticed Western Front and Middle East scenes).

In contrast, SP campaigns tell a story and rely on having interesting characters. Having a part featuring a Bedouin warrior woman or a Russian Women's Battalion would be cool and can be done without harming the authenticity of the experience.

Having said all that, I wouldn't complain if the "Russian sniper" or whatever avatar was female (IIRC, Battlefield has one unchangeable avatar for every nation/class combination, unless that changed in BF4). I just don't think Dice are being horribly noninclusive or chauvanistic for not including female soldier options in WWI shooters.

 

[system11]

the salt from all the people complaining about being spawned as a woman would make the lack of choice infinitely superior.

I remember when Call Of Duty made the default online multiplayer character a woman, and the only thing people bitched about was that Ghosts wasn't very good. Many months after release over half the field was still that character. I really don't think the general public cares too much when they're soldiering in 1st person. In BO3 it's evenly split for example, people just pick the class they like.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

I remember when Call Of Duty made the default online multiplayer character a woman, and the only thing people bitched about was that Ghosts wasn't very good. Many months after release over half the field was still that character. I really don't think the general public cares too much when they're soldiering in 1st person. In BO3 it's evenly split for example, people just pick the class they like.

Hell, the women with the bow is probably the 1st or 2nd most popular character on there.

 

[QuantumZebra]

Talk to women who play games. My wife and her friends at least get really bummed when they can't play as women, especially in multiplayer, because they feel like game companies don't care about them (using the "boys won't like it" excuse is confirmation of that) or think of them as an afterthought when women make up half of the gaming consumer population.


It's a matter of agency and belonging. Minority men usually feel the same. Look at the few examples of women characters before recently and the language used to describe them compared to male characters. The marketing for the Tomb Raider reboot talked about how players "would guide/protect/care for" Lara, not how they'd "step into her shoes/take on the roll of, etc" like they do with male characters. So if you are a majority male it's really hard to understand how minorities and women feel about this kind of thing.

Yup.

My wife expects to be able to play as a character that is similar to herself.

I find it frankly disgusting when gaming companies just ignore half the population out of some misguided (or misogynistic) garbage.

I was hype for Battlefield 1, but this does dampen it a bit.

Hell, the women with the bow is probably the 1st or 2nd most popular character on there.

Yup. I've been in matches that had like 3-4 of her. She's my main, too. Her vision pulse is off the fucking chain.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

Yup. I've been in matches that had like 3-4 of her. She's my main, too. Her vision pulse is off the fucking chain.

She is my 2nd, Seraph is my favorite in that game and her abilities aren't really the reason.

 

[Kalentan]

She is my 2nd, Seraph is my favorite in that game and her abilities aren't really the reason.

Landing shots with the Annihilator as Seraph is amazingly satisfying.

 

[GinoFelino]

It's not a matter of historically accuracy, but of context. We always forget how much the context is important.
Let's make an example. When I've played Valkyria Chronicles (yeah I know, anime characters doing anime things), female soldiers not bothered me at all, because the original context was an original rewrite of the WW1 setting. It was fine because the game made believable the context because there's not any information the game gave to me for lose the credibility of it. Battlefield 1 however, It's set on the "real WW1", a place in history when women had lot less rights than now, and one of this was the possibility to joining the army on the western front. even if this is a videogame with many things out of place like the futuristic GUI, it has a credible context inside, based on our historically knowing. If Dice said "this is not the real WW1 context, but a rewrited one" your argument would be absolutely right.

I hope, I've not bothered you with this argument.

DICE has said:

- For us, we wanted to stick to authenticity but also do it in a respectful way and an inclusive way, where we portray the different armies - not always as it was, but to portray the multitude of soldiers that fought within the different armies, showing this war in a modern way as part of what DICE believes and what Battlefield believes.

Aside from that, there are plenty of gameplay elements (guns, vehicles, parachutes, etc) that are utilized completely inaccurately from a historical point of view.

So that argument doesn't 'bother' me per se, but it just doesn't hold water in this particular instance.

 

[horkrux]

DICE has said

The bolded parts don't exist in a vacuum. 'Portraying the multitude of soldiers that fought' excludes women though. 'Showing this war in a modern way' doesn't mean they would have to include women. It means they want this to be a deliberate take on how WW1 was fought, shaping it into something more in line with what they perceive as fun as a Battlefield game. How do you do that? You change how weapons work.

 

[KonradLaw]

Am I correct in assuming the women in SP will be all on player's side? They probably want to avoid gamers brutally murdering women in their videogames.

Nothing else makes sense. Excluding women would be the right thing to do if they went for historical accuracy, but they're taking a big piss on history and realism, so that can't be it.

 

[GinoFelino]

The bolded parts don't exist in a vacuum. 'Portraying the multitude of soldiers that fought' excludes women though. 'Showing this war in a modern way' doesn't mean they would have to include women. It means they want this to be a deliberate take on how WW1 was fought, shaping it into something more in line with what they perceive as fun as a Battlefield game. How do you do that? You change how weapons work.

And by adding female soldiers in multiplayer to cater to your female audience.

Makes sense, doesn't it?

 

[-Amon-]

Am I correct in assuming the women in SP will be all on player's side? They probably want to avoid gamers brutally murdering women in their videogames

What kind of reasoning is this?

 

[horkrux]

And by adding female soldiers in multiplayer to cater to your female audience.

Makes sense, doesn't it?

Yep. They could have, but they chose not to. It's the extra mile they didn't want to go.

 

[KonradLaw]

What kind of reasoning is this?

The shitty "we don't want to cause controversies, plus women are pure beings anyway" kind of reasoning that also causes vast majority of action game not have female enemies.

 

[-Amon-]

The shitty "we don't want to cause controversies, plus women are pure beings anyway" kind of reasoning that also causes vast majority of action game not have female enemies.

In a thread were people want to impersonate female soldiers brutally killing male enemies.

So much for gender parity.

 

[Calm Mind]

That seems like a rather odd omission.

 

[4Tran]

Am I correct in assuming the women in SP will be all on player's side? They probably want to avoid gamers brutally murdering women in their videogames.

It looks like there's only a single female combatant in the single player campaign - a playable Bedouin warrior. She's not at all the kind of character that we're talking about for multiplayer though.

 

[Tovarisc]

It looks like there's only a single female combatant in the single player campaign - a playable Bedouin warrior. She's not at all the kind of character that we're talking about for multiplayer though.

How you know that she is only female soldier we are going to see?

 

[Compsiox]

Did any woman fight for the playable factions in the real war? If not then this is totally fine.

I can't believe people are getting on their case for sticking to reality. If this were completely fictional or a modern war then yeah.

 

[belvedere]

Serious question, where's the thread to discuss the game itself?

 

[CryptiK]

Did any woman fight for the playable factions in the real war? If not then this is totally fine.

I can't believe people are getting on their case for sticking to reality. If this were completely fictional or a modern war then yeah.

Well since Russia isn't playable then there were almost no women soldiers. Since the women soldier you play as in the single player is of a faction you cant play as in MP as well then... yeah none. The bigger concern is that France, are not a playable faction in a WWI game.

 

[GinoFelino]

How you know that she is only female soldier we are going to see?

In the quote in the OP, they say

- We revealed the female soldier you'll get to play as part of the campaign.

Doesn't sound like there are any more in the game, or they would have phrased that differently. But that's speculation, admittedly.

 

[MMaRsu]

Even with all this internet fallout, they'd probably get even more flak for including women in MP.

Thats not a reason not to include them.

 

[VexMythoclast]

Op you're comparing the diversity contrast between BF 1 (an relatively authentic WW! shooter) to BLOP which is basically a Michael Bay stylized Hollywood affair and Star Wars Battlefront (Science fiction). The logic is not computing for me at all.

 

[Ainsz]

So we won't be seeing an appearance from Bob then?

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

Did any woman fight for the playable factions in the real war? If not then this is totally fine.

I can't believe people are getting on their case for sticking to reality. If this were completely fictional or a modern war then yeah.

Russia created all women battalions in 1917...then disbanded them in 1917.

I wouldn't be surprised see them being added as DLC later.

 

[CryptiK]

Russia created all women battalions in 1917...then disbanded them in 1917.

Also without seeing action, and Russia isnt a playable faction.

 

[LoudCore]

I'm not one to complain about genders in games but I know my GF loves battlefield and in most games she likes to play as someone she relates to (female playing a female). Makes it feel like she is more apart of the experience. I know it loses some of the appeal with her to play as a male, but it doesn't keep her from playing it.

Battlefield 1 takes place in a fictional semi-fantasy WWI. So its not historically accurate, which means I don't see a problem to add females. Battlefield has never done it (correct me if wrong), so it'd be interesting. I think using the "historically accurate" excuse is lame, its not like this is an educational game.

Excited for this game though.