Socialism is nazism's siamese brother. Both responsible for millions of deaths.
-
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.
How Call of Duty: WW2 handles swastikas and female soldiers
- Thread starter nhlducks35
- Start date
Socialism is nazism's siamese brother. Both responsible for millions of deaths.
So is Capitalism and Christianity and...
Pegasus Actual
Member
The original COD had faction specific weapons. Of course there were plenty of modded servers where you would basically get the Overkill perk and get to choose one from each side instead, mostly because the weapons were pretty unbalanced.
This game has the perfect opportunity with its asymmetrical War mode to do faction specific weapons but nope.
As for swastikas and the like, it always seemed silly to me to avoid it. Like hey when you play a game sometimes you're gonna be the baddies. And for some reason nobody seems to care that much when WW2 games not just include the iconography of, but outright glorify the Soviets who were arguably just as bad as the Nazis.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Most of my points are infallible, it's just amateurs and ignorant people taking shots at them and throwing their own political agendas into their comments. At no point was a Swiss cheese annihilation of any opinion or point I've made achieved.
My main point is that if they're going to have them in single player, they should also be in multiplayer. Both game modes are on the same disk; it just seems strange to me that the content is in one mode, but not the other. That and all the hyperbole spewn by the developers is why I'm so pro-uncensorship for this game and for no other reason.
In the world of entertainment, things like Saving Private Ryan is the pinnacle of realism for World War II themed entertainment. I'm at least hoping for the same level of seriousness and historical accuracy from the campaign. The censorship for the multiplayer component shouldn't be happening - censoring history is just wrong. There should be no argument to that, that's my point.
As someone who has seen combat in afghanistan it's astonishing to see people think war is even remotely like a COD game.
Your argument is nonsense. If you want a realistic WW2 experience don't look for it in COD or video games at all.
You'll never be a real frontline soldier in video games because it's either fucking boring or fucking terrifying.
The developers decided they don't want to use swastikas (same as in past games). Unless you're living in Germany(like I'm) you're not getting censored because they decided to not use it.
If you want swastikas so bad get the PC version and mod as many swastikas as you want into the game.
As far as MP is concerned, for the same reason kids would want to dress up as Axis and Allies and play fake war -- because it looks cool from a historical context. It's kind of the same as kids dressing up as cowboys and Indians.
If you care that much abut playing something that's historically accurate in multiplayer, maybe this is the game for you: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=264668353
COD probably has almost zero relationship with actual infantry tactics, WWII or otherwise. The weapons probably don't operate even close to how their real life equivalents would in terms of range or damage. This is true of virtually any shooter. To get even get within light years to something that forces you to use real tactics you'd have to play a hardcore sim. Did you research how WWII squads actually fought before implementing that play style in COD?
I think the reason this happened was because after the war the allies couldn't very well punish the ENTIRE German population or even the entire German army, so they had to draw some kind of line in the process of rebuilding the country.
I mean the hypocrisy present in most "historical accuracy" arguments wherein people only focus on superficial elements of past events that are more blatant and easy to argue (the presence of a swastika) while ignoring or not being aware of the true historical nature of the event in question (clothing, weaponry, vehicles, demographics of involved peoples, battles, actual tactics, language and accents, civilian involvement, etc.).
You've been doing absolutely nothing in this topic worth note except for patting the back of people who are putting in a modicum of effort in trying to argue why the swastika is important enough to put in multiplayer while displaying no understanding on your own of what WWII was actually like or even how proper armies work. This is why people are saying you are disingenuously couching yourself in the tired veil of censorship and- at the end of the day- are only interested in nothing but the chance to see Nazi imagery proper regardless of whether or not the rest of the game is actually historically accurate. Because you haven't proven otherwise.
If it bothers you to potentially be equated with the so-called alt-right in this manner, then actually make a credible argument that shows you have a historically accurate knowledge of WWII outside of the basic facts disseminated by pop culture. Say something of note. Anything.
This doesn't mean games that include these things presence and their mechanical implementation are perfectly reflective of what goes on in real life, and thus this doesn't mean every single game is a WWII simulator.
At this rate I can call Burnout an accurate simulation of street racing. It has cars with steering, acceleration, and braking and you drive on the streets. It is exactly like driving in real life.
If I wanted to make a game where Hitler is a seaslug, you couldn't stop me.
There are tons of things in single player that aren't included in multiplayer and Swastika's are where you draw the line? Why aren't you mad about all the other huge historical inaccuracies in the game both in single player and multiplayer?
You're saying there aren't chest-high walls strategically placed all over the country?
Paasei
Member
Educate yourself
Giving me a list of commited war crimes still doesn't make every individual of any army whatsoever a good or bad person.
I don't really watch Disney movies.
Yeah, I was honestly thinking about Wildlands (coop), DayZ, Arma3 when I wrote that. BTW, CoD does have a "hardcore" mode.
Watch Zootopia. It's fucking amazeballs.
Honestly man you just need to stop, your flip flopping and blindness in this thread is crazy. You hang onto this historical accuracy phrase but don't respond to the tons of stuff that aren't historically accurate in COD mp for awhile now. There are going to be goofy colored gear, funky weapon skins, killstreaks, perks, spawn flipping, tea bagging, dances and emotes in post game, red dot sights, people running beside you quickscoping and somehow the only thing that breaks your immersion is the lack of swastikas? Come on man.
When the army's goal at its foundation is to commit warcrimes and genocide... and you join it, you're a bad person.
But wehraboos gonna wehraboo.
Thanks for the suggestion. I promise you I'll watch it at some point. You put it in my radar.
BlastKiller
Member
WaW even had Hitler speeches and original nazi music at the end of a match on the Downfall map. This was a lot more controversial, than these swastikas i think.
You didn';t seem to get it the first time(or are just outright ignoring it) but your comparison still fails.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Wehrmacht
We have historical, documented proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the Wehrmacht was just as trigger happy as an overall force as the SS was and routinely participated or engaged in war crimes.
You're being obtuse at this rate. I'm sure that the old "Mein opa did nothing wrong!" excuse must be comforting to you, but rest assured that the Wehrmact as a whole was definitely not "good" people and that "good" people were by far and a way a stupidly small minority.
Kurt Angle
Member
The cosmetic thing is another issue entirely. There are two camps on that as well, I for one am in the camp that thinks that none of that goofy Neon, weed or whatever cosmetic skins should be featured in the multiplayer because of the setting. People do like to show off their customizations, but that just completely breaks the immersion of the conflict that you are in the middle of. No one in WWII ever dressed like this:
Lol
where do i preorder for this?
Why aren't the director's arguments in the OP ?
As much as you want to discuss it, this needs to be available to read to avoid the shitload of shitposts. Not that we could have avoided another bunch of shitposts if the OP avoided the lazy comparison between the swastika and the hammer&sickel symbol.
I love how these one-sentence posts are said like it's some "common sense" but actually ignore the most recent historiographic research (and debate!) on the matter to shout their ideological opinion on the matter. Read a bit more, you'll look less like an idiot.
As much as you want to discuss it, this needs to be available to read to avoid the shitload of shitposts. Not that we could have avoided another bunch of shitposts if the OP avoided the lazy comparison between the swastika and the hammer&sickel symbol.
I love how these one-sentence posts are said like it's some "common sense" but actually ignore the most recent historiographic research (and debate!) on the matter to shout their ideological opinion on the matter. Read a bit more, you'll look less like an idiot.
Onlinehero
Member
Respawning, getting points, bullets emitting from the top of your head, 360 no-scopes. Yeah, checks out.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Thank you for your service
All you're doing in this thread is creating a commotion for no reason and attacking anybody that is saying that historical accuracy means non-censorship.
And you keep asking me to throw out what, random WWII facts to prove I am knowledgeable about the conflict? Is that what you want me to do, throw out random WWII facts relating to this game?
Is that what you're asking, because I really don't know what you want from me because you keep rambling incoherently.
What a damn tool you are.
Chubzdoomer
Banned
Exactly. This symmetrical-factions bullshit seriously needs to stop. Even Battlefield can't seem to get away from it.
I don't know if this needs to be pointed out, but there are a ton of people in the gaming community and outside of it who are Nazi fetishists. These people will plaster Nazi-era iconography like swastikas or sig runes everywhere and make it extremely unpleasant for everyone else. It's something that even the US military has to deal with.
Soviet iconography is much less of a problem because Soviet fetishists aren't really a thing. In any case, Soviet iconography is still in use in a number of countries so there's a lot less cause to forbid it.
Soviet iconography is much less of a problem because Soviet fetishists aren't really a thing. In any case, Soviet iconography is still in use in a number of countries so there's a lot less cause to forbid it.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
I haven't flip flopped once.
I'm aware that the multiplayer component is not 100% historically accurate as far as teabagging and customization, etc. I'm only referring to the fact that they don't censor Nazi iconography in single player, but they do in multiplayer and it's all on the same disk.
That's been my contention since it was merely speculated that the game was being censored.
No, I'm attacking disingenuous censorship arguments because I've seen that shit before and I know what the dog whistles mean. Again, y'all aren't fooling anyone.
Yes. Make an argument that shows you actually care about historical accuracy as a principle and not just when it personally suits you and your need to see swastikas. Surely even the single player mode isn't pitch-perfect accurate to what was going on in WWII, and certainly these imperfections should annoy you just as much as the lack of swastikas in the multiplayer mode. Maybe you could explain what some of those things are. Educate me. Prove to me that this isn't about the swastikas and your own offence to the thought of "censorship," but is instead truly about a moral appeal to historical accuracy in regards to WWII.
There's so many better avenues to go to if you're really interested in an accurate account of World War 2.
This is a call of duty game.
The only times I've noticed you or any pattern of your postings is in these specific threads about this specific game.
Really, of all the hills to die on. "I'm mad as hell there aren't enough swastikas in this game and I will keep protesting until they up the swastika count."
What are you even doing
I applaud how remarkably mindfucking this post is.
--
MP is censored to protect esports
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Okay.
If you can read this forum, thank a teacher. If you can read it in your country's respective language and have the freedom to post here, thank a World War II veteran.
WWII had a clear goal in mind for the people that fought in it. It was true good, versus true evil - we were fighting for the very right to have freedom and to stop a tyrannical mad man hell-bent on destroying the world and bending it to his sick machinations. If the Nazis had won the war, things would be completely different as far as where and how we live today. The men that crossed the English Channel on the Higgins boats were facing an uneasy uncertainty that hopefully none of us will ever have to bear. They landed on the beaches that were supposedly thinned-out of a majority of the enemy troops due to the aerial bombardments; but as we all know, the bombardments landed a little too far from the actual encampments and bunkers, so those brave men walked into a complete onslaught.
The bravery displayed by the men in the Higgins boats that day is unparalleled in the theater of war. I can only speculate as to the fear and honor they felt simultaneously. I've nothing but the utmost respect for them and what they achieved to give us the lives we lead today. And that is why censoring anything to do with World War II pisses me off. Yes I'm glad the single player is uncensored and I'll hopefully enjoy it from a historical perspective and yes, I know the multiplayer will be a clusterfuck of craziness, teabagging, supply drops and the like - but for me personally, trying to play it as a simulation and yes, I know it's Call Of Duty, but my realistic playstyle would benefit from having historically accurate environments complete with the appropriate iconography.
I hope that answers your question.
But they didn't take anything away.
The thing in question wasn't there in the beginning. And they explained their reasons why they didn't include it.
Now people who tend to be "anti-censorship" are complaining the loudest to Sledgehammer to change it.
This advocates for changing the artist's intended vision, which is commonly misconstrued in gaming as "censorship."
If only these people were as adept at noticing irony as they are the absence of swastikas.
Honestly then, people should really reconsider the ethics of having a sport associated with real life wars or catastrophic events.
MeatGrinder
Member
It's not the gameplay we are talking about, but the setting. If the setting is really toned down, then what is the point of even having a ww2 shooter... even online.
That you're not sincere with your concern with historical accuracy and just want the most edgy game they can make with the given material.
This really doesn't answer my question but I do appreciate an actual attempt to engage with the subject matter at hand.
My question is ultimately: What other historically inaccurate things are in the game that you've seen, and if there are any, why don't they bother you as much?
The fact is, CoD is not and never has been an accurate war and battle simulator. The fact that you, for some reason, try to play it like this instead of just sticking to Operation Flashpoint and calling it a day does not mean anything to the intent of the game's mechanics and experience. CoD is a blockbuster franchise that prioritizes adrenaline-pumping Rambo-esque interactive entertainment over actually trying to put the player in an accurate headspace of what it was like to be a soldier on the fronts and battles of WWII, and subsequently it prioritizes that over necessarily being respectful to WWII vets beyond putting them in the role of the heroes.
You are literally never going to get what you want out of the franchise even if they did put swastikas in multiplayer, thus it's all the more confusing to me that you're trying to argue that this is significantly important out of literally every other mechanical deviation from reality that CoD employs.
Angry Fork
Member
Black/female soldiers being on the axis side is dumb as hell. Removing swastika's in order to be respectful to those who died due to the nazi's (or whatever reason they give) while simultaneously pretending as if the nazi's embraced black and female soldiers is the most backwards shit. It's more poignant/meaningful if they're only available on the allied side, as that was how it happened for the most part.
If the reason is because of advertising bs then it's funny seeing how many corporate boot lickers are in here endorsing revisionism and censorship for the sake of marketing over what's actually correct/logical.
If the reason is because of advertising bs then it's funny seeing how many corporate boot lickers are in here endorsing revisionism and censorship for the sake of marketing over what's actually correct/logical.
World War II commonly saw engagements at 100m-300m ranges. I'm pretty sure that that kind of range is restricted to sniper rifles in CoD. It doesn't even try to reflect history because doing so would totally screw up its game design space.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
As far as a video game depiction of World War II, I've always enjoyed the original Call of Duty's and Medal of Honor games because they are a lot fun and I love the subject matter so much. Having things as historically accurate as possible makes WWII games more enjoyable for me and I feel like I'm playing through events and in places that I've learned about over the years. If I pass by an insignia that's not historically accurate, it stands out to me - that's the only reason why this is so important to me. It'd be like the next WWII Call of Duty being billed as completely historically accurate - and then setting the Battle of the Bulge in Hawaii lol
CoD has never been accurate to any war it has depicted, because it's not obligated to be accurate.
The only people who care about revisionism are the people who suddenly think it's the most important thing for this game to plaster swastika armbands on enemy soldiers they're not going to be paying that much attention to in the heat of a match anyway, all under the umbrella of a corporate entertainment product. Because apparently CoD is now the sole arbiter of access to proper information regarding WWII.
And he only people truly endorsing censorship are those who keep insisting the artists need to change their intended vision and put swastikas in multiplayer. Because as we all know, the only artist's vision that is worth defending is the one that's the edgiest out of everyone else's.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
Youre joking aren't ya?
Angry Fork
Member
Nazi iconography should be everywhere in WW2 content, with the Soviet Union subsequently burning it all to the ground. That's reality, that's morally good, and feels good. Liberals who want revisionist history in order not to offend people are severely misguided and have no concept of the meaning/worth of struggle.
Communists and socialists defeated the Nazi's and were the vanguard for every major anti-racist, anti-sexist movement in every country throughout the 20th century, and still to this day.
Communists and socialists defeated the Nazi's and were the vanguard for every major anti-racist, anti-sexist movement in every country throughout the 20th century, and still to this day.
So basically nearly anything mechanically is on the table even if it's not accurate to proper WWII wartime technique and strategy, but if an insignia or location is wrong, that's when the game steps over the line?
Artists aren't morally or legally obligated to make the vision of WWII that you want to see. Please stop advocating for censorship of their intended visions.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
How would that be a joke, do you think that we're not afforded the freedoms we have today significantly because of the men that fought and died for it in World War II?
you have flip flopped. You demand your phrase 'historical accuracy' and at the same time say you're ok with the inaccuracies I listed and ok with things like women on the front lines. Either you want 'historical accuracy' with all of it or you don't, can't have it both ways. Unless your only goal here is to see swastikas and not just actual 'historical accuracy' like you've been shouting.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
You think of it through purely as a US point of view thats the problem
Deckard Chapel
Banned
I think you must have misinterpreted what I just posted. I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative with what I said, I was merely explaining what it is I like about World War II games.
Nothing is ever 100% historically accurate to anything - especially War, but this is all we've got - the movies and games that come out that depict that subject matter. I enjoy every aspect of it and if I'm walking by something foreign that I know shouldn't have been there and is not accurate to the time or the place, then it does stand out to me. Nazi iconography would definitely fall into that category. I don't know how I can explain it better than that.
GenericUser
Member
Diversity is one of the most important parts in video gaming , so it's good to have female soldiers and black Nazis in the game. Good job sledgehammer.
Straight Edge
Member
Who is we?
Gabriel_Logan
Member
Are they seriously going to let you play as a Black Nazi? Lol