Analysts say Battlefield 5 may put EA's financial guidance at risk.

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
The Lunatic said:
I wasn't going to buy it any way, but, making a "Diverse" and wacky WW2 game is certainly not something that would sway me.
I honestly wouldn't care if I enjoyed Battlefield games. It's just a multiplayer shooter. And I don't usually concentrate on whether the enemy I'm shooting at is male or female. So I don't really see the need for any controversy here. Giving people an option to slightly tailor the game more to their liking shouldn't be seen as a bad thing. That's very immature. The only time that I would care would be if it was a single player game that advertised itself as historically accurate. Because then it would be an important aspect of the game. It's the same reason why I don't want guns in medieval games and things like that. But there's no rational reason why a fully functional adult would care about this "controversy".
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
erttheking said:
KingsGambit said:
I said not one person who was defending that game for portrayal of the wamin in the game would pre-order it, and I was right.
One person commented on your post saying that he was defending the game and pre-ordered it. He asked if you wanted the order number. Gonna have to ask you to knock it off with the revisionist history.

Also citation needed on it being because of the womez. I'm not sure why you want to frame it as gamers will refuse to buy a game with a woman on the cover in their already historically not that accurate games, but I want to give them some credit.
I'm sorry, I can't hear anything you said over the sound of being right and predicting precisely the disaster this game would be. In fact I might go and have a lie down, I'm quite exhausted from being so right.

Hades said:
If this narrative that Battlefield failed because it became a ''SJW game'' ever becomes mainstream then it would set a very nasty precedent.
It would set precisely the right precedent. Keep leftist ideology (or any ideology for that matter) out of games. Stop forcing "equity, diversity, inclusion" where they do not belong. If companies learn that, maybe they can return to making decent games instead of pandering to an audience that doesn't exist by making a product no one wants.

Hades said:
Perhaps next E3 EA would proudly present that their next Battlefield returns to its historically accurate roots while at the same time cutting their single player and putting in all the shady DLC practices COD apparently got away with.
Why? Because the only alternative to making an awful game is to make an awful game? Well, it is EA we're talking about so...

Hades said:
And the people who are so critical of Battlefield now would probably applaud this move and claim victory.
I don't know about applauding anything, but I have already claimed victory for predicting precisely how this game would turn out. And I will applaud every time an SJW game/movie fails because it's my hope we can be done with the leftist lunacy and return to some semblance of tolerance, rationality, decency and humour. I don't think it's likely, but at least I can hope and applaud.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,782
1,080
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
KingsGambit said:
I'm sorry, I can't hear anything you said over the sound of being right and predicting precisely the disaster this game would be. In fact I might go and have a lie down, I'm quite exhausted from being so right.
Except our ODST friend was pointing that you claimed that no-one here would pre-order it. As I've already demonstrated (see
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.1055577-EA-on-women-in-Battlefield-V-If-you-dont-like-it-dont-buy-it?page=7#24250254), you lied then, and you lied now.

It would set precisely the right precedent. Keep leftist ideology (or any ideology for that matter) out of games.
So basically your view is that games should never attempt to explore complex themes, that they should never attempt to do what every other art form has already achieved, and should be intellectually barren.

You're entitled to that view of course.

Stop forcing "equity, diversity, inclusion" where they do not belong. If companies learn that, maybe they can return to making decent games instead of pandering to an audience that doesn't exist by making a product no one wants.
BioShock is the example of a game that comes to mind that shows that exploring themes isn't mutually exclusive with good gameplay. Similarly, Overwatch is an example of "pandering" that became an absolute juggernaut (CoD falls into a similar category, just pandering to a different audience).

I don't know about applauding anything, but I have already claimed victory for predicting precisely how this game would turn out. And I will applaud every time an SJW game/movie fails because it's my hope we can be done with the leftist lunacy and return to some semblance of tolerance, rationality, decency and humour.
Seriously? You're arguing for "tolerance, rationality, decency, and humour," when the SQWs crying about females in BFV (and every other thing) have shown none of it? Gamergate's been called the precursor to the alt-right for a reason you know.

Need I also remind you that you've already been caught lying in this thread twice?
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
KingsGambit said:
I'm sorry, I can't hear anything you said over the sound of being right and predicting precisely the disaster this game would be. In fact I might go and have a lie down, I'm quite exhausted from being so right.
One, you still need a citation on this being because of the womez. "Because I say so" is not particularly peer reviewed.

Two.

Hawki said:
Except our ODST friend was pointing that you claimed that no-one here would pre-order it. As I've already demonstrated (see
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.1055577-EA-on-women-in-Battlefield-V-If-you-dont-like-it-dont-buy-it?page=7#24250254), you lied then, and you lied now.
So to ask a question.

Hawki said:
It would set precisely the right precedent. Keep leftist ideology (or any ideology for that matter) out of games.
So basically your view is that games should never attempt to explore complex themes, that they should never attempt to do what every other art form has already achieved, and should be intellectually barren.

You're entitled to that view of course.
This is a kind of depressing mindset I see in the gaming community a lot, the mindset that games are basically just toys and should be treated as such. It's odd that the people who "defend" gaming seem to have so little respect for it as a medium.
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
Hawki said:
None of which corresponds to your claim that the black guy on the front is meant to represent France.
In the end he wasn't, but DICE made the mistake of making it look that way for some time.

Overwatch, Horizon Zero Dawn, Uncharted Lost Legacy, Last of Us, Heroes of the Storm, Breath of the Wild, Perfect Dark, etc.

As far as I can tell, they come under the definition you're using, and all of them got to the 7-9/10 range of scores (on average).
Having gay/women/rainbow haired characters does not make the writers only interested in pushing politics and having no regard for quality (a critical component of being Woke)

-How was Ghostbusters targeted at a new demographic? The original film wasn't explicitly targeted at males.

-The audience was acting like children - I'd love to be able to tell arseholes to piss off as well. Might not be the best marketing strategy, but it's an understandable one.

-Them being women was never a marketing point. It was never expressed outside the film, and it's never expressed within the film.
-Wrong

-Wrong

-Wrong

Having a film with female leads shouldn't be controversial. I'm not surprised that it is (because that's par for the course these days), but it's an asinine train of logic.
Having female leads isn't controversial, making a shitty reboot no one wanted of a beloved franchise and having the marketing being "it's a remake, but this version has women instead", that is, rightfully, controversial.

How Amy Pascal runs things is irrelevant to what's within the movie itself - you avoided my question entirely.

Also, how is Sony "broke?" Last I checked it was still functioning.
You're really asking how things are run is connected with how things are run?

Also you have a very odd definition of functional (dead men walking must be full of life in your eyes), for the 2017 fiscal year the entire Sony conglomerate had a net loss of 700 million dollars, 1.4 billion of which came from the losses of their movie and television division. Expect Comcast or someone else to buy it off of them within the next few years.

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/12/the-story-behindmass-effect-andromedas-troubled-five-year-development/
I didn't say Kotaku didn't write an article, I said they didn't debunk anything. Which is easy when you're a rag like them who have no credibility and are on par with InfoWars in terms of reliability.

Source needed.
Look up who left the company's management and who entered its writing staff during 2009-2011, you'll see a lot of names that left where ones people attributed BioWare's success to and a lot of those that entered are ones its downfall has been attributed to.

BioWare's already planning ME5. Whether ME5 happens is another matter, but the downfall of Andromeda had nothing to do with "progressives."
Progressive writers, progressive management, progressive lead developers, not a liberal, conservative or libertarian in sight. So who could be behind this I wonder?



So, if I kneel to acknowledge that blacks are over-represented in police killings, I'm "disrespecting the anthem."

...yeah, I don't "get" sports. 0_0
See, you completely understand the ramblings that doesn't connect to reality in any way that Kapernick used as his excuse to be an asshole. People didn't like it because 1) it's not connected to reality and everyone and their dog knows it, and 2) no one wants fringe religious ideologies shoved into sports.

What about the Kelvinverse was "woke?"

Also, Star Trek is pretty "woke" already.
Why do people keep trying to pretend that Star Trek's over liberalism means that it somehow connects to an ideology that is more fundamentally opposed to liberalism then conservatism or libertarianism are?

Actually forget that, why do people keep thinking Trek fans will believe them when they claim Trek was progressive when it was about as opposed to modern progressivism as a liberal could possibly get?

Solo? What was "woke" about it?

Also, the downfall of Solo can be attributed to a number of factors, including:

-Last Jedi backlash (which is about the only thing that approaches being "woke," as asinine as that is)

-Proximity to Last Jedi (mere months rather than the previous 1 year gap)

-Terrible marketing

-A nightmare of a production schedule (that was well known before the film was released)

-Close proximity to Infinity War and Deadpool
I'll assume you didn't see Solo since you wouldn't be asking what's Woke about it if you had, but you also brought up a great point, Last Jedi, which really was the bulk of it really, was also Woke, and made the whole IP go Broke because of it.

It wasn't because of close proximity to Last Jedi, Infinity Wars and Deadpool, people are, especially during the summer, willing to go out each week to see a different movie if it interests them. Hell Marvel had its most profitable year for the MCU be the one that was most densely packed.

It also wasn't the nightmare of production, Force Awakens and Last Jedi are actually the only Star Wars movies to date that didn't have one, the only thing exceptional about it was how much it ended up costing Disney financially to produce the movie.

Again, what was "woke?" about Beyond? Sulu being gay? You mean that "blink and you'll miss it scene where he's with a guy?" Or is it because Jaylah isn't "alien of the week that Kirk employs 'diplomacy' on?

Also, the downfall of Beyond is harder to quantify, but it's generally acknowledged that it sufferred from poor marketing (not to mention awareness at all), plus a sense of burnout with the franchise. If anything, people have criticized the Kelvinverse for not dealing with complex themes, not for doing so (again, more "wokeness")
I don't think you have a proper grasp of what people mean when we call something Woke, exploring complex themes is rare for such works, and when it does happen you end up with The Last Jedi levels of quality (that is to say none, but those who are entertained by flashy effects and/or exploring ideas with the depth of a 7th grader's D- English essay). No one was calling for the Abrams movies to become more Woke, and hell when we got Trek that was Woke on Television it was so poorly received that Netflix cut how much they'd pay for the next season by a full half, and the last episode had a rushed ending made to try and desperately hook fans back for the second season on the promise that at least that one would be actually watchable.

Also, was there really burnout from 3 movies in 8 years? Star Wars had 3rd in 3 years before it started seeing diminished returns, while the MCU is at 21 in 10 years and the only financial flops it has had where television spinoffs (Agent Carter and Inhumans).

The problem with Star Trek isn't that we're burntout, it's that we want good Star Trek, the type modern hollywood is unwilling to make because it's a niche rather then the mainstream.
While it's true that Beyond and Solo underperformed, I've never seen anyone attribute that to "wokeness."
Underperformed is an understatement, they both lost 100 and 80 million for their companies respectively.

Go on Reddit, you'd be surprised.

Also, what was "woke" about Star Trek Discovery? I mean, I've seen the usual "casting minorities in lead roles, white genocide!" crap, but what in the show is actually "woke" (beyond the normal Star Trek standard)
Reddit is cancer and would be hyped by cancer, they sure didn't come out in force for STD's run given All Access ended 2017 a full 6 million subscribers short of what CBS hoped it would have.

As for the rest, fuck it, I'm going to boil things down about what you have shown until now:

-You don't understand what "Woke" means
-You don't understand why people had a problem with Ghostbusters (and why it subsequently flopped to the toon of 100 million dollars)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with NuWars (and why Solo subsequently flopped to the toon of 80 million dollars)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with STD (and why Netflix gave serious consideration to suing CBS over it)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with the Battlefield 5 trailer (and why the series popularity has collapsed because of it)
-You don't care to find out the answer to any of these things

And most importantly

-You don't let any of these facts get in the way of trying to frame the bulk of fans of these IPs as things they are not for reasons I can only assume are ideological given this site's rules.

I'm done with this thread.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
12,662
2,723
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
There's plenty of problems with the game, and I don't have any interest in getting it myself. But let's not pretend that a large portion of the uproar isn't "them ess-jay-dubbuyas wanna ruin my white-male power fantasies and take away my polygon tiddies". Anything that isn't specifically and solely aimed at them must be attacked and destroyed, lest more things they don't like (and fewer things they DO like) be made.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Zontar said:
As for the rest, fuck it, I'm going to boil things down about what you have shown until now:

-You don't understand what "Woke" means
-You don't understand why people had a problem with Ghostbusters (and why it subsequently flopped to the toon of 100 million dollars)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with NuWars (and why Solo subsequently flopped to the toon of 80 million dollars)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with STD (and why Netflix gave serious consideration to suing CBS over it)
-You don't understand why people have a problem with the Battlefield 5 trailer (and why the series popularity has collapsed because of it)
-You don't care to find out the answer to any of these things

And most importantly

-You don't let any of these facts get in the way of trying to frame the bulk of fans of these IPs as things they are not for reasons I can only assume are ideological given this site's rules.

I'm done with this thread.
Nobody I know disliked any of those things for perceived "woke" reasons. All those things listed are disliked for reasons that weren't anywhere near to EssJayDubya's ruining our stuff like say Ghostbusters just being a shit movie. One of my friends is a self-proclaimed biggest Ghostbuster fan ever and he had no complaints of its "woke-ness". Maybe BF5 is being hated for asinine EssJayDubya reasons but the online gamer community is quite "special" along with being a very vocal minority and the game hasn't even been released yet. Battlefront 2 most likely sold over 10 million yet if you just went by online forums, you'd think it bombed and didn't even sell a million. When you actually talk to real people in real life, the evil EssJayDubyas poisoning "our" stuff rarely is a talking point.
 

TheSapphireKnight

I hate Dire Wolves...
Dec 4, 2008
692
0
0
God this "controversy" is dumb. If this is how they reacted to some cosmetic shit in multiplayer, BF1 should have given them an aneurysm. Any whining about the hIsToRiCaL AcCuRaCy from that game was positively meek compared to this nonsense, but I shouldn't be surprised.

At most I can say the absence of RollieThePollie(The person previously responsible for BF trailers and videos) is sorely felt, but beyond that, I don't really have a problem with what has been shown so far. Any other reservations I have are relegated to EA's shitty business practices, especially with regards to monetization.

Its especially aggravating that this even a discussion given that BFV seems to be the first BF in a long time to actually trend towards a greater emphasis on teamwork and skill. Limited ammo, limited health regen, predicable recoil patterns, removing 3d spotting, etc. But there are prosthetic arms and womz in multiplayer so clearly the game is a complete write off.... /s
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,584
0
0
Zontar said:
Hawki said:
None of which corresponds to your claim that the black guy on the front is meant to represent France.
In the end he wasn't, but DICE made the mistake of making it look that way for some time.
No, Zontar.

DICE didn't make the mistake of forming that connection, you did. And you're probably the only person on the whole planet who did so.
 

Dansen

Master Lurker
Mar 24, 2010
925
31
33
I don said:
Hades said:
Between Battlefield and COD its COD that's doing the most wrong.
Come to think of it, COD:WW2 had playable women in multiplayer and sold well. The level of controversy wasn't as big as this, and I would say that the inaccurate guns and lack of swastikas was probably bigger than that.

Then again COD had playable women in multiplayer for some time now so it's no surprise really, but for BFV, this controversy is the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions BFV. At this point, the controversy is the game's identity.
If that is the case then the whole controversy is literally because a generic looking woman is on the cover instead of a man. Those uppity waminz need to know their place or they might start demanding rights! Its fucking pathetic.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Dansen said:
If that is the case then the whole controversy is literally because a generic looking woman is on the cover instead of a man. Those uppity waminz need to know their place or they might start demanding rights! Its fucking pathetic.
That and DICE had the gall to actually display one of said women in the trailers! I remember playing CoD: Ghosts on release and being pleasantly surprised that I could choose gender for my MP avatar, and that was back in 2013. So CoD has been doing this for the last five years, but it only becomes a problem when DICE decides to show people that avatar customization is an option.

So yeah, pathetic is a good description. Or desperate.
 

Tsun Tzu

Feuer! Sperrfeuer! Los!
Legacy
May 3, 2020
1,620
81
33
Country
Free-Dom
Gethsemani said:
Dansen said:
If that is the case then the whole controversy is literally because a generic looking woman is on the cover instead of a man. Those uppity waminz need to know their place or they might start demanding rights! Its fucking pathetic.
That and DICE had the gall to actually display one of said women in the trailers! I remember playing CoD: Ghosts on release and being pleasantly surprised that I could choose gender for my MP avatar, and that was back in 2013. So CoD has been doing this for the last five years, but it only becomes a problem when DICE decides to show people that avatar customization is an option.

So yeah, pathetic is a good description. Or desperate.
You...actually purchased Ghosts?



But, yes, this thread is everything I expected it to be.

At the end of the day though. EA is and continues to be shit.

Let's at least all come together and celebrate said shit getting kicked in.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
LostGryphon said:
You...actually purchased Ghosts?
I did. I'm sorry, Senpai. To my defense I had just gotten a swank new computer and there was really nothing else coming out in the "bombastic single player FPS" genre at the time. To my further defense I also did not like the game and it put me off CoD forever.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,782
1,080
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Zontar said:
In the end he wasn't, but DICE made the mistake of making it look that way for some time.
Um...

Squilookle said:
No, Zontar.

DICE didn't make the mistake of forming that connection, you did. And you're probably the only person on the whole planet who did so.
Yeah, what the flying fighter guy said.

Having gay/women/rainbow haired characters does not make the writers only interested in pushing politics and having no regard for quality (a critical component of being Woke)
Congratulations, you've finally given a definition of "Woke." One that is nebulous belong belief because there's little way of quantifying it.

Also, the accusation was levelled at those companies for the following reasons:

-Overwatch: "Tracergate" (bending down to SJWs), Pharah's Thunderbird dress (and subsequent creation of Sam), Tracer being gay (pushing the "gay agenda"), and the whole "Blizzard is pandering to minorities because the characters come from all over the world")

-Last of Us 2: Ellie is gay, Naughty Dog is "pushing the gay agenda."

-Horizon Zero Dawn: "Aloy is a female protagonist that outshines her male mentor. The Nora are matriarchial and give worship to a monotheistic god that's female. Guerilla is pushing a feminist agenda."

-Uncharted 4: "Naughty Dog made Nate's child female, and had Nadine beat Nate in a fight. Females aren't stronger than men. They're giving into feminists."

-Uncharted: Lost Legacy: Chloe and Nadine are the protagonists. They've replaced my series with girls. They're pandering to SJWs and feminists."

The whole "pandering to politics" argument is applied loosely and rarely stands up to scrutiny.

-Wrong

-Wrong

-Wrong
Right.

Right.

Right.

(I refuse to put more effort into my posts than you, if that's the best you can come up with.)

Having female leads isn't controversial, making a shitty reboot no one wanted of a beloved franchise and having the marketing being "it's a remake, but this version has women instead", that is, rightfully, controversial.
-People decided the reboot was shitty as soon as the trailer launched.

-The marketing never sold it as "it has women in it."

You're really asking how things are run is connected with how things are run?
Nice try to deflect the question.

Ever heard of the concept of separating art from the artist? Whatever Amy Pascal has or hasn't done, that doesn't automatically translate into the finished work.

Orson Scott Card has anti-LGBT views. His Enderverse novels are free of them. I can enjoy the art while disagreeing with the artist (similar to Heinlein and Starship Troopers for instance).

Yes, believe it or not I can enjoy things that have viewpoints I disagree with. Who knew?

Also you have a very odd definition of functional (dead men walking must be full of life in your eyes), for the 2017 fiscal year the entire Sony conglomerate had a net loss of 700 million dollars, 1.4 billion of which came from the losses of their movie and television division. Expect Comcast or someone else to buy it off of them within the next few years.
"Get woke go broke."

I'm well aware of Sony's financial situation. However, not only are they not broke, but you've named one movie that was supposedly "woke" (Ghostbusters).

Were the Spider-Man films? Hotel Transylvania? The Emoji Movie? Like, anything else Sony's produced recently?

I didn't say Kotaku didn't write an article, I said they didn't debunk anything.
So basically everyone they interviewed was lying?

Look up who left the company's management and who entered its writing staff during 2009-2011, you'll see a lot of names that left where ones people attributed BioWare's success to and a lot of those that entered are ones its downfall has been attributed to.
First of all, that's not how burden of proof works. The person making the claim is the one required to provide evidence.

Progressive writers, progressive management, progressive lead developers, not a liberal, conservative or libertarian in sight. So who could be behind this I wonder?
-Again, burden of proof is on you.

-Believe it or not, not many people are inclined to spend the time looking up writers' politics (and given how many people are involved in AAA design, that would be next to impossible - it's far easier to gauge the politics of an author or director rather than VG writing staff)

-Ah, so if they DID have liberals, conservatives, or liberatarians, it would be all right in the world. So, it's not the politics you object to, it's just that BioWare is supposedly pushing politics that you don't agree with (but I'm sure the 'politics' of CoD developers are all fine then)

Also, I asked ages ago what politics BioWare actually pushed in their games, you never answered.

I'll assume you didn't see Solo since you wouldn't be asking what's Woke about it if you had,
I have. And?

The only thing approaching "woke" is L3, and her droid rights (founded on legitimate grievances) are played for laughs. If anything, it's anti-woke, because no-one takes L3 seriously, and the film doesn't expect us to.

but you also brought up a great point, Last Jedi, which really was the bulk of it really, was also Woke,
How?

and made the whole IP go Broke because of it.
Star Wars isn't broke, and Solo's downfall can be attributed to things beside Last Jedi's "wokeness" (which isn't even present)

It wasn't because of close proximity to Last Jedi, Infinity Wars and Deadpool, people are, especially during the summer, willing to go out each week to see a different movie if it interests them.
Not in my experience - movies are expensive as hell over here. A single family outing to the films can cost up to $100.

It also wasn't the nightmare of production, Force Awakens and Last Jedi are actually the only Star Wars movies to date that didn't have one, the only thing exceptional about it was how much it ended up costing Disney financially to produce the movie.
So, 50/50, and the ones that didn't have the nightmare production grossed far more.

...you're kinda shooting down your own point, you realize that, right?

I don't think you have a proper grasp of what people mean when we call something Woke,
It took you ages to produce one, and has been applied to all sorts of media indiscriminately. Also, if we do define woke as "pushing politics over quality," again, that's so nebulous that even categorizing something as "woke" is redundant because it can apply to just about anything, as long as there's any kind of thematic complexity to it (and not even that - Ghostbusters 2016 was good, but its themes were hardly complex)

exploring complex themes is rare for such works,
-Star Trek I: Questions of faith, what it means to be human

-Star Trek II: Themes of death, generational divide, revenge

-Star Trek III: Not much

-Star Trek IV: Again

-Star Trek V: Themes of (blind) faith and religious fanaticism

-Star Trek VI: Heavy reference/allusion to the end of the Cold War, of the need to move on and embrace the future rather than be chained by the past

-Star Trek VII: Themes of time, reality vs. desire

-Star Trek VIII: Revenge, pragmatism vs. aspiration

-Star Trek IX: Haven't seen

-Star Trek X: Nature vs. nurture

-Star Trek XI: No theme

-Star Trek XII: Allusions to the morality/legality of drone warfare, questions of betterment vs. pragmatism, etc.

-Star Trek XIII: No major theme

None of these are particuarly deep themes, but the majority of Star Trek films have had themes of some kind, and a common complaint of the Kelvinverse is that action has come before themes/ideas.

No one was calling for the Abrams movies to become more Woke,
That's like saying "no-one was calling for the Abrams movies to be bad."

"Woke," again, can be applied to anything at this point, because your definition of it lacks the means of being quantified. Basically:

-I don't like X

-X has something in it I don't like

-X is therefore "woke."

and hell when we got Trek that was Woke on Television
How was Discovery "woke?"

it was so poorly received that Netflix cut how much they'd pay for the next season by a full half, and the last episode had a rushed ending made to try and desperately hook fans back for the second season on the promise that at least that one would be actually watchable.
Sure, I'll take your word for it (this time), but again, how is Discovery "woke?" If anything, it kind of underexplores its themes.

Also, was there really burnout from 3 movies in 8 years?
Already said that Beyond is hard to quantify.

Star Wars had 3rd in 3 years before it started seeing diminished returns, while the MCU is at 21 in 10 years and the only financial flops it has had where television spinoffs (Agent Carter and Inhumans).
The MCU isn't comparable to Star Wars in a key aspect, and that's that the MCU has far more of a variety in its (film) output. There's far more difference between Ant-Man and the Wasp and Black Panther vs. one Star Wars film and another.

Reddit is cancer and would be hyped by cancer, they sure didn't come out in force for STD's run given All Access ended 2017 a full 6 million subscribers short of what CBS hoped it would have.
You didn't answer my question.

-You don't understand what "Woke" means
"Pushing politics before quality."

What I don't think you understand is that that's a charge that can be levied at anything, because not only is quality in the eye of the beholder, but "politics" in this context can translate to anything from themes to the presence of anything/anyone.

For instance, take Starship Troopers (book or film, either's fine). Let's say I didn't like it. I can therefore say it's woke, accusing it of pushing politics before quality. Only difference between the two is that the politics being pushed are different between the novel and the film.

I can therefore extend that argument to any work in existence that deals with any kind of theme (or in the case of Ghostbusters, barely any theme). Saying "it's woke" isn't an argument. It's a means of avoiding argument, because instead of articulating why you dislike the work, you simply levy the charge of "woke." Which, as we've seen, can be levied at anything.

...seriously, what was political about Ghostbusters 2016? FFS, the original Ghostbusters is more political then, and only if you squint at it ("small business being stamped on by big government, bad stuff happens").

You've already indicated that you spend time checking the politics of a company's writing staff, you sure you're not looking for stuff that isn't there?

(On a side note, hands up Escapist, does anyone?)

-You don't understand why people had a problem with Ghostbusters (and why it subsequently flopped to the toon of 100 million dollars)
No, I really don't.

If people said "I saw the film and didn't like it" sure, I mean, I liked it, but not everyone is going to dislike or like the same thing. What I don't get is the backlash the film received beforehand.

-You don't understand why people have a problem with NuWars (and why Solo subsequently flopped to the toon of 80 million dollars)
I've given the reasons why Solo flopped. And actually, I do understand some of the problems with NuWars (Force Awakens is a retread of New Hope, Rogue One only gets it together in the third act, Last Jedi is a mix of high highs and low lows, Solo is simply "fun"), but some of the reasons being cited (especially Last Jedi) make so sense to me.

-You don't understand why people have a problem with STD (and why Netflix gave serious consideration to suing CBS over it)
Nice tactic, you've said "you don't understand why people have a problem with X" rather than "you don't understand why X is woke."

Also, Discovery. I can understand why some people have a problem with it (it's certainly imperfect). But again, I don't see any evidence of it being "woke" (which again, as you've demonstrated, can be levied at anything in any way).

Don't feel bad. That's par for the course with lots of people.

(Also, source needed on the lawsuit thing.)

-You don't understand why people have a problem with the Battlefield 5 trailer (and why the series popularity has collapsed because of it)
And once again you've employed the dishonest tactic of shifting goalposts. This thread was originally about Battlefield V, not the trailer. The problems with the trailer (short version: it's a mess) aren't 1:1 applicable to the issue now (females).

-You don't care to find out the answer to any of these things
That's not how the world works Zontar.

If I say "X is bad," and you ask me why, and I say "go find out the answer," then, what?

If you want to state that something is "woke," it's your burden of proof to cite examples of it being so. It's not my job to look at a piece of work, and adjust my perspective, to suit someone else's.

Let's use Star Trek Discovery as an example. If you said "Discovery is flawed because its first episodes are rushed, Burnham is unlikable (but gets better), the spore drive feels out of place, the colour scheme is iffy, it doesn't explore its themes as well as it could, and it doesn't FEEL like Star Trek," then I'd say "I agree with some of that, disagree with some of that, but at least understand where you're coming from."

If you say "Star Trek Discovery is woke" or "Star Trek Discovery puts politics before quality," then it's your burden to provide examples to back up your claim.

And most importantly

-You don't let any of these facts get in the way of trying to frame the bulk of fans of these IPs as things they are not for reasons I can only assume are ideological given this site's rules.
I'm not the one framing anyone. To quote your own post:

does happen you end up with The Last Jedi levels of quality (that is to say none, but those who are entertained by flashy effects and/or exploring ideas with the depth of a 7th grader's D- English essay).
So anyone who likes Last Jedi only does so because of the effects.

You're the one projecting. Not me.

You're the one accusing things of being "woke." Not me.

You're the one making claims and expecting the audience to look up the proof. Not me.

You're the one who brought ideology into this, demanding that writing staff meet your preferred political alignment. Not me.

I'm done with this thread.
Good. And take some time for self-reflection while you're at it.

Dansen said:
If that is the case then the whole controversy is literally because a generic looking woman is on the cover instead of a man. Those uppity waminz need to know their place or they might start demanding rights! Its fucking pathetic.
Fun fact, she's actually one of the characters from the war stories mode.

Gethsemani said:
So yeah, pathetic is a good description. Or desperate.
Why not both?

(I'd put that taco gif, but I'm too tired right now.)
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,531
1,618
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Gethsemani said:
Dansen said:
If that is the case then the whole controversy is literally because a generic looking woman is on the cover instead of a man. Those uppity waminz need to know their place or they might start demanding rights! Its fucking pathetic.
That and DICE had the gall to actually display one of said women in the trailers! I remember playing CoD: Ghosts on release and being pleasantly surprised that I could choose gender for my MP avatar, and that was back in 2013. So CoD has been doing this for the last five years, but it only becomes a problem when DICE decides to show people that avatar customization is an option.

So yeah, pathetic is a good description. Or desperate.
I think this is the most important part of this posts and tells you why this is happening now and not then
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,782
1,080
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
trunkage said:
I think this is the most important part of this posts and tells you why this is happening now and not then
In the interests of fairness, I can point out that Ghosts depicts a near-future conflict where women can (presumably) serve, whereas WWII is one where they rarely served on the frontlines.

But before anyone has a "gotcha" moment, I'll point out that:

-Battlefield V is already taking liberties, ranging from weapons, to the replacement of historical forces with a-historical ones.

-Playing as a female is completely optional.

-Said option is confined to multiplayer, which has far more leeway to take liberties.
 

Hades

Elite Member
May 7, 2020
1,404
709
118
Country
The Netherlands
KingsGambit said:
erttheking said:
KingsGambit said:
I said not one person who was defending that game for portrayal of the wamin in the game would pre-order it, and I was right.
One person commented on your post saying that he was defending the game and pre-ordered it. He asked if you wanted the order number. Gonna have to ask you to knock it off with the revisionist history.

Also citation needed on it being because of the womez. I'm not sure why you want to frame it as gamers will refuse to buy a game with a woman on the cover in their already historically not that accurate games, but I want to give them some credit.
I'm sorry, I can't hear anything you said over the sound of being right and predicting precisely the disaster this game would be. In fact I might go and have a lie down, I'm quite exhausted from being so right.

Hades said:
If this narrative that Battlefield failed because it became a ''SJW game'' ever becomes mainstream then it would set a very nasty precedent.
It would set precisely the right precedent. Keep leftist ideology (or any ideology for that matter) out of games. Stop forcing "equity, diversity, inclusion" where they do not belong. If companies learn that, maybe they can return to making decent games instead of pandering to an audience that doesn't exist by making a product no one wants.

Hades said:
Perhaps next E3 EA would proudly present that their next Battlefield returns to its historically accurate roots while at the same time cutting their single player and putting in all the shady DLC practices COD apparently got away with.
Why? Because the only alternative to making an awful game is to make an awful game? Well, it is EA we're talking about so...

Hades said:
And the people who are so critical of Battlefield now would probably applaud this move and claim victory.
I don't know about applauding anything, but I have already claimed victory for predicting precisely how this game would turn out. And I will applaud every time an SJW game/movie fails because it's my hope we can be done with the leftist lunacy and return to some semblance of tolerance, rationality, decency and humour. I don't think it's likely, but at least I can hope and applaud.
Its really quite simple. Putting those icky females in your games is an inconvenience at the very worst and even that's very subjective. Even having a black transgender woman with Bi racial parents running around ancient Rome wouldn't be as bad as what Activation is doing. It would be utter nonsense of course but the core gameplay shouldn't be effected.

Its different with COD since they ripped out a core feature and risk popularizing the removal of single player modes from tripple A games. What they are doing is by far more dangerous than appealing to the left no matter what side of the culture war nonsense you're on.

Activation getting rewarded for setting incredible nasty precedents while EA gets punished for merely adding females sends an incredibly dangerous message. It would mean that anti consumer practices and the removal of single player would be deemed less important than this culture war nonsense. This is something publishers can thus exploit and if activision gets away with their schemes it will heavily encourage EA to follow suit.
 

Kreett

Constant Contrarian
Nov 20, 2009
391
0
0
Windknight said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
It's almost like the developers told their audience that they are uneducated/on the wrong side of history and should not buy it if they didn't like what they saw. Looks like they got exactly what they wanted, congrats EA/DICE!
(shrugs) if you think women didn't fight in world war two, then yes you are both. Maybe not the politest way to put it, but its the truth.

I'm laying this more at the leftover stench of Battlefront II debacle. The pay to win loot box BS has hurt confidence and trust, if EA had any in the first place.
Women did fight in world war II yes but, I will bet several body parts on that there were no women with prosthetic arms serving as snipers in the British army, and I'm also fairly certain the British army didn't allow soldiers to alter their uniforms so all of them are wrong, oh and the guy with a Katana, how did a brit get a bloody katana?
 

Gone Rampant

New member
Feb 12, 2012
422
0
0
Um, good. Pre order culture has sucked for years, that's what people have been saying for years. Why is this a bad thing?
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Kreett said:
Women did fight in world war II yes but, I will bet several body parts on that there were no women with prosthetic arms serving as snipers in the British army, and I'm also fairly certain the British army didn't allow soldiers to alter their uniforms so all of them are wrong, oh and the guy with a Katana, how did a brit get a bloody katana?
In the same way that British soldiers got their hands on an Austrian single copy prototype SMG (the Hellreigel) or Russian soldiers got their hands on Italian prototype semi-automatic rifles that never got into full scale production (Cei-Rigotti): Because the developers included it, even if it wasn't 'realistic'.

I'll be honest, I don't see the big deal about including paraplegic women or guys in heavily altered uniforms wielding swords from a different culture when it is done in a game that let's both sides field a number of A7V's each round that would come to about half the total production run of that tank. If you can stomach all the divergences from historical authenticity that Battlefield has done so far, but draw the line at women, minorities and altered uniforms, that's saying more about you then the game.