Battlefield V reveal- your thoughts?

[EternallyBored]

If that lady is the character model for a whole class in the game, then a) you have a way too distinct player model for a class that is going to picked by essentially a quarter of the server and b) every single player using that class is going to have a bionic arm, even if you are a fan of this aesthetic you can't say that won't look weird.

If it's just a customizable thing, then you're essentially turning someone's grave injury into a fucking cosmetic item, that doesn't sound right.

I now have a feeling this lady is just going to be in singleplayer or something.

DICE has said that all soldiers in multiplayer will be customizable, so she, just like the rest of the outrageous crew (seriously, no one has anything to say about the paratrooper with the Katana, the black guy in a weird mix of tanker, paratrooper and infantry gear and two pairs of goggles or the dude running around in a tank top and non-regulation beard?) is probably meant as a showcase of what kind of customization you can achieve in multiplayer.

Besides, getting hung up on a prosthetic as a customization option as distasteful is pretty weird when you are talking about a game that is essentially providing light entertainment of the worst conflict in human history, that claimed some 70+ million lives worldwide.

To add to this, the trailer is definitely multiplayer and as far as we know none of the people shown are in single player. We see people in the trailer get shot and come back as well as the squad spawn notification at one point, the multiplayer UI shows up after the plane crashes showing the conquest control points and tickets up top.

Given the tone of the war stories from BF1 (dogfighting around zeppelins over Britain, and the juggernaut armor charge with a machine gun), the single player characters are almost definitely going to be pretty pulpy compared to more sim games like Verdun, Red Orchestra, or what I've heard about Post Scriptum, but I would guess they are going to be more grounded than the multiplayer customization.

The thing I think is throwing people in this trailer, other than the customization, is likely that the last couple BF reveals have been more about brief glimpses of combat and vehicles or shots from the single player campaign. The BF1 reveal was mostly just brief shots of tanks, planes, horses, and boats. BF 3 & 4 were both just shots of the single player campaign and brief shots of generic modern military action. I doubt people will care much when the actual game comes out, like how COD WWII had an uptick in sales despite complaints about being able to play as a Black female German soldier in multiplayer. It's more a case of the games audience has certain expectations about these types of trailers, so tends to jump the gun a lot when a company defies those expectations.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

 

[Worgen]

Looks like a pre-rendered trailer. Most of the movements in the game don't look like how things move in an fps so it doesn't really tell us anything but that its ww2. Eitherway, it won't be as good as Bad Company 2 was, partially since it won't be on steam so I won't be getting it. Still not gonna fuck with origin, just not gonna do it.

 

[Erttheking]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

Night witches don?t count? Also I guess we?re apologists for not grinding our teeth at one historically inaccurate thing in a series that isn?t historically accurate. While naysayers ignore far bigger historical fuck ups

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

Night witches don?t count? Also I guess we?re apologists for not grinding our teeth at one historically inaccurate thing in a series that isn?t historically accurate. While naysayers ignore far bigger historical fuck ups

Count them in, but Russia's stunts were wholly segregated, primarily propagandistic and more often than not the exception than the rule. There were no women fighting on the battlefront on the Western front for the French, British or American forces. And I think that to pretend that they did belittles their actual homefront/sideline service, which was just as valuable.

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

If you want to play a historically accurate game you shouldn't be playing a battlefield game

I'm all about dumb fun. I don't even think WW2 is a touchy subject. I liked Inglorious Basterds. I liked Wolfenstein: The New Order, which features tons of female soldiers and officers. But Battlefield has always had a closer relationship to reality and the effect of some choice but very deliberate inaccuracies is uncanny. Context is everything.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

So like, do we just not get notifs anymore when people quote our posts? I haven't been on here in a while, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

DICE has said that all soldiers in multiplayer will be customizable, so she, just like the rest of the outrageous crew (seriously, no one has anything to say about the paratrooper with the Katana, the black guy in a weird mix of tanker, paratrooper and infantry gear and two pairs of goggles or the dude running around in a tank top and non-regulation beard?) is probably meant as a showcase of what kind of customization you can achieve in multiplayer.

Besides, getting hung up on a prosthetic as a customization option as distasteful is pretty weird when you are talking about a game that is essentially providing light entertainment of the worst conflict in human history, that claimed some 70+ million lives worldwide.

I actually just noticed the katana guy and the black dude, although considering how much spotlight they gave bionic lady (they literally zoom in on her claw at some times), you can hardly blame me. The katana thing... what the fuck is that shit.

Anyway, you do have a point. This is a first for me, what other game has ever given you the option to be an amputee with a prosthetic arm? I mean, the obvious reason why most people are okay with WWII is because of the passage of time. But injuries that result in the loss of a limb still happen today, and I wonder what a person with a prosthetic arm would feel about what happened to them being turned into decoration in a video game.

I didn't notice her using a bolt action, but I agree, that would be difficult as fuck to use with one working hand.

Not really. Any shooter worth their damn, especially of the sharpshooter or sniper variety, will cycle the bolt without taking the rifle off their shoulder. When you do it that way you are using your shoulder as a brace for the rifle, which means that whether you've got a stable grip on the front hand guard or not isn't important. The point of doing it like that is to preserve your aim for a follow up shot and it is pretty basic drill for bolt action rifles.[/quote]

Huh? But how would you keep the rifle braced against your shoulder to cycle the bolt? Also I meant it would be hard to actually aim the rifle. Surely a bionic arm is not at all ideal for accurate sniping.

Besides that, there were part of the trailer where bionic lady was actually carrying the rifle with her prosthetic arm, and I'm no expert on WWII era prosthesis, but I don't think that should be possible?

EDIT: This prosthetic arm is bugging me so much! I've moved on from wondering why it's in the game to how the heck its going to work.

For example, just reloading your weapons. Pistols, I've seen people reload one handed. I even watched a video where a guy reloaded an AK with one hand. But these all involved a reload process that takes way longer than a conventional reload. Is DICE going to take that into account? If they do, why would anyone choose to have it as an option?

I know I'm really overthinking this but I just got on break and I'm really bored.

 

[Erttheking]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

Night witches don?t count? Also I guess we?re apologists for not grinding our teeth at one historically inaccurate thing in a series that isn?t historically accurate. While naysayers ignore far bigger historical fuck ups

Count them in, but Russia's stunts were wholly segregated, primarily propagandistic and more often than not the exception than the rule. There were no women fighting on the battlefront on the Western front for the French, British or American forces. And I think that to pretend that they did belittles their actual homefront/sideline service, which was just as valuable.

The French Resistance would like a word with you. Though I concede to you on the technical aspects of your argument for the rest.

As for belittling, Battlefield and Call of Duty kind of belittle everything about the wars they cover, it kind of reached that point where Battlefield 1942 had a map where one side was playing as Nazis gunning down allied soldiers landing on Ohama Beach, or generally just allowing armies to spawn with weapons used mainly by the enemy and aim SMGs with ungodly accuracy.

I mean seriously, come the hell on. It's arbitrary as all hell to call this belittling and not take issue with everything else war shooters have been doing since their inception. Isn't it belittling to everyone who was wounded to imply that you can heal up with just a med kit or ten seconds behind cover? Isn't it belittling to engineers to imply that you can fix a nearly destroyed tank by holding a repair tool on it for twenty seconds? Isn't it belittling to gunners to have people running around and shoulder firing LMGs with pin point accuracy?

Also, Battlefield stopped being anywhere close to historically accurate with Battlefield 1...oh who am I kidding, it was gone long before that.

https://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Amazing+bf4+kill+i+made+this+out+of+a+youtube_0af43a_5164751.gif

Honestly the only game series that I ever saw take the attempt to portray warfare as realistically as possible were Verdun and Red Orchestra.

 

[EternallyBored]

Huh? But how would you keep the rifle braced against your shoulder to cycle the bolt? Also I meant it would be hard to actually aim the rifle. Surely a bionic arm is not at all ideal for accurate sniping.

Besides that, there were part of the trailer where bionic lady was actually carrying the rifle with her prosthetic arm, and I'm no expert on WWII era prosthesis, but I don't think that should be possible?

EDIT: This prosthetic arm is bugging me so much! I've moved on from wondering why it's in the game to how the heck its going to work.

For example, just reloading your weapons. Pistols, I've seen people reload one handed. I even watched a video where a guy reloaded an AK with one hand. But these all involved a reload process that takes way longer than a conventional reload. Is DICE going to take that into account? If they do, why would anyone choose to have it as an option?

I know I'm really overthinking this but I just got on break and I'm really bored.

They make attachments for this, otherwise you get the hook wedged towards the front as best you can or open the hook and clamp it around the front, some of those prosthetics have adjustable grip strength, works best with a notch or handgrip you can use to keep the rifle snug against the shoulder, then use your hand to cycle the bolt.

It's possible, though yeah, I doubt any amputee could match the speed and precision of even a moderately a trained shooter.

As for DICE, I seriously doubt the prosthetic will effect anything gameplay wise, like how Sea of Thieves lets you have a hook hand but it doesn't effect anything beyond visuals, the most I would expect would be that they might change some of the reload animations to make them look at least passably believable with the hook involved.

Considering in the past their normal reload animations, especially for heavy weapons, trend towards unbelievably fast and sometimes impossible to pull off moving or standing up, they've never really been concerned about weapon realism in the past beyond, "did it exist as a real weapon or prototype at some point", after that, as long as the weapon obeys archetypes (SMG, shotgun, etc.) they'll adjust distance, accuracy, round capacity, and reload speed with game play rather than any sort of realism in mind. Some of the BF1 weapons would be almost impossible to reload from a standing position, generally DICE has always gone for arcadey game play over simulation level realism.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

The fact that there's a Churchill Gun Carrier seeing combat (and going 2-3 times as fast as a Churchill could) shows just what level of realism DICE is working with.

Seriously, if even a single British secret operative lady from the SOE linked up with allied line troops and shot a nazi, that's one more Nazi than any CGC ever killed.

 

[BreakfastMan]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

If you want to play a historically accurate game you shouldn't be playing a battlefield game

To shamelessly steal a point made in a post on reddit that someone linked me in a discord group, it isn't that the games aren't historically accurate; they never were and never would be. However, the marketing and presentation of the game had the "air" of accuracy, and that is what is important. That supposed "accuracy" was the fantasy being sold. Like, when you watch an add for a sports car they show you attractive people driving around big cities being important; they don't show you the reality, that these things are mostly bought by balding, out of shape, middle-aged guys in a midlife crisis.

 

[I can't enter my old name]

it kind of reached that point where Battlefield 1942 had a map where one side was playing as Nazis gunning down allied soldiers landing on Ohama Beach

Man, that's like everyone's dream back then after watching Saving Private Ryan. MoH:AA did it first, and it was amazing. MoH:AA also did a lot of crazy things like a level where you drive a captured Tiger II. Also in that game you could play as a female soldier in multiplayer.

Also, Battlefield stopped being anywhere close to historically accurate with Battlefield 1...oh who am I kidding, it was gone long before that.

Yeah, you can do ridiculous things in Battlefield, but then again you could also do ridiculous things in ARMA. These aren't really things you are supposed to do, but that's the fun part.


For shooters, there are some concessions that you have to make, for example ARMA has medkits. You want to avoid situations where people blow themselves up with grenades so they can respawn with a new pair of legs.

Honestly the only game series that I ever saw take the attempt to portray warfare as realistically as possible were Verdun and Red Orchestra.

Red Orchestra series was borked after RO2. It's a bunch of nonsense where people run around with OP MG42s and MG-Rambo their way into your base and spawn camp you, and then get 100 kills at the end of the game. The worst part is that the MG42 wasn't even used in Stalingrad, which makes you realize how important historical accuracy and realism is.

 

[Elijin]

Did you really just compare obvious mod content against regular content to make a 'Silly thing happen everywhere' point?
You are bad at making points.

 

[I can't enter my old name]

Did you really just compare obvious mod content against regular content to make a 'Silly thing happen everywhere' point?
You are bad at making points.

It looked like in-game objects thrown together in the level editor to me. Silly things do not happen everywhere, just like in Battlefield highlights of trickshots are not representative of gameplay.

Here's something better I guess.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

Night witches don?t count? Also I guess we?re apologists for not grinding our teeth at one historically inaccurate thing in a series that isn?t historically accurate. While naysayers ignore far bigger historical fuck ups

Count them in, but Russia's stunts were wholly segregated, primarily propagandistic and more often than not the exception than the rule. There were no women fighting on the battlefront on the Western front for the French, British or American forces. And I think that to pretend that they did belittles their actual homefront/sideline service, which was just as valuable.

The French Resistance would like a word with you.

The French Resistance, like every other form of Resistance, was a collection of thinly-connected militia cells working on urban guerrilla warfare. They weren't part of the military, they weren't soldiers and they certainly did NOT fight in the battlefront nor engaged in direct military combat (guerrilla warfare and sabotage more like), which is the point I'm making: what little fighting women did in WW2 was confined to a few segregated operations on the Russian homefront, mostly designed as propaganda stunts. And on the subject of French Resistance:

Despite opposing the collaborationist regime, the French Resistance generally sympathised with its antifeminism and did not encourage the participation of women in war and politics, following, in the words of historian Henri Nogueres, "a notion of inequality between the sexes as old as our civilisation and as firmly implanted in the Resistance as it was elsewhere in France".Consequently, women in the Resistance were less numerous than men and averaged only 11% of the members in the formal networks and movements

As to the other blatant inaccuracies you point out: of course I expect a game to simplify history, what it shouldn't do in all seriousness is contradict it while pretending otherwise.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

This is patently false. Like, it is so wrong it isn't even funny. Go read War Does Not Have a Woman's Face by Alexievich, just so that you get an idea just how diverse the military service of Soviet women during the Great Patriotic War was. She interviews women who were deployed in a wide range of roles ranging from nurses to combat medics to snipers to truck drivers to tank commanders to combat pilots (and a lot of other roles), in all theaters of the Soviet western front. There's an irony to the fact that you are perpetrating post-war Soviet propaganda that was meant to downplay women's contributions to the military war effort.

So yeah, women saw combat action in the Great Patriotic War. Marina Raskova, a famous Soviet flight pioneer, was killed when her Po-2 crashed during a forced landing in 1943. She crashed while leading the combat operations of the 588th Night Bomber Aviation Regiment, which was an all women regiment. Raskova was instrumental in setting up the 586th, 587th and 588th aviation regiments, all initially all women. So that "photo op" unit you are talking about is, to be polite about it, fucking hogwash.

 

[Erttheking]

I like how all the Battlefield V apologists are running around scrounging the same 4 or 5 Russian female snipers to prove a point that, sorry, just isn't true. Aside from that one Russian unit that mostly did photo ops there were no female soldiers deployed on the battlefront, nor did they engage in direct combat during WW2. Most Allied forces didn't even allow it.

Night witches don?t count? Also I guess we?re apologists for not grinding our teeth at one historically inaccurate thing in a series that isn?t historically accurate. While naysayers ignore far bigger historical fuck ups

Count them in, but Russia's stunts were wholly segregated, primarily propagandistic and more often than not the exception than the rule. There were no women fighting on the battlefront on the Western front for the French, British or American forces. And I think that to pretend that they did belittles their actual homefront/sideline service, which was just as valuable.

The French Resistance would like a word with you.

The French Resistance, like every other form of Resistance, was a collection of thinly-connected militia cells working on urban guerrilla warfare. They weren't part of the military, they weren't soldiers and they certainly did NOT fight in the battlefront nor engaged in direct military combat (guerrilla warfare and sabotage more like), which is the point I'm making: what little fighting women did in WW2 was confined to a few segregated operations on the Russian homefront, mostly designed as propaganda stunts. And on the subject of French Resistance:

Despite opposing the collaborationist regime, the French Resistance generally sympathised with its antifeminism and did not encourage the participation of women in war and politics, following, in the words of historian Henri Nogueres, "a notion of inequality between the sexes as old as our civilisation and as firmly implanted in the Resistance as it was elsewhere in France".Consequently, women in the Resistance were less numerous than men and averaged only 11% of the members in the formal networks and movements

As to the other blatant inaccuracies you point out: of course I expect a game to simplify history, what it shouldn't do in all seriousness is contradict it while pretending otherwise.

Well Geth seems like she wants to have some words with you on the Russian front, I never claimed the French Resistance to be uber feminist, and the inaccuracies aren't the simplifying of history, it's flat-out inaccurate. Kind of like when, in COD WW 2, on the D-day battle between Americans and Germans, you can find Russian sub-machine guns lying around. Or how in that trailer, there's a British tank that never actually saw combat. Ever. Or how in Battlefield 1 they had no interest in making it actually feel at all like the first world war, because otherwise they might have to change up how the game mechanics work and actually make the game feel like Verdun.

Also, you're the second person claiming that this game is attempting to portray history accurately. Where did you get that impression?

 

[Sassafrass]

The trailer made it look fucking ridiculous and this is why I'm intrigued by it.

I don't give a fuck it has women in it, nor that people are running around with prosthetic arms. I mean, the fact you can apparently catch a grenade out of the air, throw it back, have someone else shoot it out of the air and take out a plane with the resulting explosion signals to me they're going a bit OTT with it, and that's fine by me if they do go that way. I do eventually look forward to the open beta so I can see if it is actually like that.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

I don't really have any thoughts on this since I don't do MMSs (modern military shooters), they just aren't my bag (baby). I just wanted to be involved in a thread where the word "clusterfuck" has been used quite frequently. It's one of my favourite words and I'm enjoying seeing it applied here. Just reading it makes me happy.

 

[Silvanus]

As to the other blatant inaccuracies you point out: of course I expect a game to simplify history, what it shouldn't do in all seriousness is contradict it while pretending otherwise.

Then, again, you shouldn't be playing Battlefield (or, in fact, pretty much any game based around WW2). The number of liberties they require is absolutely colossal, and unavoidable if they want to make a game that's an ounce of fun to play.

One requires utterly arbitrary and nonsensical historical blinkers in order to believe that a female combatant is "uncanny", but not to feel the same way about constant action and combat in the field of war.

 

[sXeth]

If that lady is the character model for a whole class in the game, then a) you have a way too distinct player model for a class that is going to picked by essentially a quarter of the server and b) every single player using that class is going to have a bionic arm, even if you are a fan of this aesthetic you can't say that won't look weird.

If it's just a customizable thing, then you're essentially turning someone's grave injury into a fucking cosmetic item, that doesn't sound right.

I now have a feeling this lady is just going to be in singleplayer or something.

DICE has said that all soldiers in multiplayer will be customizable, so she, just like the rest of the outrageous crew (seriously, no one has anything to say about the paratrooper with the Katana, the black guy in a weird mix of tanker, paratrooper and infantry gear and two pairs of goggles or the dude running around in a tank top and non-regulation beard?) is probably meant as a showcase of what kind of customization you can achieve in multiplayer.

Well yeah, its EA. There's a -0.00000001% chance this won't have some microtransaction stuff in it, and random cosmetics are the one that doesn't murder their franchise. And you run out of "Realistic" cosmetics pretty fast (besides the general market preferring to be obnoxious looking clowns and so on). I"m more surprised its a relatively grounded prosthetic arm and not some pre-order Winter soldier skin or something.