My argument was that in a game where you can freely choose what you are/have, if you include things that were the exception and dont have anything to limit the amount then it no longer is the exception like it was, you showed that there actually were women fighting in the war but just like you said it was an exception.Zhukov said:Okay.josemlopes said:And that is the SMG's argument all over again, did you saw the gameplay? Everyone was using smgs, although in the war not many soldiers had one. You have that justification that if you dig enough you see that at some point some used those weapons late in the war but that doesnt mean that everyone did all the time.Zhukov said:[snip]
I dont care much about having a female character playable, the weapon selection is a much bigger issue, but that argument of finding some exception doesnt really fit well in this context because unless there was something limiting the ratio (the weapons should have this shit) then it doesnt make sense since because in the game that wouldnt be an exception at all. Just like the submachine guns arent an exception and everyone fucking has one.
I think I understand what you're trying to say but I'm not certain because, mate, your post is a mess.
For whatever it's worth I personally would have preferred the game to have less automatic weapons. I would have made rifles the standard and given players pistols to fill the close range niche. Machine guns would be highly inaccurate unless fired from a set up position. However I understand why they went the way they did and it's not a deal breaker for me.
I used that to paralel with another issue that the game has with a similar source of the problem, having something that is an exception be widely used with no restrictions.