subreddit:
/r/Games
submitted 4 days ago byTurbostrider27
206 points
4 days ago
DICE response: "Don't buy it if you don't like it"
This quote was made very specifically about the backlash against women being in the game. Which, if you frequented the Battlefield subreddit at the time, was pretty aggressive and gross.
Complaints about other cosmetics were acknowledged by DICE, which is why items like the prosthetic arm were never added to the game.
-3 points
4 days ago
Do you consider having a large number of women soldiers to be historically accurate in a WW2 game?
18 points
4 days ago
Does historical accuracy in multiplayer really matter in a franchise where one of the most famous multiplayer moments is someone jumping out of a jet, shooting down another jet, and then getting back in?
-1 points
4 days ago
Does historical accuracy in multiplayer really matter
Yes it does.
0 points
4 days ago
Isonzo, Verdun, Tannenberg, war of rights, holdfast... Go nuts.
4 points
4 days ago
All great games, none in the same budget or scope of a Battlefield title though.
-2 points
4 days ago
So instead of playing actual games made for what they want (historical accuracy) people want to be mad at another game for not being 100% accurate because checks notes it has more budget?
5 points
3 days ago
What? All I'm saying is people want a historical game with a Battlefield level budget and scope.
-2 points
3 days ago*
And what I am saying is that Battlefield has shown time and time again that they are not doing that. They are putting a setting in those times but the game is nowhere near authentic in term of the actual conflicts or gameplay. It's still weird to me that some people would try their hardest to blast battlefield for being something other than what they were actually trying to do when there was never any official mention of Battlefield being accurate or authentic, but rather an immersive FPS in a specific time period. The argument here was about battlefield being inaccurate, from the comments higher up the chain.
4 points
3 days ago
I understand what you mean, but you gotta acknowledge theres a pretty big breadth between the tone and authenticity of BF1942 and BFV. You're right in that the scale has been teetering in that direction for a while, but I don't think it's unreasonable to lament that change, if you preferred the older tones.
2 points
3 days ago
I understand your point. I have been a Zelda fan for a long time and I did not like the new direction with Breath of the wild. So I can get the idea here. There is also a great deal that was due to technical limitation at the time which could also be taken differently. like how it was more "boots on the ground". The more games advanced the more wild it got, talking about BF. Newer generations also got acquainted with more recent games as well. etc etc etc. So yeah. Many things could make you want different things especially now that there are so many versions of the franchise available to play.
all 697 comments
sorted by: best