Has "historical accuracy" been a bullet point in previous Battlefields? I feel like it's a thinly veiled excuse for garbage people to froth with rage that a game has the audacity to include female character models and male character models that aren't white. Was there outrage when that BF1942 expansion came out and featured jet packs?
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
I think there are people who legitimately want historical accuracy, and at the same time, people who use it as an excuse to shit on women. I don't think it's fair to paint everyone with the same brush as being the latter.
There are games available that are realistic and cater to the historical accuracy crowd. I don't think Battlefield has ever really been one of those games.
I'd be willing to bet real money that the majority of the people upset over "inaccuracy" are the turds using it as a thinly veiled excuse because there are character options that appeal to a wider array of people, and they just can't stand it.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
There are games available that are realistic and cater to the historical accuracy crowd. I don't think Battlefield has ever really been one of those games.
I'd be willing to bet real money that the majority of the people upset over "inaccuracy" are the turds using it as a thinly veiled excuse because there are character options that appeal to a wider array of people, and they just can't stand it.
Of this there can be no doubt. The majority of people complaining are turds. People complained enlessly about the German sniper in BF1 being black, but had no issue with using guns that never saw combat. It's thinly veiled hypocrisy.
But, when the characters show up on screen, they don't feel like WW2 soldiers. I felt that CoD WW2 did a great job of adding in the ability to make your character who you want while still looking like you belonged in WW2.
Battlefield 4 had lootboxes (battlepacks) and it was fine. Sure you could unlock weapon attachments through them but there was no attachment that you couldn't get by simply using the weapon.
I really enjoyed opening battlepacks and getting gun/vehicle camos. I haven't played a round in ~2 years but I still occasionally log into battlelog to open the monthly battlepacks.
The same people mad at BFV for having women in it are also shitting on Gears 5 for having a female protagonist and Last of Us 2 for being "too gay". Surprise! They were lying about why they didn't like the thing.
But, when the characters show up on screen, they don't feel like WW2 soldiers. I felt that CoD WW2 did a great job of adding in the ability to make your character who you want while still looking like you belonged in WW2.
Well, except for the loot boxes.
Yeah, I'm the same way. I don't care too much about women (though do find it amusing the one country that did field women on the frontlines in numbers isn't in the game), but my main sticklers are that the outfits in general don't visually even look like WW2 any more, and more importantly, how the fuck do you visually tell Axis from Allied in-game any more? One of the Youtubers who played noted this was a real problem, and I have no faith this'll be fixed when there's money to be had from hocking outfits.
Given some of the clothing, maybe they should've gone alt-history Cold War gone hot or some post-apoc setting. It'd allow them to go hog-wild with customisation compared this incredibly thin veneer of WW2.
Don't care about women and poc. I echo the uniform style, seeing some dude run around in a pink unicorn outfit kills my immersion.
So far looking at the promotional squads they are showing they looks like circus performs with guns.
Not what i want in bf, if they had chosen a more modern era maybe but not WW2, the good guys wore green and the bad guy wore grey ( super simplified that there)
I saw a kid get handed a JB poster by who I presume was his parents outside my store today....he tore it in half infront of his horrified parents.....There's hope for our youth yet!
The same people mad at BFV for having women in it are also shitting on Gears 5 for having a female protagonist and Last of Us 2 for being "too gay". Surprise! They were lying about why they didn't like the thing.
I find the TLoU complaints to be confusing. I mean, it's the internet and shitheads are gonna be shitheads, but even without playing the DLC it was no secret in the first game that Ellie is gay.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
Being able to identify what class someone is and what they are capable of at a glance is really important. I get that people love to make their avatar their own, but in a game like battlefield it takes away a lot of information from the player.
+3
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
I'm actually finding myself more upset about the entire like, 3rd person action/adventure/survival genre becoming murderhobo simulators. How am I supposed to buy the "real human connections factor" of the story when you're racking up kills in the thousands by the end of the game?
Being able to identify what class someone is and what they are capable of at a glance is really important. I get that people love to make their avatar their own, but in a game like battlefield it takes away a lot of information from the player.
On a completely unrelated note, I think a better thread title would've been "Beat back the Krauts with dank no scope on plane wing."
There are games available that are realistic and cater to the historical accuracy crowd. I don't think Battlefield has ever really been one of those games.
I'd be willing to bet real money that the majority of the people upset over "inaccuracy" are the turds using it as a thinly veiled excuse because there are character options that appeal to a wider array of people, and they just can't stand it.
I saw someone else make an argument that I thought was interesting:
Battlefield has never tried to be COMPLETELY historically accurate or realistic. If it did, the entire games wouldn't exist - regenerating from bullet wounds within half a minute, pulling infinite ammo out of your a**, never getting tired, magically appearing tanks and so on and so forth. What he said, however, is that they have tried to be aesthetically accurate, meaning that guns, uniforms, characters, vehicles - and partially maps - would look like their real world counterparts, which I think is true. Following that logic, you wouldn't have people on the front line looking like people that wouldn't actually be or have been on the front lines, like amputees or women in the british army during World War II. This is barring exceptions of course; In reality there was an actual bear delivering munitions and some crazy guy playing the fricking bagpipe on the front line! But you can't include everything on the game.
That said, I am not boycotting the game, in fact it is very high on my buy-list. Yet I can understand people that are upset about aesthetic inaccuracy, and honestly, almost everyone I've seen arguing about this hasn't said "I don't want women in Battlefield V!" but some variation of "They should put women where they would've actually fought, like the russian army or the french freedom fighters!". The titular women with the prosthetic arm, to me, definitely feels like a way to draw in the kind of gamer pushing for variety in player character selection, but in a game where it doesn't make sense.
One final thing: The quote by one of the developers justifying it by being asked by his daughter why she wouldn't be able to play a woman in this game - maybe he should've explained to her that the sexist view and treatment of women during that time period - more so than today - meant that they weren't allowed on the front lines in most armies, instead of pushing it under the rug? That feels incredibly disrespectul and igonrant.
Watching some of the new Jackfrags videos yeah, the character models are all virtually identical. It's very hard to tell whose whose and what team they're on.
Also saw a guy in a Jason style hockey mask and... I think it may have killed it for me? I reeeeeallly hope they have an option to turn off customization on the player side now.
Check your emails, closed alpha invites went out today (starts tomorrow). I'm in, wooooooooooooo!
If you get invited, you can tackle Conquest mode or the Grand Operation Fall of Norway. Taking place on the map Arctic Fjord, Fall of Norway lets you experience two of its in-game 'days' and play two of the modes that the Grand Operation strings together: Airborne and Breakthrough.
If any of you invited to the Alpha will try to run this on a slightly older PC, let me know how it goes! Sitting here with my 770 GT (4 GB RAM) and a core i5 4670k, wondering if I'll be able to run this.
I have an i5-4660k and a radeon r9 200 and it works great. I'm not sure off the cuff how my vid card compares to yours but the CPU is near the same. My only complaints so far are the medic changes. there is a weird delay between when someone dies and when they can revive that I think is a bug or alpha thing. it's bizarre. I like the changes, but there is weirdness there. I also really like the squad changes. my squad was sticking together this game unlike the last 2. much closer to bf 2142 as I remember. I spawned on my squad much much more often.
I have an i5-4660k and a radeon r9 200 and it works great. I'm not sure off the cuff how my vid card compares to yours but the CPU is near the same. My only complaints so far are the medic changes. there is a weird delay between when someone dies and when they can revive that I think is a bug or alpha thing. it's bizarre. I like the changes, but there is weirdness there. I also really like the squad changes. my squad was sticking together this game unlike the last 2. much closer to bf 2142 as I remember. I spawned on my squad much much more often.
What settings, scaling, rez, and framerate? That would help him figure roughly where he'd sit with it.
Women and PoC in the game making it not historically accurate is a valid complaint. But it so happens that I don't really care that the game isn't historically accurate.
Though removing things like Swastiksas (I don't think they're doing that, right? I know it happened in COD but only in MP) is something I'd be wary of, because then we'd be calling them "Nuzos" in the next iteration if we continue the trend.
Battlefield has always been less historically accurate so much as its been full of random historical trivia. Which is cool! It means lots of random guns that saw development somewhere or were used in this one theater. In that vein female combatants is awesome because again, obviously not the norm, it happened and we'll get to see it.
So...is it the turret spinning like a top or that 91/100hp on the tank is "Heavy damage irreparable by self-repair and need to return to a base to heal up" the part worth noting? 'cuz, to me, both are pretty egregious and need a bit of tuning.
EDIT - ah...I see. Working on camp internet had the resolution set so low, I couldn't see what was happening. Bumped it up and suffered through the slideshow. Gotcha.
Erlkönig on
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
That's not entirely unreasonable for a British tank shell to do that. The Brits never got on the explosive filler train like other nations and pretty much exclusively used solid shot for anti-tank operations for most of the war. Since most tank crews would tend to just bail out after receiving a penetrating hit and spalling could still reliably swiss cheese a tank crew anyway without need for explosive filler, the Brits just stuck to solid shot. Especially since that style of shot worked better in their smaller bore guns and was easier to manufacture. Furthermore, just basing off the brief view we see of the short gun barrel on that Churchill, I'm guessing it's only a 6 pounder.
ANYHOO, after the player takes the first shot you see the reload icon on the bottom right that looks a lot like an AP vs armor style indicator and not an HE icon which allows for the logical assumption that the tank is firing solid shot AP. This means that against what I'm guessing is a Stuka due to the landing gear and wing profile, a shot through the wing wouldn't necessarily vaporize the whole thing since it's getting hit by a 57mm chunk of metal. It could knock out a control surface or something like that but it wouldn't rip the wing off and get an instant kill without other circumstances like prior wing damage, hitting it at just the right spot that it weakens a structural support while the plane is undergoing airframe stress, something like that.
As WolveSight noted, it did crash right afterwards so it may have been a disabling shot in which case the real issue here is the player isn't being credited with a rightfully earned kill. Now, if every tank does that then there's a big damn problem and they're taking away something that has always been a mainstay, super fun feature of Battlefield which is just duuuuuuuuuuuumb.
So Battlefield jumped on the bandwagon where doing stuff in a prior game unlocks stuff in the upcoming games?
I do not have the time to do all thi-fine, I'll re-install BF1.
Probably a dumb question, but what does it unlock?
it unlocks skins and such (xp boosts, rare skins, etc) for current bf1 weapons, and skins for weapons in the upcoming bf5.
Ah, okay. I knew there were BF1 unlocks for pre-ordering V, didn't realize it went the other way.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
0
Options
mojojoeoA block off the park, living the dream.Registered Userregular
edited August 2018
this alpha map is doo doo. TLDR there obvious advantages for 1 side.
D heaaaavily favors the team coming from the elevated train tracks side.
C does not favor the team starting on the other side. its rubble sliglty favors the other team- in no way the same as the snipers nest D is. you hold D- you have vantage on D, F, A, C -> its trash. the building feature is problem here as the counter to having such a potent snipers nest would be low/no cover for that spot- Well.... you can fix that with a hammer. its tough. F to D is a complete meat grinder. Not enough cover (no way to build cover for approach), snipe fest. So the team far from D has to hope for C to be held for some sort of equal approach (sniping points are equal or its a squish match. If they move C closer to E so that its an advantage for that side it may even things up a good bit.
Gun play is great. RES system is GREAT. AMMO system is GREAAAAAT. The class / archetype system is dumb as hell. Ill pick the gear i want thanks, dont need to pick class, then flavor, then gear. Its convoluted. It wastes time. its like star card builds vs battlefield.
I LLLLLLLLLLLOVE the distinction of heavy and light machine gun, and love how good the heavy gun is when placed. But you are doomed on the move- may as well keep pistol out.
mojojoeo on
Chief Wiggum: "Ladies, please. All our founding fathers, astronauts, and World Series heroes have been either drunk or on cocaine."
As for me, I love Battlefield; Some people may say that it's not historically exact but who can prove it? Damn, I love it and if anyone wants more, can wait for another part; oh my god
Posts
I'd be willing to bet real money that the majority of the people upset over "inaccuracy" are the turds using it as a thinly veiled excuse because there are character options that appeal to a wider array of people, and they just can't stand it.
Of this there can be no doubt. The majority of people complaining are turds. People complained enlessly about the German sniper in BF1 being black, but had no issue with using guns that never saw combat. It's thinly veiled hypocrisy.
But, when the characters show up on screen, they don't feel like WW2 soldiers. I felt that CoD WW2 did a great job of adding in the ability to make your character who you want while still looking like you belonged in WW2.
Well, except for the loot boxes.
I really enjoyed opening battlepacks and getting gun/vehicle camos. I haven't played a round in ~2 years but I still occasionally log into battlelog to open the monthly battlepacks.
Yeah, I'm the same way. I don't care too much about women (though do find it amusing the one country that did field women on the frontlines in numbers isn't in the game), but my main sticklers are that the outfits in general don't visually even look like WW2 any more, and more importantly, how the fuck do you visually tell Axis from Allied in-game any more? One of the Youtubers who played noted this was a real problem, and I have no faith this'll be fixed when there's money to be had from hocking outfits.
Given some of the clothing, maybe they should've gone alt-history Cold War gone hot or some post-apoc setting. It'd allow them to go hog-wild with customisation compared this incredibly thin veneer of WW2.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
So far looking at the promotional squads they are showing they looks like circus performs with guns.
Not what i want in bf, if they had chosen a more modern era maybe but not WW2, the good guys wore green and the bad guy wore grey ( super simplified that there)
I find the TLoU complaints to be confusing. I mean, it's the internet and shitheads are gonna be shitheads, but even without playing the DLC it was no secret in the first game that Ellie is gay.
On a completely unrelated note, I think a better thread title would've been "Beat back the Krauts with dank no scope on plane wing."
I saw someone else make an argument that I thought was interesting:
Battlefield has never tried to be COMPLETELY historically accurate or realistic. If it did, the entire games wouldn't exist - regenerating from bullet wounds within half a minute, pulling infinite ammo out of your a**, never getting tired, magically appearing tanks and so on and so forth. What he said, however, is that they have tried to be aesthetically accurate, meaning that guns, uniforms, characters, vehicles - and partially maps - would look like their real world counterparts, which I think is true. Following that logic, you wouldn't have people on the front line looking like people that wouldn't actually be or have been on the front lines, like amputees or women in the british army during World War II. This is barring exceptions of course; In reality there was an actual bear delivering munitions and some crazy guy playing the fricking bagpipe on the front line! But you can't include everything on the game.
That said, I am not boycotting the game, in fact it is very high on my buy-list. Yet I can understand people that are upset about aesthetic inaccuracy, and honestly, almost everyone I've seen arguing about this hasn't said "I don't want women in Battlefield V!" but some variation of "They should put women where they would've actually fought, like the russian army or the french freedom fighters!". The titular women with the prosthetic arm, to me, definitely feels like a way to draw in the kind of gamer pushing for variety in player character selection, but in a game where it doesn't make sense.
One final thing: The quote by one of the developers justifying it by being asked by his daughter why she wouldn't be able to play a woman in this game - maybe he should've explained to her that the sexist view and treatment of women during that time period - more so than today - meant that they weren't allowed on the front lines in most armies, instead of pushing it under the rug? That feels incredibly disrespectul and igonrant.
Steam ID: 76561198021298113
Origin ID: SR71C_Blackbird
Also saw a guy in a Jason style hockey mask and... I think it may have killed it for me? I reeeeeallly hope they have an option to turn off customization on the player side now.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
It seems a large majority of people who did the BF1 incursions were given a code so it may be tied to that.
Steam ID: 76561198021298113
Origin ID: SR71C_Blackbird
What settings, scaling, rez, and framerate? That would help him figure roughly where he'd sit with it.
1920x1080 60 Hz
Auto Settings, but everything is on High
getting between 45-60 fps.
Battlefield has always been less historically accurate so much as its been full of random historical trivia. Which is cool! It means lots of random guns that saw development somewhere or were used in this one theater. In that vein female combatants is awesome because again, obviously not the norm, it happened and we'll get to see it.
Game has 266k viewers right now
Should be 300k in no time since some of them just started
So...is it the turret spinning like a top or that 91/100hp on the tank is "Heavy damage irreparable by self-repair and need to return to a base to heal up" the part worth noting? 'cuz, to me, both are pretty egregious and need a bit of tuning.
EDIT - ah...I see. Working on camp internet had the resolution set so low, I couldn't see what was happening. Bumped it up and suffered through the slideshow. Gotcha.
Go home DICE you're drunk.
ANYHOO, after the player takes the first shot you see the reload icon on the bottom right that looks a lot like an AP vs armor style indicator and not an HE icon which allows for the logical assumption that the tank is firing solid shot AP. This means that against what I'm guessing is a Stuka due to the landing gear and wing profile, a shot through the wing wouldn't necessarily vaporize the whole thing since it's getting hit by a 57mm chunk of metal. It could knock out a control surface or something like that but it wouldn't rip the wing off and get an instant kill without other circumstances like prior wing damage, hitting it at just the right spot that it weakens a structural support while the plane is undergoing airframe stress, something like that.
As WolveSight noted, it did crash right afterwards so it may have been a disabling shot in which case the real issue here is the player isn't being credited with a rightfully earned kill. Now, if every tank does that then there's a big damn problem and they're taking away something that has always been a mainstay, super fun feature of Battlefield which is just duuuuuuuuuuuumb.
I do not have the time to do all thi-fine, I'll re-install BF1.
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
This has been a thing for years now, even BF4 had it and I think BF3 also had it.
Probably a dumb question, but what does it unlock?
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
it unlocks skins and such (xp boosts, rare skins, etc) for current bf1 weapons, and skins for weapons in the upcoming bf5.
Ah, okay. I knew there were BF1 unlocks for pre-ordering V, didn't realize it went the other way.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
D heaaaavily favors the team coming from the elevated train tracks side.
C does not favor the team starting on the other side. its rubble sliglty favors the other team- in no way the same as the snipers nest D is. you hold D- you have vantage on D, F, A, C -> its trash. the building feature is problem here as the counter to having such a potent snipers nest would be low/no cover for that spot- Well.... you can fix that with a hammer. its tough. F to D is a complete meat grinder. Not enough cover (no way to build cover for approach), snipe fest. So the team far from D has to hope for C to be held for some sort of equal approach (sniping points are equal or its a squish match. If they move C closer to E so that its an advantage for that side it may even things up a good bit.
Gun play is great. RES system is GREAT. AMMO system is GREAAAAAT. The class / archetype system is dumb as hell. Ill pick the gear i want thanks, dont need to pick class, then flavor, then gear. Its convoluted. It wastes time. its like star card builds vs battlefield.
I LLLLLLLLLLLOVE the distinction of heavy and light machine gun, and love how good the heavy gun is when placed. But you are doomed on the move- may as well keep pistol out.