Battlefield V Reveal Trailer

[Zaune]

This is not the World War 2 you've come to expect. This is Battlefield V.

Well, that's a bloody understatement.

Token female character despite the game being set in the 40s? Okay, stretching historical accuracy a bit but I can roll with it. Token female character who looks like a refugee from Mad Max: Fury Road and beats Germans to death with a cricket bat wrapped in barbed wire, in a game that is allegedly not set in some kind of dieselpunk alt-history 'verse? At this point trying to play it up as a realistic WW2 shooter is probably grounds for another bollocking from the Advertising Standards Agency. I'm not even going to comment on the rest of that rollercoaster.

[ray245]

It feels like a ham-fisted attempt at chasing the female/ minority demographics. Nothing wrong with chasing female/minority demographics and getting more female players to the fanbase, but I'm not sure what DICE is doing is really going to work.

They did mention you can customise the ethnicity and gender of your soldier. What I am not sure is whether you really want to let players create a black, female SS soldier.

[Gandalf]

They did mention you can customise the ethnicity and gender of your soldier. What I am not sure is whether you really want to let players create a black, female SS soldier.

Assuming they let people have and customise the SS of all organisations, what's wrong with letting them create ahistorical looks?

[ray245]

Assuming they let people have and customise the SS of all organisations, what's wrong with letting them create ahistorical looks?

Sell a false image of Nazi Germany? Yes, there were Africans serving in the German military, but that doesn't mean we should make the Nazis look like an ethnically diverse force.

[TheFeniX]

Pandering for the sake of pandering is dumb, but writers have the right to push whatever nonsense they want, I have the choice not to buy it. I further don't rate video games to highly in the "white-wash history" deal since, you know, the entire concept of a "one-man army" or even a small group making huge strides in warfare (outside specific examples, usually not related to shooting) is a huge whitewash.

We had to study WWII and the Holocaust ad nauseam throughout school, even into college. And the amount of straight up bullshit or just omissions (try finding a history teacher who will talk about the brave Allied soldiers who marched homosexuals back into prison and the heads who denied them reparations) to make me just kind of laugh at "we might portray the Nazis as diverse in our video games."

Even modern day god damn Nazis won't whitewash what the Nazis did, except the Holocaust itself which they deny happened.* They still hold dear to vile shit like anti-semitism, homophobia,racism, fascism, and eugenics. So I'm not exactly terrified of THAT being whitewashed unlike how, even with like A (singular) game being made about it (and it involved time travel) the U.S. Civil War is consistently whitewashed to this day and the whitewashed versions of those soldiers and leaders looked at as heroes.

*That's kind of a bit I run into, even with a lot of the shitheels I (used to) "debate" with: I can't recall a single one who tried to justify if the Nazis actually murdered Jews, but locking them up would have been A-OK to protect German Interests (like the U.S. did to the Japanese). So they deny the murders happened and Jews were just imprisoned. To me it shows even the worst kinds of people, generally, won't justify genocide. Kind of like racists: they won't agree with KILLING black people, but deporting them all or locking them up is a pretty common argument if you bother getting to that point (I usually stopped bothering once the N-word started getting popped off).

To cut off my stupid rant: I would laugh hard at something like an incredibly (willingly) diverse Nazi army up against a mostly white allied force. People might be offended, but at some point the absurdity takes over for me and the offense can't really apply. I mean, look at the reality of the Germans making the Japanese "honorary Aryans."

[Sea Skimmer]

The trailer smacks of Fortnite and if I wanted Fortnite I'd go buy that game instead and not give my money to EA.

As far as gameplay goes one of the better streamers has a lengthy video about what he was shown and told personally, I will say about 50% sounds good (but largely only is fixing problems created in BF1) and 50% sounds absolutely horrible to the point that I seriously doubt now that I will want to play this game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xegBXGaFrOU

The fact is this game is being made by the exact same morons who thought Battlefront 2's innovation was a good idea, and new conquest in battlefield 1 was a good idea. I have no faith in them whatsoever. DICE can deliver good graphics but the last game they delivered with in my opinion actually GOOD end to end gameplay is now BF4 back in 2013. And that thing launched as a bugged mess. I love battlefield but it would also hardly be the first franchise to evolve into a corner and die. I actually played more BF1 then any prior battlefield, but because I played with friends, and now BFV is going from 5 to 4 man squads so even my ability to play with friends is being undermined by moronic design choices.

[TheFeniX]

From what I've gathered over the years, Executive meddling starts from the top down with BF pretty much since EA bought DICE, which was shortly before the release of BF2 IIRC. At that point, much like with Mass Effect, EA couldn't "EA the fuck" out of BF2 since it was ready to ship. So they just had DICE add in all the unlock shit* (that we ALL LOVE these days) and used it to test how much bullshit the consumer would put up with.

Since then, EA has always been down to use DICE to try and chase CoD money, basically gutting what made BF > BF in the process.

* and blacklist servers that bypassed the unlock system.

[Patroklos]

What could possibly be the justification for going from 5 man to 4 man squads?

[Gandalf]

Assuming they let people have and customise the SS of all organisations, what's wrong with letting them create ahistorical looks?

Sell a false image of Nazi Germany? Yes, there were Africans serving in the German military, but that doesn't mean we should make the Nazis look like an ethnically diverse force.

Wait, when did realism become a selling point of these games? Are people using them for educational purposes?

Though a level for people playing as Germany where they have to navigate the Nuremberg trials would be something. "Press X to declare 'Just following orders.'"

[Zaune]

Wait, when did realism become a selling point of these games? Are people using them for educational purposes?

Though a level for people playing as Germany where they have to navigate the Nuremberg trials would be something. "Press X to declare 'Just following orders.'"

Well, if you're marketing a work of fiction as being based on actual historical events then generally speaking, there's only so many creative liberties you can take before people start to get annoyed.

[ray245]

Wait, when did realism become a selling point of these games? Are people using them for educational purposes?

Though a level for people playing as Germany where they have to navigate the Nuremberg trials would be something. "Press X to declare 'Just following orders.'"

Not realism. I'm talking about representation. Games based in a historical setting ought to have a responsibility of representing the past in a good way. They don't need to be fully accurate, but they need to make sure the general "gist" of history is correct. Nazi Germany was extremely racists and exclusive, so I don't think games should represent them as some sort of diverse faction.

Also, I think you'll be surprised how important popular entertainment is in educating or miseducating people about history. There are academic historians that worked with video games funded by research/educational councils because they think they are important tools of education.

[TheFeniX]

That doesn't play though because then we would never have games like Wolfenstein. And you also kick other works in the dick. As much as I've played as the Allied Forces winning WW2, I would love to see a game where I play as a Patriotic and HEROIC™ German (or Japanese or Italian) foot-solider who kills many Allied Soldiers as Germany is slowly pushed back and they lose the war. Lower on that list would be one where Germany pushes back. Or whaetver, because it's fucking video games (read: fiction): writers have the ability (and right) to go balls to the wall.

You could already do this in CoD:WaW and Battlefield 1 and 2, but only in Multiplayer.

"They sendz ze houdz! To tear us to SHREDZ!"

No work of fiction is under obligation to pander to historical accuracy, unless they are selling that game based on historical accuracy.

[ray245]

That doesn't play though because then we would never have games like Wolfenstein. And you also kick other works in the dick. As much as I've played as the Allied Forces winning WW2, I would love to see a game where I play as a Patriotic and HEROIC™ German (or Japanese or Italian) foot-solider who kills many Allied Soldiers as Germany is slowly pushed back and they lose the war. Lower on that list would be one where Germany pushes back. Or whaetver, because it's fucking video games (read: fiction): writers have the ability (and right) to go balls to the wall.

You could already do this in CoD:WaW and Battlefield 1 and 2, but only in Multiplayer.

"They sendz ze houdz! To tear us to SHREDZ!"

No work of fiction is under obligation to pander to historical accuracy, unless they are selling that game based on historical accuracy.

Wolfenstein plays up the insanity with Nazi superweapons, but they have never ignored the racist ideology that is in the heart of Nazi ideology.

[TheFeniX]

Wolfenstein plays up the insanity with Nazi superweapons, but they have never ignored the racist ideology that is in the heart of Nazi ideology.

Who gets to choose what parts of history writers are able to take liberties with?

[ray245]

Wolfenstein plays up the insanity with Nazi superweapons, but they have never ignored the racist ideology that is in the heart of Nazi ideology.

Who gets to choose what parts of history writers are able to take liberties with?

At that point you aren't even talking about history. It's just a fantasy setting with 1940s visual design. Otherwise, you'll give writers freedom to ignore the whole slavery aspect of the American civil war.

[TheFeniX]

At that point you aren't even talking about history. It's just a fantasy setting with 1940s visual design. Otherwise, you'll give writers freedom to ignore the whole slavery aspect of the American civil war.

AAAAAHAHAHAHA! My primary school history books had that covered already. And we whitewash WW2 consistently. Hell, the public tried to act like the Allied forces had no non-whites in it for decades.

Really, the only thing Germany did different than other countries (like the U.S.) when it came to eugenics, racism, homophobia was SCALE. And WW2 wasn't even ABOUT fighting Nazi policy. No one really gave a shit about Hilter running off the gays, Jews, ethics, etc. In fact, many APPLAUDED him for this. But a combination of whole-sale murdering millions of them pushed people over the brink. And I still don't believe anyone would have lifted a finger to stop this if Germany hadn't started invading other countries. Fuck man, The U.S. was probably going to get involved directly in the War at some point, but we did so because Japan fucking bombed us. Gloves off and all that.

And Britain just RECENTLY pardoned the man who broke the fucking Enigma encoding for being a "filthy homo." Edit: Wait, not the Omega code. WTF am I smoking./edit

We might talk big about how this was a war against "EBIL" or some shit, but I believe pretty heavily no one would have given many shits if Hitler hadn't been trying to bomb Britain and France (among others) into submission. Because all the people he was targetting? "Real people" didn't like them anyway: Homosexuals, gypsies, the poor, the mentally/physically infirm/disabled, Jews.

So when people tell me "Nazi ideology" all I think of is "World ideology."

FPS, Hell most video games, are in the fantasy realm just by nature of "dude takes out 50 guys in close combat." Starcraft is more realistic in the grand scheme of things since fighting these desperate types of wars is about bodies, LOT and LOTS of bodies.

But none of the above is even my point. If this whole "games are art" bullshit is to be believed: you don't have the right to tell artists what they can and can't depict. You can criticize, you can chose not to give them money, you can boycott. But this: "I don't like the thing, get rid of it" is bullshit.

[ray245]

AAAAAHAHAHAHA! My primary school history books had that covered already. And we whitewash WW2 consistently. Hell, the public tried to act like the Allied forces had no non-whites in it for decades.

And I think the allied forces should depict more non-whites.

Really, the only thing Germany did different than other countries (like the U.S.) when it came to eugenics, racism, homophobia was SCALE. And WW2 wasn't even ABOUT fighting Nazi policy. No one really gave a shit about Hilter running off the gays, Jews, ethics, etc. In fact, many APPLAUDED him for this. But a combination of whole-sale murdering millions of them pushed people over the brink. And I still don't believe anyone would have lifted a finger to stop this if Germany hadn't started invading other countries. Fuck man, The U.S. was probably going to get involved directly in the War at some point, but we did so because Japan fucking bombed us. Gloves off and all that.

And Nazi Germany made it explicitly clear that racist policies were central to their entire political ideology. The Allies did horrible shit as well, but I don't think it's just a matter of scale. Did the Allies have a coherent ideology centered around race-supremacy on the same level as the Nazis?

I'm not opposed to Fascist Italy having African soldiers and so forth, because they never make race ideology paramount to their whole political ideology the same way the Nazis did.

And Britain just RECENTLY pardoned the man who broke the fucking Enigma encoding for being a "filthy homo." Edit: Wait, not the Omega code. WTF am I smoking./edit

See above.

We might talk big about how this was a war against "EBIL" or some shit, but I believe pretty heavily no one would have given many shits if Hitler hadn't been trying to bomb Britain and France (among others) into submission. Because all the people he was targetting? "Real people" didn't like them anyway: Homosexuals, gypsies, the poor, the mentally/physically infirm/disabled, Jews.

So when people tell me "Nazi ideology" all I think of is "World ideology."

Did the other powers formulate an ideology that makes it explicitly clear they are built upon race ideology? Every country back then was racist, homophobic, practicing eugenics and so forth. That is true. (Concentration camps also exist in the US at that time.) That does not mean they built their entire political ideology based on those views.

FPS, Hell most video games, are in the fantasy realm just by nature of "dude takes out 50 guys in close combat." Starcraft is more realistic in the grand scheme of things since fighting these desperate types of wars is about bodies, LOT and LOTS of bodies.

But none of the above is even my point. If this whole "games are art" bullshit is to be believed: you don't have the right to tell artists what they can and can't depict. You can criticize, you can chose not to give them money, you can boycott. But this: "I don't like the thing, get rid of it" is bullshit.

Do you seriously think I have any power over what DICE thinks? Put it this way, if "games are art", does that make it acceptable to make a game about a Black soldier fighting for the Confederacy? They did exist (in non-combat roles), but there are problems with such depictions imo.

Of course, no one from the Allies ever saw the war as a fight against racism ( because that's not really true). That does not mean the Nazis were not driven by an extreme form of racist ideology even by 1940s standards.

[TheFeniX]

And I think the allied forces should depict more non-whites.

If you're looking for accuracy, then sure: in segregated units and black officers dealing with as many "n-words" and "boy" being throw their way by white enlisted men and general douchebaggery.

And Nazi Germany made it explicitly clear that racist policies were central to their entire political ideology. The Allies did horrible shit as well, but I don't think it's just a matter of scale. Did the Allies have a coherent ideology centered around race-supremacy on the same level as the Nazis?

I'm confused at your distinction between "scale" and "level." They mean about the same thing to me. On the topic, the U.S. had Jim Crow running alive and well. But even though that was true, no one would really have cared about the whole thing. They only started caring when Germany started moving West.

I'm not opposed to Fascist Italy having African soldiers and so forth, because they never make race ideology paramount to their whole political ideology the same way the Nazis did.

Allying with Japan showed Hilter cared more about winning than any ideas of ideological purity.

Did the other powers formulate an ideology that makes it explicitly clear they are built upon race ideology? Every country back then was racist, homophobic, practicing eugenics and so forth. That is true. (Concentration camps also exist in the US at that time.) That does not mean they built their entire political ideology based on those views.

Once again, you're talking about scale: something I already admitted to. But Hitler based a lot of his ideology on U.S. attempts, eugenics being one in particular. The U.S. had it's own which hunts. Even we weren't shitty enough (all the time) to imprison someone JUST for being black. But, provided you could avoid being murdered, homosexuality was a crime. And not just in the U.S. So I doubt "political ideology" meant anything to a homosexual back when hiding it was a desperate "non-choice."

If the results are the same then whatever ideology is most prevalent doesn't matter.

Do you seriously think I have any power over what DICE thinks? Put it this way, if "games are art", does that make it acceptable to make a game about a Black soldier fighting for the Confederacy? They did exist (in non-combat roles), but there are problems with such depictions imo.

Yes, yes it makes it "acceptable." That's a rather large point of "art:" it's going to offend someone. We're talking about a game that, by nature of what it is, is almost 99% going to glamourize mowing motherfuckers down en masse. In fact, out of one trailer some woman beats another soldier to death with (I think is) a cricket bat. Blood for all. Sure, there's probably going to be a "what is man" style lamenting here and there... you know, in between all the DAKA DAKA DAKA.

A woman doing that rates a big "non-issue" for me considering the other shit we're whitewashing. Big Goddamn Heroes! I've talked to many vets of war(s). They don't talk about it like Big Goddamn Heroes.... except the 2 Marines... those guys are on a whole other level.

I'm ranting again, but I'll say I don't like arbitrary lines drawn on what's acceptable and what's not, mostly when it comes to fiction. Because it leads to stupid shit. Like, would you read a book about a pre-pubescent girl being raped by a family member, told from her perspective and all the lack of understanding to come along with it? And in fact talking about how it was relatively pleasant? Pretty shitty, huh? That's a line even I'm line "uuhhhhhh, I don't know about this." But I think I would be poorer for it never having read "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings."

Shit's banned down here now. My wife's high school kids won't read it, school board won't let them.

[ray245]

If you're looking for accuracy, then sure: in segregated units and black officers dealing with as many "n-words" and "boy" being throw their way by white enlisted men and general douchebaggery.

I'm not looking for accuracy. Representation and accuracy is not the same thing.

I'm confused at your distinction between "scale" and "level." They mean about the same thing to me. On the topic, the U.S. had Jim Crow running alive and well. But even though that was true, no one would really have cared about the whole thing. They only started caring when Germany started moving West.

When you mean scale, I took it to mean the sheer number of persecution involved. When I mean level, I am talking about whether they were a systematic process rooted in Allied nations' political ideology at the time.

Allying with Japan showed Hilter cared more about winning than any ideas of ideological purity.

That does not mean ideological purity was a major driving force behind his actions and his regime. We should not downplay that.

Once again, you're talking about scale: something I already admitted to. But Hitler based a lot of his ideology on U.S. attempts, eugenics being one in particular. The U.S. had it's own which hunts. Even we weren't shitty enough (all the time) to imprison someone JUST for being black. But, provided you could avoid being murdered, homosexuality was a crime. And not just in the U.S. So I doubt "political ideology" meant anything to a homosexual back when hiding it was a desperate "non-choice."

If the results are the same then whatever ideology is most prevalent doesn't matter.

I think looking at ideology is more important than looking at the result. The scale of the Nazi persecution was enabled by its ideology.

Yes, yes it makes it "acceptable." That's a rather large point of "art:" it's going to offend someone. We're talking about a game that, by nature of what it is, is almost 99% going to glamourize mowing motherfuckers down en masse. In fact, out of one trailer some woman beats another soldier to death with (I think is) a cricket bat. Blood for all. Sure, there's probably going to be a "what is man" style lamenting here and there... you know, in between all the DAKA DAKA DAKA.

A woman doing that rates a big "non-issue" for me considering the other shit we're whitewashing. Big Goddamn Heroes! I've talked to many vets of war(s). They don't talk about it like Big Goddamn Heroes.... except the 2 Marines... those guys are on a whole other level.

I think hiding behind "art" creates more problems for us. Art has the power to influence our perception of the past. Look at how our popular understanding of WW2 is influenced by movies about WW2 ( such as downplaying the amount of Indian soldiers in the British army at the time).

I'm ranting again, but I'll say I don't like arbitrary lines drawn on what's acceptable and what's not, mostly when it comes to fiction. Because it leads to stupid shit. Like, would you read a book about a pre-pubescent girl being raped by a family member, told from her perspective and all the lack of understanding to come along with it? And in fact talking about how it was relatively pleasant? Pretty shitty, huh? That's a line even I'm line "uuhhhhhh, I don't know about this." But I think I would be poorer for it never having read "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings."

Shit's banned down here now. My wife's high school kids won't read it, school board won't let them.

Fiction is not something innocent. Fiction is capable of being used to distort and subvert people's views and understanding off the past. See the notion of "black-Conferdate soldiers" being used by some groups to undermine the idea that slavery was not a major reason for the war.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-myth- ... te-soldier

[Gandalf]

Wolfenstein plays up the insanity with Nazi superweapons, but they have never ignored the racist ideology that is in the heart of Nazi ideology.

Who gets to choose what parts of history writers are able to take liberties with?

At that point you aren't even talking about history. It's just a fantasy setting with 1940s visual design. Otherwise, you'll give writers freedom to ignore the whole slavery aspect of the American civil war.

I've played a bunch of games rekating to the US Civil War. Slavery doesn't come up exceot under very rare and specific circumstances.

[ray245]

I've played a bunch of games relating to the US Civil War. Slavery doesn't come up except under very rare and specific circumstances.

I don't think that's a good thing, especially in the context of people today denying slavery was the main reason for the war. I think people are underestimating just how pervasive fiction is in our understanding of history. Sure, picking up a good history book is the ideal way to go, but there are many people too lazy to do so and rely on popular media to be the sole means of learning history.

[Gandalf]

I've played a bunch of games relating to the US Civil War. Slavery doesn't come up except under very rare and specific circumstances.

I don't think that's a good thing, especially in the context of people today denying slavery was the main reason for the war. I think people are underestimating just how pervasive fiction is in our understanding of history. Sure, picking up a good history book is the ideal way to go, but there are many people too lazy to do so and rely on popular media to be the sole means of learning history.

Then that's on them. Most wargames are largely just two generic opposing sides, with window dressing and at time varied stats to make them a specific historical faction, especially in tabletop. I'm not sure how to integrate any sort of historical lesson into that.

[ray245]

Then that's on them. Most wargames are largely just two generic opposing sides, with window dressing and at time varied stats to make them a specific historical faction, especially in tabletop. I'm not sure how to integrate any sort of historical lesson into that.

Represent them in an abstract manner that reflects what they were about. If civilisation series games can create a decent abstraction of different historical civilisations, then there's really no reason why an FPS game cannot make some attempt to reflect what Nazi Germany was about.

Allowing the Allies(and other Axis powers like Italy) to have more diverse ethnicity in their armies while limiting Nazi Germany's customization would have been a very stark and constant reminder of what it was really about.

[Gandalf]

So how do you do that in a setting where you're sending little soldiers (digital or minis) around some terrain of maybe a square kilometre?

Barbarossa: Decisive Campaigns (IIRC) sort of addresses what you're discussing. You play some high up in the Wehrmacht and need to make varied decisions, some of which include decisions around treatment of conquered peoples and prisoners.

[ray245]

So how do you do that in a setting where you're sending little soldiers (digital or minis) around some terrain of maybe a square kilometre?

Barbarossa: Decisive Campaigns (IIRC) sort of addresses what you're discussing. You play some high up in the Wehrmacht and need to make varied decisions, some of which include decisions around treatment of conquered peoples and prisoners.

Show how exclusionist Nazi Germany was and how that filtered down to the Wehrmacht by limiting their customisation. Or put up a short little description that pops up when you try and select people of colour as your custom option.