By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Lafiel on 26 August 2018
Edit Thread
Faelco said:

I never use that term, but Battlefield is a good example of rewriting history to make it fit with the morals that some people have today.

Like making Achilles or a British Queen black. "History hurts my feeling, so we should modify History to make it according to my principles". It's a very dangerous slope, and is usually used in totalitarian regimes or dystopias.

If you read books like 1984, A brave new world or Fahrenheit 451, you would recognize some obvious patterns that our society started to follow lately. Fahrenheit 451, particularly, explains that it became a society of forbidden (and burned) knowledge and culture because of "SJW". They explain that some small groups of people started to make stuff that offended them forbidden, like books or shows, and it became worse and worse, to the point where almost all scientific knowledge, history, or culture is banned from society. Because it's offensive and can hurt the feelings of some people.

History is History. It's bad? Then good, it will show to new generations what to do or not. But rewriting History because it offenses you? Who those people think they are?

Firstly, Battlefield 5 is by faaaar not the first in the series to have events or characters that didn't exist/happen or were rewritten to be more manageable to the modern palate, were you complaining back then? There are tons and tons of games releasing each year that are altered that way and not "to fit with moral standards some people have today", but to fit the sensibilities of the main target-audience (US/western 14-40 year old males) and we let it slide? Why? Because these games have no claim to historical accuracy, they are not works of historians and not used/ment to educate.

Achilles is a fictional/mythological character from the Illiad, we can't ask Homer what his dermal light absorption coefficent is supposed to be, but as he was supposed to be a Greek living some 3k years ago I suspect it's higher than mine. At least I can agree that I haven't heard of a black british Queen, yet I don't know a reason why a work of fiction ment to entertain wouldn't be allowed to display one of them as such - are you fine with limiting creative freedom?

You are name dropping 1984, A brave new world and talking about Fahrenheit 451 as if it was a documentary - it isn't, it's a thought experiment with a very limited scope for complexity, the real world is more complex than that.

History should be displayed as undistorted as possible in works ment to educate about history.

Last edited by Lafiel - on 26 August 2018