Forums - Gaming Discussion - Not getting Battlefield this time around

Are you getting Battlefield 5?

Yes 11 25.00%
 
No 33 75.00%
 
Total:44

Battlefield 5 is a mockery of WW2. There is diversity for the sake of it, bombastic action to make it look exciting at the cost of immersion. They might as well call it an alternate reality WW2, that would be tenable. The prosthetic hands of the woman was laughably bad, why is DICE doing this? I've played since Battlefield 3 but this is putting me away from the game.

There were women soldiers in WW2 but they were mostly Russian and by far the biggest proportion of soldiers were men. To have a sizable portion of the squad as women and DICE's comments regarding the game show that its being shoehorned in the game to make a social statement. I don't want a social statement in a game about WW2, atleast not one based on current society. Its a WW2 game, it should depict WW2 scenarios and people. Men were dying on the battlefields forced to live in difficult surroundings and die from a variety of dangers. This is just dishonorable to them.

I'm in no way against women in games. Horizon: Zero Dawn and Rise of the Tomb Raider are some of my favourite games this gen. There is a place for men and women but you can't put them in everywhere for muh diversity.

This makes a decision easier. It really does.

Red Dead Redemption 2 was always a priority. I still thought I'll get Battlefield 5 next year when I'm done with it. That was before the reveal as I have no intention of getting Battlefield 5 at all. I'm sure the gameplay will be good but in a market saturated with shooters with good gameplay that's the base a game has to build for me to consider it. WW2 could have been that immersion factor that shooters lack but DICE doesn't want it to be so. They want diversity.

Last edited by GOWTLOZ - on 30 May 2018

Around the Network

It's funny that you're not getting it because you think it's not accurate enough to WW2, while I'm not getting it because I think it's too accurate to WW2



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

It's not my list of future purchases for several reasons, mostly because i am a petty Star Wars-fan



Nothing to see here, move along

It's a day one purchase for me. Can't help myself.



Theres also A Westerner carrying a katana and not a japanese soldier ? I also heard there wont be Swastikas? And some guns aren't accurate too I think? while They go the steam punk graphics route instead of realism like past games?



My xbl:dx11332sega

My second Xbl:Segasaturnsan

My psn:Segasaturnsan

My Nintendo Friend Code:1302-4985-4999

My Steam:dx11332sega

My youtube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2EeIs1FP89Oz7du7IAEbqg?view_as=subscriber

Around the Network

I feel like I've already seen this discussed to death within like 2 other threads.

In any case, I really haven't seen enough of the game to feel very strongly about it one way or another. The reveal trailer wasn't nearly as good as the BF1 reveal, that's for sure. That said, I'm quite confident the gameplay experience will be exactly what one has come to expect from a BF game, and provided that's the case, I'll probably pick it up sooner or later. The various bells and whistles they put in there, in terms of cosmetic customization options, be they for lootboxes or otherwise….I just don't really care. None of that affects how I play the game.



Who cares. It's a video game ... a shooter and its purpose is entertainment. The main story will be made up anyway. Inglourious basterds was fun to watch even though it was completely fictional. If you want historical accuracy, go and watch some documentaries. If you want realism, Battlefield games (in general) are not the best choice.



Both CoD and Battlefield look terrible this year. I'll be skipping both, RDR2 releases around the same time anyway, so that's what I'll be playing.



Still don't get why people are looking to games like Battlefield for historical accuracy. There's are many places where historical accuracy is extremely important, but a first-person shooter is generally not one of those places.



My Most Recent Articles:

1. Video Game Music Spotlight #14: A Moment of Calm

2. Gods and Superheroes: The Story of Clover Studio

3. Video Game Music Spotlight #13: Winter and Cold

For my non-video game related writings you can check my blog below.

Latest Post: Disney Canon: Dumbo (1941)

Darashiva said:
Still don't get why people are looking to games like Battlefield for historical accuracy. There's are many places where historical accuracy is extremely important, but a first-person shooter is generally not one of those places.

While the series was never exactly Arma in terms of realism, it became as popular as it is today because it was far more realistic than it's chief AAA competitors, especially CoD. Battlefield 3 blew people away with it's realistic art style and graphics on the new Frostbite engine, and gameplay that was far more realistic than CoD MW3 which released the same year. Battlefield 4 continued that trend of aiming for realism as much as possible while still being balanced. Then with Battlefield 1, they started to go a bit less accurate and realistic, and now Battlefield V seems to be taking that even further. That is why the backlash is happening.