By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Call of Duty: WWII Multiplayer will have female characters. Your thoughts?

 

What are your thoughts?

This is good 28 23.73%
 
This is bad 42 35.59%
 
I'm indifferent 48 40.68%
 
Total:118
Dreamcaster said:
VGPolyglot said:

It's revisionism to suggest that there were no female troops at all in WWII.

I never stated that there were none, however, women did not serve on the front-lines in combat roles for the military of the United States. The game implies otherwise, and as such borders on revisionism.

You said that you disagree with the decision of having female characters in the multiplayer. It's not like the United States will be the only country represented in multiplayer.



Around the Network

I don't really remember people caring about the female soldiers that you fought alongside during the Russian campaign in Call of Duty 2. Anyhow, it's not a big deal, but I tend to like playing as female characters, so it's a nice inclusion. Historically accurate? Not entirely, but I don't think that's the intention with Call of Duty. Now, if the game developers were striving for historical realism, then sure, I'd have a problem. But considering multiplayer is always ridiculous, I don't mind this at all. I find it funny that Battlefield One blocked female characters in their mp, for example, when there are people leaping out of biplanes mid-flight to jump into other bi-planes and soldiers running down and jumping off zeppelins with impunity. 



Louie said:
Dreamcaster said:
I disagree with the decision not because it's unrealistic, but rather because it feels like they're bordering on revisionism. Obviously if there's a Nazi zombie side-game, everybody knows that it is fantasy just for fun. Alluding, however, that the way the war was fought was different to how it really was is a dangerous thing. Once you begin to tread the path of slight alterations to the portrayal of events in works of entertainment, those 'slight alterations' can become greater and greater in the name of concepts such as 'diversity' and 'inclusiveness'. A perversion to history can lead to a perversion in the thoughts of the impressionable masses, and such is never a good thing as has been seen time and time again.

I understand where you're coming from. But I think they included the characters in a way that makes sense and is historically correct (like, there are no female US soldiers but there are female resistance fighters). Correct me if I'm wrong - not a huge CoD fan here - but I don't think it's to prove a point.

To my knowledge, they haven't stated what the woman you'll play as will be. Whether that is a resistance fighter or an American soldier of course makes a big difference. Considering though, that this is an American game, they will most likely make the mistake of making the woman American (or British).

I, too, don't think that they are doing this to prove a point; but to sell more copies of the game. This however, whether intentionally or not, is still making it easier for those who may seek to boost a political agenda to do so.



Don't see the big deal, it's just multiplayer which is already fantasy.



They should limit the amount of people to play as women per team or not allow it at all.



Around the Network
Dreamcaster said:
Louie said:

I understand where you're coming from. But I think they included the characters in a way that makes sense and is historically correct (like, there are no female US soldiers but there are female resistance fighters). Correct me if I'm wrong - not a huge CoD fan here - but I don't think it's to prove a point.

To my knowledge, they haven't stated what the woman you'll play as will be. Whether that is a resistance fighter or an American soldier of course makes a big difference. Considering though, that this is an American game, they will most likely make the mistake of making the woman American (or British).

I, too, don't think that they are doing this to prove a point; but to sell more copies of the game. This however, whether intentionally or not, is still making it easier for those who may seek to boost a political agenda to do so.

You do realize the implications of that, do you? It's about a war, of course it's going to spread a political agenda. If the game were made by Chinese people, Japanese people, Russian people, etc. it would have a different point of view. That is unavoidable on a subject like this.



VGPolyglot said:
WagnerPaiva said:
I think it is innacurate. There were no female battalions on WW2. I do think there were female doctors, nurses and intelligence oficials. But no infantry. Please someone correct me if wrong.

Soviet women in WWII

Thanks bro, did not know that. Probably in the end there were nazi females in the front as well, since there were also children as young as 8 years old defending Berlim.



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

Well I dont care about CoD so I don't care about what they do with the game, but considering we are talking about multiplayer it shouldn't be a big deal.



                                                                                     

RolStoppable said:
Children should be playable as well.

I saw documetaries saying that kids as young as 8 years old defended Berlim in the last days of the war, in the last push. They had explosives and everything. So, yes, great idea!



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

VGPolyglot said:
Dreamcaster said:

I never stated that there were none, however, women did not serve on the front-lines in combat roles for the military of the United States. The game implies otherwise, and as such borders on revisionism.

You said that you disagree with the decision of having female characters in the multiplayer. It's not like the United States will be the only country represented in multiplayer.

It isn't a matter of whether the United States is the only country or not, if it is one of many then it is still a potentially harmful misrepresentation of the truth. For example, if China and Japan were to be included, and yet the only playable characters were to be white men, while this would be a true representation for some countires, for these it would not and would as such be a perversion of the truth.

SpokenTruth said:
Dreamcaster said:
I disagree with the decision not because it's unrealistic, but rather because it feels like they're bordering on revisionism. Obviously if there's a Nazi zombie side-game, everybody knows that it is fantasy just for fun. Alluding, however, that the way the war was fought was different to how it really was is a dangerous thing. Once you begin to tread the path of slight alterations to the portrayal of events in works of entertainment, those 'slight alterations' can become greater and greater in the name of concepts such as 'diversity' and 'inclusiveness'. A perversion to history can lead to a perversion in the thoughts of the impressionable masses, and such is never a good thing as has been seen time and time again.

It's a video game, not a historical document.  It's also multiplayer, not the single player campagin.

Light forms of entertainment such as video games or movies sculpt large parts of the thoughts of the majority of people. While you may be able to play a game of this nature and see the inaccuracies and disreagard them due to your 'a posteriori' knowledge, if an impressionable young person's initial exposure to the setting of a game is that game then they would not be able to discern fact from fiction and would continue into adulthood with false knowledge.