While that may be true, just because it is what has been done in the past and what you expect to happen in the future, that alone does not make it right. When discussing whether or not the actions of mankind are 'unavoidable' or not, the inevitability of any conclusion is only pertinent if one takes the view of it being so. In other words, the only reason you say that this type of thing is inevitable is because you are not willing to attempt to prevent it.

Pretty much a non-issue as far as I'm concerned, especially since it seems to be just for the multiplayer.

I concur, but just because you see one wrong as being less immediate than another, that 'lesser' wrong does not suddenly cease to be a wrong. If one were to steal a loaf of bread and then rape another person, just beacuse the rape is perceived as being worse, that does not mean that the theft should be excused, as it is still wrong itself. In this case, we were asked our thoughts on female characters in CoD multiplayer, and so I gave them, just because I may view something else as greater issue, that does not mean that I stop perceiving this in the way that I do.

Dude, it's my opinion. It's not exactly wrong to have one.

I don't care about it, but I don't see how it adds anything to the game. Won't be buying soon anyway, seems like a rehash of the first few CoDs. Hell, even the female resistance fighter in the campaign was already in the campaign in CoD 3, as a NPC.

LIKE MULAN??????

I think it's already back, I saw One Piece has updated, and usually popular Jump stuff gets translated the same day.

I should probably get back on topic. Yeah women in Call of Duty yeah....

If it was Eastern Front, then yeah, that would make sense, women fought "boots on the ground" (as those idiotic COD trailers/interviews keep insisting) in Red Army as tank drivers, machine gunners and snipers (apart from "usual stuff", like being pilots).

But it's Western Front, so unless it's Resistance, from what I understand, only female combatants on ground on both sides were those in AA batteries.

I'd prefer they stay out of the single player campaign only because they rarely showed up as characters (unless they want to include them in Russia where they were actually fairly common). Even in a fictional setting I prefer they try to replicate the history that they're portraying as much as possible.

As for multiplayer, though, I see no issue with this whatsoever. If anything, it'll be refreshing to see less clone-looking people in an FPS.

I can't really answer on this poll then, as none really feature my stance. If I were to write my own poll answer, it would be "Historical role in campaign, do whatever you like in multiplayer"

They're not trying to tell a historical story with characters in the multiplayer. Unlike the campaign, the multiplayer part of the game is just game mechanics with the theme and aesthetic of the campaign, so it's good that they gave everyone more choices

It would also be interested if the campaign had a female lead. A female soldier to be more specific. But they'd need good writers for that. The stories in COD games always felt like they were designed by committee and derivative of other war movies and I can't think of any WWII movie with a female lead.

Call of Duty: Finest Hour had a female protagonist, I think she was Russian.

Bottom line, just depends how its done and multiplayer doesn't matter.