Forums - Gaming Discussion - All Things BATTLEFIELD V

Ka-pi96 said:
CuCabeludo said:

People are tired of modern/futuristic FPS that was pushed by CoD in the last years to the point of saturation. WW1-2 is giving fans a fresh air until it becomes saturated, they get bored again and demand modern shooter. Then the cycle repeats.

WW shooter -> Saturation  -> Modern/Futuristic shooter -> Saturation -> repeat.

And? I don't care what other people like/want. I'm just saying I'm not interested in a WW2 shooter (and never will be).

They are cattering FPS fans which at this very moment are kinda tired of modern FPS. If you are not a FPS player then you are not in the list of the target audience anyways.



Around the Network
areason said:
Hiku said:

Oh?

Or finding any excuse they can to complain about female representation, hiding behind "SJW nonsense".

Bet you none of those people cared that Battlefield's previous stories were largely fictionalized. But as soon as it pertains to a gender or a minority group, ohhhhhh snap! "This ruins my immersion." "Also my favorite character in a videogame is The Boss from MGS3."

Well i can't speak for them, but it is a fact that their has been SJW nonsense attacking gaming over the last couple of years. 

It's often hard to distinguish between the two. Though I will say this speaking for myself. I'm not a woman, but I usually prefer female characters. It has nothing to do with social standing or justice. It's purely an aesthetic preference. And I know I'm not the only one with a preference like that.

So if a company makes the protagonist female to please fans who for whatever reason prefer a female character, after several games with a male protagonists, as long as there's no story conflict, then yeah, go for it. I think that's good.

Last edited by Hiku - on 23 May 2018

CuCabeludo said:
Ka-pi96 said:

And? I don't care what other people like/want. I'm just saying I'm not interested in a WW2 shooter (and never will be).

They are cattering FPS fans which at this very moment are kinda tired of modern FPS. If you are not a FPS player then you are not in the list of the target audience anyways.

I didn't say I wasn't an FPS player. I said I don't like multiplayer FPS. So if they were to make a good singleplayer campaign then I'd be part of the target audience for that...



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

Eh. The trailer's packed ridiculously full of action, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of that. If it's any indication of the final game, I think I'll pass. I'd play Call of Duty if I wanted stuff like that. That said, I'll reserve final judgement until later.

Another thing I don't exactly like is the amount of female soldiers in the trailer. Perhaps I wasn't perceptive enough, but those didn't seem like forces that were known to have any significant amount of female soldiers. Unrealistic female soldiers are a thing I expect to really kill the immersion for me. I'm not expecting that much immersion from Battlefield anyway, but some things really kill even the remaining immersion. I'm not a huge fan of (sort of) rewriting history just for the sake of inclusiveness...



SJWs only want representation in fiction. I want to know is: if all countries that at this very moment don't force women to enlist, now passed a law forcing all women to go to military the same way men are forced to serve against their will once they hit their legal age for adulthood. Whould they be happy?



Around the Network
areason said:
The reveal basically showed nothing.

Don't see the point of having a 40 minute event if you're going to show 1 minute of shitty gameplay.

Also people on reddit are going ape shit about having women in the game.

was wondering why this was an issue, then realised it's set in WW2. I'm now not sure if I'll get into to because I get tired of the harking back to WW2 games. Plus now it just feels like it's a year behind CoD.



CuCabeludo said:
Ka-pi96 said:
So... it is WW2 as rumoured then? I'm not much into FPS games (especially MP focused ones) but if it's WW2 I'm definitely out. I just find that era incredibly boring. A modern day one could have interested me though.

People are tired of modern/futuristic FPS that was pushed by CoD in the last years to the point of saturation. WW1-2 is giving fans a fresh air until it becomes saturated, they get bored again and demand modern shooter. Then the cycle repeats.

WW shooter -> Saturation  -> Modern/Futuristic shooter -> Saturation -> repeat.

CoD hasn't done a truly modern game since 2011. They've all been near future or far future. Alot of people were hoping for Korean War, Vietnam War, or modern for Battlefield V, since we haven't had a proper recent historic or modern shooter in so long. 



Looks like what you'd expect from a BF game. I'm really much more interest in the DLC/microtransaction plan to support it. What they've said so far sounds good, but then again, what they said for Battlefront 2 originally sounded good too. Really hard to buy EA games and feel good about it these days.



areason said:
Mar1217 said:

I mean, if she's from the French Resistance or Soviet Union's side, then there's no problem as far as history accuracy goes. 

She's supposed to be a British fighter, at least that's what they showed in the trailer.

Some of them did appear throughout the war on the Bristish/Canadian side. Most of them never really got into the centric action of the war but we're relayed as a support role (like in the British aviation, if I remember right).

Honestly, even if I do understand why this topic has such a viewed "outrage and disrespect" toward the historical facts, I still think it is a best an inoffensive supplement destined to a pure entertainment goal. 



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

Also, best fictional WW2 hero: