I feel like if it under performs, it has more to do with EA's response and poor PR than the diversity itself.

For developers to stop pushing agendas as a whole, we would not only need BFV for fail, but also TLoU2, Horizon 2 (first had some obvious SJW themes in it, as fantaic as the game was), Gears 5, etc would have to fail as well.

I am not saying these games should or will fail, I am simply saying that is what would have to happen. One game would do little in the grand scheme of things.

I legit wrote that at 1am, so sorry for all the inconsistencies. The people who don't want women in the game all together are mysoginists for sure, I have to admit. It's just that people like us and them are being put under the same umbrella by any of the lefties.

And they said it themselves: "...that this is a plausible scenario". When it is clearly not. 

And how is what I said a lie? It's clear that in that sentence "they don't understand that this is a plausible scenario" they are referring to the very first trailer with the woman. 

I don't get it.  Medal of Honor used to have playable women in fucking 2000 

and there was NO ONE complaining about " SJWs" and " muh historical accuracy"

( even though women did fight in WW2).

what I am trying to say is if you believe comment made by EA is dumb and stupid, there was no need for you to break down flash fire comment as if he is exaggerating the situation as something of a propaganda against women in game, coz in my understanding of his post, I can say people are upset on many things about battlefield 5 which includes the portrayal of the women in the game, but EA choose to spin it into a PR about gamer's being misogynist and wanted to wipe some bad PR about BF2 while emerging as some sort of flag bearer of women in game! but it backed fired, but some people were still lead to believe that this was gender issue.

That is fine. I wrote my response at like 2am. So I can understand feeling tired. Some of my comment might have come off as unclear. 

If you admit that, then hey, I am happy and we have no real disagreements.

"And how is what I said a lie? It's clear that in that sentence "they don't understand that this is a plausible scenario" they are referring to the very first trailer with the woman. "

It wasn't a lie so much as a purposeful exaggeration (unless you genuinely just did not read the statement). I said this in my original reply, but maybe I didn't make myself clear. Up until the "prosthetic arm" and "cricket bat" part, nothing you said in that part of your comment was really objectionable. But when you lump in that stuff as if the developer was trying to say that fans are ignorant for not knowing about prosthetic arms then ... well ... you're kind of putting a word in his mouth. If you just stuck to the part about women it would make some sense because that's clearly what he is referring to and it historically objectionable in some ways, but when you try to pin down the completely fantastical elements into that comment as well you're either misrepresenting, forgot the quote or are trying to make a  point. Trying to make a point by showing the contrast between saying fans "just don't know things about history n' stuff" and simultaneously having completely unrealistic elements in the game would be both hilarious and effective, it's a nice contrast. However even under that circumstance the developer clarifies his view in the same exact quote, when he later on says "and listen: this is a game". So there's no real contradiction in what he's saying. He's saying that fans just don't know things (referring to women) and then clarifies that it's just a game so there should be some levity. It's only unreasonable as a statement when you deconstruct how realistic having women in certain regions really is, but when you added on the rest it made your point weaker. Admittedly, this is the most nitpick-y worthless part of my reply. It was really supposed to be more of a "P.S." or addendum, but I ended up writing it like it was a central part of my argument.

You dont see an issue of empowering minorities by oppressing other groups? I dont have an issue with minority empowerment, I have an issue with the fact that it's done at the expense of whites, straights and males. (and any one of those) My issue is that if someone from of those three groups were to say/do something that is celebrated as promoting empowerment by minorities, they would be branded a social outcast. It's the double standard that is the issue. Because now one group has certain freedoms that another doesn't. Not legal freedoms, but social freedoms, that if broken will lose you your job, your family so on and so forth. Right now those groups still have it pretty good. In 20 years they'll likely be a "power minority" (men already are in college and itll show up later economically). However they wont be able to do a damn thing about it, because there's a double standard of who can even speak for empowerment and who cannot. If these people werent branded racists, sexists, homophobes etc for any disagreement with leftist politics or for doing/saying the exact same things minorities are allowed to I'd have zero problem. But thats not the case.

But how are straight white men being suppressed? What makes this even more baffling is that white straight males are being “suppressed” in fields that are still largely dominated by straight white males. It's like you're assuming that when group is fighting for proper representation in a field it somehow means that the group currently in power loses out. Imagine how silly it would sound if black rappers started talking about how they can't properly voice their opinions when Eminem started getting famous

I already made it clear that it's about double standards of whats acceptable conduct. Can a straight white male say and do everything a minority can in media with the same results? Can a straight white male openly celebrate being part of an all straight, white male movie for example, without negative consequence? 

Straight white males did openly celebrate being straight white males for the longest time and we have hundreds of years of bigotry, racism, sexism, ect as proof of that. The fact that minority and feminist groups can celebrate their simple existence and push causes that are specific to them is a result of living in a culture that formally had more respect for straight white males than any other group. In a perfect world this divide of who can and can't say or do certain things wouldn't exist but this isn't a perfect world and you're looking at the byproduct of that.