Maybe you can also think a little bit and understand that there is a slight difference between "The weapon is a bit faster than what it should be" and "The assault on Omaha Beach was led by women with prosthetic arms and katanas". Even without the women, the prosthetic arms and the katanas would be too much and would have a backlash. 

Do you think that women will play BFV more because of this? Really? No they won't, let's be serious for one sec. 

And you forget the most important thing here : how EA handled the controversy. Saying "If you don't like how we modified WW2, you're uneducated, so don't buy it" is just a direct insult to their playerbase. Are you saying that it's normal for a game company to say to their players "You're uneducated, don't buy our game" ?

Lots of games have a female option without any backlash, quite the opposite (How many guys like me play a female character in MMO games?). Doing so in a complete change of tone in the series (people complain just as much about the "Fortnite-like" tone), modifying well known facts about one of the major events of History, and insulting people who didn't like it, are the reasons why this game has issues with it.

As it's always said in those threads, players would love a campaign about women in the resistance, or even on the back lines. EA did it poorly, and reacted even more poorly.

Nothing to do with "the guns are not 100% as they were back then", this is one of the most ririculous arguments I've read. "They made Lincoln the leader of the Third Reich? Why do you complain? In the last game the soldiers' uniform were not the exact true shade of green, so it's obviously not a documentary and they can change anything they want!". Ridiculous.

Oh, sorry, I'll try to keep it to a more usual forum level.

"EA bad, CoD and BF are for noobs, git gud, lol". Better?

Firstly, Battlefield 5 is by faaaar not the first in the series to have events or characters that didn't exist/happen or were rewritten to be more manageable to the modern palate, were you complaining back then? There are tons and tons of games releasing each year that are altered that way and not "to fit with moral standards some people have today", but to fit the sensibilities of the main target-audience (US/western 14-40 year old males) and we let it slide? Why? Because these games have no claim to historical accuracy, they are not works of historians and not used/ment to educate.

Achilles is a fictional/mythological character from the Illiad, we can't ask Homer what his dermal light absorption coefficent is supposed to be, but as he was supposed to be a Greek living some 3k years ago I suspect it's higher than mine. At least I can agree that I haven't heard of a black british Queen, yet I don't know a reason why a work of fiction ment to entertain wouldn't be allowed to display one of them as such - are you fine with limiting creative freedom?

You are name dropping 1984, A brave new world and talking about Fahrenheit 451 as if it was a documentary - it isn't, it's a thought experiment with a very limited scope for complexity, the real world is more complex than that.

History should be displayed as undistorted as possible in works ment to educate about history.

You've got absolutely everything wrong about the BFV situation. People are mad about the way EA handled it and attacked fans. People are mad that a white british women with a prosthetic arm is running around with a wood board smashing skulls like it's nothin. No one cares about females fighting in places they didn't fight in IRL. look at AC Odyssey, no one is mad about a female character choice. You're saying people are mad about females in WW2, you're wrong, people are mad at EA for being typical cunts.
EA made it so damn clear that they are pushing an agenda here and trying to rewrite history when they try to say that BFV is a historically accurate game, and then call everyone ignorant for not knowing that disabled british white women were fighting in WW2, and taking gun shot wounds to the abdomen like its a BB pellet.

What's next? You can choose to have a "plus-sized" black lesbian transgender attack helicopter female Nazi running around in a WW2 game. IF you didn't know that part of history, and don't accept that, don't buy our fucking game then you imbecile.

Yeah, BoTW was good at representing women, but I see no difference between it and Horizon ZD, for example. The difference is that in Horizon you play as a woman. But citing Bayonetta as a good representation of female characters is really stupid. The characters in Bayonetta are probably the most over-sexualized characters in mainstream gaming. They're unapologetically treated as sexual objects to appeal to the hetero male demographic. That doesn't make the games bad, it just makes them not very progressive.

This is not a history lesson, or a book that claims to be an accurate betrayal of world war 2.  It's a game with a primary purpose of entertaining.  If they think the game would be more entertaining with women, that's their business.  

Do you take objection to X-Men first class implying mutants were responsible for the cuban missile crisis?  Was that also rewriting history?

I can partly agree, and I understand what you mean with the creative freedom, no problem here. 

The main issue is the reaction. Saying "You're stupid, misogynist, on the wrong side of History, basically a Nazi" when someone disagree with what creative freedom did is what's wrong. Don't say to people who wants to stick to the fact that the facts are wrong and "the wrong side of History". If they just stick to the creative freedom and explain that they're in a "What if" world, then there would be a lot less arguments about those cases. 

You would obviously always have some internet trolls or real racists/misogynists complaining, but the debates would be far more peaceful and shorter if everyone was answering like you instead of "You're a uneducated Nazi, don't buy our product".

The Star Wars controversy is a good example. The Last Jedi had a lot of plot flaws and a lot of poorly written and handled stuff that fans didn't like, but if you say that you didn't like it, then you're a stupid reactionary far right supporter. The character of Rose is very poorly written, with an awful face-palming plot full of logical flaws and angrying decisions, but people who don't like her are racist and misogynistic because nobody is allowed to complain about a female Asian character, even if the very numerous flaws have nothing to do with her race or gender. Fans were also racist Nazis when they complained about Jar-Jar! 

I really don't care. If some people decide to make a game, they have the right to do whatever the hell they want in my book. I will just decide if I like it or not. That is all. If I was so keen on having a game with any political agenda, I would just make it myself. But generally, I am in favor of artistical freedom. Whether or not an artist is driven by political motives doesn't matter. He can do whatever the hell he likes in his work as far as I'm concerned. So bring on WW2 games with transgender soldiers. I probably won't buy it, but I won't cry about it either.

But that's just me, what the hell do I know.

Or like making Jesus white (looking like a Middle European instead of Middle Eastern ethnicity)

But nobody will call you a racist white hating leftist for pointing that, because it's true 😉

It wouldn't be stupid if the goal was to achieve historical accuracy.

I'd love to see woman snipers on the Soviet side, it's historically accurate and pulls me in even more into a setting.

Indeed it was but I think there's a threshold that should not be crossed. BF5 made the mistake of constantly featuring a soldier who was not only a woman but also had a prosthetic limb: two highly unlikely sights expected on a WW2 battlefield. Also, there was a British soldier with a katana on his back.

These things just pull me out of a trailer. Also, BF5's trailer was loud and obnoxious with things falling all over the place that seemed horribly cartoony to me while BF1's trailer transitioned between different WW1 arenas that seemed more grounded in reality.

I don't recall any of that for HZD. The YT trailer reactions seem overwhelmingly positive.

When I first saw that, the first thing I started wondering was: "has there ever been a game trailer that featured a heterosexual couple being this open about their affection"?

Fortnite. Overwatch. Many fighting games.

I think one key thing is BF5 devs started to talk too much on social media and they said things that only made things worse rather than just shutting up and letting things die out. Maybe cool things down with a new trailer that seemed more historically accurate.