Feminists next target; Battlefield 1.

[Squilookle]

And they based this on what... the multiplayer livestream? If we believed that was all there was to the game, then we could also complain about there being no deserts, forests, Bristol Fighters and so many other things in the trailer.

Pretty sure it's just about confirmed that the Arabian woman on horseback in the trailer is one of the main protagonists. Even if there were no women in the game, I'd understand due to the nature of this particular historical conflict, but if they're going to have a whinge about it, at least wait until we get more info about who we can play as in the game, because if that Arabian woman/any other women get confirmed as playable, then those knee-jerk critics will have a helluva lot of egg on their faces.

 

[Zhukov]

[snip]

And that is the SMG's argument all over again, did you saw the gameplay? Everyone was using smgs, although in the war not many soldiers had one. You have that justification that if you dig enough you see that at some point some used those weapons late in the war but that doesnt mean that everyone did all the time.

I dont care much about having a female character playable, the weapon selection is a much bigger issue, but that argument of finding some exception doesnt really fit well in this context because unless there was something limiting the ratio (the weapons should have this shit) then it doesnt make sense since because in the game that wouldnt be an exception at all. Just like the submachine guns arent an exception and everyone fucking has one.

Okay.

I think I understand what you're trying to say but I'm not certain because, mate, your post is a mess.

For whatever it's worth I personally would have preferred the game to have less automatic weapons. I would have made rifles the standard and given players pistols to fill the close range niche. Machine guns would be highly inaccurate unless fired from a set up position. However I understand why they went the way they did and it's not a deal breaker for me.

 

[josemlopes]

[snip]

And that is the SMG's argument all over again, did you saw the gameplay? Everyone was using smgs, although in the war not many soldiers had one. You have that justification that if you dig enough you see that at some point some used those weapons late in the war but that doesnt mean that everyone did all the time.

I dont care much about having a female character playable, the weapon selection is a much bigger issue, but that argument of finding some exception doesnt really fit well in this context because unless there was something limiting the ratio (the weapons should have this shit) then it doesnt make sense since because in the game that wouldnt be an exception at all. Just like the submachine guns arent an exception and everyone fucking has one.

Okay.

I think I understand what you're trying to say but I'm not certain because, mate, your post is a mess.

For whatever it's worth I personally would have preferred the game to have less automatic weapons. I would have made rifles the standard and given players pistols to fill the close range niche. Machine guns would be highly inaccurate unless fired from a set up position. However I understand why they went the way they did and it's not a deal breaker for me.

My argument was that in a game where you can freely choose what you are/have, if you include things that were the exception and dont have anything to limit the amount then it no longer is the exception like it was, you showed that there actually were women fighting in the war but just like you said it was an exception.

I used that to paralel with another issue that the game has with a similar source of the problem, having something that is an exception be widely used with no restrictions.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Oh, those pesky feminists. Stop trying to destroy video games you lousy... oh, they haven't actually done anything yet.

Ah well, I'm sure someone somewhere will have something to say. Which will destroy video games!

But they decided to revert this decision since there were no female soldiers in WWI.

How pedantic do you want me to get about this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Battalion

Admittedly, an exception that proves the rule, but an exception nonetheless.

Personally I'd be fine with this decision going either way. "We want to be inclusive and give players options" and "Female soldiers were extremely rare in WWI and we want to save a bit of money" are both valid justifications in my book.

Funnily enough, I've heard that BF1's single player features a female in a prominent role. Not confirmed though.

Russia aren't in the game anyway, so a very rare Russian thing is hardly relevant:
https://www.vg247.com/2016/06/14/battlefield-1-multiplayer-factions-wont-include-france-and-russia/

Though people should forget about this gender crap and be more bothered about the fact that France isn't a playable faction. ...In a game about WW1, they may as well not have the Germans in it. I mean fuck, there's a better argument to be make about how poorly the French are portrayed in games rather than women.

 

[Zhukov]

Though people should forget about this gender crap and be more bothered about the fact that France isn't a playable faction. ...In a game about WW1, they may as well not have the Germans in it.

They had to make room for the Americans.

The French aren't the target audience. Everyone knows French people are disinclined to play video games on a genetic level. It's just science.

 

[Oroboros]

The omission is a bit glaring considering the fact that a female soldier was featured rather prominently in the trailer.

Yes women had a rather limited frontline combat role in WWI, but from what we know about the game so far, they aren't exactly shying away from some of the less prominent aspects of the war. They certainly aren't afraid of from giving the player access to some rather low-circulation equipment, or indulging in hollywood-isms like hip firing machine guns. And they don't seem bothered by expanding the roles of certain groups at the expense of others....the French and Russians being sidelined in favor of the Americans and British springs to mind. I have no doubt that if they wanted they could focus on one or more of the outlier female soldiers, it would probably make for a rather interesting perspective.

 

[Wrex Brogan]

...weird, I don't recall this being on the board at the last Meeting of the Feminists, but I'll have to bring it up next time. Can't let one of these pesky vidya gaems go un-destroyed!

Anyway, pretty... ambivalent to this. While figuring out who and what fought in World War I is a bit of a nightmare given the sheer number of biased opinions and views on that period of history, there's probably a fair few women involved that it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to include 1 or 2. Seems weird they're worrying about historical accuracy for gender in a game that's most likely going to involve Americans doing stuff Americans didn't do in the war with technology that didn't exist at the time, but ehhhh. Safe bet says someone somewhere made a promise they couldn't keep and now they're backtracking because... well, it's the AAA game industry. It's what they do.

 

[Neverhoodian]

Wait, so people WANT to see depictions of women getting shot, gassed, bombed, bayoneted, and crushed under tank treads all in the name of imperialism and nationalism gone awry? Who are the misogynists here?

Feminism means equality.
Equality means that women get to do the same things men do. INCLUDING GETTING SLAUGHTERED IN VIDEOGAMES.

Frankly I don't understand the logic of "gasp, you want to see women getting killed??". Women are adult human beings just like men.... they're not children.

Fair enough. If people want true equality of genders, then it stands to reason that there should be no objection to sharing equal hardship. It's just that, based on my (albeit circumstantial) observations, the folks who tend to push hardest for more female representation also cry foul the loudest at depictions of women suffering.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

so according to feminist every game need female character?

Im surprised they didnot talk about STALKER games since these games have all male NPC.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Unless the OP has some kind of super secret new source for this information that renders what I'm about to say out dated, this applies to the multiplayer, not the single player. Apparently there is a female character in the single player, but players won't be able to select their sex in the multiplayer.

As for the question "what do you think?" Well, I'm thinking "can we please not for once?" I'm probably sounding like a broken record here, but as much as I despise all the social justice politics in practically every form of media now, I'm getting increasingly sick of the other side and their antics. Do we really have to get preemptively outraged over nothing more than predicted outrage? Is it too much to ask that we at least wait for the feminists to complain about it before blowing their complaints out of proportion?

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Ah, gamers. Or should I just say 'Ah, people'?

Nicely combative ("Feminists target...") language right there in the thread title (like it's a Daily Mail headline), no less, plus language about them "bitching". Wouldn't want to maybe see some value in a feminist argument, or anything, no siree... Must dismiss!

Until sources/details are clarified it's hard to comment. What statement did they make, exactly, and what changes are they planning to make? The OP is less than thorough, ergo less than helpful in forming an actual response.

If they're not allowing players to choose gender in MP, then I do see that as a bit quaint and miserly. Maybe they're just lazy and can't be arsed to create more assets, but variety is always a nice thing. Either way, personally I'm not affected - never bought a BF before, never intend to. A silly looking arcade shooter set in World War I, of all times, is not my thang.

...weird, I don't recall this being on the board at the last Meeting of the Feminists, but I'll have to bring it up next time. Can't let one of these pesky vidya gaems go un-destroyed!

You didn't get the memo? I'm sure where was a memo... Also: do we have a battlebus? Destroying games is all well and good, but if we don't have a battlebus my support may waver...

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

I think it's just EA being jackasses, kinda like the whole "No French Army" thing.
I mean, I can't find the twitter thread, but I do remember reading one of the Devs going "Yeah, it's not realistic to have that many female soldiers but neither is a lot of the other stuff in the game. Besides, we want to do it"
Personally, I can imagine a lot of people being bummed about this backpedal, including DICE themselves as it was one of the first features that they agreed on.

At this rate, I think someone at EA realized they were going too good so they are trying to burn all the goodwill they had managed to gather since the reveal V_V

Though people should forget about this gender crap and be more bothered about the fact that France isn't a playable faction. ...In a game about WW1, they may as well not have the Germans in it.

They had to make room for the Americans.

The French aren't the target audience. Everyone knows French people are disinclined to play video games on a genetic level. It's just science.

I hear that. And to think, EA said that that kids didn't know anything about WW1...

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

If they're not allowing players to choose gender in MP, then I do see that as a bit quaint and miserly. Maybe they're just lazy and can't be arsed to create more assets, but variety is always a nice thing. Either way, personally I'm not affected - never bought a BF before, never intend to. A silly looking arcade shooter set in World War I, of all times, is not my thang.

Nah, from what I gathered, they actually went out of their way to include them before something (Most likely a EA Veto) caused the backpedal.
They even knew it kinda made little sense in the setting but they pushed for it anyway and that's why there were female soldiers in the trailers.

 

[Aerosteam]

Is there anything really wrong with having your game be more historically accurate?

However, now they really have to stick to the setting. Not sure I can trust them on that, there'll probably be loads of stuff that didn't happen or didn't exist during WW1 in the game I bet.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Wait, so people WANT to see depictions of women getting shot, gassed, bombed, bayoneted, and crushed under tank treads all in the name of imperialism and nationalism gone awry? Who are the misogynists here?

Feminism means equality.
Equality means that women get to do the same things men do. INCLUDING GETTING SLAUGHTERED IN VIDEOGAMES.

Frankly I don't understand the logic of "gasp, you want to see women getting killed??". Women are adult human beings just like men.... they're not children.

Fair enough. If people want true equality of genders, then it stands to reason that there should be no objection to sharing equal hardship. It's just that, based on my (albeit circumstantial) observations, the folks who tend to push hardest for more female representation also cry foul the loudest at depictions of women suffering.

I'd imagine it'd be a context thing, kinda like that bit in the Tomb Raider reboot where it looked like Lara was going to be raped if you failed a QTE whist if it was a male you'd just get killed flat out.
I know that equality means females in games get the rough end of the stick, kinda like how Quiet spent most of her first time on screen getting lit on fire and falling out a 3 story window, but I'd guess the case they would be making is "Can we have more depictions of women suffering that aren't Domestic Abuse/Rape-y? We got enough of those."
Hell, I remember that one of the Timesplitter games (Future Perfect i think) had a ton of henchwomen you mowed down along with henchmen. Just do more of that.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

What do you think?

I think you might have accidentally posted your thread twice

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

Hell, I remember that one of the Timesplitter games (Future Perfect i think) had a ton of henchwomen you mowed down along with henchmen. Just do more of that.

Well yeah, look at the Bethesda Elder Scrolls/Fallout. You gun/chop down loads of women in those and no one has a problem with it because they aren't really treated any different to the guys.

Personally I think I would find the Multiplayer a bit odd if it was full of women soldiers, but then the same could be said of everyone running round with MP18s. But then fuck online multiplayer, I'm never going to buy it anyway, so I don't really have a horse in this race.

On a side note, I kind of feel sorry for the people making/made Verdun.

 

[shrekfan246]

Wait, so people WANT to see depictions of women getting shot, gassed, bombed, bayoneted, and crushed under tank treads all in the name of imperialism and nationalism gone awry? Who are the misogynists here?

Yes there were exceptions, but statistically speaking practically all front line soldiers in WWI were male. Men are traditionally utilized for this role because we're far more expendable (sorry, fellas), and one would be hard pressed to find a conflict that illustrated this better than the meat grinder that was WWI.

There's so much wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin. The short of it is that both of your observations are incredibly wrong and that video is complete biotruth bullshit.

First of all, if you actually paid attention to what feminists said, then while yes, many oppose things like war, they oppose it for everyone, and hold the belief that if there's going to be war anyway, men and women should be serving equally. And yes, that means dying equally.

Second, the myth of the "expendable" male has absolutely no place in modern society, and is mostly perpetuated by people of a certain ideology in order to peddle their sexist trash. America hasn't been in danger of losing half of its population of men or women in a very, very long time, and women aren't literally only good for making babies.

Men weren't the primary soldiers in World War 1 because, "lol it doesn't matter if guys die!" Men were the soldiers in WW1 because highly "masculine" societies stated that women were incapable of fighting, and would distract their fellow soldiers with their "feminine wiles" and cause dissent among the ranks.

 

[the December King]

Well, EA dropped the ball here. I wouldn't expect female soldiers in a WW1 game, but I WOULD expect them in a game where they...said there would be female soldiers.

Really well put. If this is what they said they were going to do, then it was on them to deliver.