Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Battlefield V

  1. I don't get it. Are they mad that her tits aren't half out?

  2. A video game that has primarily always been about the online multiplayer, that is telling a story that takes place during WII, isn't being portrayed as historically accurate. I have been trying to debate with some, and no matter what, they are upset that Dice isn't giving them the accurate portrayal of WII that they seem to think was promised to them. They apparently don't want any women in a WWII game unless she is tending to wounded soldiers back at camp, or working in a factory back home. I don't know, there are obviously underlying issues with them, but they don't want to admit it.

    When did people actually start caring about a BF campaign anyways?
    Last edited by ElCapichan; 24 May 2018 at 04:38 PM.

  3. I guess they just respect our fallen soldiers enough to want them to be portrayed accurately - as bullet sponges who auto heal and can't climb over three-foot fences.

  4. In Battlefeild One, Dice took a large amount of care to make the game feel real, and actually succeeded. This seems like a step back.

  5. Or it could just be a different direction. Other than the core gameplay, it's not like there has been a cohesive tone, story, or theme to the Battlefield games. Bad Company 1 & 2 were very different from their predecessors, BF 3 & 4 were different from the BC games, and then BF1 took another turn as well. I keep seeing people say that the BF games have always been about ultra realism and historical authenticity, but that couldn't be further from the truth. I can't speak for BF1, as I never played its story, but the campaigns haven't exactly been that great to begin with. BC2 wasn't terrible, but isn't the main reason most people play a BF game for the online multiplayer? I'll be to busy blowing up tanks, capturing points, and building fortifications to be bothers by female soldiers and whatever customizations they will have. It's a video game, and if it is fun, then I am happy.

    And another thing that bothers me are the people calling blasphemy on "re-writing" history, as if this isn't a work of fiction. I don't recall anyone crying foul over Wolfenstein or Inglorious Basterds, or other obvious fictional forms of entertainment set in WWII. I think it is fine if people really wanted an ultra authentic WWII game, but I'm not sure where this idea that Dice was going to deliver exactly that came from. We've only had rumors that the setting might be WWII, and there were even rumors that it could have been BC3. Disappointed that they didn't make Band of of Brothers the video game? Fine, but don't act like this is a slight against you and those who were actually involved in WWII. I was really hoping for a more modern setting, or even a barely futuristic setting, I'm not mad at Dice because they didn't make the game that I wanted. We haven't seen any gameplay yet, but based on what I heard, I will still probably be very happy with what is delivered.

  6. BF1's single player was a series of mini stories focused on giving you a taste of the war from a bunch of different viewpoints. It was probably the best thing about BF1 honestly.

  7. I still want a sequel to BF2142.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Games.com logo