Lurker > 2SweetforTurtle

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Board List
Page List: 1, 2
TopicSony Japan shows off a bunch of Spiderman footage
2SweetforTurtle
09/01/18 7:35:09 PM
#8
There is no downgrade
---
Slow and steady wins the race
TopicNew Battkefield V Trailer. Why is DICE pushing the diversity agenda so much?
2SweetforTurtle
08/21/18 6:27:12 PM
#121
Hexenherz posted...
I don't mind customization I just don't get why they decided to do it with a WW2 game.

Like, they literally could have just released 2143 and then it could have been like Titanfall and you could have all sorts of crazy gear and no one would bat an eye.


Thats another issue I have with it. Why pick one of the wars with the most structure in terms of uniforms, weapons, and even down to race as well, in order to introduce the craziest customization and utter nonsense in Battlefied history? Like why take a unique approach to history, when you can take all of the creative freedoms with made up wars? FFS, Battlefield 3 and 4 took place in a fictional future and they attempted to be more realistic with that than they are with WW2 lmao
---
Slow and steady wins the race
TopicNew Battkefield V Trailer. Why is DICE pushing the diversity agenda so much?
2SweetforTurtle
08/21/18 5:23:11 PM
#110
Lets just use examples for the games Im familiar with in the franchise. Bad Company 1 and 2 featured black and white soldiers for Americans, and did not have any black soldiers in the Russian side. The game also featured weapons that were unique per faction.

Battlefield 1943 comes along and features the pacific campaign of WW2. You did not have any black soldiers in the Japanese side or anything like that. Youd expect the Japanese faction to feature Japanese characters, and it did. It also had faction specific weaponry.

Battlefield 3 and 4 come along and start letting you customize your character slightly. IIRC most classes wore masks and scarves preventing you from seeing their faces.

Battlefield 1 comes along and for the first time, Battlefield starts getting a little silly with their characters. Not only did they have integrated forces for Americans (not that big of a dea though), they had integrated forces for the Germans lmao. A black sniper on the german side was featured. Then eventually we got our first female characters in the Russian sniper. The Indian characters in the UK side, women on the russian side, never phased me and probably only upset the diehards who were convinced these were overrepresented or whatever. But in any case, the factions had mostly logical diversity. The Ottomans looked like ottomans, european forces were predominantly white, and the multicultural Americans were multicultural.

So as you can see, up until Battlfield 1, theres been reasonable expectation of representation and diversity and there hasnt been an issue with whitewashing or anything like that. Now if people are complaining about asain female nazis, how is that an issue of being racist or sexist? The Battlefield franchise has been reasonable with its inclusions of different ethnicities in game, but with Battlefield V it has turned its back on any sort of realism for the sake of customization.

I personally would prefer faction specific weaponry like previous games, along with faction specific race and gender options. Should I be able to play as an asian if Im in the US Army? Fuck yeah. How about a black chick for the nazis? Fuck no. A woman in the Soviet Army? Sure. A hispanic or black man in the US Army? Sure.

Is it that hard to comprehend? Diversity isnt the issue. Its the unadulterated disrespect given to history, and yet these developers say read a book when confronted about these things. Gee thanks EA, I didnt know the Nazis were so open minded, I guess our history books are all wrong.
---
Slow and steady wins the race
TopicJust finished watching Deadpool 2.
2SweetforTurtle
08/12/18 6:34:08 PM
#4
masterpug53 posted...
Only part I didn't like was the 'hey let's kill off the love interest at the start of the sequel because we don't know what to do with her otherwise' trope. Other than that, I thought it was gold.


Good I fucking hated her being the center of the last movie.

This movie was much more fun to me.
---
Slow and steady wins the race
TopicNirvana is a less than average band.
2SweetforTurtle
08/10/18 2:17:36 PM
#2
Ehh, Foo Fighters are genuine trash. Nirvana is okay.
---
Slow and steady wins the race
TopicOh look. Racist/sexist comic book nerds at it again. Harassing another girl
2SweetforTurtle
07/24/18 9:18:54 PM
#22
Thats not even getting into the fact that she doesnt even look like they tried to change her skin tone to orange. Starfire would look weird if she were albino white, or dark chocolate.

Its kinda like Gamora. Were some people mad at her being played by a minority? Maybe. But the vast majority of people dont care about her race at all, and think that she looks great because they actually made her look great.

This Starfire looks like a cheap prostitute because of everything from the weird wig, weird outfit, cheap affects, lack of alien skin tone, and so on.
---
Slow and steady wins the race
Board List
Page List: 1, 2