Battlefield V (2018)

[Commander Clueless]

Because we all know that millions of kids play these games. I started out in this thread by explaining that a lot of my students had a strong understanding of ww1, and they all said it’s because of battlefield 1.

Again, though, shouldn't that be the focus of your issue?

Parental control tools already exist. Why would your issue, right or wrong, be with the content itself?

Age ratings do exist for a reason.

Regardless, I don’t think teaching adults fake history is a good thing either.

As I said before, this is a video game, not a documentary. Nothing is being presented as fact.

If you are concerned about the general human ability to separate fantasy from reality, that is a larger issue. At that point, though, we're talking a much larger scope than should ever be discussed in a video game thread.

Although to be fair, I think we've already reached that point.


Meanwhile, back in the realm of relevance, Battlefield V is one of the games partnering with NVIDIA for real-time raytracing. While I'm not usually one who pays close attention to lighting and shadow fidelity, the visuals are impressive.

 

[Jussi]

Because we all know that millions of kids play these games. I started out in this thread by explaining that a lot of my students had a strong understanding of ww1, and they all said it’s because of battlefield 1.

Regardless, I don’t think teaching adults fake history is a good thing either.

Then your target should be retailers who do that by selling the game.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

So you're saying you have no problem with historical movies targeted at children altering history for the sake of pushing a narrative?

Historical fiction? Not really. If Disney was marketing their moves as being historically accurate, I would have a huge problem.

As far as I’m aware they aren’t, and Dice isn’t doing it for BFV either.

 

[Xelebes]

If you dumb ****s want to play a realistic WW2 game go buy Red Orchestra 2.

Post Scriptum is the current game that is going for simulation.

 

[Cor]

@Throw More Waffles

 

[XX]

If you have any qualms about the skins, just remember BF1. Most of them are impossible to see unless you are extremely close to your target or doing a melee takedown. There's an endless treasure trove of formal and informal gear they can add to the game, so I'm excited to see what they come up with. The 'advanced' classes are also more interesting than the old base class + perk combo.

Not crazy about them offering reflex/red dot sights on every gun now but I guess you have to throw a bone to the COD crowd. Hopefully they will have a mode that forces ironsights and a bit more realism (like faction limited weapons).

 

[XX]

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Regardless, I don’t think teaching adults fake history is a good thing either.

You what else isn't good? People who lack the courage of their convictions.

You don't want women in your video games because you think it's "giving ground" to the SJWs. The historical accuracy angle is complete horse sh*t, we all know it and you do as well.

Just man up and admit to it, enough beating around the bush.

 

[Osprey]

You what else isn't good? People who lack the courage of their convictions.

You don't want women in your video games because you think it's "giving ground" to the SJWs. The historical accuracy angle is complete horse sh*t, we all know it and you do as well.

Just man up and admit to it, enough beating around the bush.

He's actually exhibiting the most courage of conviction here, because he's continued to argue for what he believes, despite being challenged, mocked and accused of being disingenuous. Conversely, it takes no courage to join in on a dog pile, especially this late and especially when political correctness is on your side. As a teacher with first-hand knowledge, he's put forth one of the more educated and thoughtful arguments in this thread... and, perhaps because of that, you chose to not argue with it, but to put him down personally. That's more akin to a monkey slinging feces at something that he doesn't like, which makes it ironic that you challenged him to "man up." Disagree with an opinion and offer your own equally thoughtful counter argument or else you run the risk of making only yourself look bad.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

He's actually exhibiting the most courage of conviction here, because he's continued to argue for what he believes, despite being challenged, mocked and accused of being disingenuous. Conversely, it takes no courage to join in on a dog pile, especially this late and especially when political correctness is on your side. As a teacher with first-hand knowledge, he's put forth one of the more educated and thoughtful arguments in this thread... and, perhaps because of that, you chose to not argue with him, but to be rude and disrespectful to him. That's more like a monkey slinging feces at something that he doesn't like, which makes it ironic that you challenged him to "man up." Disagree with his opinion and offer your own equally thoughtful counter argument or else he's not really the one that you're making look bad.

I don't need to make him look bad, he's done that himself.

There are plenty of reasons to be critical of a game, historical accuracy is utter bull crap, unless the game is marketed as a "historically accurate experience".

What I love is how you think I think he hates women. I never said that, the crux of the issue is here is that people who espouse this historical accuracy angle all have one thing in common: they hate the SJWs and the Left. They don't like feeling like the people they oppose are winning, because that means they are losing, and when Battlefield makes a big deal about women being in the game, that's a big deal in the Right vs Left online war.

If he were to honestly asks himself "why do I care so much about this? Why am I arguing a historical accuracy angle in a video game that is not realistic at all and never claimed to be", I guarantee you that he'll end up right where I pegged him: he doesn't like the SJWs and he feels they are forcing their values on to him with stuff like BFV.

That position, "I don't like values being forced on to me", isn't unreasonable to hold, it's a logical position in a conflict of values. But you can't make any progress in that conflict until he accepts it for what it is: this is about values, it isn't about historical accuracy.

 

[Osprey]

I don't need to make him look bad, he's done that himself.

If that were true, you wouldn't have felt the need to resurrect the conversation five days after it ended just so that you could blast him.

There are plenty of reasons to be critical of a game, historical accuracy is utter bull crap, unless the game is marketed as a "historically accurate experience".

To borrow Waffles' analogy, if a game were to deny or minimize the Holocaust, would it be above criticism as long as it wasn't marketed as a "historically accurate experience"? Are people allowed to be critical of aspects of games only if they were marketed otherwise? I can't recall Bethesda ever marketing their games around the strength of their stories, yet that didn't stop you yesterday from being critical of their games for being "poorly written." I don't see why a game's marketing should dictate what we're allowed to express disapproval of.

What I love is how you think I think he hates women.

I didn't say anything close to that or even hint at that. That does seem to confirm, though, that you're inclined to argue against what you imagine people to be thinking, rather than what they say.

That isn't unreasonable, it's a logical position to hold in a conflict of values. But you can't make any progress in that conflict until he accepts it for what it is: this is about values, it isn't about historical accuracy.

Maybe it's about values for you and you're projecting. We did just establish, basically, that you like to imagine what others are thinking. Unless you're a teacher or historian, I'm not sure that you can even imagine what he thinks. Personally, I wouldn't accuse a history teacher of being disingenuous about caring about historical accuracy. That seems to me like it would have to take a whole lot of hubris.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Are people allowed to be critical of aspects of games only if they were marketed otherwise? I can't recall Bethesda ever marketing their games around the strength of their stories, yet that didn't stop you yesterday from being critical of their games for being "poorly written." What does the game's marketing have to do with expressing things that we don't like about games?



I didn't say anything close to that or even hint at that. That does seem to confirm, though, that you're inclined to argue against what you imagine people to be thinking, rather than what they say.



Maybe it's about values for you and you're projecting. We did just establish, basically, that you like to imagine what others are thinking. Unless you're a teacher or historian, I'm not sure that you can even imagine what he thinks. Personally, I wouldn't accuse a history teacher of being disingenuous about caring about historical accuracy. That seems to me like it would have to take a whole lot of hubris.

Not hubris, just a bit of life experience and critical thinking. His position is untenable, it is not coherent.

 

[Osprey]

Not hubris, just a bit of life experience and critical thinking. His position is untenable, it is not coherent.

If citing "a bit of life experience" as an excuse for dismissing someone's experience in the field isn't hubristic, I'm not sure what is, to be honest.

You may not, but I find his argument tenable and coherent. I think that you simply don't agree with it and don't understand it. There's nothing wrong with not understanding something, but that shouldn't be confused with it making no sense. It's more tempting to conclude the latter because it's easier than accepting that we may lack knowledge or perspective and going in search of it. It also takes courage because understanding an opposite opinion can undermine the assuredness of our own, but that's a good thing. That's what real life experience is, after all: learning to see and appreciate things from new perspectives. A lifetime of experience being close minded, of looking at and judging things from only one perspective, isn't worth anything.

Anyways, the point is that it's possible to respect his experience and his intentions while still disagreeing with his opinions. I've disagreed with professionals (particularly addiction and mental health professionals) on these boards before, myself, but never doubted that they genuinely felt what they believed.

 

[Blender]

To borrow Waffles' analogy, if a game were to deny or minimize the Holocaust, would it be above criticism as long as it wasn't marketed as a "historically accurate experience"? Are people allowed to be critical of aspects of games only if they were marketed otherwise? I can't recall Bethesda ever marketing their games around the strength of their stories, yet that didn't stop you yesterday from being critical of their games for being "poorly written." I don't see why a game's marketing should dictate what we're allowed to express disapproval of.

Of course it wouldn't be above criticism, and no one has said Battlefield V is above criticism for a lack of historical accuracy. The problem is the selective outrage over historical accuracy when it comes to this one issue, rather than a consistent and intellectually honest criticism of the historical inaccuracies rampant throughout this series and genre. Also, comparing being able to play as a woman in multiplayer mode in a WW2 game to denying possibly the worst crime in modern history is disingenuous to say the least. One deserves a shrug and maybe an eye roll at the typical lack of historical accuracy this franchise contains, the other is disgusting antisemitism.

If kids are learning inaccurate history from video games, especially video games rated for adults, the problem doesn't lie with the video games, it lies with the parents and the school system not teaching them proper history. Those games deserve criticism for bad history in the same way any movie or television show does as well (I'm looking at you Braveheart for one example), but if you're going to criticize historical accuracy in entertainment you better damn well do it consistently and not just pop up to be outraged because it fits some anti-SJW narrative that you are fond of.

 

[Osprey]

Of course it wouldn't be above criticism, and no one has said Battlefield V is above criticism for a lack of historical accuracy.

I appreciate that you and others haven't argued that, but he did, which is why I replied to him directly.

The problem is the selective outrage over historical accuracy when it comes to this one issue, rather than a consistent and intellectually honest criticism of the historical inaccuracies rampant throughout this series and genre.

I don't see that as relevant here because Waffles has said that he's not outraged and he's been very consistent and intellectually honest about his concerns being a whole lot broader than this one issue.

Also, comparing being able to play as a woman in multiplayer mode in a WW2 game to denying possibly the worst crime in modern history is disingenuous to say the least. One deserves a shrug and maybe an eye roll at the typical lack of historical accuracy this franchise contains, the other is disgusting antisemitism.

Using the example in the context that I did was not disingenuous. Taking it out of context is. Once again, look at what I was replying to. The argument was that a game is above criticism for its historical inaccuracy unless it's actually been marketed as being historically accurate. An extreme example is perfectly acceptable to challenge such a general statement. Nowhere was there a comparison of that example to anything else.

 

[SeidoN]

launch date has been moved to November 20th

 

[XX]

launch date has been moved to November 20th

Game has been behind schedule, not surprised.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I'm not surprised by the delay.

It has the added benefit of getting further away from CoD.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Gives me more time to think if I want it or not .

 

[Osprey]

I like how EA is spinning it as being motivated by a commitment to quality (as if they would never rush a game) and tremendous fan interest. It has nothing to do with the fact that the game's initial release date was one week after CoD:BO4 and one week before RDR2 and that EA's Titanfall 2 got killed a couple of years ago by coming out one week after BF1 and one week before CoD:AW. Amusingly, they didn't think that the player bases overlapped and that Titanfall 2 would do just fine. Maybe EA is capable of learning a lesson.

 

[John Price]

Bit disappointed to hear about the delay but I can understand why they did it.

 

[XX]

Battlefield V Open Beta Update Notes

DICE posted eleventy billion details about the game, including in depth talk about changes to core mechanics and balance issues.

 

[crowi]

I like how EA is spinning it as being motivated by a commitment to quality (as if they would never rush a game) and tremendous fan interest. It has nothing to do with the fact that the game's initial release date was one week after CoD:BO4 and one week before RDR2 and that EA's Titanfall 2 got killed a couple of years ago by coming out one week after BF1 and one week before CoD:AW. Amusingly, they didn't think that the player bases overlapped and that Titanfall 2 would do just fine. Maybe EA is capable of learning a lesson.

I think it's more likely they're now realizing badly they sandwitched their new game, after the previous one was doing poorly too. Some people buy it for sure, but comments about the lack of pre-orders was probably the final straw.
Personally I have no interest at all for this game - I could maybe download it as free-to-play and play a few matches to see the graphics. Other than that - F EA.
Only game of these 3 I'm buying is RDR2 as that will actually have a gripping story and great production value.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

16 teams of 4 for battle royale.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Sounds like a good amount. Not too small and not too big.

Also, it seems that there will be 8 maps to start with.