Well better get the worst confer nice out of the way first.
The only things of interest to me were Unravel 2 and Sea of Solitude. Anthem did absolutely nothing for me, even after they showed some gameplay.
Also, who thought it was a good idea to have 10 minutes of C&C Rivals? It was absolutely embarrassing.
I don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.
I don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.
Most don't and they don't play Battlefield for it. I think most people are blowing the trailer out of proportion and ignoring all the information and big gameplay overhaul the game is actually getting which is making this sound like the series has a lot more depth in it for the first time in quite awhile. If the trailer was annoying to anyone, just check out Jackfrags videos on Battlefield V, he lays out all the new information and it's really exciting me as a BF fan.
I'm even interested in the Battlefield Battle Royale mode if they hopefully do some unique stuff with it. It has potential to stand out.
Battlefield has never been about historical accuracy. It's always used it as a playground for gameplay. That trailer was perfectly fine as it was a clear multiplayer trailer, which is an amalgamation of everything from the war. So a guy wielding a katana isn't out of place, and a woman fighting on the british side is just because it's a custom character fighting for the British on whatever that map is meant to be. Most people are seriously blowing it out of proportion.
If wanting historical accuracy, or at least more of it, that's what the singleplayer stories before, which dive into specific battles throughout the wars.
Then don't buy itI don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.
Most don't and they don't play Battlefield for it. I think most people are blowing the trailer out of proportion and ignoring all the information and big gameplay overhaul the game is actually getting which is making this sound like the series has a lot more depth in it for the first time in quite awhile. If the trailer was annoying to anyone, just check out Jackfrags videos on Battlefield V, he lays out all the new information and it's really exciting me as a BF fan.
I'm even interested in the Battlefield Battle Royale mode if they hopefully do some unique stuff with it. It has potential to stand out.
I think the nearing half a million dislikes in a little over 2 weeks say otherwise. If you scroll through the comments, you'll find that majority of the community plays the game for historical accuracy and realism. COD:WW2 also had this problem last year but tidied it up by having a somewhat realistic campaign to save face.
Sledgehammer had to release statements on this, stressing how multiplayer would be inclusive but campaign will preserve historical accuracy in respect to the war to calm the raging player base, most of which who do play it for historical accuracy and don't wan't actual wars being skewed by game devs for the sake of pushing modern era political agendas of inclusiveness even if you don't.
Even if you put historical accuracy aside, which is hard to do with WW2 games, when the game is based on history.... what about realism? That is certainly something most gamers today care about. People make thousands of videos comparing COD with BF explicitly on the aspect of realism and accuracy, garnering millions of views.
I'm all for games not being realistic, they are funner that way. Same way I like non fiction books. But label them as such. Don't have the disrespect to say "WW2, the darkest time in human history" in the description and have blue man group doing no scopes out of 2nd floor windows with Katana blades on their back. It was trash.
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1745/40931286820_bbf8b5fa82.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1735/42024731024_c4f9217834_z.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1759/42024724884_f0e096daf3_z.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1725/42024721874_0f691382bb_z.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1721/42024831384_dc4caf8317_z.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1760/42024833184_8db8f1de52_z.jpg)
Yeah, nobody cares. ;D
A significant portion of the dislikes were by trolls whining about women and "robot arms". It got pretty disgusting in the comments early on. There aren't many being genuinely serious about actual historical accuracy and more than a few were being incredibly inaccurate about the history (Yes, women didn't fight on most frontlines, but were for Russia and were a part of resistance forces). I'm not acting like DICE isn't stretching things for the sake of more options in the multiplayer, but it's multiplayer. Multiplayer is the combination of the entire war. It's not out of place to have an American soldier, using a Japanese gun, in France. Does having women seriously affect the gameplay at all? No? Then I think people should calm it down abit. People act like they turned the game into Fortnite and it's just cartoon bullshit everywhere, when it's nothing even close to that. I've seen the gameplay, the game looks really impressive right now and has me excited for BF for the first time in a few entries now.