Battlefield V - The Burning Issue

“V for Victory.” On Wednesday this week at 1pm PT (9pm BST) Battlefield V was revealed to the world live from London, sticking with a historic setting and going back to its WW2 roots after the success of its WW1 epic: Battlefield 1

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ClanPsi155d ago

This is probably the most well-written gaming article I've read in 2018.

drpepperdude54d ago

My only complaint about the article is the overused trope of specifying the current year to justify your argument.

ClanPsi153d ago

I'm Canadian. My prime minister is WAY worse. That was pretty much his entire campaign for half a year. -_-

moomoo31955d ago

Yes! Thank you for being a voice of reason

godofiron55d ago

Yuuuuppp this article pretty well summed up the worries i had from seeing the trailer.

The games were never super realistic in practice, but it made solid attempts, which is what attracted me to the series in the first place. the over-the-top action with the ultra quirky characters was just too much.

I'm even willing to bet that woman would have been much better received if she wasn't equipped with an automail arm and hair bright as the fires of London, throwing the realism of the game out of wack.

Antigenetic54d ago

I always liked the balance that Battlefield 1 held up; was never perfect, but it lived up to WW1 namesake imo.

-Foxtrot55d ago

Oh look at that a well written article that gets into the REAL issues of the game and not using the typical “bu bu but people are crying over just a woman” bullshit argument

MrSwankSinatra55d ago

You know I really don't understand that argument because women did fight in WW2 on both sides of the spectrum, were they as prevalent as men, of course not, but they did nonetheless. The fact that people really got their panties in a bunch over that don't have inkling of knowledge on history clearly.

AHall8855d ago

I feel like that was just websites taking select youtube comments, of all things, and running with it for easy clicks. I think more people just hate the overall look and feel the trailer gave off.

Silkside55d ago

It was never about the women, it was. About the unrealistic cosmetics, laughable action, claims of inclusion when in fact it was all a ruse to justify their new fortnite like micro transactions.

I'm pretty 50/50 about this new battlefield, on one side we get free content and dlcs with the removal of premium which is amazing because it will give this game longevity without splitting the community.

On the other end they have to milk us somehow with these ridiculous outlandish cosmetics to entice the kids and casuals to spend extra cash.

Time will tell how far dice will push these cosmetics, I feel they'll try to get away with as much as possible ignoring any historical accuracy with the excuse that they want to be inclusive and make the game fun.

Inzo55d ago

Actually women werent on the front line other than to be slaughtered. The Germans would send women into the line of fire and when they tried to turn back or run away they would be shot, the Russians had similar practices, a lot of women died and many by the hands of their own people, it was sick really. Women on the other side of the spectrum were auxiliaries with main duties being in the medical tents and in the case of Japan some women auxiliaries would be tasked to do sexual "favours" for the men before battle. The British did not allow women in battle and neither did the Americans.

My biggest gripe with the woman in trailer is not just that she is a woman but because she is so overpowered that she seems to be more efficient than the men while having a prosthetic arm and wielding a WW2 automatic weapon, which has some of the worst recoil ever, as if she is holding an air rifle.

SlashHabit55d ago

Beaches of Normandy, 150 000 men, 1 woman.

haydenlake54d ago

It cannot be ignored how essential a role women played in both world wars i imagine, but in support roles. Without them the men who died in battle might have died in vein, but that’s the thing. Compared to men, the sacrifice made by the very small (if any) amount of sisters on the frontline is not enough to justify the potentially overproportionate screentime and spotlight preference they get in our contemporary media. Every man on the field was just as important as those women, but i’m sorry DICE, 95%+ of army casualties... were men.

MrVux00054d ago

"You know I really don't understand that argument because women did fight in WW2 on both sides of the spectrum"

Aside from Russian side of things, women NEVER served on the front-line as foot-soldiers. Especially not a woman with a prosthetic arm (that did not even exist at the time) wielding a full auto machine gun with it... Battlefield series was never historically accurate but there was always a certain balanced-level of realism put into the gameplay.

sampsonon54d ago

the down votes show why a person like Trump can be elected President, ignorance at its finest

Realms54d ago

Women have never been in the front line in combat units in any modern war only in extreme exceptions like the battle of Stalingrad, no one with a brain has said women didn't participate during WW2 or that they where not in harms way but the depiction of the trailer is very misleading. I personally could give zero F's if women are in the game and that's coming from a Marine veteran that doesn't even care if women are in combat units as long as they meet the standards. I say let them go find out what's like maybe then they will stop bitching and moaning about inequality when they realize what they where asking for was hell.

ClanPsi153d ago (Edited 53d ago )

@Inzo: That's just.... wow. Can you (and the 11 people who somehow agree with your fiction prose) please go to your local library to take out a WW2 history book and read it? Or just read a Wikipedia article ffs.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 53d ago
Silkside55d ago

Ok looks like Dice have gone for an alternative history of WW2

Facebook promo for Battlefield

"forget what you learnt in history class"
"WW2 as you have never seen it before"

Inzo55d ago

Its a disgrace and an insult to those who served in WW2.

DexSun54d ago

So do you think it's an insult that war video games trivialise the real harrowing events and suffering of soilders and civilians of both genders into entertainment for your boredom? Or is it just an insult because a cgi woman was depicted to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

haydenlake54d ago (Edited 54d ago )


If anything they are modern day reminders of the facts about war. You can’t be reminded if you can’t recognise the topic, pal.

Best of all, they turn war into harmless fun, and spark interest in people to learn, especially about history, but it’d be pretty sad if history proves what you like is a lie, wouldn’t it?

Honesty is the best policy.

Inzo54d ago


I am talking about the tag line son. Yeah lets tell the 6 million Jews and the hundreds of thousands of men that lost their lives in WW2 that you should forget what you learned in history class.

DexSun54d ago

@ Inzo, and haydenlake

I'm certainly not going to forget what I know about wars in history because I played a game that didn't portray that moment with 100% accuracy. I didnt suddenly believe that Hitler was shot in the testicle and killed because I played sniper elite.

Nobody buys these games for a history lesson, they want to shoot nazis in single player and tea bag in multiplayer.

If however a game sparks your interest in learning more about the back drop or people involved then you should be smart enough to look for other sources and not expect that game to give you that information with complete accuracy.

The games we play based on historical events are simply a back drop, if dice/ea have to tweek that event slightly for the purpose of more player option while still incorporating real locations, vehicles, weapons linked to that back drop I'm all for it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 54d ago
Liqu1d54d ago (Edited 54d ago )

If they wanted to do alt history then I don't know why they didn't go all out. Add in some steampunk elements or alt history weapons, just go full on Wolfenstein with it. It would be better than some half-assed attempt at alt history that is solely designed to push cosmetic microtransactions.

DexSun54d ago


People are losing there s**t because of a woman character with a prosthetic arm was placed in a trailer therefore somehow disrespecting those who fought in ww2 and is changing history, imagine now what those people would say if they did a completely alt ww2 setting.

At least the cosmetics are optional, and perhaps unlockable through game play. A season pass or map packs however segregate players. And is it any wonder why its now like this with how much money games like overwatch and fortnight make through cosmetic purchases.

I do hope there is a way to turn off cosmetics in multiplayer for those that want a more authentic experience with the look of characters, that should keep everyone happy.

ClanPsi153d ago

I'm perfectly okay with alternate history. I just really prefer when they make it clear that's their intent.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 53d ago
Show all comments (64)
The story is too old to be commented.