“Gamers expressing themselves” is the dumbest rational I’ve heard yet, why do you need to express yourself via an ahistorical avatar? If I’m playing a game set in medieval japan I dont feel unexpressed or marginalized because the avatar isnt a 40yr old american dork. When I play the Witcher I dont feel left out because I am not actually a super-human mutant man.
The whole point of video games is you are transported to a time place and character impossible to you in real life. When I play a world war 2 game I dont want to be me, because then I would probably be on a laundry ship or behind a typewriter, I want to play as one of the *young english, french, german, russian, japanese and american men* that fought the conflict. I dont want to play as someone who did not fight the war, whos presence in the game is dictated purely by a political agenda in contradiction of the audience’s desire for realism. I don’t want to play mp in a world war 2 game and hear a bunch of women screaming, or see female avatars in whermacht uniforms running around because it is silly. Enough players agree with me that preorder sales are dropping precipitously. Get woke, go broke.
Folks, folks, No american should ever have to worry about weapon durability in a zelda game. Thats my promise and its a promise ill keep, believe me. A Zelda survival game? Nintendo isnt sending us their best folks. Sad.
@presauk: How does being black or a woman create gameplay opportunities? Is there an afro picking or tampon application QTE? The French employed colonial troops from Africa, granted, but they were a miniscule part of the war, totally insignificant. World War 1 extended into the Middle East and Bedouin warriors, often on horseback, were a big part of it. We know this, the question is: why *lie* and claim that Bedouin women were a part of that when they were't? This is corporate identity politics pandering b u l l s h i t, its insulting to the battlefield community and stains what should be a great game.
@bitwhys: 1) Americans were only in the war for less than a year from spring of 1918 through the end of the war in November 1918, the American experience is hardly representative of most soldiers experience. 2) The man pictured is clearly a Sub-Sahran African and serves with the French. Like the American this happened but in such small numbers its hardly representative of most soldiers. 3) There were literally no Arab women fighting in the Middle East in the first world war. NONE. Know why? because Islam discriminates against women. Go watch Lawrence of Arabia (or newsreel footage), see any women among the Bedouin warriors? No? Thats because they didn't exist.
Dice chose to make a game not based on the experience of most soldiers, which were 99.9% young European men (it was a European war, isn't this obvious?), but instead chose to make a game based on the demands of modern social justice warriors for an ahistorical fantasy that includes blacks and women as main characters when they were actually barely present on the stage. Please don't try to tell to us this is accurate, you simply don't know what you are talking about.
@slappy54: No but I truly admire the Swedes championing of Soshul Justis™ for video game characters in ahistorical settings. I mean why let a little thing like historical fact, common sense or even one's gag reflex stop you from including every victim group possible in historical events they were not involved with. Peeps feels are at stake here.
Alls I know is when I think World War 1, I think black dudes and arab chicks, bc thats who fought it right? You know how in islam women are totally equal to men and are treated as equals on the battlefield, remember how in Lawrence of Arabia there were all those female arab soldiers? This is 100% based on historical FACT and all you sh*tlords need to shut your mouths talking about how it was fought 99.999% by european men. What about the other 0.0001%? It makes total sense to have them featured prominently. U racists.
coolbeans1's comments