Cool take the month to implement an option that makes it so player generated character models are not shown in Multiplayer, but instead default historically plausible character models will be used, like in past games.

Then everyone can play the game they want to play, without having to pick a side.

If this is not about forcing their politics into the game, give the game an option to disable it.

I watched it through twice! Its great! Love it.

@kairauk: And I support that choice being there when it makes sense. Like in Battlefield 1 where they had Russian maps with Russian female snipers, where that actually happened.

When it is obviously out of place, like it is with a female British soldier with 1 arm and a cricket bat, I cannot. Its fundamentally altering the feeling of the property. Its taking a serious property and making it a cartoon.

@noforceken: How awesome would it have been if the single player female story was you showing up on a train to a farm to work as a land girl. Having to dig ditches and pick fields to complete your objectives and win. All of course in a beautifully rendered English countryside.

@dubguin: But apparently the reason we all bought that game but not this one is the women, not the historical inaccuracy, cyborg prosthesis, and general cartoony wackiness, the fact that there are playable females, like the last game...

@Ant_17: real shame they couldn't create like a generic soldier default that is accurate and then an option to enable them and hide player avatars. Really difficult to pull off that easy compromise that gives everyone what they claim they wanted.

@SoNin360: BF1 also had female characters, as they mention above. I wasn't outraged that they had russian females on a russian map where russia had actual female snipers.

The "OMG GET THEM FEMALES OUT OF MY VIDYA" argument is a lazy lie, proven false by the last game they just did. Its not just that they are having women, nor that they are having women where they didn't actually fight, nor that they are now having handicapped soldiers whose artificial limbs function like Cable's cyborg arm, and its not just that they are putting in skins to sell people, its the whole package. Its the whole Social Justice and Fortnite inspired destruction of the Battlefield IP.

@Barighm: I wouldn't, that would be like watching Band of Brothers, and then all of a sudden wacky one armed chick with a cricket bat is fighting with them... a disclaimer is not enough.

Its changing the very nature of the product. Its 'Jumping the Shark'.

They should have called it Bad Company 3. Then wacky would have been expected, and it would have been a lot easier to just roll with.

@therogerwilco: Thats actually one of the few that I have no issue with at all, as the Doctor is not actually human.

@scatterbrain007: You call it entitlement, I call it giving the customers who have supported you for over a decade a product they want to BUY, and treating them with respect.

But being Woke is more important for DICE and EA these days. Who needs a loyal passionate fan base that ensures you have a profit before the game even is released, when you can get social justice brownie points.