Forum Discussion
@-DFA-ThumpOh I forgot that whinge.....
Video games MUST be 100% historically accurate.
Shall we ignore the fact that where maps depicted a historical battle, the side that in reality, lost could actually win?
There is a difference between 'authentic' and 'accurate', you might want to look that up.
@Trokey66The way they presented it...yes, it needed to be that way. Do all video games HAVE to be historically accurate, no. But when they tout that it will be the most authentic (read: Marketing made it sound as if it was going to be along the lines of OG CoD where you stormed normandy's beaches), they have an obligation to live up to that standard. But in good DICE/EA fashion, they went for the trend chase. There is also nothing authentic about one armed prosthetic wearing women on the front lines in WW2. There is also nothing authentic about two people being able to take down an entire Nazi facility in the dead of winter.
Again, it has to do with EA/DICE misleading their customers. It was supposed to be the return of the BF1942 days (just like 2042 was supposed to be the return to the BF3/4 days) and it turns out it was the first iteration of trend chasing even if it meant going against the franchise's history (funnily enough).
- Trokey664 years agoSeasoned Ace@-DFA-Thump Again, you need to look up, read and inwardly digest than apply the difference between 'authentic' and 'accurate'.
The prosthetic was 'authentic'.
Women on the front line was 'authentic' (in some arenas).
The mission, if not the participants was 'authentic'.
Many aspects of BFV were 'authentic' and those that weren't were usually for understandable gameplay/marketing reasons.
If you read all the marketing to mean 'accurate', that is your fault, not DICE/EA's. Most sensible people understand that video games and the entertainment industry in general, is rarely if ever, 'accurate'. Sensible people who want accuracy read a book or watch a documentary, not play video games or watch Saving Private Ryan!- 4 years ago
@Trokey66Defend the multi-billion dollar corporation all ya want bud, they still sold the game incorrectly. The fact that these aspects existed in the era (women, prosthetics, and missions involving nations in conflict) doesn't mean that it is authentic.
Definition of authentic
1a: worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact
paints an authentic picture of our society
----There is nothing that makes me believe that two people can take out a Nazi heavy water plant, there is nothing to make me believe that prosthetic wearing women were on the battlefront wielding cricket bats. If they really cared about being authentic, they would have done a mission that reflected the experiences of Lyudmila Pavlichenko...but then again this "authentic" WW2 game didn't even have the Russians iirc.
b: conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features
an authentic reproduction of a colonial farmhouse
---There is nothing in BFV other than "it's a world war ii setting" that reproduces essential feeling of what it was to fight in that era. Just because they put a M1 Garande in there with some enemies wearing a Nazi uniform doesn't make it an authentic experience. It's about as authentic as Tropic Thunder's depiction of the Vietnam War.
c: made or done the same way as an original
authentic Mexican fare
---This definition doesn't really apply, but if you can argue that BFV was made the same way as BF1942, knock yourself out.
Also, throwing in "sensible people" as an insult tells me more than enough. Video games are more than "just entertainment" (or at least could be) as it is a medium by which people can interact directly (moreso than a book or documentary). Brothers In Arms proved this to an extent along with Verdun and Medal of Honor as well as multiple other non-FPS games.
Lastly...not sure how you're lumping Saving Private Ryan in with the likes of BFV. The accuracy and authenticity of that movie was so great that it actually caused distress to those who survived the beaches of Normandy.- Trokey664 years agoSeasoned Ace@-DFA-Thump Although loosely based on a true story, the exploits in Saving Private Ryan where wholly fictional and therefore inaccurate however, the story was told in an authentic way.
Video games, especially sand box FPS such as Battlefield are just entertainment but at best, they could inspire the user to research actions depicted from more reliable sources.
How accurate is it that all battles depicted only ever had 64 combatants at any one time?
How accurate is it that a side that historically lost a given battle can win.
Let's ignore the fact that a German can use a gold Thompson or a Brit a Gold STG.
Simply put, an authentic thing can be used in an inaccurate way/setting but never the less, remain authentic to the over all experience.
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 4 seconds ago
- 17 minutes ago
- 9 hours ago