I tried to fix it anons
You did good senpai
Thanks user, that's all I needed to hear.
Needs more dubstep.
Still too many automatic weapons, to many blacks and not enough French/Russians
It's already fixed user.
I think the French are perfectly represented with blacks
So this is the power of Russian humor. Not bad.
Much better without the rap(e) music
But the blacks are German in the game
>The White Stripes
>Rap
Aren't you a little old for this website, gramps?
Needs more dubstep, more automatic weapons, more POC, and less French people.
>american gun
Why? Is this a screenshot from MP that is loadout based? I swear if this is campaign footage I'll be just as upset as I've been this whole time.
its mp
Well done op
>campaign
>Battlefield
No one gives a fuck about the campaign.
(you)
There were African colonial soldiers.
Though to be fair they didn't fight in Europe. The game is taking historical liberty for fun. This isn't a new thing. Thomas Pynchon's 1973 WW2 novel Gravity's Rainbow features a black Nazi character named Enzian and he has a host of "Schwarzkommando" under his thumb.
Historical revisionism based loosely on facts is fun. I'd say it's less the artist's fault for taking liberties and more the public's fault for not taking the art with a grain of salt.
That was more a end-move, not an attempt to acquire more (you)s.
holy shit I knew the people whining about this game were autists, now I have concrete proof.
>Historical revisionism is fun
It might be for the best as well. Some people who play this game may immediately assume the Germans are Nazis.
>spreading disinformation to the masses
>fun
>bastardization of actual WWI conditions is art
they aren't taking liberties, they are removing realities. there were pretty much no black soldiers in Europe during WWI. there were very few automatic weapons per soldier during WWI.
If this is in colonial German Africa (where there actually was fighting) then it's accurate.
In art. Not for the sake of propaganda. Nobody thinks they know Egypt because they watched The Mummy. Nobody thinks they know WWII just because they read Gravity's Rainbow. Besides, the production cycles of industrial art are too quick to warrant thorough, expensive research for the sake of peddling esoteric facts to the public, which the public will ignore in favor of the fun and sensationalized bits, marketing psychology shows. Financial incentives negate most attempts at scholarship in art. Good capitalists by their very nature cannot endeavor to create historically accurate works at a guaranteed financial gain.
If a subset of the public is interested in the academia behind the work, they will google-fu their way through primary sources.
Correct! And who is to blame? The artist who took creative liberty, or the public who doesn't care about being informed?
Cool your jets user. I even added the public should expect this sort of thing and study more. It's complained about so often that I'd venture to say most people know hollywood, novels, and video games aren't primary sources. They might be too lazy to care further, but who the fuck cares.
>In art. Not for the sake of propaganda. Nobody thinks they know Egypt because they watched The Mummy. Nobody thinks they know WWII just because they read Gravity's Rainbow.
I think you'd be surprised, I'm sure your average Joe thought he knew everything about the French Revolution from reading the Scarlet Pimpernel before the advent of Television and Computer technology, media is a very very very powerful thing and history proves this
> there were pretty much no black soldiers in Europe during WWI. there were very few automatic weapons per soldier during WWI.
I mentioned and acknowledged all this and then some.
I'm acknowledging your points more than you're acknowledging mine.
Young black males are a target demographic. They want to be represented in art an fiction. The market moves faster than academia or concerns about historicity. The makers of the game wanted to make something vaguely historical that appealed to modern sentiments. Most people know this vaguely, and if they are intersted, will look into primary sources. If they aren't intersted, they'll skill through even the historically accurate stuff in the game. Plebs don't pay attention to facts. They throw their money at what they want to see, and you can bet your sweet ass the developers know more about their audience than you do.
Even if you find it immoral, you cannot stop the tug of war of financial incentives that drive the video game and movie market. The best you can do is what you're doing: Take issue with the historical innacuracy and drive *INTERESTED PARTIES* to study more.
The problem is no matter how hard you try there won't be that many interested parties. The appeal of historical revisionism has less to do with the "evil merchants" meme and more to do with the "wants and needs of stupid plebs" meme. If the general public smartened up in a statistically significant way, the market would respond to these new needs with more scholarly work.
I'm trying to give you the keys to making the change you want to see. Instead of bitching about le evil artists and merchants, maybe you can convince le stupid public.
Most of le stupid public is not on this board, and is not concerned with historicity. They're concerned with vaguely historical aesthetic and kick-ass action.
Look at 300. Look at The Mummy. Look at Kingdom of Heaven. These are responses by Market to the Public desire.
Market wants $. Public wants :-).
tl;dr
This is a fair point, but since then academia has engaged in so much criticism of the media and its liberties that it takes that the general public is started to catch on to this phenomenon.
The new problem is apathy of the public to study further. The market will only respond with historicity once the public craves it. This is a tug of war of incentives, financial and cultural, not a conspiracy to make everyone stupid, at least not totally so
.
Consider this!!
Even in historical art, there are ridiculous liberties taken. How many renaissance paintings of Jesus, for instance, show him in contemporary clothes, walking amongst contemporary architecture? I think it's a testament to progress that we don't typically paint jesus in jeans these days.
Fucking get chromespeak plugin, right click, and read text with your eyes closed, you lazy faggot.
>tl;dr
is the exact problem the public has. You don't want to read two paragraphs, let alone a history book.
Pic related. It's from a book called "How Not To Write A Novel." It shows the market forces I'm talking about.
>Implying you can change what the public wants.
>they'll skill through
I meant skip through
good job
EA should be liquified for adding fucking glitchstep to a WWI game though
tl;dr
>BF1
>Not a massive insult to Europe's history
>Designed by Swedish cucks
Yeah no thanks
I was implying you couldn't, but that a better effort could be made than getting mad at the market, which responds to pleb desires and moves fast.
I was giving the complaining anons a place to aim their efforts, in short.
Complaining about
>"Waah the media makes historically inaccurate garbage"
is way less worthy of an effort than trying to change what the public wants, though both efforts might be futile.
Consider that Thermopylae, in terms of survival, was futile for the Spartans. They still fought.
Likewise is the butthurt user's fight for historical accuracy in fiction. He can aim his efforts at the right place, and still lose. It's better than crying at other anons on Veeky Forums about what the market is doing to muh heritage.
>"wants and needs of stupid plebs"
That rhymed.
100x better
you could do more
maybe allow others to cut in
>adding fucking glitchstep to a WWI game
That sounds radical as hell though.
Go somewhere where text isn't the primary medium
This is why I tend to avoid mainstream entertainment. It tries to widen the demographic to such a degree that it starts to lack in plot and accuracy. Luckily there are still small developers like the ones at Kingdom Come who care more about it
>Anons complain that the public and the market doesn't care about history
>proceed to ignore the lengthiest and most informative posts in the thread, proving the plebs and the market have it right
Stay stupid as fuck Veeky Forums
This is the best we can do. We can't change the overall market, but we can support the niche markets.
>be my great-great-grandfather that had to fight in the trenches since late 1914
>have had to endure Verdun, Chemin-des-Dames and all such horrors
>have had to kill men in cold-blood, confront the stinging frostbite in the colder months by being stranded out in your trench, and probably crawl through the corpses of men to survive no man's land
>tell yourself that it will be all worth it, because you will forever be known as "that" generation that defended your country and its freedom
>peer down from the Heavens in 2016 to see how people commemorate you
>"lol, french people stop being mad that you aren't in this WW1 game! It's not like you did anything! We had to save you anyways! French are such pussies! Btw, my historical knowledge spans only from 1939 to current day :)"
>tfw
Je suis désolé papi :c
same here, he was early relieved by his friend of guard duty, not long after his post was destroyed by artillery
>WWI game
>most of the infantry have full-auto guns
Goddammit. Even WWII didn't have widespread use of those weapons until near the end.
JUST BUY THE DLC TO PLAY AS THE FRENCH FOR THE LOW LOW PRICE OF $29.99 :^)
>artillery
Darn. Something that's amiss in this game, or how I humbly feel it, is it not being materialized to us how devastating arrillery was. At Verdun, on both sides, half the men perished by artillery fire. That war truly was life or death, based only on your luck.
My (...)grandfather had to be on the front lines throughout the entire war, but I'm sure he'd say that he was only lucky to have been spared. Check out his WW1 Art work by researching "Adolphe Dubigeon WW1".
I don't even mind buying it, but I do hate that it might entertain this lie that the french were so useless in WW1, that "lol we can just put them in a DLC". That's what I feel a DLC implies anyways.
This. We can always play Verdun, Red Orchestra/Rising Storm, DCS, etc. The historical autist market isn't big enough to warrant it, so all we can do is support those among us who make this kinda game.
Apparently DICE thinks that France during WW1 was so "important" that putting them in the game was enough and that it would deserve a dlc just for the French... which you have to pay extra for. I small backtracking, greed and ignorance with this.
Thankfully, some youtubers have been able to pierce through DICE's unabashed lies to justify France being a DLC. Most of France does realize that thete are more suited ways to honor a country than to leave it in a DLC.
I really wonder what happens when you create a big budget shooter and only have single shot/bolt action rifles or incentivize its usage over other weapons.
Like, what kinds of gameplay - particularly in multiplayer- would emerge from that shit. Would run and gun still happen? Would cunts actually focus on cooperation? Or would the shit that happened in WWI actually happen and you have players going stormtrooper with shovels and semiauto handguns, and grenade spamming?
But nope, DICEcucks just have to have a lost opportunity.
THE FRENCH ARE ACTUALLY SO SO SO VERY MUCH IMPORTANT THAT THEY GET THEIR OWN FULL DLC! VIVA LA FRANCE! for the low low price of $29.99! ;^)
>VIVA LA FRANCE!
Why must Americans always say this so fervently. It's "Vive la France" dimwits :o!
And that's seems to be their strategy to ward themselves from criticism from the french, with frail attempts at stroking our faint ego, but I don't see why the french would be won over by that lie, when something being DLC usually implies that it's expendable to the game. And France SHOULD NOT BE EXPENDABLE TO A FUCKING WW1 GAME!
Au contraire. DLC implies the french were so important you have to pay extra to play as them
;^) ;^)
>something being DLC usually implies that it's expendable to the game.
OH CONTRAIR! DLCs ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE GAME ITSELF! WHICH IT IS WHY IT IS A STEAL AT THE LOW LOW PRICE OF $29.99! (^: :^) (^: :^)
>Why must Americans always say this so fervently. It's "Vive la France" dimwits :o!
>They want to be represented in art an fiction
Then why don't they play GTA or some gangster game?
What is this shitty trend of pouring everyone everywhere like that?
A game about WW1 or Medieval Europe should have no blacks, just like a game about Medieval Japan should have no whites
Uh whatever you say monsieur Goldberg.
In all honesty, I can find peace in this belief that to embody the true heroes of WW1, there's larger fee. Oh well :c.
Well you never know, they might put limits on the number of players who can use the classes that have access to automatic weapons. They probably won't, because it's EA and they're all money grubbing shitbags, but maybe someone will be able to make a mod for the PC version that does that.
B-But, what makes France so much more important than Germany that they would need a DLC Mr. Marketer? Shouldn't Germany also get a DLC if important factions need so much work and effort? Why France in particular Mr. Marketer, plz explain.
Shitting all over even vaguely historical events for the sake of political correctness and profit is an absolutely abhorrent trend. I'm not arguing that everything should be 100% historically accurate, but any adaptation should respect what said adaptation is based upon and there is absolutely none of that respect present. For games like Wolfenstein or God of War or whatever that don't even make a pretense of historicity then it really doesn't matter how far you stray but for games that DO make that pretense - such as the Battlefield games - then this is basically a massive fuck you to anyone who cares about WWI history.
Out of the entire debacle this has been, I have however been fond of how deeply it has disclosed to me that Veeky Forums has France's back, and will be as distraught that history is being warped for american interests. It has have been very refreshing to see that only 9gag and reddit are those to believe in the meme that is "surrender monkeys lol".
>pics heavily related
omg he is so funny
he has repeated a meme that has been reiterated a thousand times already, except with even less originality this time
we did it reddit!
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY WILL GET IT'S OWN DLC TOO BECAUSE THEY STARTED THE WAR! VERY IMPORTANT AND WE ARE PRACTICALLY GIVING IT AWAY AT THE PRICE OF $24.99 (€25 or £35)!
To represent blacks in a WW1 video game, all you have to do is set a campaign in colonial Africa! Most the soldiers in those campaigns were black. Doing this would not only bring an often forgotten part of the war to the public, but would also please targeted demographics more so than having some niggas fighting on the eastern front.
>the french aren't in the game
Wait, is this shit serious?
Oui ;-;.
I see marketer-chan! That's great, I am now excited for the French™ DLC for Battlefield 1™, as well as the Russian™ DLC, and Verdun™ Map Pack! However I'm just wondering...Why would you include the US as a playable multiplayer faction from day 1, wouldn't they have been a better suited DLC? After all, DLCs are a measure of importance right?
>would also please targeted demographics more so than having some niggas fighting on the eastern front.
E-mail the EA games or whoever.
>Then why don't they play GTA or some gangster game?
As something other than a criminal stereotype, moron
And has already been mentioned there were Colonial Africans and American blacks in WW1
Honestly, I'm starting to think they put blacks in the game just to make idiots like you butthurt
Red Dead Redemption.
>Russian™ DLC
No such thing. I may weep over what shame we are afflicted with, by being relegated to a mere DLC, and it implicitly being taught to children that our contributions are to be overlooked, but Russians arguably will suffer far worst.
For the game to conform to standards of "the Americans already need to whopping ass!", I believe that they've perhaps confined the game to only its ultimate year, in which the Russians already had suffered.
It is therefore doubtful that we may the heroism of our allies being praised too.
had surendered*
This.
Also I LOVED the bolt-action mechanics in the older Call of Duty games. So satisfying.
It's a travesty if they don't at least make a Russian Civil War game with this model.
ALL FACTIONS ARE VERY IMPORTANT! BUY THE SEASON PASS TO ALL FUTURE DLC CONTENT RIGHT NOW AND YOU WILL GET IT FOR THE AMAZING DISCOUNT OF $59.99!
And Tripwire decided to make a Rising Storm sequel in Vietnam instead of a new Red Orchestra game. Now all the normies are going to be playing some EA game instead of Red Orchestra.
I DONT KNOW IF I CAN DO IT TOVARISHCH
RDR is coverfaggorty though. Games with Cover Mechanics force multiplayers to not run and gun like idiots.
t. veteran GoW player.
I might seriously buy a Russian civil war game just for the opportunity to butcher Bolshevik scum online.
What your talking about is Red Orchestra Fritz.
>E-mail the EA games or whoever.
I know Veeky Forums isn't my personal army, but...
And EA IS PROUD ITS VERY FIRST, RUSSIAN CIVIL WAR DLC. WHITE TROOPS ARE TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE AMERICAN CONTIGENT BY THE WAY, AND THE ORIGINAL RUSSIAN WHITE TROOPS WILL ONLY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU IN DLC, BECAUSE EA CONSIDERS THEM LESS IMPORTANT THAN THAT BADASS AMERICAN CONTIGENT!
That's how I feel a Russian civil war DLC would transpire under the reigns of EA.
Here you go bud:
How are they going to deal with the fact that a majority of Western front fighting was done in France and yet feature no French in the game?
Weren't the Harlem Hellfighters attached to a French division?
History's about to get mightily warped if you haven't noticed yet.
"Fuck France" regrettably seems to prevail as EA's leading marketing policy.
Besides "Buy the upcoming DLC" has EA made any response to the backlash it has received?
OH IF ONLY
I'd love to play as the White Army man
I've sadly not stored it on my computer (can someone find it for user though?), though there's been an EA executive whose commentary to the scandal revolved around "I can't see why so many people are upset, it's just a game". It was in a tweet from how I recall things.
Which does irritate me much farther, because they're veiling to the world that they know how this game will fashion how WW1 is conceived by today's youngsters. This game should've re-asserted France and Britain as the lesson contributors to the allied victory, rather than renew laughably dishonest americocentrism "hurr durr we won the war".
Waiting for Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force DLC, cause the cavalry is actually Mounties.
>black sea fleet naval battle
>the soldiers are all black
t-thanks DICE
EA of all game companies would be the type to say "it's just a game" in the face of that sort of criticism.
This is a product for them, that's the long and short of it. They don't actually give a shit about the subject matter, the fans, any sort of authenticity, etc. They care about selling copies. They probably spent as much if not more on marketing people who made more significant design choices than actual developers over what would appeal to normies.
>Army called the White Army killing communists
user, I hate to spout /pol/ memes...
This is just shameful. While I do not want to belittle American involvement, to make it them the dominant force is just an outright lie and miscommunication of already misperceived understandings of history. Saying that "it's just a game" is to ignore the role that media plays in cultural understanding; a company this large that has had this big of an impact due to their product should know this by now. (I am just reiterating your point I guess).
>Russian White Army Fleet
>Composed of black soldiers
Top kek right there
Lol I was joking that EA would target wewuz types who think the black sea fleet was made up of blacks.
Were there any sort of special forces on the Entente side during WW1? I'm wondering who will be the characters in the campaign.
New Trailer for BF1
Hahaha even better
there are layers to the stupidity!