In this topic I am going to analyze the arguments of people who did not like the presentation of the new Battlefield V. Not because they are against everyone, but because they do not have any objective reasoning behind them, as it seems to me. This is detrimental because these people are the majority and they create a rather unpleasant information sphere around the game, which will clearly affect the online world in the future. I really can’t understand why people got so mad at a two-minute video.

Battlefield is no longer realistic

And he was? Let’s take Battlefield 1. Submachine guns in the First World War, as well as axes in a soldier’s equipment, are far from realistic. Battlefield 1 is so stylish because it took real special cases and elevated them to absolutes. A machine gunner with almost knightly armor is also a dubious contender for realism. But such a case really happened on the Italian front. Let’s remember the expansion The Shall Not Pass and the special trench raider class. And in general, a variety of batons with engraving. No, perhaps it was so if the entire platoon consisted of professional engravers, but I don’t really believe it.

I love the smell of realism in the morning!

New customizable characters look more like clowns than real soldiers

Why do we need customization in games at all?? To associate yourself with your avatar, and just admire it. Many are comparing the new Battlefield V heroes to Overwatch characters or Call Of Duty customization. For me, this comparison is inappropriate because in the above games you can create a hero of almost any color and shape. Despite the fact that the customizable characters of Battlefield V correspond to the military style. Here it would be more appropriate to compare with Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Wildlands, where you can also dress up your character, but your bow does not go beyond the setting. However, the prosthesis confuses me too. The diversity of races and genders personally does not annoy me at all because, to the surprise of the public, games are played by people of different races and genders. If I’m a hot redhead or a guy from the streets of LA, then I can make myself a hero to match myself. What’s wrong with that? I don’t see any modern inadequate intolerant tolerance here. They just give all the players avatars to match themselves and there is nothing wrong with that. There are no Amazons with bulging sides or an army of fighting blacks against the Aryans here.

The guy on the left is in a flight jacket, with a red beret and war paint. At the same time, the katana does not stand out from the setting at all, but only adds brutality to the hero. The girl wears a military coat, also hung with equipment in the color of the battlefield. A man with a bald head in a T-shirt and military pants. The guy on the far right wears a camouflage jacket and is also covered up to his ears in equipment. They don’t glow pink from half a kilometer away, they just wear what they wore at the time.

Everything is somehow colorful and positive

I think I’ve figured out why everything in the Battlefield V trailer looks the way it does. Here’s why:

DICE used as a prototype for inspiration not photographs from the front, but rather positive colorful postcards from the Second World War, full of propaganda and patriotism. And this seems to me at least an interesting solution. Especially in contrast to DICE’s brutal vision of war. Characters and equipment from postcards burst into reality and immediately receive a tasty slap in the face from the battlefield. Planes crash, colorful heroes die every thirty seconds. Personally I like it.

The trailer sucks

It seems to me that it https://talksportbetcasino.uk/bonus/ plays well within the presentation because you can see that the video visually lists all the advantages of the new game, told by the developers during the presentation. I personally don’t like the usual cutting to music because it can greatly distort the impression of what you see. The absence of music works well to immerse the viewer in what is happening because the whole action takes on realism. The absence of assembly adhesives also works for this. I immediately remembered the teaser for last year’s Dunkirk, in which there were no cuts or pop music, and the video itself worked for immersion.

This scene had simply mind-blowingly authentic acoustics that worked for immersion

What do the developers think??

I completely agree with the quote from the executive producer of Battlefield V – “For us, fun will always be more important than authenticity.”. Battlefield was never realistic. Rendezuk in Battlefield 3 – the height of realism. Seriously? However, there is no denying the fact that some DICE developers are clearly going overboard in arguing with haters and such behavior is unacceptable. They accuse players of sexism, intolerance, racism. On the one hand, I can understand them because, besides sexism, I can’t find a reason why the player doesn’t like the redhead in the frame. But it’s not cool to resort to personal insults.

In general, what do you think about Battlefield V??Have your say.

Battlefield V

Best comments

What do I think about the new battle… I don’t think about it, I need to sell three kidneys in order to buy a computer that will handle it. But I’m thinking about authenticity and WWII. For me, they have already released a shooter about this war, which I am completely satisfied with Red Orchestra 2, grey, dirty and bloody, this is how war should be shown, as for me, and the dice would be better off with Bad compani 3 or 2142(2), well, whichever is better, I would look at it with great interest, and since I don’t matter one bit, let everything be as it is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

As they say, people are greeted by their clothes, in this case by the trailer, in which I didn’t see any innovations other than costumed hippies, and, comparing what I saw on the screen with what I know about the Second World War, I was a little surprised by what was happening on the screen, which can’t be called anything other than a circus. But then, after watching Zombirus, I found out that there was a closed screening, where they showed and talked about new gameplay features, which, by the way, not a word was said at the presentation. Hence the hate, plus many initially did not like the idea of ​​returning to World War II.

Anyone who considers himself a battle guru is obliged to divide the audience of players into “garbage”, who do not understand anything and simply eat shit, and into the “elite”, who have lived life from the very bottom and see errors in the binary code directly through the monitor. And according to all the laws of liberalism and democracy, the first ones deserve to rot in agony and not touch the battle at all, and then it will blossom and three and a half cripples will play the game of their dreams. Or no, they won’t, because no one will do it if one and a half diggers play it, who know the innermost secret of what battle actually is. The video says that the main thing is the gameplay, not the abundance of content. Let’s say I agree with the content’s claim, but it turns out that there is no gameplay in the battle, since she died? What do I play in the evenings then?? Since I’m casual, I don’t have the right to play the game, paying for it like everyone else, just because a more experienced guy saw an error in the netcode that happens once a day, and accuses me of being a hamster and killing battles, bitch, playing it and having fun. You go into witchcraft – good riddance, why should I be interested in this?? You behave like an offended young lady who left a guy, and then specially dressed up waits for him everywhere to show off, saying that everything is fine with her.

I completely agree with the author. Every time I have fun with the idiots who squeal about realism within the BF series. The battle was always about a meat grinder on the cards, when it was still 32 to 32, and not about authenticity and realism.

I personally perceived the trailer neutrally, but the information is much more important. Personally, I don’t really care what the game will look like (because I’m sure it will look decent, after all, Frostbite is a powerful engine, and most players will not go to the extremes of costumeization (even, I think, there will be more whites, because many did not really like the fixed races in the Bf1 classes)) in comparison with its content, qualitative changes, and then the need for medics and supports with ammunition (and not mortars in the ass of the world) on the front line is growing exponentially (finally, snipers will also partially die out – without bullets and autoregen you won’t be able to camp for long at the other end of the map), greater emphasis on means of defense and attack (including aggressive defense)

Even if you calculate/think purely theoretically..
The number of likes/dislikes under the trailer is approximately half. If those who were disliked are really for authenticity, then at least half of the fighters on the map will run in a non-customized form. Next, the second half – even if everyone wants to customize themselves, it is unlikely that these will be extreme options. In the end, most players subconsciously create themselves. Well, let another half be customized, but in moderation. The most extreme options will probably be paid, and not everyone will want to pay money for it. What I mean is that in the end, we will have three young ladies running around the field, well, let one with a prosthesis, well, another one with a katana, and another most extreme option – a dark-skinned young lady with a prosthesis and a katana. and it’s not a fact that we will all meet them and be an eyesore.

Well, I’m talking about the same thing – mostly internal autists or streamers/youtubers will show off in order to stand out even more and amuse their feelings

>counterargumentation
>personal opinion of noname from YouTubers
When the hell will you learn to express your opinion in your own words?? Some idiots will watch enough of DRZV (DRZh… well, they’ve lost their minds), others – in general, etc. – and fly into discussions to throw poop at the fan, quoting their opinion, forgetting about their own.

I was going to write something similar myself, but you got ahead of me. I personally wasn’t offended by the video and I didn’t see a circus there. Well, innovations generally delight you right to your fingertips. It’s clear what customization is for, they want to make money from it after release, and this is the lesser of two evils, given that all post-release content will be free. The main thing is that the negative buzz out of the blue does not play a cruel joke when there is no online and support stops before it even begins..

Well, that is, the hate is absolutely subjective, because I didn’t see hippies in the trailer, but quite the opposite, I noticed all those moments that were just talked about at the presentation – walls that can be shot through, buildings that are beautifully penetrated by a tank, and the physics of the body, and fortifications. Plus, I initially liked the idea of ​​going back to World War II.

Thank you for taking 16 minutes of my life. I didn’t see any valid complaints. The man dug into non-working chips, while forgetting that BF always worked for fun. Need a tactical shooter? Welcome to Arma. Battlefield has always been a casual arcade and, most importantly, large-scale game. And from part to part the scale increases, the controls become more and more pleasant, and the action is concentrated where it is needed and when it is needed. The main thing is fun, not idle chips.

The trailer is kind of crap, but I like everything that the developers promise. And in general, my favorite part is Heroes, which is basically frivolous and about customization.