Forums

Topic: The PlayStation 4 Fan Thread

Posts 9,001 to 9,020 of 9,958

NEStalgia

@Haru17 Blame Microsoft. They stared it with Minecraft in 4k so you can use 5000 pixels to render an 8x8 sprite. But they'll be the highest quality 8x8 pixels anyone has ever seen.

Oh, nice, the reply button is broken.

NEStalgia

Dezzy

Haru17 wrote:

And the gall of Rare to put these highly historically inaccurate robot arms and legs into Sea of Thieves. Shame on them, and shame on Dice. Feed their firstborns to the wolves!!!

Choosing a cartoony art style completely dismantles any expectation of historical accuracy.
Also "pirates" is not a historical event. People sailing around in wooden ships shooting canons at each could be set any time between 1300 and 1800.

Converted from Sony to Nintendo during 7th gen and never looked back.

Haru17

Dezzy wrote:

Choosing a cartoony art style completely dismantles any expectation of historical accuracy.
Also "pirates" is not a historical event. People sailing around in wooden ships shooting canons at each could be set any time between 1300 and 1800.

It's almost like that comment was sarcastic or something. Because it's not a robot leg, it's a peg leg and as it happens they had stick technology in 1300. The only thing ridiculous about that Battlefield trailer are all of these neckbeards who need to come down from their treehouses moaning about SJWs (read: the ever-so gradual loss of male privilege).

Oh, and all of the falling objects and explosions. But mostly the first thing.

Don't hate me because I'm bnahabulous.

KirbyTheVampire

@Haru17 What exactly is it that they're complaining about? The fact that there's a woman in the trailer?

KirbyTheVampire

Dezzy

Haru17 wrote:

The only thing ridiculous about that Battlefield trailer are all of these neckbeards who need to come down from their treehouses moaning about SJWs (read: the ever-so gradual loss of male privilege).

The male privilege of being 99% of combat deaths while the women suffered the oppression of sitting at home, is obviously meaningful to some social neckbeard treehouse justice warriors.

It's mostly just recreational internet outrage though. If the actual game reviews well, no-one will care about the cyborg lesbian infantry. But at the same time, it's not unreasonable to expect Dice to just decide if it's supposed to be a historically accurate series or not. If they made it obvious that it's not realistic, like Far Cry or Wolfenstein, almost no-one would care. It's that sense they're trying to lie about history that annoys people, not simply the inclusion of a female character.

Converted from Sony to Nintendo during 7th gen and never looked back.

Knuckles-Fajita

Battlefield hasn't been realistic for a long time.

Sign up for the Rocket League of Legends Tournament (Sept 15th)!

https://bit.ly/2IoFIvj

Website: https://bit.ly/2Ikg7U0

Twitch: https://bit.ly/2wcA7E4

49/50 followers - Sep 2

redd214

@Dezzy how is it that they're lieing about history when there were in fact female soldiers? Yeah the were an extreme minority but it is still indeed factual. Was actually reading about a female soldier, who also happened to be an amputee, crazy enough, a couple days ago.

But tbh, the fact that people are even having this conversation is just dumb. It's a video game based on history with some obvious liberties taken along the way, they aren't making a documentary or a history text book. Hopefully they don't remove those historically accurate respawns after dying, that would be a true crime 😜

Friend Code: SW-6622-7227-4707

Dezzy

@redd214

Women in the british army were explicitly not allowed in combat roles. Same for the US and Germany.
There were plenty in auxiliary positions, like supplying ammunition, medics positions and some cases of operating guns inside fighter planes. Nothing like that woman in the trailer though.
The Soviets were the only main participant who had women in proper military combat roles such as you would find in a serious battle.

Converted from Sony to Nintendo during 7th gen and never looked back.

Octane

@redd214 Whilst that's true, those were definitely different times, the British army didn't allow women on the front line during WW2, so they've obviously taken some creative liberties here and there.

But we've got people wielding katanas, weird blue face paint that serves no purpose at all, prosthetics that – despite existing back then – wouldn't allow you to use a weapon that swiftly. And the fact that the entire battle sequence should've ended with nearly everyone dead on the ground, considering the amount of bullets that flew across the screen. Extremely flimsy buildings, and flight manoeuvres that don't make any sense unless it's a kamikaze plane

Octane

NEStalgia

Anyone here use the setup where you make someone elses Playstation your "primary" and then play all the games on it on your own account on the other machine so you can both play the games that are on it, buying digitally only once? Ii've heard of that and that would be cool for the 2 playstations in the house. Any odd or unexpected side effects of that? (I guess Switch could do it too, but not until cloud saves exist since I can't take my saves off it.)

@Dezzy Exactly, BF has always been a semi-historically accurate series when it does history themes. BF1 goes as far as making the campaign loosely on the stories of actual fallen soldiers. To take it totally fictional is just a weird turn for BF. But it's that hind of revisionism rather than pure fiction that makes it insulting.

That's my one pet peeve of For Honor as well. It doesn't pretend to technically be historical, taking place in an imaginary set of cities after a fictional calamity they don't define, like an alternate history. But part of its appeal is the semi-accurate reproduction of medieval battle. Except they stack the knights and samurai with women, and female-only classes which really breaks the illusion. There were essentially no female knights in real life (Joan of Arc was laughed at until she actually found the sword and the French were losing so badly they figured "screw it, we'll go with it.") And not even in modern Japan is the idea of female samurai all that believable. (Though women were often ninja assassins....but that's a different Ubisoft series ) The only one where it rightfully DOES belong is the vikings. Women certainly were combatants among the vikings in real life. My "this is fake history" senses tingle every time I see it. Female viking warriors = accurate. Female crusaders and samurai = not accurate. The game toys with us. It pretends to be historical while also being alternate history at the same time.

NEStalgia

redd214

Octane wrote:

@redd214 , so they've obviously taken some creative liberties here and there.

Exactly this is the whole point, it's a video game. It's really not as serious as people are making it out to be.

Friend Code: SW-6622-7227-4707

Dezzy

@NEStalgia

Stuff like For Honor is just fine with me. That seems deliberately exaggerated enough in its style and deliberately vague enough in its setting that I wasn't remotely expecting historical accuracy from that. That's mostly what it comes down to for me. How serious a tone it has and how specific they are in the details of its setting.

Converted from Sony to Nintendo during 7th gen and never looked back.

NEStalgia

@Dezzy For Honor tries to be realistic in a fantasy setting though. It's a weird game (It's Ubisoft after all;...) but the whole selling point is "realistic crusader/viking battles. Plus samurai because reasons." Then they threw it in this odd fiction world, poorly defined. But...it's just weird when the knights/vikings are so realistic in some ways and so....not, in others. It's also weird that the game lists Japan by name, but never Germany, Spain, France, or Viking lands by name, but has the Crusaders speaking Latin (as most did since they worked for the Catholic Church), and the Vikings speaking Icelandic (as most would have, though there were probably a dozen tribal dialects) though. Is this the real world or a fictional world?

NEStalgia

CanisWolfred

Dezzy wrote:

The Soviets were the only main participant who had women in proper military combat roles such as you would find in a serious battle.

Oh hey, I read something about that last week. Was interesting stuff.

NEStalgia wrote:

@Dezzy For Honor tries to be realistic in a fantasy setting though. It's a weird game (It's Ubisoft after all;...) but the whole selling point is "realistic crusader/viking battles. Plus samurai because reasons." Then they threw it in this odd fiction world, poorly defined. But...it's just weird when the knights/vikings are so realistic in some ways and so....not, in others. It's also weird that the game lists Japan by name, but never Germany, Spain, France, or Viking lands by name, but has the Crusaders speaking Latin (as most did since they worked for the Catholic Church), and the Vikings speaking Icelandic (as most would have, though there were probably a dozen tribal dialects) though. Is this the real world or a fictional world?

Neither, It's fanfiction. Who would win in a fight if Vikings, samurai, and Crusaders all started fighting eachother? Any ounce of realism is there to add authenticity when your decked out samurai cleaves a viking in half, only to be stabbed in the back by a crusader.

Edited on by CanisWolfred

I am the Wolf...Red
Backloggery | DeviantArt
Wolfrun

3DS Friend Code: 1418-6849-7569 | Nintendo Network ID: CanisWolfred

Ryu_Niiyama

@NEStalgia There were female samurai though (and yes they fought in war). Onna-bugeshi such as Tomoe Gozen or Hojo Masako for instance. The Naginata is traditionally viewed as a "woman's" weapon because it was light enough that a woman could use it to counter a sword but its less heavy than a yari (both sexes do use the naginata though). Japan pre Edo period allowed for women to have more autonomy and equal view (in part because in the farming class women were out there with the men...because folks gotta eat...that whole man/woman can only do this crap goes out the window when you are hungry) and because for a bit in their early history Japan was more matriarchal and the Empresses were (mostly) allowed to rule with autonomy so long as they had or adopted a male heir. Japan got really prudish edo period on and as western influence increased. Pardon the lack of dates but since I popped in for a minor derail so I didn't want it to turn into a side convo.

Still really really wish For Honor was offline though. bitter tears

Edited on by Ryu_Niiyama

Taiko is good for the soul. Let the drums fill you with FIRE! Hoisa!
Japanese NNID:RyuNiiyamajp
Switch FC: SW-2230-0265-0353
Team Cupcake! 11/15/14 I'm a Dream Fighter. Perfume is Love, Perfume is Life.
Please tag me before you sent a Friend Request. Thanks!

3DS Friend Code: 3737-9849-8413 | Nintendo Network ID: RyuNiiyama

Haru17

@Dezzy Don’t confuse the issue, you know I was referring to modern day male privilege.

Anyway, everyone followed rules in WWII, right? Severely impoverished Germany was all too happy to not raise an army, engage in trench warfare, gas battlefields, and bomb cities. Dude, people were desprate and there were countless civilian deaths and loss of limb, regardless of sex. If you’re trying to tell me that no Northern European women picked up a gun when her town became a war zone, you’re wrong.

Don't hate me because I'm bnahabulous.

Dezzy

@Haru17

Of course. Which is what they should've included in the game if they needed to fulfill some corporate checkbox of having a female character.
I didn't complain that they included a female character in Battlefield One. Because it's not clear that it was necessarily unrealistic in that example, she was fighting with one of the rebel groups that were trying to overthrow the Ottoman empire that they were living under, and therefore almost definitely didn't operate based on rules and guidelines. Making it a very different situation to the military of a nation. Also no way near as well documented.

Converted from Sony to Nintendo during 7th gen and never looked back.

Heavyarms55

So yeah, the PS4 has had at least 4 updates this year alone, none of them have, as far as I can tell, done a single thing, and 2 out of the 4 times the console has crashed mid-update, forcing me to follow step by step instructions on how to reboot it and redo the update.

And the PS4 doesn't like HDMI switch boxes. Unlike PS3, Wii U or Switch, the PS4 seems to output a weaker signal, causing some HDMI boxes to think the device has turned off at times - at least that's the only explanation I have been able to find online for the issue.

complaining rant over

Nintendo Switch FC: 4867-2891-2493
Discord: Heavyarms55#1475
Pokemon Go FC: 3838 2595 7596
Feel free to add me

CanisWolfred

Heavyarms55 wrote:

So yeah, the PS4 has had at least 4 updates this year alone, none of them have, as far as I can tell, done a single thing, and 2 out of the 4 times the console has crashed mid-update, forcing me to follow step by step instructions on how to reboot it and redo the update.

And the PS4 doesn't like HDMI switch boxes. Unlike PS3, Wii U or Switch, the PS4 seems to output a weaker signal, causing some HDMI boxes to think the device has turned off at times - at least that's the only explanation I have been able to find online for the issue.

complaining rant over

Sure it's not the cable? I use an HDMI box so I can have 6 consoles hooked up at once. I have not had this issue. I have, however, had to replace an HDMI cable for the PS3 since it would make the screen fuzzy at times. Only thing I got, since I don't know anything about the box you're using.

I am the Wolf...Red
Backloggery | DeviantArt
Wolfrun

3DS Friend Code: 1418-6849-7569 | Nintendo Network ID: CanisWolfred

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic