Message Wall:Boomer8

"The [comparison] was to serve as how ridiculous... having a bunch of black guys and women fighting in [Call of Duty:] WWII."

Although mildly unrealistic, it's not entirely so. At the end of the day, it's Call of Duty. Call of Duty does a damn fine job of being downright insulting towards historical accuracy. The game and the franchise has never tried to be a simulator. It's never tried to be "accurate". It's never been the case.

There are some things that should be said. There are some things that definitely SHOULD NOT be said. And then there are some things that just don't make a damn bit of difference. If the depiction of non-Caucasian-male soldiers in your World War II game is an issue for you, DON'T BUY THE GAME. Not that terribly hard. Sure, they weren't there when the history was made, but neither was a zombie outbreak. Or for that matter, basically any of the characters. NO GAME IS HISTORICALLY ACCURATE. They wouldn't be as fun if they were entirely historically accurate. Get over yourself, is I guess what I'm saying. SteveHeist (talk) 00:49, June 20, 2017 (UTC)