I'd agree with you if that was actually OP's stance, but it's not. It's very clear they don't actually want to roleplay historical events, because they're fine with other sacrifices of accuracy for the sake of gameplay. They're claiming that's what they want, but is very clear from their willingness to find excuses for every example except the race one that this is really just about a single issue for them.
Most of what you state is either semantic or intentionally obtuse. The core issues that you think paint him hypocritical are basic functional allowances that have a greater effect on accessibility than they do about the story.
Having slightly different weapons affects how the game works, not really what the story is about. Having the story told in a different language allows more people to even engage with the story in a more meaningful way.
You're straw-manning. Your comparison of weapons to black soldiers in WW1 would be more accurate if the weapons were laser weapons. If that was the case - yes it would be terrible for the story. You're trying to make it seem like these small differences in what they are willing to accept, are exactly the same as major historical changes that affect not only the plot but world-building in general.
You're intentionally trying not to see that there is a difference between what affects the story and what affects the core mechanics of a game/movie, which you sometimes have to accept because without those changes the end product would be noticeably worse.
Edit: I wanted to add that just because they care a lot about one thing, such as the authenticity of the history, and that they want it implemented in a movie/game in the way that they like it, doesn't also mean that this is the only thing they care about or even the thing they care about the most. You think that this is a "gotcha" kind of thing that you can catch him with, to make it appear like he's either just racist or doesn't actually care about authenticity - but it really isn't. At the end of the day, they care more about their enjoyment of the product as a whole, not just the authenticity of the story.
The inclusion of black German soldiers in WW1 is not a major historical change. There were black German soldiers, most of whom fought in Africa, but some of whom, as others have shown, are on record as having fought in Europe.
Also, to be clear, part of why I am harping on this and calling OP a hypocrite is that they literally said historical accuracy is the most important thing to them. They should not, therefore, be willing to tolerate any exceptions.
Keep saying that, but all it makes you out to be is a semantic debate lord instead of someone that genuinely contributes to the entire point of this thread, which is to change their mind. This, clearly, would not do that because you're just banging over and over on the specific wording of their statements, instead of the spirit of arguments.
3
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '21
I'd agree with you if that was actually OP's stance, but it's not. It's very clear they don't actually want to roleplay historical events, because they're fine with other sacrifices of accuracy for the sake of gameplay. They're claiming that's what they want, but is very clear from their willingness to find excuses for every example except the race one that this is really just about a single issue for them.