IDK I didn't play it. It looked stupid though as I saw a clip of it.
It also depends on the genre, Assassin's Creed for example takes liberties with physics for example.
If you're using a historical back drop you should probably make the effort of replicating that eras values.
Wonder Women for example. You had exceptional women but there's also an element of fantasy in her movie. She has superpowers and is a demigod and it's a super hero movie. Doesn't break immersion it's fine.
A female commando is out if place in a WW2 setting. A female resistance leader or Soviet fighter pilot not so much.
There are stories of a female pope for example but once discovered she was in trouble. Having a female pope for example would be very silly if you're doing a historical setting. If it's fantasy it's fine.
If you really wanted to, you could find a lot more that's ahistorical about the aforementioned WWII game. The issue here is you're picking a very well-publicised (and by publicised I mean fodder for the YouTube outrage engine) example over anything else in the game. So you're noting it's ahistorical, and this doesn't match up for you.
The
problem is that the sources in this case, in these clips that you see, is that they're manufactured to cause controversy over these specific (usually women and minority) characters. If you applied that level of historical accuracy to the rest of the game, you'd come up with
tons of issues. Guns not jamming would be a nice big one there. People who
then justify that based on how jamming might affect their enjoyment of gameplay then reveal their bias - that it's okay to make something ahistorical because it benefits a certain aspect of gameplay, but it's not okay to include women and / or minorities (which benefits gameplay for those demographics, and sometimes us white dudes as well!) because . . . I dunno. Discrimination? Selfishness?
It can only really be one or the other, you see. Either the person is happy with their bias, or they just selfishly prefer the game to specifically cater to them. I can't forsee any negative consequences to having women shoot a gun in Battlefield, right? It doesn't exactly cause me to bleed out of my ears or some other horrendously violent reaction.
tl;dr: popular shooter franchises are effectively fantasy because they don't adhere to any realistic form of combat or strategy. They're all about being the biggest badass and killing other big badasses. To impose the limitation of being historical on them but only for specific subjects, means you're not fairly applying that limitation on the whole game.