Blizzard to Remove "Sexy" Tracer Pose in Overwatch - Update


Space Ace
Mar 13, 2009
I agree, seeing dat ass totally undermines the strong wimminz.

So long as her 8 year old daughter doesn't get negatively influenced whilst playing an online shooter game with random strangers with access to voice functions, that's what truly matters. Won't someone please think of the squeakers? D:


Will never say anything smart
Feb 25, 2014
It seems to me that their biggest mistake was crediting some random forum user as their reason for removing the pose. If they just removed the pose and just said "We didn't really like it", there would have been so much less backlash than what they did instead.

But, they decided that it would be a good idea to thank some rando on the internet for talking them out of a pose that people interpret as "sexy" and had this entire shitstorm brew instead. (Personally, the pose seemed cute to me rather than sexy) It certainly didn't help that the first post that he made was talking about how he didn't want to make anyone uncomfortable with the content within the game.

The poster in question certainly didn't do anything improve the situation. That line about congratulating Blizzard for having a diverse cast of female characters seemed throwaway more than anything. Maybe that's just me.

But this whole thing about censorship and SJWs and bullshit like that? Really? I thought we were past this. Apparently not. Ugh.


New member
Feb 3, 2010
why don't they just alter all female characters to be generic flat women that have no feminine distinctions or anything that could be considered provocative. I mean, we all know that real life women avoid being sexy, even when it's with their partner, being sexy is just wrong! The fact that Blizzard is exploiting this sacrilegious booty is just disgusting, real women don't look or pose like that!

I'm making a new movement "Replace ALL female characters in any medium with tofu"

Secondhand Revenant

Recycle, Reduce, Redead
Oct 29, 2014
The Nine Hells
GZGoten said:
why don't they just alter all female characters to be generic flat women that have no feminine distinctions or anything that could be considered provocative. I mean, we all know that real life women avoid being sexy, even when it's with their partner, being sexy is just wrong! The fact that Blizzard is exploiting this sacrilegious booty is just disgusting, real women don't look or pose like that!

I'm making a new movement "Replace ALL female characters in any medium with tofu"
I've certainly never seen someone pose like that in real life. Nor someone try to be sexy while being ready to get into some kind of athletic competition (which is the closest thing I can think of outside an actual fight).

I'm not sure what kind of point you think is made by suggesting that women actually go around trying to show off their butts in this sort of context or that people actually pose like this for anything but rather specific photographs.


New member
Apr 23, 2009
Personally, yeah, I can get why the poster had problems - I mean, when I see that pose, my eyes are immediately drawn to 'dat ass', which kinda contrasts with Tracer's chipper nature. I mean, maybe if her outfit wasn't designed so it wrapped so snugly around her ass, like female armor in Mass Effect, it wouldn't be quite so glaring.

It wouldn't be a gamebreaker for me if it was in the final product, but I do understand how it can be an issue to some.


New member
Dec 5, 2008

On one hand, yeah, it really isn't a big deal. I mean, I'm ever so slightly curious what they'll replace the given animation with, but it's just an optional animation.

Blizzard has made some hay over trying, in its new game, to offer characters with a wide variety of appearances and body types. That it should move quickly to change something that someone found offensive isn't really surprising.

If this alteration had occurred "behind the scenes", without public comment and discussion, no one would have been the wiser.

On the other hand, this didn't occur "behind the scenes" without public comment and discussion. And while the change is trivial, the atmosphere surrounding said change is charged and brittle and growing ever more so.

The question of whether a single person's discomfort is sufficient reason to make a change is not a trivial one, particularly when many others might prefer that change not have been made. It goes well beyond mere aesthetics. And it's uncomfortable to contemplate that a smaller group might have their choice overwhelm the majority largely because of the amount of headache they might cause a work's creator(s) if their views aren't heeded.

Every time one of these topics blows up, there's inevitably someone throwing out the usual "And now the claims about censorship and SJWs..." as though that observation was the height of wit and perspicacity. It would be equally observant (and equally shallow) to say "One more instance in which someone's 'offense' trumps all other interests or concerns."

We're not getting anywhere like this.

Trying to take Overwatch as a single example, rather than one more shell in an increasingly bitter and reflexive culture war, I will say this:

Overwatch has staked a claim on trying to create a game that is "inclusive" in the sense that its overall style will please as many people as possible and offend as few as possible (within the context of a first-person shooter that some people are inevitably going to write off as another murder simulator rotting out poor children's minds.)

I do not think this is a bad thing. I will be interested to see if this investment of time and resources pays off with a game environment and community that is similarly diverse, or if it will still see the typically male audience that such games usually seem to court. There will still inevitably be questions, in the latter case, if the environment that the players create is still off-putting despite the creators' efforts, but if nothing else, it will make for a worthy experiment.

In the grander scheme of things, however, I am waiting to see a developer who actively says, "You know what, this element you find disturbing was an actively made creative choice, we're not going to change it, and you don't have any right to demand otherwise. If that's a deal-breaker for you, look elsewhere."

...Which might lead to the question of whether some developers are basically allowing parts of their audience to make that statement for them by proxy to avoid the inevitable fallout. That's another discussion. But at least it would be a discussion.


New member
Jul 2, 2014
I expect a certain amount of mental strength in other people, to be okay with things like this that they don't particularly like. She decided to speak up anyway, and they listened - that's fair, if Blizzard wants to encourage this kind of input then that's up to them. But holy crap do I find it difficult to respect her opinion, and as a consequence, her.


Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
It looks like the situation's resolved itself, but I really don't see the problem with having some sexually appealing fictional characters in video games. It's like certain minority of voices are turing into neo-victorians.

Some people get so angry that nerds enjoy looking at polygonal booty.


sneaky sneaky
Jul 23, 2009
So what exactly did they remove? She still has those tight pants, doesn't she? Also they'd have to change Tracer on a fundamental level to remove her sexiness imo. It's not about her butt or anything; she just exudes such a great energy that I personally find attractive.


You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
erttheking said:
A general statement explaining the general idea behind the change, and then a clarification because the internet takes itself too seriously. I fail to see the contradiction.
I pointed out to you twice where they contradict themselves, twice. The course of the events supports this. Yes, you fail to see the contradiction.

And I read the post. It was a very civil, detailed and polite post. It even started off by praising Overwatch overall before moving on to criticize one teeny tiny part of it I fail to see what's so terrible about it.
I never said that this was terrible. I said that it was terrible that Blizzard reacted to it by giving in.

"Previously they were blind" Except for the article that claims that it was controversial internally and they had been heavily debating about it.
Do you need the link again? I'll give you the link again. Yeah I do. It's a change followed by PR control because people on the internet mistake creative freedom as censorship and fancy themselves champions of freedom.
As the game director, I have final creative say over what does or does not go into the game. With this particular decision, it was an easy one to make?not just for me, but for the art team as well. We actually already have an alternate pose that we love and we feel speaks more to the character of Tracer. We weren?t entirely happy with the original pose, it was always one that we wrestled with creatively
It just doesn't make sense. When this was so controversial, why was it publicized in the first place? And if it had nothing to do with a reaction, why did they state exactly this twice? Mind giving me your opinion about this? I'm asking since two posts. edit: It's OK. Don't.

They announced that it wouldn't be sold in the west MONTHS before controversy happened, and poor sales was the source cited. No one had a problem with it then. The game that wasn't released in the west sold best in the west? I beg your pardon? Oh you mean the previous games in the series, yes they sold better...because they were exclusive to Xbox and Xbox 360, which sold poorly in Japan. DOAX3 isn't. So...yeah.
I don't know where to begin.

Before you say my language were loaded, have this wikipedia quote:

DOAX3 was announced to be released exclusively to Asian markets, but following protests from fans, Hayashi said a version of the game "adjusted for North America" might come to the West if the demand is high enough. However, on November 24, 2015, Team Ninja posted on the franchise's Facebook page stating that they will not release the game in Western territories. The Asian version will include an English language option and is region-free on both systems.

Following the announcement not to release the game outside Asia, a public debate arose whether this was due to avoid criticism of the sexualized portrayal of women in the games, or the comparatively low US and European sales of the previous game in the Dead or Alive Xtreme series. Shuhei Yoshida, president of Sony, said in a statement; "It's due to cultural differences. The West has its own thinking about how to depict women in games media which is different from Japan [?] Speaking personally, if it is a representation acceptable to the general people in Japan, I wouldn't be concerned about it in Japan. It's a difficult problem". In response to the decision not to distribute, the developer behind the adult puzzle game and dating sim HuniePop offered Koei Tecmo a million dollars for distribution rights in North America.
And you're telling me that my opinion were invalid because you deem that it's infactual. Nice one.

Oh and if you're not going to "bother with the rest" then don't bother replying at all, because half responses that ignore my points are a waste of my time.
If you think that I'm stealing your time, think how I must have felt if I replied to anymore than your DoAX3-fiasco-nonsense.

It's not your opinion when you claim things that are inaccurate.
You're telling me what my opinion is and what it isn't.

I brought points in and you did bring points in. I highly disagree with you, you highly disa-- dehumanize me.

If you don't think you had to treat me like a human being, that's fine. Please, have a nice day.


Sep 4, 2014
bossfight1 said:
Personally, yeah, I can get why the poster had problems - I mean, when I see that pose, my eyes are immediately drawn to 'dat ass', which kinda contrasts with Tracer's chipper nature. I mean, maybe if her outfit wasn't designed so it wrapped so snugly around her ass, like female armor in Mass Effect, it wouldn't be quite so glaring.
That's not a problem with her pose or the designers, but a problem on the viewer's end. I'm first drawn to her face in the over-shoulder pic, others drawn to her back because of the composition of the pic as a whole. That some are immediately drawn to her bum first says those people are "ass people" and that's the first thing they look at when checking someone out.


New member
Sep 20, 2010
another day another case of developers doing stupid shit.
i'm thinking about becoming one of these people as a hobby, just try and see what i can get they to change and remove just for fun. i recon i could get blizzard to change a heartstone cards art at least.


New member
Oct 14, 2010
Revolutionary said:
Well I feel like TB pretty much nailed this one. Pretty much reflects how I feel on the matter
Saw his video before reading about this, but could already tell what must have happened.

I guess this is why we just can't have nice things.


Sperm Alien
Mar 26, 2009
Caramel Frappe said:
( ) <--- Please censor my post because someone might think that's a boob.

But it's not a boob- it's just two brackets put together. Anyone can turn something into context that doesn't reflect off the creator's vision but rather what you want it to be, or in this case .. something you want changed because of what you imagine it to be.
Actually Frappe, I thought you were about to get lucky with your digi-member in some video-ladybits.


Oct 5, 2011
United States
Naldan said:
I'm failing to see it. The second one comes off as a clarification of the process behind the choice.

Well presumably Blizzard didn't think taking one out pose would cause the internet to shit itself so violently. I envy their idealism and naivety frankly. So they made the original post giving what they thought was a rational, simple explanation, and afterwards they had to go behind the scenes to deflect accusations of them not making the decision of their own free will.

Well then, my apologizes. I was going mainly off of how the people who made the game (the person who's opinion I take the most seriously) made this statement decrying the playasia comment. And even then the company said that they would release if "If demand was high enough" clearly saying that they needed support to make it worthwhile. But fair enough, the claim was made by Sony's president. I roll my eyes at it considering Dragon's Crown has a 82 on metacritic, user and player, but fair enough.

I thought you were basing your opinion off of incorrect information. I see that I was wrong and I apologize.

It's a matter of principle. When someone makes an argument, you reply to all of their points or what's the point of having an argument You were right about the DOAX3 thing, but since this was only a tiny part of a larger argument that you ignored, I feel a little cheated.

You haven't exactly been the most respectful to me either. Ignoring large portions of my arguments, plus that part where you told people who disagree with you to "fuck off". But I'll grant your wish now. I'll fuck off.


New member
Oct 31, 2013
Hey, remember when the Mass Effect 3 ending came out and it was eventually changed? Boy, I sure remember the outrage that was caused cause the writer wasn't allowed to follow his artistic vision!


New member
Oct 14, 2010
Pluvia said:
Rathkor said:
You said it couldn't be proven that the people making these complaints weren't customers. I provided proof of one of the loudest critics literally saying she was not a gamer, knew nothing about gamers, and had to learn about gaming. Seems to me that might be enough to convince anyone who wasn't being intellectually dishonest that maybe she isn't a game companies target audience.
Just throwing this out there but Sarkeesian has nothing to do with this situation.

Like literally nothing at all.
I take it, like most everyone else, you didn't see her last rant on strategic but coverings.

Opps, well that's the wrong one but you get the idea. So not literally nothing. Just very little.


Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
"But sass is sexually objectifying women and MUH FEMINISM HURTS!"

When will these people understand that actual, objective feminists wouldn't fly off the handle for something so trivial?

cleric of the order

New member
Sep 13, 2010
The Moralists and Neo Puritans are back, that's good, I kinda missed it.
Where was my invitation to the meeting anyway, where we decided more than a bit of ankle is too much for the poor children.
Seriously I don't see what's all that sexual about it,it's just an arse, in form fitting clothing. It's not like she bent over to show us DAT ASS, rather she seems to have been striking a I'm too to face the camera pose (she likely blow some hair out of her eyes before that knowing tracer). Arguably the eye is drawn to the arse but that could just be my wandering eye.
If she was bending over just and shit like that, it would be out of place yes, much the same if any of the other did so, male or female (or bastion).
Doesn't help that 76 and others strike that same pose anyway nor does it help that symetra strikes a far more suggestive pose with dance or widowmaker does it with a far more prominent behind, and far more suggestive poses before that.
If they seriously removed that pose because of "sexualization" then it's really fucking stupid, given there are similar cases for it.
I'd like to hope this is some sort of manufactured controversy to help boast sales and interest too or it was a placeholder otherwise blizzard you dumb.

Also bliz if you are listening to random idiots, Gib JoJo zarya skin