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

[Dizchu]

But perception is reality, and the greater perception is that Blizzard made this change because they were trying to pander to progressives.

Just because people perceive it that way does not make it true. For the same reason people who perceive a correlation between sexualised video game characters and real-life sexism aren't necessarily right.

Ironically due to the huge backlash Blizzard are in a position where they are pressured to compromise their artistic integrity, not by "SJWs" but by reactionaries who feel that their hobby is at risk.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/#7926cbdd1c5c This Forbes article puts it best:

You can?t have it both ways. You can?t say ?well Dragon?s Crown wants to keep its busty, exaggerated characters because that?s their design? while simultaneously criticizing Blizzard for agreeing with fan complaints on one occasion, and removing something relatively minor.

I know why people are going down this route, I'm just picking apart the flimsy logic. It's essentially one massive slippery slope fallacy.

 

[Yuuki]

So this is happening.

An opportunity was missed to use "my 8 year old child etc" as leverage though, or at the very least "think of the children". That usually works wonders.

 

[SlumlordThanatos]

But perception is reality, and the greater perception is that Blizzard made this change because they were trying to pander to progressives.

Just because people perceive it that way does not make it true. For the same reason people who perceive a correlation between sexualised video game characters and real-life sexism aren't necessarily right.

Ironically due to the huge backlash Blizzard are in a position where they are pressured to compromise their artistic integrity, not by "SJWs" but by reactionaries who feel that their hobby is at risk.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/#7926cbdd1c5c This Forbes article puts it best:

You can?t have it both ways. You can't say "well Dragon's Crown wants to keep its busty, exaggerated characters because that's their design" while simultaneously criticizing Blizzard for agreeing with fan complaints on one occasion, and removing something relatively minor.

I know why people are going down this route, I'm just picking apart the flimsy logic. It's essentially one massive slippery slope fallacy.

There's flimsy logic everywhere, on both sides of the issue.

It was my impression that the people criticizing Tracer's pose were in a minority, which is a large part of the reason behind the backlash. People who thought they were in the majority (which may or may not be true) felt like they were being ignored when the developers said that a single forum post was the catalyst that made the decision go through. Again, perception is reality, even if (I'd say especially if) that perception may or may not actually be true. The developers might have changed the pose chiefly because they thought that it didn't fit the character, but it looks like they're trying to score brownie points with the progressive left, and that's all that matters.

At the same time, the people who are crying about censorship are getting upset over something that is a non-issue. Compared to the many changes Japanese developers made to their games to please Western audiences (Fire Emblem, Street Fighter V, Bravely Default, and simply not releasing Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 in the States), Blizzard's changes seem minor and made largely for different reasons. They're not cutting content, or adding shorts to female characters in bikinis, or even refusing to release anticipated games. They're just changing a single pose, and we have a regular shitstorm on our hands.

Regardless, I was leaning towards not buying this game anyway; $40 is a bit much when I can get similar games for significantly cheaper or even free. But their mishandling of this whole affair is only pushing me farther away than I already was, and I bet I'm not the only one.

And I hate it, not only because I desperately wanted to like this game, but also because this mess could've been avoided so, so easily.

 

[Dizchu]

It was my impression that the people criticizing Tracer's pose were in a minority, which is a large part of the reason behind the backlash. People who thought they were in the majority (which may or may not be true) felt like they were being ignored when the developers said that a single forum post was the catalyst that made the decision go through.

Had it not been for the backlash I would have leaned towards the side of "keep it", even if personally I can see how it could be improved.

But the opposition were criticising the original forum post, they weren't saying "keep it, it's a great pose and the game would suffer without it". If we assume that Blizzard did not have a problem with the pose prior to this forum post, they'd be left with two options.

1. Change a very minor part of the game which will benefit the smaller group while not significantly impacting the larger group
2. Keep the pose and risk alienating the smaller group while not benefiting or harming the larger group

I'm trying to look at it from their perspective here. I'm also assuming that they didn't forsee that it'd become a shitstorm of this magnitude.

Personally if I were in that position I'd set up a forum poll or suggest a compromise or... just anything.

Regardless, I was leaning towards not buying this game anyway; $40 is a bit much when I can get similar games for significantly cheaper or even free. But their mishandling of this whole affair is only pushing me farther away than I already was, and I bet I'm not the only one.

I think it shows a failure of their PR and forum moderation rather than a failure of the company (though I've never played a Blizzard game so what do I know?) All I know about Overwatch is that the female characters have nice designs and are uh... depicted in a lot of naughty fanart.

 

[Lightknight]

When they said that they are removing them because they want people to feel strong and heroic. The easily applied logical conclusion being that being sexy means you are weak and not heroic.

Of course, this is why they scrapped the Widowmaker character. Oh wait.

I think the Widowmaker is a "bad guy" which doesn't seem to conflict with their "feeling heroic" since her character is villain.

This only continues to feed into the idea that they think sexy isn't heroic. That it should be seen as an attribute of evil. Like some seed stealing seductress...

You are making several jumps in logic here and it sounds like you're deliberately trying to interpret this in the worst way possible.

They did not say "looking sexy" = "unheroic".

Their comment was in response to an article complaining about the sexy pose making her into sex object. So the conversation was already accepting the fact that this was intended as a sexy pose. So there's absolutely no leap in logic. This team believes that "Sexy" is not strong or heroic and removed what they saw as a sexy pose in order to help make players feel strong and heroic.

There's literally no leap. It's a direct conclusion of what they said.

That is not the statement that they made.

That is what they said to someone complaining about the sexuality of the pose. They will remove it because they want people to feel strong and heroic and apparently her looking over her shoulder as she does in everything I'm about to show you below makes people feel not strong and not heroic.

Why do you think it is incorrect to state that the inevitable conclusion of their statement is that if you've got a picture of someone looking over their shoulder and they're wearing superhero tights then seeing your character's ass makes you feel weak and unheroic.

What a bizarre form of body shaming in this comment. They really messed up using this wording.

Outside of fanart, I haven't even seen any indication that Tracer's character is meant to flaunt her sexuality. I don't even think the "controversial" pose is in any way sexual. So why are you trying to make it about sexuality?

Right, because in the trailer she's totally not clearly posing her ass there too at the 44 second mark unless you can describe the tactical advantage of bending over facing the other direction while twisting your upper torso to shoot backwards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqnKB22pOC0

http://source.superherostuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/overwatch.png

In the video itself she does seem to bend over a lot in air but the action is so fast that there's never any focus on one spot. There is at least one picture of her shooting over her back again in the action, but again, too fast to care.

Oh, interesting, look what I've found as the cover photo for Overwatch Origins Edition:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ3iHa4Q1O8le2swmxFDQvLRuU8ardpTS6om0WUDLAkrZBCvpcY

Her in mid-air shooting crossed over so her ass is still displayed.

There's also this ass-fabulous statue they've made:

http://arcadesushi.com/550/files/2014/11/tracer.png?w=720&cdnnode=1

I'm sorry, but they clearly intended to make her ass a thing. It's all over the place and if you haven't seen anything about her regularly flaunting her ass then you just haven't been looking just as I hadn't noticed until having to research this for you just now. Her standard pose is obviously pointing both her gun and ass at the enemy (aka over the should at the camera) at the same time. That's standard ass-posing.

I honestly wouldn't have known this if you hadn't made this claim and I had to research to respond. But Blizzard removing this casual over the should glance is actually contrary to how she has been displayed from day one. So they can't claim it being out of character either. Not when her ass is prominent in the trailer, the video game marketing cover and statue. They probably just thought her ass looked weird and wanted a better one in place. I mean, whose crack goes that high up?

I mean, haha, I'm not kidding. If I were a product developer who had let all the ass-centric pictures and poses pass otherwise then my contention with this one would just be that it's not aesthetically pleasing and makes her look unnatural as though she has no tail bone. That would be a whole lot harder to explain than him saying, "we want her ass to look more realistic". I wonder if her replacement pose will literally be one of her shooting over her shoulder instead. That could be cool.

 

[Lightknight]

But the opposition were criticising the original forum post, they weren't saying "keep it, it's a great pose and the game would suffer without it". If we assume that Blizzard did not have a problem with the pose prior to this forum post, they'd be left with two options.

It's really just the standing rest form of her standard pose. Her poses in game should be over the shoulder at least sometimes since that's what Blizzard has been showing her as since the first trailer. Just because some people have alternate arguments to go with doesn't mean they don't think the game will be better for it remaining too.

I don't care, but I do think the game would be better for it simply because it's yet another option that someone can choose if they want to. More options are about inclusivity, not less. Removing options based on sexuality is as trite and incongruous to inclusivity as removing options based on orientation. "What, people are complaining that you can have a gay relationship in Mass Effect, we want everyone to feel strong an heroic so I guess we'll have to remove it". Instead, it's just an optional thing that you can pursue if you want or not if you don't. That's the right way to be inclusive.

 

[Dizchu]

This only continues to feed into the idea that they think sexy isn't heroic. That it should be seen as an attribute of evil. Like some seed stealing seductress...

Actually... http://overwatch.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Hero

She is a hero. "Hero" is the word the game uses to describe player characters.

So unless they remove her from the roster I'm going to assume that you're exaggerating something very minor.

There's literally no leap. It's a direct conclusion of what they said.

The original post said that the pose didn't fit the character, it didn't say "get rid of all the sexy content in this game".

Blizzard's response was written in public-relationese and essentially said "we don't want to piss anyone off" (ironic).

That is what they said to someone complaining about the sexuality of the pose. They will remove it because they want people to feel strong and heroic and apparently her looking over her shoulder as she does in everything I'm about to show you below makes people feel not strong and not heroic.

The original complaint was shitty because it tried to use the man's daughter as emotional leverage, but its main gripe was that the pose was out of character.

What a bizarre form of body shaming in this comment. They really messed up using this wording.

Body shaming!? W...what?

snip

So you posted a bunch of artwork of Tracer. You know what they have in common? You know what differentiates them from that one pose that was removed? She's in an assertive action pose. Almost as if that's representative of her character or something.

I honestly wouldn't have known this if you hadn't made this claim and I had to research to respond. But Blizzard removing this casual over the should glance is actually contrary to how she has been displayed from day one. So they can't claim it being out of character either. Not when her ass is prominent in the trailer, the video game marketing cover and statue.

You seem to think the whole controversy is based around the fact that she has even has a butt. Obviously she was designed to be attractive and her butt was designed to look nice.

Can you seriously not see how that pose differs from other official representations of her? And keep in mind, this is a victory pose. This is supposed to represent her as a character at her highest point, not "hey silly you better not be checking out my ass".

I mean at this point I'm not even arguing any of the "is it sexy or not?" stuff, the pose sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the others and if Blizzard intended to remove it I'd understand why.

More options are about inclusivity, not less. Removing options based on sexuality is as trite and incongruous to inclusivity as removing options based on orientation. "What, people are complaining that you can have a gay relationship in Mass Effect, we want everyone to feel strong an heroic so I guess we'll have to remove it".

This is a poor analogy. A more accurate analogy would be if every character in Mass Effect was a potential love interest for Shepard regardless of their gender. I mean it'd be more "inclusive" however it'd compromise what the developers intended for the characters. Instead of writing a straight, gay or bisexual character they'd have to make them all bisexual.

Similarly if that Tracer pose wasn't consistent with her other poses and they removed it, on one hand it limit's the player's choice but on the other hand it strengthens her character's identity. If we're just gonna do slippery slope arguments, then how about I suggest that, under pressures from their fans, Blizzard just makes every character a blank slate with completely interchangeable personalities and poses.

Want to see Tracer in more sexy poses? No problem, just use all the poses we designed for Widowmaker instead! Widowmaker's a bit too saucy? Great, just use Mei's poses. Nobody gets left out! Yay!

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...oga+pants+butt&btnG=Search+by+image&oq=&gs_l=

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.

I admire your dedication to research.

Areloch performed this research in a lab with a lab coat on and goggles. Areloch spent weeks searching and testing and verifying the results. Then they performed a double blind study on the matter and finally put his work to rest. There were lab assistants and volunteers. They even had a government grant or too thanks to a little known trust left running from the Clinton Era.

Areloch, for butt-conforming-pants hero!

I will say that some of those butts were SO bootilicious that I sometimes had to wear a lead apron and chemical gloves. We actually lost two lab assistants. It was very tragic.

Always remember their noble sacrifice!

Raise a glass to our heroic fallen, they gave their life for the love of booty! May we all be so lucky to reach such lofty heights in pursuit of truth and knowledge!

 

[SlumlordThanatos]

Actually... http://overwatch.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Hero

She is a hero. "Hero" is the word the game uses to describe player characters.

So unless they remove her from the roster I'm going to assume that you're exaggerating something very minor.

In his defense, there's a difference between being a hero in this game (every character is a "hero"), and being "heroic." Tracer is heroic, Widowmaker is not.

They didn't actually say it in so many words, but they are subconsciously stating that sexiness isn't a "heroic" attribute. Otherwise, they would've either kept both poses, done something about the other female characters, or decide not to talk about the change at all.

He's just pointing out an inconsistency in their reasoning.

What a bizarre form of body shaming in this comment. They really messed up using this wording.

Body shaming!? W...what?

Body shaming is a bit of a stretch, though. Not entirely irrelevant, but definitely on the fringes of this conversation.

 

[Dizchu]

In his defense, there's a difference between being a hero in this game (every character is a "hero"), and being "heroic." Tracer is heroic, Widowmaker is not.

They didn't actually say it in so many words, but they are subconsciously stating that sexiness isn't a "heroic" attribute. Otherwise, they would've either kept both poses, done something about the other female characters, or decide not to talk about the change at all.

I know it's all semantics, but if the game refers to all its player characters as "heroes" and someone representing the game uses the word "heroic", I don't think they're making any moral judgements. In fact a lot of MOBAs use terms like "heroes" and "champions" interchangeably with "playable characters", regardless of whether they're angels and knights or demons and witches.

I just wouldn't look too deeply into their use of the word "heroic", that's all. To me it seems obvious that it's part of the general language used in-game.

 

[Redryhno]

Widowmaker is allowed to be sexy because she's evil.

Tracer is not allowed to be sexy because she's a good guy.

At least, that's what it seems like to me.

While it is true that the "evil is sexy" thing is a trope, I see no evidence to suggest that's the angle that the developers have approached this with.

The pose just didn't look right. I haven't played the game but I've looked at a lot of official material of the Overwatch characters, and overwhelmingly it appears that Tracer's character is meant to be assertive and snarky in that Dreamworks kinda way. The pose that was removed just didn't reflect that. And it's not because it was an "over-the-shoulder" pose that had her butt facing the camera, it just didn't fit. Her posture doesn't look confident and her facial expression looks like she's been caught stealing someone's leftover pizza.

Your opinion. Alot of other people think it fits with her cheeky playfulness. I think it's a bit of a stupid pose(because most of them are) that they could've honestly jsut explained away as being a placeholder and it would've been bought.

But with the way he answered by adding on all that extraneous stuff that really should be irrelevant, nobody's buying the bullshit when Blizzard has a habit of pretty much ignoring their communities until it looks like they might start looking bad because of something(examples, see how they fucked over Hearthstone's cards multiple times, the buggy shit in WoW over the years, Diablo3 being basically dead on launch and them blaming the consumer base for it, etc.).

And with the multiple other characters with the same pose and even more constipated looks on their faces still in the game and no mention of those poses not fitting the characters so they'll be replaced, I think we can safely infer that it only matters because it's Tracer and Kaplan saw an easy way to make more brownie points since the ones from Zarya's release are pretty much dried up.

 

[Dizchu]

And with the multiple other characters with the same pose and even more constipated looks on their faces still in the game and no mention of those poses not fitting the characters so they'll be replaced, I think we can safely infer that it only matters because it's Tracer and Kaplan saw an easy way to make more brownie points since the ones from Zarya's release are pretty much dried up.

I think that's a likely scenario. When people insist that the SJWs are censoring our video games and freedom of expression is at risk, that's where I start to roll my eyes.

 

[Redryhno]

And with the multiple other characters with the same pose and even more constipated looks on their faces still in the game and no mention of those poses not fitting the characters so they'll be replaced, I think we can safely infer that it only matters because it's Tracer and Kaplan saw an easy way to make more brownie points since the ones from Zarya's release are pretty much dried up.

I think that's a likely scenario. When people insist that the SJWs are censoring our video games and freedom of expression is at risk, that's where I start to roll my eyes.

You have to remember that most of that is shitposting honestly and is just more an annoyance with the times because the mindset that spawned the original post has spawned so much of what you're calling SJW censoring crap in the first place. Like seriously, go look at pretty much any Overwatch community at the moment and they're just taking the ball and running with it as fast as they can.

Treehouse fucked up the Fire Emblem translation(please don't even try to say otherwise, they Flanderized the majority of the cast from early lines and took away alot of the depth that was there), Funimation has multiple people that added in unnecessary lines in their dubs the last couple years unashamedly(the biggest being the infamous Prison School dub that swapped a character knowing a guy was looking at her cleavage into dropping Gamergate of all things out as an insult instead of "perv" which they use literally everywhere else which just dates the damn thing so much harder than cellphones or the style it's drawn in), and you've got 4kids in the past that had alot of the same root ideas that people raised holy hell against and they'd much rather it not happen again under a different name.

History repeats itself whether people want to admit it or not, and some people pick up on the early signs after living through it once faster than others(or are cringing at shadows) and just jump on the nearest train to get the bullshit they don't want/need out of their hobbies.

Overall though, it's about Blizzard and particularly Kaplan overplaying and sticking their foot in their mouth and then doubling down on it with the PR speak. It's why I'm ticked at them, and I'm really only interested in the world/lore/characters of Overwatch because I just have no interest in FPS' anymore.

 

[Yuuki]

For anyone who is late to the thread and needs to get a recap on why this blew up, here you go:

Spoiler

Original complaint from user Fipps:

What about this pose has anything to do with the character you're building in tracer? It's not fun, its not silly, it has nothing to do with being a fast elite killer. It just reduces tracer to another bland female sex symbol.
We aren't looking at a Widowmaker pose here, this isn't a character who is in part defined by flaunting her sexuality. This pose says to the player base, oh we've got all these cool diverse characters, but at any moment we are willing to reduce them to sex symbols to help boost our investment game.
I have a young daughter that everyday when I wake up wants to watch the recall trailer again. She knows who tracer is, and as she grows up, she can grow up alongside these characters. What I'm asking is that as you continue to add to the overwatch cast and investment elements, you double down on your commitment to create strong female characters. You've been doing a good job so far, but shipping with a tracer pose like this undermines so much of the good you've already done.

Blizzard dev's initial response (Jeff Kaplan) which sparked the shitstorm:

We'll replace the pose. We want *everyone* to feel strong and heroic in our community. The last thing we want to do is make someone feel uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented.
Apologies and we'll continue to try to do better.

Fully understandeable why this blew up. Literally Jeff's very first line was "We'll replace the pose" and the rest of his response seemed to be personally apology for Fipps. It's looked like something out of a political correctness comic, except in this case it actually happened.
At that point in time people were *fully* within their right to assume Blizzard had caved in to the type of "ban everything that offends me!" crybaby whining that is so prevalent in USA these days. Because that's exactly what it looked like.

It's important to realize the time gap between Jeff's first response, and his follow-up response. It gave the situation plenty of time + fuel to explode.

Jeff's followed up his response to the shitstorm (1 day later):

Well, that escalated quickly...

While I stand by my previous comment, I realize I should have been more clear. 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. That the pose had been called into question from an appropriateness standpoint by players in our community did help influence our decision - getting that kind of feedback is part of the reason we're holding a closed beta test - but it wasn't the only factor. We made the decision to go with a different pose in part because we shared some of the same concerns, but also because we wanted to create something better.
We wouldn't do anything to sacrifice our creative vision for Overwatch, and we're not going to remove something solely because someone may take issue with it. Our goal isn't to water down or homogenize the world, or the diverse cast of heroes we've built within it. We have poured so much of our heart and souls into this game that it would be a travesty for us to do so.
We understand that not everyone will agree with our decision, and that's okay. That's what these kinds of public tests are for. This wasn't pandering or caving, though. This was the right call from our perspective, and we think the game will be just as fun the next time you play it.
If it isn't, feel free to continue sharing your concerns, thoughts, and feedback about this and other issues you may have with the game, please just keep the discussion respectful.

Thanks,
Jeffrey

We'll never know whether Jeff is telling the truth (about the art team already considering the change before this complaint), or whether he's simply trying to do damage control in the aftermath with "we were totally planning to do this anyway guys, honest!".

But yeah, the blow-up over the initial response made sense.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Alot of other people think it fits with her cheeky playfulness. I think it's a bit of a stupid pose(because most of them are) that they could've honestly jsut explained away as being a placeholder and it would've been bought.

The thing about it that gets, and keeps, me absolutely seeing red is the underlying assumption of the original whine post no-one except a muted minority are calling out (and certainly no one in the games media). That being, and I'll (mis)quote the ED forums here,

"Clearly, women are either celibate or whores".

What, Tracer can't be -- worst case scenario here, based on that pose -- mildly flirtatious without it being some fundamental violation of character? God forbid women in their mid-twenties who exhibit exuberant and youthful personalities be...sexual. I think I need my fainting couch! And, Blizzard of all people is officially endoring, albeit tacitly, that statement.

Sometimes, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. God forbid, what with all this clamor and strife over misogyny and sexism, someone point out the actual, honest-to-god, misogyny.

 

[Redryhno]

I take your meaning, but I also think that an over the shoulder ass-pose is more than "Mildly" flirtatious, don't you?

Not especially. Sure, it CAN be, but I'm not seeing it with Tracer. And like multiple people have said, look at every other character that has the same pose, it looks about the same. But they aren't taking those out.

And hell, look up a bit and that's how she's presented by Blizz in pretty much all of Overwatch's promotional material still. But they aren't doing a recall or saying they made a mistake with those. Just with this pose.

 

[Redryhno]

I take your meaning, but I also think that an over the shoulder ass-pose is more than "Mildly" flirtatious, don't you?

Not especially. Sure, it CAN be, but I'm not seeing it with Tracer. And like multiple people have said, look at every other character that has the same pose, it looks about the same. But they aren't taking those out.

And hell, look up a bit and that's how she's presented by Blizz in pretty much all of Overwatch's promotional material still. But they aren't doing a recall or saying they made a mistake with those. Just with this pose.

Let me ask you this... have you ever been flirted with, mildly or otherwise? I bet that the answer is yes. Is this what it looked like to you in the "Mild" stage?

This is what my girlfriend does when she wants to fuck.

An over the shoulder smirk means that to you? Because that's largely what I'm seeing. To me it's largely just been that "yeah, this is my ass" kind of thing. An invitation, sure, but not much more than to introduce and talk.