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

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Silliness, friendliness, and, most relevant, a complete absence of anything resembling sexuality.

The hidden premise being silly and friendly women can't be sexual beings. Especially when you compare her to, say, Widowmaker who is a case example of the femme fatale archetype, and apparently her sexuality is A-okay!

I can't help but noticed you missed one. It begins with an "I" and is commonly associated with asexuality, chiefly virginity. (Hint, it's "innocence")

No, no, no, you're doing it wrong. See, you have to actually find something people are doing to complain about, not just make up some strawman that no one seems to have ever even hinted at.

Oh, really? Well, let's just see about that.

...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.

In case you may not recognize the quote, it's from the original post by Fipps about the pose.

http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20743015583

You see, to espouse that position, you must first assume female sexuality is a reductive force which stifles or outright negates all other aspects of characterization. Straw man my rosy pink ass, do better.

Well, I would certainly say that female sexuality is a bit repressed and controversial, but that's only if we're talking about actual sexuality, as in, having sex and being a sexual being, rather than the most common conflation with sexuality, fanservice.

Just maybe the problem lies with people who cannot tell the difference between a depiction of a female character who is a sexual agent, and fanservice. Or maybe people who erase the existence, even the potential for existing, of the former, by screaming from the rooftops about the latter.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

snip

I'm seeing nothing different with the Genji pose beyond an arm being up...Can you perhaps explain why it's bad that Tracer has that pose when Soldier 76 is taunting me with that old-man ass of his? Or Hanzo with his rippling chest he's so shyly hiding from the camera? What about Reaper's conveniently placed trenchcoat that shows you his legs all the way up to his ass before it's hidden from view?

Er, maybe the fact that one is a person in a completely neutral standing position while Tracer looks like she's about to do a turn on a catwalk? Her body is at completely different angles from his.

Because all I'm continuing to see is that the only people seriously arguing about the pose being bad/out of character/etc. seems to continually be the ones that focus on her ass and nothing else with the pose. Are her pants tight? Fuck yeah. But why are you worried about her pants when she's got that little smirk going on up top? Why has it taken THIS long for people to realize that she's got alot of stuff showing off her ass? And why is nobody wanting to talk about the multitudes of promotional material that have roughly the same pose and optional focus?

Also multiple people have said what's wrong with adding in sexy poses for the guys. I mean, besides Hanzo, because that guys' just designed as eye-candy.

Mine hasn't. The original post focused on it being a deliberate and seductive pose which is odd for a silly dynamic character.
EDIT: It appears I projected my own opinion onto the original post to some degree. I still don't find it anything close to rage inspiring, just unfortunately worded, but whatever.

Snip

Is this really worth getting upset over? I mean really? This is such a non-issue I just don't get why it's getting so much attention. Blizzard made the changes because they clearly thought it was the best one, and if you're going to bring up the argument with me that Blizzard couldn't just ignore the feedback, it was a minor thread no one was paying attention too, and apparently Blizzard has a tendency to drag their feet on even the most basic thing. I struggle to see them as being cowed here.

Someone liked it better? Well the game is in beta. There hasn't been a beta under the sun where a change has made everyone happy. This is how betas work. It's how game development works.

Dude, for alot of people, this is just another brick in the road of "is this worth getting upset over". Is it really worth getting upset over another white guy being the protagonist? Is it worth getting upset over something as inane as the girl being turned into a guy? Is it really worth getting upset over an urban setting using black guys as the predominant criminal element? Because those are just as pointless, but they've all kicked up a shitstorm on this site in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. So what exactly makes those complaints worthwhile, while this is just some stupid cosmetic thing?

So, what you're saying is that a team removing a single pose in a game is as big a deal as the lack of minority protagonists in games and the reinforcement of black stereotypes in light of recent major discussions on race? One butt pose, in a game with dozens? I mean, I'm not generally the guy that makes those arguments against particular games, more just games in general, but you've got to see the world of difference here.

And yes, they have the tendency to drag their feet. So what makes this post so special to respond to? Especially since there's been MULTIPLE threads and posts coming from women and not just concerned fathers worrying about their pre-teen daughter playing a T rated game since it was decided to be taken out supporting the option for the pose to be there that have been ignored or outright locked. And why say anything more than "yeah, we decided that would be a placeholder pose for alot of heroes, thanks for the feedback, but it's not necessary"? Why go into a spiel about making everyone feel "heroic"? I've yet to get an answer that can't be summed up with "I dunno, because they said so in the PR speak!".

I don't know why any Morello keeps using the word toxic for fucking everything in his posts about league, but I'm willing to bet it's just a term the team decided they needed to focus on to describe things that were bad. Maybe for these guys they want to focus on the idea of heroic, and by that they mean something equatable to iconic, someone with clearly defined and incredible personality traits, and they feel the mixed language in the pose got in the way of that.

As for why they changed now, probably just because they felt like it. They've probably wanted to change this for a while to suit some general vision of the game and posted in that thread because it was convenient. I've seen this with league a ton.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Silliness, friendliness, and, most relevant, a complete absence of anything resembling sexuality.

The hidden premise being silly and friendly women can't be sexual beings. Especially when you compare her to, say, Widowmaker who is a case example of the femme fatale archetype, and apparently her sexuality is A-okay!

I can't help but noticed you missed one. It begins with an "I" and is commonly associated with asexuality, chiefly virginity. (Hint, it's "innocence")

My mother, assuming my existence is not some miracle, has done the sex thing, and is definitely not someone I would describe as innocent. She also doesn't do those kinds of poses. She just doesn't do a lot of sexy things. Sexuality does not define her. This is true of many women. That does not make them innocent virgins, that just means sex isn't a big deal for them. It doesn't appear to be a big part of Tracer's design either. That doesn't make her some innocent virgin.

 

[Something Amyss]

I got no problem with ass-hugging tights either, though I do have a problem with how often I see them on female character designs, its on of those design elements that almost feels like the designer isn't certain that they've presented this character as female so they emphasise something, sometimes its a low-cut cleaving showing top, sometimes its boob armour, sometimes its pants, regardless of fabric (or intended fabric) hugging the females cheeks like their afraid of slipping off. Oddly enough whenever this get brought up people are quick to rush to bring up pics of Solid Snake and go 'MALE CHARACTERS GET THIS TREATMENT TOO!' but in most cases where they do its cause they get designed with skin tight clothing like a wetsuit or something. But yeah, its a design element that always bugs me if I see it, kinda like whenever I see male character designs for warriors/fighters or typical fantasy combat roles and its always some super buff dude, actually one example I could give is Street Fighter where the male characters get really absurd muscle design to the point where they sometimes just look too beefy, sure you have instances like Birdy in SFV or Rufus in USFIV, but those are like the only two differences. Also I'm aware that if I wanted to see sleeker male character designs for fighters then JRPGs are the place to look but... most of those designs are too anime for my taste at times.

Honestly, I think it's mostly fanservice. Well, actually, I suspect fanservice becomes normalised and that's what this is. So we get these de facto getups where women look like they're poured into almost any material, with asset-emphasising clothes and poses (I've even heard people say women naturally move like this, to which I must ask if they've ever seen women in the wild). I mean, in this case, Tracer may have been designed as-is for that exact reason. This is just what you do.

And yeah, men get a lot more body diversity, period. It's not controversial to have a fat character, or a scarred one. Or a thin one. That's one of the big issues, that women tend to have a much narrower range in terms of assets.

This carries over into gaming a lot for me. Like, I've played a fair share of DC Universe Online with friends. And They're all playing male characters. They get these awesome armour drops. I'm like, wow, cool, I want that for my character! And then I get it, and it's like, a halter top or has a giant boob window in it. Might even be closer to spandex than the cool battle armour the male models get. Same pieces of equipment.

In fact, there are threads on the game's forums looking basically for help making certain characters who aren't proudly flaunting their tits and ass.

I've mentioned this online, and I've been accused of wanting to censor people. I've been accused of hating video games or being an anti-sex prude. And, I mean, I like looking at the female form. That doesn't mean that I want my character to be all torpedo tits and a thong. I just wish there were more options that didn't do that, because it means female pickings are slim if you don't want to make a sexy character. And it's not necessarily even the worst example, because high-level gear doesn't strip you to a thong, but I don't play many MMOs and so I rarely have a direct comparison between male and female armour.

But like, I want my characters to look the way I want them to. Often time, I want them to look badass. Not always, but often times.

And I mean, obviously this gets a bit off the track of these characters, who are non-created characters, but it's still sort of an issue that there's such slim pickings. But it's basically a scandal when a woman doesn't show off her butt in a game.

 

[Nemmerle]

Funny how no one seems to be advocating that all the male characters be given a sexual butt pose for them, despite them likely being just as sexual as Tracer. I mean, there has been literally no indication that they're someone who would flaunt their sexuality as a way to celebrate winning a firefight, but isn't assuming that just because they've not been shown to be the type to flaunt their sexuality they wouldn't strike a butt pose genuine misandry?

Or is "sexuality" something that simply every female character must have and display in such overt gestures regardless of what their character actually is, but male characters can just not while not falling into some sort of problematic celibate/whore dichotomy?

Male and female standards of attractiveness are different. We've not got any conditioning that striking butt poses is attractive to our counterparts. To the point it's hard to take the contrary view seriously. I mean really, you want girly-men? As something more than a joke? Just don't think it would sell.

But if they want some man-candy, so to speak, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with that as a general principle. I fully support hot men in video games for women that want them.

 

[Something Amyss]

Spoiler: A Male Character edited to actually be in literally the same pose

Can that be the compromise? Can we get some skimpy outfits and titillating poses from the men? Because I think he'd look nice with a metal thong and a pose like that. Come on, Blizzard! It'll make him more "agile!"

If it wasn't for all of the people making a fuss about censorship (only when its related to sexualized women I can't help but notice) this would've flown under the radar

I am still saddened that Mevis gets no love. :'(

That assumes Blizzard made their decision based only on the pose itself.

Yes, because that's the only assumption that can be made based on the given information without adding it ourselves. To assume otherwise would be to assume evidence not actually demonstrated.

More to the point, you ignore anyone at your own peril if you're in business. They're choosing to ignore the people upset by this change over gender politicians at their own peril, despite the response of the latter being a fraction of a percent of the former. If that's the case, maybe there's more to it than that.

Uhrm, that doesn't show people who object to the change getting "shit on". She's describing how the change made her feel-- which is completely valid, of course-- but there's nobody denigrating people who object, or anything. Don't mischaracterise that.

Oh my god, the irony of that OP. Complaining that she has to prove herself and then accusing others of not really playing the games. And she's the one being shit on.

Sorry, tangential, I guess.

I can't help but noticed you missed one. It begins with an "I" and is commonly associated with asexuality, chiefly virginity. (Hint, it's "innocence")

Does a woman have to show off her ass to not be "innocent?" It really seems like this is the artificial paradigm being set up here. But not because of LifeCharacter. Not every woman who likes sex goes around waving their ass. You're not innocent simply because you don't give people a look at your butt.

My mother, assuming my existence is not some miracle, has done the sex thing, and is definitely not someone I would describe as innocent. She also doesn't do those kinds of poses. She just doesn't do a lot of sexy things. Sexuality does not define her. This is true of many women. That does not make them innocent virgins, that just means sex isn't a big deal for them. It doesn't appear to be a big part of Tracer's design either. That doesn't make her some innocent virgin.

Hell, sex could still be important to a woman and not impact the way she poses and dresses. I think most people understand that not every moment is sexy times.

For all we know, Tracer had a lot of sex before the match began. Or none at all. She could be a virgin, which shouldn't be an issue, but she doesn't have to be. She might love sex, like it, hate it, be indifferent to it, or have had no experience with it. None of this is changed by whether she shows off her butt or how she dresses.

 

[Something Amyss]

I mean really, you want girly-men? As something more than a joke? Just don't think it would sell.

I want girly-men. Or, if this is what counts as girly men, then yes. Moar sexy and provocative guys, please.

 

[Something Amyss]

Can that be the compromise? Can we get some skimpy outfits and titillating poses from the men? Because I think he'd look nice with a metal thong and a pose like that. Come on, Blizzard! It'll make him more "agile!"

While generally I'd agree, in this case there seems to be roughly three men who being put in skimpy outfits and sexy poses would actually achieve titillation: McCree, Hanzo, and Lucio. The rest are either old men, robots, a cyborg, a gorilla, or a comically fat guy. I mean, some of them could no doubt still be sexy, but it's somewhat lacking when compared to the female roster of six supermodels, one average looking woman in a winter coat, and sexy, sexy Zarya.

Though, if Blizzard was willing to put practicality before appearance, everyone would be wearing those metal thongs. Everyone knows the extra speed is worth the loss of armor, especially when you pair it with some heels.[/quote]

Yeah, I was mostly joking anyway. Not that I would complain about some more T&A (testosterone and assets), but it doesn't exactly address the inequity in "diversity," I guess.

 

[Nemmerle]

I want girly-men. Or, if this is what counts as girly men, then yes. Moar sexy and provocative guys, please.

I don't think a sexy guy showing off his ass would make him a girly-man or a joke, it would just mean he's some eye-candy for the ladies and some men. I mean, I don't doubt people would whine about how utterly gay or pandering it was because such people have no sense of self-awareness, but I feel like such people's opinions can and should be disregarded as worthless.

Well, if that's what women find attractive... okay? I'm not convinced it is, but on the assumption that it's not just a joke or something you're saying because it's convenient to the argument - in terms of the general principle behind it, you've as much right to eye-candy as everyone else. Then we can both disregard the calls to remove this sort of stuff, enjoy our attractive counterparts, and we all win.

Just don't see why anyone would have a problem with that. Like, how could you not want women to find men attractive? Kinda seems like shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Falling_v1legacy]

Hell, sex could still be important to a woman and not impact the way she poses and dresses. I think most people understand that not every moment is sexy times.

For all we know, Tracer had a lot of sex before the match began. Or none at all. She could be a virgin, which shouldn't be an issue, but she doesn't have to be. She might love sex, like it, hate it, be indifferent to it, or have had no experience with it. None of this is changed by whether she shows off her butt or how she dresses.

This is certainly worth thinking about.

Because I think the main issue here is whether Blizzard was succeeding in their intentions. As much as people have been arguing against Blizzard making a change in the name of artistic freedom, artistic freedom is bigger than that, especially in the Beta stage. You also need to give an artist freedom to solicit and curate feedback and then make changes as they deem necessary... or ignore it. Either is acceptable. Many authors make use of alpha and beta readers to see if they are getting the desired reactions- is what is in their head actually translating onto the page that another person understands it in a vaguely similar way. You don't make changes on everything. Some feedback is just difference of opinion. Nor is it a matter of creation by popularity- sometimes you have vague hunch that something is not right, and you just need one person to verbalize what you were thinking, and bam the change happens. You need to give an artist that freedom right to make that change.

And it seems to me Blizzard freely made their change- there wasn't a petition to make a change (unlike that dumb joke get rid of guns petition). A user offered their perspective and that perspective seemed to align with where Blizzard wanted to go. I'm not sure I'd have worded it the same as Fipp, but largely Fipp was suggesting that Blizzard was failing in their execution. (It is possible to intend one thing and then not succeed... not every super hero film we get on the screen is quite as bad ass as the film maker thought in their heads, which is why we have absolute box office bombs. The artist did not succeed in their intentions and garnered the wrong reactions from their audience.)If that was supposed to be a victory pose, I think they weren't entirely successful either. The first thought that comes to mind is 'that's a really pronounced butt." If that was the intention of the pose, well and good, I guess. But if it was supposed to be sassy or a quirky victory pose... then it's not as successful as other possible poses. Not every design or pose equally conveys the same attitude. Failed bad ass poses can look silly and it something is failing, then there needs to be freedom to fix it so that it actually does what you were intending.


Furthermore, Overwatch is in Beta, and this is Blizzard Beta, which means unlike some companies, they are actually open for feedback. (Often Beta is just a glorified pre-release for other companies.) Artists have vision, yes. But artistry is an iterative process, not something that is photocopied in perfection from their Muse. Let them be free to change their minds from a pretty even keeled piece of feedback that wasn't even threatening anything.

 

[Shraggler]

It's certainly not censorship, but there does appear to be external influence on the decision.

Didn't blizzard hear yet? Everything sexy is the work of the patriarchy. Let's face it. The sex-negative reactionaries will not shut up until every character is wearing a burka.

Can't have people enjoy sexy things now, can we? That's just evil.

'Tis, well said. Without sex, there would be no humans. With no humans, there would be no evil. Join the Anti-Sex Squad.

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".

Hm, I see it more as a coy & smug check over the shoulder, as if to say, "pwnd". The kind of message people have expressed in various ways since competition existed, vae victus, et al.

Does each character have a three hour, single-player campaign that gives a bit of background story on them? No? Then there is no official character. The person playing that avatar is the character. It's a team deathmatch game - there's no character. Who cares about all of the comics and other tie-in bullshit that they're releasing & promoting as if TF2 never existed? Who cares about how the character moves around in-game? Who cares about the little vocal jests they give her whenever a random if... statement is satisfied? It has no relevance in the game. No one playing is going to be even considering it. They're going to be clicking the mouse button. The character argument is so paper thin that it seems more like a deflective strategy than a stance based on solid reasoning.

Now if her victory pose was, say, her jamming the recently amputated arm of an opponent into her vagina up to the elbow, I can see some understandably awkward reactions. A little smarmy pose? Please.

For all we know, Tracer had a lot of sex before the match began. Or none at all. She could be a virgin, which shouldn't be an issue, but she doesn't have to be. She might love sex, like it, hate it, be indifferent to it, or have had no experience with it. None of this is changed by whether she shows off her butt or how she dresses.

Bing. None of that is pertinent at all. Her 'character' is meaningless. She's a class in a team deathmatch game. Advantages and disadvantages for the sake of gameplay balance. If it's not directly in the game, her characterization is ephemeral and has no actual impact on the game itself; it's just addendums, secondary elements in an attempt to create a unique universe.

Sometimes, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I feel like that all the time. I wish I could blame it on an atrocious drug habit or clinical brain damage, but I can do neither. More and more frequently, I have panic attacks telling my conscious mind that this reality is just an infinite yet subtle nightmare made manifest.

 

[Redryhno]

snip

I'm seeing nothing different with the Genji pose beyond an arm being up...Can you perhaps explain why it's bad that Tracer has that pose when Soldier 76 is taunting me with that old-man ass of his? Or Hanzo with his rippling chest he's so shyly hiding from the camera? What about Reaper's conveniently placed trenchcoat that shows you his legs all the way up to his ass before it's hidden from view?

Er, maybe the fact that one is a person in a completely neutral standing position while Tracer looks like she's about to do a turn on a catwalk? Her body is at completely different angles from his.

Because all I'm continuing to see is that the only people seriously arguing about the pose being bad/out of character/etc. seems to continually be the ones that focus on her ass and nothing else with the pose. Are her pants tight? Fuck yeah. But why are you worried about her pants when she's got that little smirk going on up top? Why has it taken THIS long for people to realize that she's got alot of stuff showing off her ass? And why is nobody wanting to talk about the multitudes of promotional material that have roughly the same pose and optional focus?

Also multiple people have said what's wrong with adding in sexy poses for the guys. I mean, besides Hanzo, because that guys' just designed as eye-candy.

Mine hasn't. The original post focused on it being a deliberate and seductive pose which is odd for a silly dynamic character.
EDIT: It appears I projected my own opinion onto the original post to some degree. I still don't find it anything close to rage inspiring, just unfortunately worded, but whatever.

Well, sure, but the thing is, there's alot of poses and skins that don't "fit" the character. That's half the fun of them. You think Mariachi Reaper is intended as a different part of his personality(at least one that he shows while he's doing Overwatchy things?)? What about Winston in rage-mode? Something I'm pretty sure he refers to as "regressing" since the apes on the moon don't do that anymore(I could be mixing this up with a different universe though).

What's so bad about a single optional pose showing a character in a different light? And it's not even that different of a light since people still don't want to talk about the other promotional material that already has something similar going on with her.

 

[EternallyBored]

I want girly-men. Or, if this is what counts as girly men, then yes. Moar sexy and provocative guys, please.

I don't think a sexy guy showing off his ass would make him a girly-man or a joke, it would just mean he's some eye-candy for the ladies and some men. I mean, I don't doubt people would whine about how utterly gay or pandering it was because such people have no sense of self-awareness, but I feel like such people's opinions can and should be disregarded as worthless.

Well, if that's what women find attractive... okay? I'm not convinced it is, but on the assumption that it's not just a joke or something you're saying because it's convenient to the argument - in terms of the general principle behind it, you've as much right to eye-candy as everyone else. Then we can both disregard the calls to remove this sort of stuff, enjoy our attractive counterparts, and we all win.

Just don't see why anyone would have a problem with that. Like, how could you not want women to find men attractive? Kinda seems like shooting yourself in the foot.

People sometimes find it uncomfortable to have the same sex being blatantly sexual around them. I worked nightclub security and we had gogo dancers, almost always women, but sometimes men. Whenever we had the male dancers on stage there was always a not insignificant number of male patrons that would complain that they didn't want to see, "that gay shit" when they were out clubbing. I always thought it was odd that women never seemed to complain much about the female dancers until I realized when I asked that it did bother them but the sheer prevalence of it desensitized them to it. Even then stats we collected at the door would always show less men showing up on nights with male dancers, and more women, and vice versa when it was solely female dancers. It wasn't some colossal swing, but in a club with thousands of people through the door on some nights, it would get high enough that the difference could reach a couple hundred people.

I don't think it's so much that girly men are especially attractive to women, but that such men are often called girly by other men that aren't comfortable with the sexuality on display, or at least that's my experience with it. The guys we had on stage were athletic dancers with visible muscles and they weren't gyrating like the female dancers, they were more often almost just straight up break dancing, which to be fair, the female dancers couldn't really do in high heels. Even then, the most common insults hurled at them behind being called gay, was that they were too girly and/or effeminate. Not that I'm accusing you of doing that, but I find that from many females I've asked, what some men call girly, many women find to be both attractive and masculine.

 

[SweetShark]

I am offended how this game represents Russians. Remove Zarya now.

NnnNNNnnnnOOOOOooOOooOOOOooOOooooo!!!
She is one of the characters I would like to play. I love fictional muscular women.

 

[Falling_v1legacy]

It's certainly not censorship, but there does appear to be external influence on the decision.

External influence... that was explicitly requested, given that it is a beta and Blizzard actually solicits feedback and makes changes in their betas. And it's not like that thread was an organized mob that was clamouring for this change. One poster gave their feedback, a few agreed, a bunch jumped on the OP for daring to give feedback (Zaon 'defending' artistic freedom) and a great many others disagreed. Of course later on that thread blew up. Point is, for external influence, there wasn't a lot of leverage being applied. So one set of feedback lined up with where Blizzard wanted to go and the rest fell by the wayside.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

snip

I'm seeing nothing different with the Genji pose beyond an arm being up...Can you perhaps explain why it's bad that Tracer has that pose when Soldier 76 is taunting me with that old-man ass of his? Or Hanzo with his rippling chest he's so shyly hiding from the camera? What about Reaper's conveniently placed trenchcoat that shows you his legs all the way up to his ass before it's hidden from view?

Er, maybe the fact that one is a person in a completely neutral standing position while Tracer looks like she's about to do a turn on a catwalk? Her body is at completely different angles from his.

Because all I'm continuing to see is that the only people seriously arguing about the pose being bad/out of character/etc. seems to continually be the ones that focus on her ass and nothing else with the pose. Are her pants tight? Fuck yeah. But why are you worried about her pants when she's got that little smirk going on up top? Why has it taken THIS long for people to realize that she's got alot of stuff showing off her ass? And why is nobody wanting to talk about the multitudes of promotional material that have roughly the same pose and optional focus?

Also multiple people have said what's wrong with adding in sexy poses for the guys. I mean, besides Hanzo, because that guys' just designed as eye-candy.

Mine hasn't. The original post focused on it being a deliberate and seductive pose which is odd for a silly dynamic character.
EDIT: It appears I projected my own opinion onto the original post to some degree. I still don't find it anything close to rage inspiring, just unfortunately worded, but whatever.

Well, sure, but the thing is, there's alot of poses and skins that don't "fit" the character. That's half the fun of them. You think Mariachi Reaper is intended as a different part of his personality(at least one that he shows while he's doing Overwatchy things?)? What about Winston in rage-mode? Something I'm pretty sure he refers to as "regressing" since the apes on the moon don't do that anymore(I could be mixing this up with a different universe though).

What's so bad about a single optional pose showing a character in a different light? And it's not even that different of a light since people still don't want to talk about the other promotional material that already has something similar going on with her.

I have the same issues with bunny-suit Riven, so I'm really not the person to make this argument to. However, assuming I'd humor that, it still doesn't work. There's just not enough there to present a thorough, separate interpretation of the character, it only shows enough to not gel with the current version of the character. There's no good joke to the whole thing, just an out of character pose. That's it.

And no, other promotional material does not show her being deliberate and seductive. It just also shows her ass, which I've already pointed out I'm not taking issue with.

Finally, I'm not calling it deeply, profoundly immoral, I'm saying that it is a bad pose. Like the bad animation in Sonic Boom or something. It just doesn't work, it feels off. If I were the designer, I'd remove it, and so I am not at all okay with the outrage caused by doing so. And I think ultimately that last bit is the main thing that upsets me. I know I may in the future make a decision just like this, removing some cheesecake because I didn't think it fit the character or adding it because I did, and I don't appreciate the idea of half the Internet exploding over it because I worded my reason for doing so a bit poorly. That's my problem here. You guys all fucking terrify me.

 

[Redryhno]

I have the same issues with bunny-suit Riven, so I'm really not the person to make this argument to. However, assuming I'd humor that, it still doesn't work. There's just not enough there to present a thorough, separate interpretation of the character, it only shows enough to not gel with the current version of the character. There's no good joke to the whole thing, just an out of character pose. That's it.

And no, other promotional material does not show her being deliberate and seductive. It just also shows her ass, which I've already pointed out I'm not taking issue with.

Finally, I'm not calling it deeply, profoundly immoral, I'm saying that it is a bad pose. Like the bad animation in Sonic Boom or something. It just doesn't work, it feels off. If I were the designer, I'd remove it, and so I am not at all okay with the outrage caused by doing so. And I think ultimately that last bit is the main thing that upsets me. I know I may in the future make a decision just like this, removing some cheesecake because I didn't think it fit the character or adding it because I did, and I don't appreciate the idea of half the Internet exploding over it because I worded my reason for doing so a bit poorly. That's my problem here. You guys all fucking terrify me.

So it doesn't gel with what you want the character to be, therefore you deem it to be not good? I never said they all had to be fun or humorous to work either, that's you. I just said that they could have fun with them. I'll go with you so far as saying the pose is sorta bad, but it's bad on all of the characters that use it, but it's only Tracer people are taking issue with.

And what you said about the promotional material is exactly what I've been saying all along. People are focusing on her "seductive" pose, when all I'm seeing is more of her cheeky terrible out of this world accent and personality(in that it sounds like someone that just heard about the brits tried to do it). It all seems to tie back to whether you're seeing it(pose or Tracer) as overly sexual or not. For some women, it's empowering to have someone as light-hearted as her still knowing that she looks good, for some it's just more imp, tomboy-type stuff, for others it's just another pose they llike for no particular reason. I mean, there's still people that think Reaper is the most amazingly designed character in the game(personally like his backstory and gameplay, just not his design, just feels really generic)

And then there's the people insisting that it's completely out of character and saying that Widowmaker is who the pose should go to when she's not even the femme fatale archetype in the universe's lore. She's not even supposedly "sexy", essentially she's just the Winter Soldier. She's honestly the one design I have alot of problems with in regards to lore since they released more than the bare minimum.