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

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Aeshi said:
Apparently said pose has now been replaced with:

It's almost the same animation, she's just on one leg now.

So in other words, it basically hasn't been removed and all this fuss has been over nothing.

I'm starting to wonder if Blizzard started this all on purpose as a Viral Marketing thing XD
If anything, the new pose is significantly sexier... so... hah. That was unexpected. They must have just not liked the original pose and thought it could be better. If you're going to emphasize the ass, then emphasize the ass and don't half-ass it (teehee).

Unspoiled here since this is central to the discussion.

http://4d663a369f9f03c3c61e-870e77779efd63f7bd6c2ee08d8cfae6.r2.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/ZNSWPLojgK2g.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Revelo said:
Anyone want to tell me how this even got as heated as it did.

I'm wonderinf if this is a sneaky case of viral marketing, forgot this game existed untill this hit the news.
Because some person said that Tracer having a pose where her ass is in the picture makes his dick feel weird when he lets his 8-year-old (overwatch is rated T for teen) daughter play it so rather than going to counseling or explaining to his daughter that women have asses too he asked Blizzard to remove it so that no one can have it if they wanted it. It was a totally optional asset that no one had to use if they didn't want to and so his request was purely to take away from everyone just because he didn't like it.

This caused a stir because we (people) hate it when someone tries to impose their views on how we consume our media and try to take things away from everyone just because they want the world to conform to them.

This also caused a stir when the staff explained that they were removing the picture because they said the sexy pose wasn't heroic or strong. So people like me thought the implication was that being sexy is weak and not heroic, taking a significant step back and degrading women who value their appearance like humans do.

But in light of the replacement. It's still sexy and the pose is more active like in mid-celebration. So maybe that's all they meant since it's certainly an even more emphasized ass now. Just like her action figure and her picture that's on the cover of the game box.
 

Aeshi

New member
Dec 22, 2009
2,640
0
0
Lightknight said:
Unspoiled here since this is central to the discussion.
I put the image behind a spoiler more for anyone with a slow internet connection than anything, but suit yourself.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Aeshi said:
Lightknight said:
Unspoiled here since this is central to the discussion.
I put the image behind a spoiler more for anyone with a slow internet connection than anything, but suit yourself.
Myself be suited, thanks. It's a significant development in this story and should even be updated in the main article. Posted unspoiled so people will actually see it.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
So they went with basing her new pose on a pinup then:



I got a good hearty laugh out of that. Apparently the intent is to imply her past as a pilot by having a bomber pinup painting pose. I guess it kinda works? Though her old pose wasn't bad in my opinion either because it had that whole 'cheeky snark' attitude to it.

Both options would be better than one in my opinion.

That said, wonder if the person that started the entire thing is gunna be mad they're still 'reducing her to a sex symbol', only they're doing it more explicitly now because her pose is based on a classic pinup painting.
 

Piecewise

New member
Apr 18, 2008
706
0
0
So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...



Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Areloch said:
So they went with basing her new pose on a pinup then:



I got a good hearty laugh out of that. Apparently the intent is to imply her past as a pilot by having a bomber pinup painting pose. I guess it kinda works? Though her old pose wasn't bad in my opinion either because it had that whole 'cheeky snark' attitude to it.

Both options would be better than one in my opinion.

That said, wonder if the person that started the entire thing is gunna be mad they're still 'reducing her to a sex symbol', only they're doing it more explicitly now because her pose is based on a classic pinup painting.
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Overwatch was either trying to generate buzz or implementing a social experiment.

I don't know if the pinup was the inspiration. I'd find it hard to believe that that is the only scenario where a person has posed in that way. But either way, they've always had Tracer's ass in prominence, even in the first trailer. Unless people can tell me how pointing your gun and butt at your opponent (aka the camera) is a tactical advantage of any kind.

And yes, it stands to reason that they could always include the other one. But seeing what they replaced it with I actually totally believe them now when they say they just weren't happy with the first stance.
 

The Material Sheep

New member
Nov 12, 2009
339
0
0
Lightknight said:
Areloch said:
So they went with basing her new pose on a pinup then:



I got a good hearty laugh out of that. Apparently the intent is to imply her past as a pilot by having a bomber pinup painting pose. I guess it kinda works? Though her old pose wasn't bad in my opinion either because it had that whole 'cheeky snark' attitude to it.

Both options would be better than one in my opinion.

That said, wonder if the person that started the entire thing is gunna be mad they're still 'reducing her to a sex symbol', only they're doing it more explicitly now because her pose is based on a classic pinup painting.
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Overwatch was either trying to generate buzz or implementing a social experiment.

I don't know if the pinup was the inspiration. I'd find it hard to believe that that is the only scenario where a person has posed in that way. But either way, they've always had Tracer's ass in prominence, even in the first trailer. Unless people can tell me how pointing your gun and butt at your opponent (aka the camera) is a tactical advantage of any kind.

And yes, it stands to reason that they could always include the other one. But seeing what they replaced it with I actually totally believe them now when they say they just weren't happy with the first stance.
For the most part this pose fits a bit more with Tracer's character. Its more of a call back to 1940's pinup girls that would often get painted on planes, and tbh I think a big portion of Tracer's character design is based on those ww2 airplane pinup girls. It was a logical choice to make, I just hope they made it for the right reasons, and not to capitulate to people like Fipps who would be offended unless she walked out in a burka.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Piecewise said:
So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...



Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.
Considering that the new pose still shows her butt but people like it because they claim it's in character, I'm pretty sure it's just you.
 

Piecewise

New member
Apr 18, 2008
706
0
0
erttheking said:
Piecewise said:
So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...



Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.
Considering that the new pose still shows her butt but people like it because they claim it's in character, I'm pretty sure it's just you.
I thought her character was "Spunky" not "Gravity defying"

Seriously, try to do that pose and hold it for more than half a second.
 

LawAndChaos

Nice things are gone
Aug 29, 2014
116
0
0
Falling said:
I think that's still part of the overreaching prudishness of people and believing that anything that makes someone uncomfortable is perceived as bad for everyone, regardless of intent. I will not debate that yeah, taking it to the opposite extreme isn't good either, but let's not act like the whole discussion isn't frequently hijacked by the vocal minority, which twists a narrative to the point where everyone feels the need to be on the defensive.

The vocal minority on one side says that sexy stuff is bad, and as a result gamers get defensive when the sexy stuff is criticized because now they are expecting anything sexy to be criticized and called for removal (even in the case of a relatively tame pose like the original OverTheShoulder Tracer had).

The vocal minority on the other says people should just deal with that dental floss swimsuit and like it because fuck their feelings. This puts the critics on the defensive because they expect their hand to be swatted away from that slider.

This isn't just one side being antagonistic, no matter how hard someone tries to paint it that way. This is two vocal minorities turning the more reasonable sides against each other while both groups are also eating each other from the inside out and sabotaging the potential for rational discussion.

Gaming has been growing to the point where we can have both focus on story over gameplay or vice versa, and with that comes diversity through variety. While there are games that become formulaic, this doesn't stop creators from trying new things and indie devs from creating more games.

Yet somehow nobody is happy. Everything is still wrong and bad and needs to be fixed.

That being said I do agree that while there was nothing wrong with the old pose, there was no reason not to change it either; the devs have that creative freedom.

However it seems to me now that it was all a big trick making people think they caved to "SJWs" and with the atmosphere surrounding gaming everyone believes that any victory for "SJWs," no matter how small, will lead to the elimination of fanservice as a whole.

I'm not saying that is correct, that is merely my theory, both on what's happened and on the reason why things like this seem to always blow up.

And damn, that pose is actually more "sexy" than the original too. Inb4 it's "still bad and needs changing."
Gotta admit if it really was a trick, kudos on Blizz. They legit trolled everyone.

It's a shame I can't play Overwatch right now, cuz I'd totally buy it now.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Piecewise said:
I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
LawAndChaos said:
Rebel_Raven said:
Paraphrasing is hard to take because it's based off of memory which can skew, or bias one way or the other.
Well I mostly paraphrased because it was either that or regurgitate the entire long ass post. I just figured I'd take some of the core tenets of the criticism Fipps was giving to get the basic point across.
I didn't paraphrase from memory. I reread Fipps OP beforehand, and read through the thread in question. Fipps frequently backpedaled or evaded certain counterpoints throughout before Kaplan's announcement.
I'd have gladly read the copy/paste.

Still, that's ONE incident, and strangely there's lots more T&A around. Again, I ask, in all seriousness, does Blackwidow's Butt enlarge when she puts on her goggles?]http://hackerbot.net/blog/54-game-characters/366-widowmaker-overwatch Forget the nature of the page, the gif of her inflating butt is what I'm after to make my point.
I know she has a neckline that plunges harder than a barrel off of Niagra falls.
I think that's a glitch. Also, there have been people (myself included) kinda going "eh" at Widow's design. TBH as a character who's intended to be a (literal) cold-blooded assassin, you'd think she'd do something about that neckline. Ofc tight suits are quite practical for movement, so that aspect of her is just fine.

I think though that it's the presence of other sex appeal that makes people question why THIS sex appeal specifically is a problem. On the surface it makes no sense.
I think it's a glitch, too, but that doesn't mean we're right. :p
Honestly, I feel like it was a matter of the pose's sex appeal coupled with the personality of the pose clashing with tracer's personality.

I find your faith in the loud members of the gaming community, nevermind the people firmly against "feminists" and "SJWs" a bit disturbing.
Ah, but the dark siiiiiiiiiiiede...

Ugh, it's hard to translate Palpatine's voice into text.
Palpatine has that sort of voice doesn't he?

Sure, that's probably how you, or I would act, but to pretend we're the template for facebook users, youtubers, twitter users, and heck, some escapists is kinda absurd (They actually made a poll on the pose! No respect for the developer's acts, there, IMO), IMO.
Well honestly there's the possibility they felt the devs weren't having respect for them, so this brings up the "eye for an eye" problem I once mentioned somewhere else. But reading through the thread, I barely saw that much outrage at all. Maybe I wasn't there to see it at the time. All that's there now are posters being critical of Fipps original critique and trying to poke holes in it.
Bluntly, I'm more looking at the Escapist (A gleaming oasis of civility, IMO thanks to the dedicated moderation staff), Facebook, and Youtube. Of course I can't name and shame, but I will say that my rant reflects the tone used by the majority of the "gamers" upset with tracer's change, among other things I'll get into later in this post.

If they weren't the face of the gaming community on this matter, I wouldn't implicate that I think they are at all.
Broad strokes for a few folks.
Those "few folks" are drowning out any hope of seeing the more civil people. Infact they pretty much have drowned it all out. People enter conversations on the topic at hand, and these people are first and foremost the people seen by the people entering the conversations. They're setting the tone. They're basically the majority of people involved in the topic. So, they are the face of the gaming community.

I don't doubt there's a very quiet, very under the radar sizable amount of reasonable people out there, but the issue is they're quiet. they're not policing the idiots, they aren't calling out the assholes, or much of anything, are they? Not that I expect them to take action, mind you, but they certainly aren't doing anything to change the face of gamers on this issue.
Well gamers are dead, don'tchaknow?

Joking aside,
honestly "policing the idiots" sounds a lot like we should be silencing them, which I don't agree with. I mean jesus, "policing" them, really? I guess we should form a safety committee, then. You can't expect people to go across the vast internet and call every single person out for "being an asshole."
In fact, you chastising gamers in such a way for "not policing the idiots" sounds to me like an excuse to paint all gamers as "just as bad as the assholes" or "worse than the assholes."
I suppose policing might be a harsh term, and again, I don't expect anyone to really attempt this because I know it's like trying to drink an ocean.
I'm not really saying to silence them, I'm saying maybe, if one were to actually attempt the massive feat, is try hard to show that these people aren't the only representatives of gaming. That there are people out there that can be civil. Maybe call someone out when they're being an asshole even if they are on your side. As much as it sucks, going along with what the asshole is saying is more or less giving credibility to them.

I'm not chastising "gamers" I'm chastising the assholes. I'm basically giving them a shout out to let them know they're being assholes, see?

I mean look at the Chun Li boob jiggle glitch. It certainly wasn't normal that only p2's Chun Li would have wobbley DOA boobs while P1 didn't. People pitched a fit over the news it was going to be fixed, and there were suggestions that Chun Li should keep the DoA boob wobble. Just that instance for example.
Last I checked people were making jokes about how it should be kept and that a large number of people agreed that it needed to be fixed.
As far as I know the only real outrage came from R.Mika's butt slap being removed and a dynamic camera angle getting changed for what people considered were frivolous reasons. I don't even remember any outrage over what everyone agreed was just a really funny glitch.
We must have seen different comments.

Why would we want to question a Developer's desire to improve a character cosmetically and have her be more true to her personality over posing in painted on pants? Sure if it changed her stats, I could see a long, massive discussion, but this is just a pose.
Then why did it need to be removed if it's just a pose? Why deny players the option?
I don't think we're going to get anywhere back and forthing in such a way.
In the name of character integrity, and better writing, IMO. Still, I agree we're probably not going anywhere.

See, while you have a point in the notion that maybe they didn't want to change the pose, it certainly doesn't negate the point that maybe they did want to change her pose after all.
So we're at an impasse, then.
Looks that way.

Again, people, often arguing against inclusion in the long run, say that if women were to be added, they have to be well written! Well, this is their argument, yet they don't want tracer to be better written. They want to keep the pose that shows her butt.
No. No, no, no, no, no.
This is not a zero sum game.
Sexuality does not make a character automatically shit.
The argument was that the pose somehow contradicted established traits about Tracer's personality. A lot of people disagreed because the critic was basing their argument on their own perception of the character, filling in the blanks that Blizzard left.
This is what people took umbrage against.
I never said, or never wanted to imply sexuality makes a character shit automatically, as evidenced by later in my post. I honestly don't mind fan service, and I don't feel a character can only be sexual, or only well written. They can assuredly be both, but that certainly doesn't mean sexualized characters are all we should get.

I say this after years, and years of trying to make a case for more women in videogames, especially as player characters, which has more or less happened.
Because games with women in them never happened until all the progressives began to do their part to improve gaming.
Not in large numbers. Hell, not even on a yearly basis. Rarely good ones.
I'm not saying the games didn't exist, I'm saying that they're far too rare.
A lot of those characters listed you don't play as.
Let me put things in to focus. I'm mainly referring to games where you can play as a woman from start to finish. Bonus points if you don't have the choice to play as a guy because the game revolves around the female character(s). yeah, you can call it moving the goal posts, and I probably should have elaborated earlier, but that's what I expect from games with female protagonists.
Yeah, I get the point of this vid. It doesn't make things better.

Yeah, the "Pander to me" crowd is on all sides, but honestly, it just seems way more two faced on the "Team 1" example. They're often people defending the developer's desire to, say, show midriff and have fantasy over function female armor while having the best of both worlds on guys, or, say, to keep Tracer's pose, and generally fight tooth and nail to keep sexuality no matter what.
What's wrong with sexuality? And there is best of both worlds on girls too, depending on the game. Fantasy is just that--fantasy. Why should I have to deal with someone shouting in my ear how gross my character is in an MMO for wearing something "impractical" that exposes her midriff? Why should I put up with people shouting at me about my "virtual male privilege" in how I can have both sexy and practical clothing?

A lot of the common arguments aren't about adding in more options, but rather about removing the fanservicy stuff. And sometimes about removing characters altogether.
Nothing's wrong with sexuality in and of itself. It's a tool for conveying ideas.
The problem comes in when that's all that you get. I'm not wanting it gone. I'm wanting it toned down some, or used better.
Seeing a guy walk around in a suit of armor that is pretty practical, and fantastic, and then seeing women stuck in impractical armor that no sane person would wear into battle -all the time- is kinda unfair, and lopsided.
Having one's guts spilling out because the midriff is unprotected is pretty life threatening, so I'd imagine any sane person would want to prevent that from happening. Especially when they take great pains to cover up other areas. It kinda screws with immersion, and it's a little insulting that women are often only able to look sexy in their armor and not really have an option to look practical when trying to dress in full plate. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying why is it the only thing that can really happen?
Granted this sort of thing is getting a little more rare.

At least the people that want inclusiveness seem to be more honest in that they want more inclusiveness, and not try to boot people out, and that, IMO, inclusivity would spice things up in the gaming world.
Except when they try to shunt everyone with a dissenting opinion out of the conversation, which also happens when you disagree with the "honest" side.
Oops.
And inclusivity is already present. Diversity is a natural result of variety. I don't know why people feel that now, in the current year when we have a bajillion games available to everyone who is willing to play them that we need to be "inclusive" when there is almost literally something for everyone.
Why would one want to argue against inclusiveness? I doubt those arguments would win me over.
you can thank the loud, obnoxious face of the gaming community for the lack of desire to talk. Having 1 civil person among thousands of people resorting to every sort of slur imaginable won't be doing that civil person any favors.

Inclusivity is showing up more, and more, yeah. It wasn't always there, but it's getting there, and I'm at a pretty happy place with the current state of things, aside from some rare event like this pose issue, and a few other things.
Minus the men are drooling apes part, yeah. You want to show me how gaming between, say, 2000, and 2013 wasn't filled with women as objects, macguffins, unplayable, and so forth in mainstream gaming over, say, the sort of characters we have lately?
Well in case the video wasn't enough, I'll do a quick check to find some examples, from, I dunno, 2000, 2005? Just a couple years as a snapshot, if that's fair?
2000
Resident Evil - Code: Veronica. Claire is the main protagonist, with a male support/love interest who is kidnapped partway through the game. But I suppose since her brother shows up to help her in the climax it doesn't count since she needed a man's help?

The Misadventures of Tron Bonne - In this game, Tron is working to pay off a ransom to save her family by any means necessary.

Perfect Dark - Joanna Dark's debut

Space Channel 5 - Ulala saves the galaxy with the power of funky dancing

Tomb Raider - As Yahtzee would probably say: archaeologist with loose moral fiber shoots endangered animals and fellow explorers to get treasure. Oh but those polygons are soooooo objectifying, amirite?

Jet Set Radio - While you play as multiple characters, one of the initial playables is female, and there are numerous additional female characters to unlock as playables.

Threads of Fate - One of the main protagonists is playable, and almost all of the female characters are presented as powerful or capable (albeit eccentric). At one point there's a motherly character who in the midst of shit going down busts out a fugging plain, regular steel sword and starts fighting one of the main bad guys to protect the people she cares about.

American McGee's Alice - A story of a young girl growing up without her family and suffering from some severe emotional and mental trauma played out in a demented version of wonderland.

The Operative: No One Lives Forever - Female protagonist in a spy film styled game
This isn't counting any RPGs and fighting games that featured playable female characters, as well as any games which give the option to play as either gender in a single role (like Pokemon, I mean, where the story is unchanged regardless of gender).

To save time let's jump ahead, hm...about 5 years.

2005
Kameo: Elements of Power & Perfect Dark Zero - Here comes rare with 2 more strong female protagonists. Shame about the games, though.

Fatal Frame 3 -- Typical horror story of girl in creepy village trying to not die and bustin' ghosts with an ancient Polaroid.

Ghost in the Shell -- A PSP game, so I dunno if you wanna count this or not because I don't think anyone owned a PSP.

Metal Gear Ac!d -- A PSP game again, with a playable female character, although I can't say if she was a protagonist or not because y'know...Solid Snake.

Haunting Ground -- These horror games usually use female protags to evoke sympathy and care in male gamers I think...plus the vulnerability adds to the horror and tension in these games, I think. She does still develop as a character through the story, and things go well for her if you get the best ending.

...plus I don't think it needs to be said that a woman chasing the protag to cut out her womb to take it for herself is horrifying regardless of what gender you are.

Red Ninja -- Okay this is a bad example; it's about a young woman going around murdering dudes for revenge while wearing a questionably loose kimono. Apparently the game was also shitty.
And in 2010 we had Bayonetta. Oh, but because she does sexy dancing and poses we should disregard her since she's sexy so she's clearly a shit character.
Well, first off, yes, Red Ninja was a terrible game. It had potential, but it basically wasted it.

Secondly, this list isn't all that great. Kinda weird you'd pick 2 of 13 years when gaming doesn't only occur in them, and 2 years doesn't negate my experiences.
Let me put this into perspective.
Think back to your days gaming in 2000 to 2013. All the resources you had back then, you still have them, and no more.
The lists of playable women, and if you don't mind me narrowing the scope a bit, games starring these women, are the ONLY games you get to play. Period. If you don't have the system the games are on, you don't get to play those. Are you happy with that selection?
If the answer is even remotely close to "no" then I think we might have an understanding.
Because I can just about guarantee that games with only male leads are far more varied in gameplay, subject, and basically everything that really matters.
I'm not saying I only play games with female leads, or anything like that, I'm just trying to make a point in how readily accessible they are, the quality of them, and the presentation of the female leads.

We still have women wearing impossibly skimpy clothes, but ya know what? It's not all that's being put out there, and I'm actually okay with the balance.
Let's not get self-congratulatory here.
This progressivism in gaming hasn't been around as long as gaming has, and older games had less men and women and more animals and mascot characters.

RPGs introduced diverse casts, and while they did have a lot of male protagonists, they were only the protagonists insofar as the game took place from their POV. This didn't diminish the other characters unless the writing was bad; Terra in FF6 is perceived to be the "main character" but that doesn't lessen
Celes' personal conflict as a member of the empire or the development of her character and how she almost gives into despair and attempts suicide after believing that she's lost everyone she's ever cared about in a ruined world, something many a gamer cried over if they weren't bawling over Aeris dying in FF7. By the by, as dumb as FF7 and Aeris' death is, she is the reason the world gets saved at the end of FF7, so I don't see how her not being "da mein characdur" diminishes her as a female character in general.
When most of the female cast members mainly exist only to make the male cast members look good, largely by suffering so the main guy can save them, yes, it diminishes things. It'd be nice to not always see women crammed into supporting roles.
A few good supporting roles doesn't erase everything else because the good ones are very much in the minority.
It's nice, sometimes, to play as the woman, and have all the power to save the world, and freedom to do whatever the game allows, and generally be in the role that the main, generally male, lead has.

Hell, I play Senran Kagura in general, and while I don't openly in public, I'm open to saying I play it, and enjoy it. I like the dragon's crown Sorceress. I want DoAX3 in NA. I don't mind the fan service, it's that just until lately, within the past few years it really hasn't felt like there's been much more to women in games than that.
Hell, I wouldn't have minded the skinship minigame in fire emblem. Honestly, I think they might have broken the relationship system when they took it out because there's endless heart earning.
Would you argue that the Senran Kagura girls have no character? Sorceress is part of an arcade game that references DnD quite a bit so she, like every other playable in DC, is a blank slate anyway. DoAX3 is not coming to NA, whether because they feared actual backlash or because they wanted to stir up press, I dunno. But the current atmosphere surrounding gaming contributed to their decision.

There is a big pushback against fanservice among the inclusive crowd, because "misrepresentation" or whatever.
The truth is, we need to ADD, not to REMOVE.

Also I do think they broke the MyRoom mechanics by removing the game, because now it acts kind of...weird, sometimes.
Of course not. It's sorta strange that the girls in Senran Kagura are among the best written. That sorta sidestepps my point, though. Like I said before, sexualization doesn't automatically make a character shitty. Senran Kagura is also not the only way women get presented in modern gaming.There is the Evie Frye, and rebooted Lara Croft, and more than a few other women that aren't presented like the Senran Kagura girls. There's a balance here. It certainly helps that the Senran Kagura games are oddly well written considering the level of fan service. Most games with the presentation of Senran Kagura rarely have the writing to back it up.

I don't get what adding fan service would do to help the situation. The pushback is there because people are sick of it being so prevalent in gaming.

You missed Chun Li's boob wobble to say the least which I think lends proof to my argument. :p
Also Karin, and Cammy's face remodeling.
People complained because Cammy looked like she had a duckface. And I think most of the complaints there came from Japanese players more than American ones. I didn't even know Karin's face got a remodel at all.
Just saying it's there.

Yes, and clearly painting large numbers of gamers who like fanservice as intellectually bankrupt morons, perverts, or misogynists will definitely help increase the demand for more female protagonists.

Wait.

Not gonna debate the whole Kaplan thing; I've already stated that he handled it poorly and let his initial message get misconstrued as "caving" to Fipps, so in the end regardless of whether he was virtue signalling or not (I changed my stance on this a couple posts up), he should've at least been transparent about what was going on with this one pose from the get go.
Well, when the face of gamers heads away from people screaming bloody murder, and going on witch hunts, and throwing "sjw" and "feminist" around in seriousness, people will give gamers a break. Letting a horde of drunken uncles greet the guests at a civil dinner isn't going to make people ignore the drunken uncles in favor of the few civil people inside.

About the topic I mentioned earlier, I was getting to? The new Baldur's Gate has a trans character in it. The drunken uncles are loose, and raising hell over it. It's like Mass Effect's LGBT relationships all over again, mostly. I don't see Baldur's gate being banned in several countries for LGBT content, but hey, I'm probably wrong on that.
So, yeah, there's more drama over people not wanting inclusiveness in a game, and blemishing the face of the "gamers" community and no doubt there's too few people trying to fight the fire. So, yeah, you'll have to pardon me if my view on the people I lump into "team 1" isn't getting any higher.
The response to this, much like Blizzard's response to Tracer, is that they're going to put more emphasis on the trans character.
 

Piecewise

New member
Apr 18, 2008
706
0
0
erttheking said:
Piecewise said:
I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.
You stood on your tip toes on one foot and shoved your other foot up your butt and held that for 3 seconds?

It's an accomplishment I suppose.
 

Falling_v1legacy

No one of consequence
Nov 3, 2009
116
0
0
but let's not act like the whole discussion isn't frequently hijacked by the vocal minority
I certainly hope it was a vocal minority, because it certainly feels like a majority yammering at Blizzard over a pretty harmless suggestion. (And without fail, the initial post is psychoanalyzed or mischaracterized to create an SJW boogeyman that never existed except in one's panicky imagination. The central issue was that Blizzard didn't execute the pose very well. I don't know if I'd call the initial pose sexy as such, but I thought it was a poor pose and was fine with it gone.)

However, I think it's viewing the entire issue too much through the lens of gaming culture war to think that Blizzard was trying to trick people, manipulating them into an outrage. (Doesn't say much for modern gamers if we are so predictably susceptible to provocation that that a company could rely upon it for their marketing- particularly considering how cursory their initial response was 'we're sorry' and then close the thread, rather than big announcements saying 'look at us, aren't we so progressive.' Seems a pretty low key method to provoke a controversy for marketing purposes.) I think their motive is a little more plain: they really, really want people to like them and their game. Have you listened to some of their interviews? Metzen was literally (in the proper sense) choking back tears describing an 8 year old kid that was asking about more backstory for Winston. They want people to like this game, their first new IP in decades.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Piecewise said:
erttheking said:
Piecewise said:
I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.
You stood on your tip toes on one foot and shoved your other foot up your butt and held that for 3 seconds?

It's an accomplishment I suppose.
I missed the part where she shoved her own foot up her rear.
 

LawAndChaos

Nice things are gone
Aug 29, 2014
116
0
0
I think it's a glitch, too, but that doesn't mean we're right. :p
Honestly, I feel like it was a matter of the pose's sex appeal coupled with the personality of the pose clashing with tracer's personality.
I will point out that any seductive behavior on Widowmaker's part doesn't really fall in line with her character either. Sniping is an incredibly impersonal method of assassination, and she's a walking corpse. I think the Black Widow motif on her isn't representing her character, but her backstory more than anything.

Besides they made Tracer's new pose even more sex appeal-y, and not only that, it falls in line with Tracer's character, according to them.

Palpatine has that sort of voice doesn't he?
Palpatine is the only good thing about the prequels.

Bluntly, I'm more looking at the Escapist (A gleaming oasis of civility, IMO thanks to the dedicated moderation staff), Facebook, and Youtube. Of course I can't name and shame, but I will say that my rant reflects the tone used by the majority of the "gamers" upset with tracer's change, among other things I'll get into later in this post.
Ah, ok, thanks for the clarification.
But honestly most of the outrage I see is the fact that everyone's pissed or relatively annoyed that people "couldn't handle a butt." The controversy is overblown, sure, but it stands in line with the genuine concern most gamers have that people who don't actually care about video games are trying to force changes based on their ideologies into video games. So as previously stated, any "victory" for them is a "defeat" for gamers. Of course that's dumb, but that's what we've come to.

Those "few folks" are drowning out any hope of seeing the more civil people. Infact they pretty much have drowned it all out. People enter conversations on the topic at hand, and these people are first and foremost the people seen by the people entering the conversations. They're setting the tone. They're basically the majority of people involved in the topic. So, they are the face of the gaming community.
That applies to both sides. It's unfair to act like the onus of blame is all on the gaming community. The vocal minority of both sides of the argument have left gaming on the defensive while also looking unwelcoming. Neither side wants to clear the bats out of the belfry, though.

I suppose policing might be a harsh term, and again, I don't expect anyone to really attempt this because I know it's like trying to drink an ocean.
I'm not really saying to silence them, I'm saying maybe, if one were to actually attempt the massive feat, is try hard to show that these people aren't the only representatives of gaming. That there are people out there that can be civil. Maybe call someone out when they're being an asshole even if they are on your side. As much as it sucks, going along with what the asshole is saying is more or less giving credibility to them.
Well I suppose this is a case of them feeling like it's not their responsibility to fight against every zealous asshole that hops into a conversation. Plus the current atmosphere surrounding gaming is that people are expecting to just be disregarded, disrespected or dismissed because they are a gamer.

I'm not chastising "gamers" I'm chastising the assholes. I'm basically giving them a shout out to let them know they're being assholes, see?
Actually thinking about it, why do assholes suddenly become gaming reps? Just because they are part of a gaming community or play games?
Plus anyone can be labelled an asshole simply for being critical nowadays, so what even constitutes an asshole?

Gaming at its core doesn't have an ideology, it's a hobby. So why do we need to act like a political movement?
A lot of the general attitude surrounding gaming is "when someone's being a dick they're not worth dealing with, ignore them." I think that mostly comes from the fact that in our current age of gaming we are used to mute and silence options to keep those sorts of people out of our fun. Furthermore there have been cases of one side completely shutting down the discussion entirely rather than wanting to hear gamers' side of things, so there is no other option appearing to them except to keep to themselves and put up as many defensive walls as possible to keep "SJW" stuff out of games.

Yes, essentially gamers felt like they needed to turn the place into a "safe space." Funny, right?

We must have seen different comments.
I didn't see any outrage over it, honest.
I'm not going to assume there wasn't any, but I really didn't see any.
I probably missed them.
Still, I mean, if you're talking about specifically in the Escapist, that's like, just one community, man.
We can't base the whole of gaming off one community.

I never said, or never wanted to imply sexuality makes a character shit automatically, as evidenced by later in my post. I honestly don't mind fan service, and I don't feel a character can only be sexual, or only well written. They can assuredly be both, but that certainly doesn't mean sexualized characters are all we should get.
And I never said or implied that sexualized characters are all we should get.
And in the case of Overwatch, we don't.
The truth is that there are options out there that many conveniently ignore for the sake of continuing to rally against games for not representing enough or representing them properly.
And again, what's wrong with sexuality?
I'm not talking taking it to the extreme with dental floss bathing suits or thongs or whatever, I'm talking flirting, or doing sexy poses or dances, or simply having some interest in sexuality at all.
You see this is why so many gamers mischaracterise the argument as "ALL WOMEN IN BURKHAS HERP DERP," because any semblance of female sexuality is often put under the microscope and criticized for being there.

And to me personally, characters are either blank slates to project onto, or characters within a story that are following a plot for that character, so I'm not the sort of person to talk to about representation when I already feel that a character's gender should take a backseat to how well they're written.

Not in large numbers. Hell, not even on a yearly basis. Rarely good ones.
I'm not saying the games didn't exist, I'm saying that they're far too rare.
A lot of those characters listed you don't play as.
They're still there. And in RPGs you are technically playing as a party, not just one character. Plus I don't see why they NEED to be playable, so long as they're good examples of well-written female characters.

Let me put things in to focus. I'm mainly referring to games where you can play as a woman from start to finish. Bonus points if you don't have the choice to play as a guy because the game revolves around the female character(s). yeah, you can call it moving the goal posts, and I probably should have elaborated earlier, but that's what I expect from games with female protagonists.
Yeah, I get the point of this vid. It doesn't make things better.
So you want more games that focus purely on a female protagonist, and not give the option for anything other than female?
Ok, I see, I getcha perfectly.
You don't want to count games that have women as an playable option because...any game that has the option to play as both men and women is somehow not supporting women, simply because male protagonists are more common?

Even though there were at the time more men playing games than women?

Well ok.

Nothing's wrong with sexuality in and of itself. It's a tool for conveying ideas.
The problem comes in when that's all that you get. I'm not wanting it gone. I'm wanting it toned down some, or used better.
Seeing a guy walk around in a suit of armor that is pretty practical, and fantastic, and then seeing women stuck in impractical armor that no sane person would wear into battle -all the time- is kinda unfair, and lopsided.
Dark Souls never had this problem.

Having one's guts spilling out because the midriff is unprotected is pretty life threatening, so I'd imagine any sane person would want to prevent that from happening. Especially when they take great pains to cover up other areas.
See now this makes logical sense. I can only imagine the midriff exposure being a thing if it was for ease of movement and flexibility, but that would only work if you're playing a class that would logically require that, like a thief.

It kinda screws with immersion, and it's a little insulting that women are often only able to look sexy in their armor and not really have an option to look practical when trying to dress in full plate. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying why is it the only thing that can really happen?
Granted this sort of thing is getting a little more rare.
And yet people still complain about it even though it's going away. Well color me shocked.

Why would one want to argue against inclusiveness? I doubt those arguments would win me over.
you can thank the loud, obnoxious face of the gaming community for the lack of desire to talk. Having 1 civil person among thousands of people resorting to every sort of slur imaginable won't be doing that civil person any favors.
Because diversity is a natural result of variety. When you argue for inclusiveness you are arguing for a diversity checklist. "Oop, better make sure I have this and this and this, gotta make sure everyone's represented." It gives meaning to things like race and gender when those things shouldn't be a big deal. It should be the creator's choice to make their characters and playables how they want, and if they want to change something more power to them to do so.

But nobody wants to see creators be pressured into making changes because everyone was angry at them for not being inclusive.

Inclusivity is showing up more, and more, yeah. It wasn't always there, but it's getting there, and I'm at a pretty happy place with the current state of things, aside from some rare event like this pose issue, and a few other things.
It's a shame that we had to shake up the entirety of gaming and attempting to hold it up as "problematic" to do it, eh?

Well, first off, yes, Red Ninja was a terrible game. It had potential, but it basically wasted it.

Secondly, this list isn't all that great. Kinda weird you'd pick 2 of 13 years when gaming doesn't only occur in them, and 2 years doesn't negate my experiences.
Well I'm only one person, and I didn't want to spend about 2-2 & 1/2 hours just making a response to a forum post containing like every single example over the course of 13 years.

I'll freely admit laziness on my part.
Let me put this into perspective.
Think back to your days gaming in 2000 to 2013. All the resources you had back then, you still have them, and no more.
The lists of playable women, and if you don't mind me narrowing the scope a bit, games starring these women, are the ONLY games you get to play. Period. If you don't have the system the games are on, you don't get to play those. Are you happy with that selection?
Why does it only have to be games exclusively with women protagonists?
"I don't count anything that doesn't have ONLY a female protagonist as representing women."
And it's funny because yeah, I agree with you that it might've been limited, sure. Although a lot came about in 13 years, all things considered. How many consoles did we see in that time, not counting PC? I mean in 2000 we still had the PS1, which was back when gaming was still primarily male-dominated.

But then nobody said anything until not too long ago, when gaming was really starting to develop and grow, and variety was becoming the norm, and by extension diversity. But of course then the regressives came out to essentially attempt to set gaming backwards under the guise of "improving gaming diversity." I really, really, REALLY don't want to even bring Sarkeesian up, but from what I've seen she was the one that turned the conversation into something to clash against. Had she not attempted to paint gaming in a negative light in such an intellectually dishonest manner, the conversation would've likely come about on its own, or alternatively we would've seen more female protagonists over time through civil discourse instead of making misogyny accusations.

If the answer is even remotely close to "no" then I think we might have an understanding.
Because I can just about guarantee that games with only male leads are far more varied in gameplay, subject, and basically everything that really matters.
I'm not saying I only play games with female leads, or anything like that, I'm just trying to make a point in how readily accessible they are, the quality of them, and the presentation of the female leads.
So what you're saying is, Cloud should've been a girl...

When most of the female cast members mainly exist only to make the male cast members look good, largely by suffering so the main guy can save them, yes, it diminishes things. It'd be nice to not always see women crammed into supporting roles.
Terra was a woman, and FF6 followed EVERY character in the party, even giving you the choice of who to follow when everyone got split up.
Every character in RPGs has a story to tell and an arc to follow. This is why I argue for every party member being a main character in their own way, even though there's a single "hero" main character for the player to directly interface with.
Plus "supporting roles" are just as important as the "main role." This pisses me off to no end when people see women in the supporting role and casually dismiss it offhand like it means fucking nothing.

A few good supporting roles doesn't erase everything else because the good ones are very much in the minority.
It's nice, sometimes, to play as the woman, and have all the power to save the world, and freedom to do whatever the game allows, and generally be in the role that the main, generally male, lead has.
Then maybe you should stop getting hung up on gender and focus more on playing the character, maybe.
Do you feel excluded when you are expected to play as a gender neutral robot in a game, since you are unable to play as a human? Or if it were a male robot, would you still feel excluded because the robot identifies as male?

Of course not. It's sorta strange that the girls in Senran Kagura are among the best written. That sorta sidestepps my point, though. Like I said before, sexualization doesn't automatically make a character shitty. Senran Kagura is also not the only way women get presented in modern gaming.There is the Evie Frye, and rebooted Lara Croft, and more than a few other women that aren't presented like the Senran Kagura girls. There's a balance here. It certainly helps that the Senran Kagura games are oddly well written considering the level of fan service. Most games with the presentation of Senran Kagura rarely have the writing to back it up.

I don't get what adding fan service would do to help the situation. The pushback is there because people are sick of it being so prevalent in gaming.
And not everyone shares that sentiment, hence the pushback against the pushback.
Adding male fanservice would equal the field just fine. In games where the fanservice fits the tone, at least.
Not every game needs fanservice, but as far as I know fanservice has only been prevalent in Japanese games, waaaaaaaay more than American ones.

Well, so much for Senran Kagura then. I guess we know which devs are going to decide to not release their next game in the west next.

Just saying it's there.
Just saying. Duckface. Quack quack.
The bitching was likely because uncanny valley way more than anything to do with sexyness or female sexuality.
Unless you want to argue the duckface implied she had BJ lips, or something.

Well, when the face of gamers heads away from people screaming bloody murder, and going on witch hunts, and throwing "sjw" and "feminist" around in seriousness, people will give gamers a break. Letting a horde of drunken uncles greet the guests at a civil dinner isn't going to make people ignore the drunken uncles in favor of the few civil people inside.
Where the hell IS this even? As far as I've seen gamers are just being gobbed back into the pit of social outcasts from whence they came. Back when gaming was still young it was considered "for nerds" and anyone who played it was undeserving of respect or understanding from society.

DnD had satanic accusations thrown at it, and gaming was accused of inciting violent behavior in players.
Now the narrative has changed to gaming causing misogyny, and yet it's all gamer's fault for going on witch hunts and screaming bloody murder? The chicken didn't come before the egg here. A precedent was set that CREATED this atmosphere of witch hunting and vocal rage.

It seems to me that you're just affirming "no, it's always gamer's fault, it's always been their fault, they never wanted a reasonable discussion about anything from the start." I have some serious doubts about that.

About the topic I mentioned earlier, I was getting to? The new Baldur's Gate has a trans character in it. The drunken uncles are loose, and raising hell over it. It's like Mass Effect's LGBT relationships all over again, mostly. I don't see Baldur's gate being banned in several countries for LGBT content, but hey, I'm probably wrong on that.
So, yeah, there's more drama over people not wanting inclusiveness in a game, and blemishing the face of the "gamers" community and no doubt there's too few people trying to fight the fire. So, yeah, you'll have to pardon me if my view on the people I lump into "team 1" isn't getting any higher.
Well excuse me, I guess I'll go sit in my corner for not doing anything about something I didn't know anything about, since my failure to tell them to shut up means I am part of the problem.

And Mass Effect's LGBT content was criticized because there had been up to that point no hint that Male!Shepard had any sort of interest in a homosexual relationship.
Female!Shepard is debatable because you could pursue a relationship with Liara regardless of your gender, but that was more because Asari are justified in-universe as being the galaxy's universal remote (because they turn everyone on, ya get it? Ya get it!?
...ok, I'll show myself out.) but Fem!Shep never pursued any sort of lesbian relationship outside of her.

You could even argue this is evidence of pushback against compromising established character for the sake of pandering to LGBT communities. You could argue "well that's your choice, isn't that what ME is about?" But at the same time not only Shepard, but other characters suffer for this change as well. With every character now potentially having a romantic interest in Shepherd, it essentially rewrites characters into having an interest in Shepherd even if there was no established chemistry or interest in prior installments of the game.

Jack in ME2 made it very clear she has no interest in Fem!Shep, yet she does in ME3?

A good example too is a romantic interest between someone like Kaidan and Male!Shep for instance, when there was no chemistry in ME1 (he wasn't in 2 unless you saved him, and even then he only has a brief appearance) between them makes a romantic relationship rather rushed.

There were probably people bitching about the gay stuff itself, but I don't think people were hating on it simply because it was gay. There were perfectly valid reasons to be critical of it.
 

LawAndChaos

Nice things are gone
Aug 29, 2014
116
0
0
Falling said:
Well the notion of creating a "SJW" bogeyman is debatable, yes. Looking at some of Fipps' posts however does at the very least leave it up in the air at best.

Had the OP not even mentioned the booty or the "sexiness" of the pose and focused on how it didn't really fit for the character I bet dollars to donuts the discussion would've been more civil. But Fipps themselves stated "they were turning Tracer into another bland sex object."

The implications are right there; the pose turns Tracer into "another bland sex object." If it was just about the pose being bad and not fitting her character, why even bother bringing that up at all? Why was it worth mentioning?

I will agree all in all that this could've been a publicity stunt by Blizz. And the fact that they really want people to like their game is a plus. But stirring up contreversy in such a way is questionable when they could've just handled it better and taken the high road in all this.

It's a no-win scenario for Blizz. If they admit they agreed with Fipps, they're "pandering to SJWs." If they admit they did it for controversy, then they just used a sore spot in the gaming community and exploited gamer's fears and reservations to make some quick PR.

Perception is reality to a lot of people, remember. There is no way to perceive this negatively without being considered naive. Unless of course, the trolling itself is lauded, which considering the gaming community is likely. At the end of the day there was even a couple formal apology threads about people who flipped out over the pose, and a lot of people laughing everything off.

I think this result will set a good precedent and reassure gamers that "no, the SJWs aren't coming for your vidya."
This can reopen discussion about representation in a reasonable manner, without gamers trying to duck into the safe space they felt they "needed."