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

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
Pants don't conform to the butt like that. If you look to the top results of a google image-search for "reality" I'm a little concerned about you.
 

Cati

😏
Sep 4, 2014
37
0
0
@Olas - "pants don't conform to the butt like that", an assertion made based on a piece of digital artwork.
"pants do conform to the butt like that", an assertion made based on photos of real people, and of people's real experiences (either first or secondhand xp).

Belief in one of those should cause concern about a person's perception of reality, and it ain't the one based on what real-life pants look on real-life women.
 

OldNewNewOld

New member
Mar 2, 2011
1,494
0
0
dunam said:
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
I admire your dedication to research.
We can safely assume that the research was conduted purely to bring the point across. They had nothing else in mind except a birther future of gaming.

 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
At the end of the day, to anyone still reading this thread. The problem was not that blizzard removed an image. It was that they made the claim that you can't be sexy and strong or heroic. They didn't quite slut shame but they did err on the side of the root of slut shaming. That a woman who is proud of her sexuality is somehow less valuable and less competent as a person. It also makes the assumption that women and men do not feel empowered by being attractive and sexy. Shame on Blizzard for such a blunder in offensiveness and assumptive reasoning.

Had they merely said that expressions of overt sexuality do not match the theme of their game then I would still be mildly annoyed that they created and released it in the first place and then removed a perfectly valid and finished asset for players to select if they wanted to, but at least then I could respect their artistic integrity. Instead, they did it in a way that again demonized sexuality. A mind set that the same people arguing against this image today would have fought against during the sexual empowerment revolution that enabled women to show off some ankle if they damn well pleased and everyone else be darned. It's so silly, we wouldn't say shit about a woman in a sports bra and booty shorts jogging down the street. That fight has already been fought and women won. This is just nonsense and puritanical.

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

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
I admire your dedication to research.
Areloch performed this research in a lab with a lab coat on and goggles. Areloch spent weeks searching and testing and verifying the results. Then they performed a double blind study on the matter and finally put his work to rest. There were lab assistants and volunteers. They even had a government grant or too thanks to a little known trust left running from the Clinton Era.

Areloch, for butt-conforming-pants hero!
 

go-10

New member
Feb 3, 2010
1,557
0
0
I don't get why so much discussion over her butt... it's not even big! But now that we know that Blizzard will listen to the fans I hope they change her croc shoes and zip up Widowmaker's zipper
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
GZGoten said:
I don't get why so much discussion over her butt... it's not even big! But now that we know that Blizzard will listen to the fans I hope they change her croc shoes and zip up Widowmaker's zipper
Are... are you joking or not? Can't tell if Poe's law or not...

Tilly said:
Lol well I read about this story in about 10 different places before I even saw the pose.

THATS IT?????

That's barely even sexual. Simply having an ass is now a sexual thing? When did we unwittingly get invaded by Saudi Arabia?
Not only that, but according to Blizzard if you have an ass and pose in any way that displays said ass then you are not strong or heroic. By proxy this logic also supports slut shaming, fyi.
 
Sep 14, 2009
9,073
0
0
Olas said:
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
Pants don't conform to the butt like that. If you look to the top results of a google image-search for "reality" I'm a little concerned about you.
yes, yes they do. I have no idea where you live, but when it's not blistering cold out women in my area pretty much default to yoga pants, and that amplifies x10 when you go to gyms/workout rooms, and unless the ass is just the flabbiest grandma thing in the world, the yoga pants pretty much have a high chance of conforming to the ass like that.

I feel very sorry for you since you seem to never encounter these in the wild.
 

Einspanner

New member
Mar 6, 2016
122
0
0
If I were Blizzard, I'd be pissing my myself, laughing right now. "So what, you took out .5 seconds of pose, and they're still talking about it?! WHOO!!! Free publicity!"
 

go-10

New member
Feb 3, 2010
1,557
0
0
Lightknight said:
GZGoten said:
I don't get why so much discussion over her butt... it's not even big! But now that we know that Blizzard will listen to the fans I hope they change her croc shoes and zip up Widowmaker's zipper
Are... are you joking or not? Can't tell if Poe's law or not...
I'm not joking, her shoes are fugly!



give her some cool ass looking combat boots or something
 

Dizchu

...brutal
Sep 23, 2014
1,277
0
0
Lightknight said:
At the end of the day, to anyone still reading this thread. The problem was not that blizzard removed an image. It was that they made the claim that you can't be sexy and strong or heroic.
Where did they make this claim?

That a woman who is proud of her sexuality is somehow less valuable and less competent as a person. It also makes the assumption that women and men do not feel empowered by being attractive and sexy.
I think you're looking way too deeply into this, the pose wasn't even sexual and nothing about Tracer from what I've seen suggests that she's the kind of character that flaunts her sexuality proudly. It doesn't mean that she's ashamed of it either, I just don't think it's relevant. I don't think the original forum post had a point and I also don't think these people talking about "female sexuality" have a point.

It's just a butt.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
Lightknight said:
dunam said:
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
I admire your dedication to research.
Areloch performed this research in a lab with a lab coat on and goggles. Areloch spent weeks searching and testing and verifying the results. Then they performed a double blind study on the matter and finally put his work to rest. There were lab assistants and volunteers. They even had a government grant or too thanks to a little known trust left running from the Clinton Era.

Areloch, for butt-conforming-pants hero!
I will say that some of those butts were SO bootilicious that I sometimes had to wear a lead apron and chemical gloves. We actually lost two lab assistants. It was very tragic.

Always remember their noble sacrifice!
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Dizchu said:
Lightknight said:
At the end of the day, to anyone still reading this thread. The problem was not that blizzard removed an image. It was that they made the claim that you can't be sexy and strong or heroic.
Where did they make this claim?
When they said that they are removing them because they want people to feel strong and heroic. The easily applied logical conclusion being that being sexy means you are weak and not heroic.

Ergo, the devaluation of people who, say, take nice selfies in mirrors because they like how they look. Not as far as slut shaming but somewhere around the same root cause of slut shaming in which a person needs to be ashamed of their sexuality.

Dizchu said:
I think you're looking way too deeply into this, the pose wasn't even sexual and nothing about Tracer from what I've seen suggests that she's the kind of character that flaunts her sexuality proudly. It doesn't mean that she's ashamed of it either, I just don't think it's relevant. I don't think the original forum post had a point and I also don't think these people talking about "female sexuality" have a point.

It's just a butt.
The pose itself doesn't matter and had they stated that it was because it was out of character then that's fine. But instead they said they are removing it because looking sexy means weak and unheroic in their minds. That's messed up when you consider it in terms of the whole sexual revolution in which women fought for a world in which no was no long OK to shame women for showing some ankle on their own damn terms.

This makes just about as much sense as claiming that Rhonda Rousey's sexy photo-shoots make her less strong and capable. Anyone who makes that mistake in the ring with her or in public might find themselves waking up in a hospital. Expressing sexuality =/= weak or less value as a person but that is the statement they made in their public reasoning.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Areloch said:
Lightknight said:
dunam said:
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
I admire your dedication to research.
Areloch performed this research in a lab with a lab coat on and goggles. Areloch spent weeks searching and testing and verifying the results. Then they performed a double blind study on the matter and finally put his work to rest. There were lab assistants and volunteers. They even had a government grant or too thanks to a little known trust left running from the Clinton Era.

Areloch, for butt-conforming-pants hero!
I will say that some of those butts were SO bootilicious that I sometimes had to wear a lead apron and chemical gloves. We actually lost two lab assistants. It was very tragic.
May the portion of the inevitable Nobel prize allotted to their involvement ease their family's pain.

Oh, wait, they were just assistants so they don't get any. Still though, at least their families can rest easy knowing that they died doing what they loved...

Always remember their noble sacrifice!
Hear hear, pour some out.
 

Dizchu

...brutal
Sep 23, 2014
1,277
0
0
Lightknight said:
When they said that they are removing them because they want people to feel strong and heroic. The easily applied logical conclusion being that being sexy means you are weak and not heroic.
Of course, this is why they scrapped the Widowmaker character. Oh wait.

The pose itself doesn't matter and had they stated that it was because it was out of character then that's fine. But instead they said they are removing it because looking sexy means weak and unheroic in their minds. That's messed up when you consider it in terms of the whole sexual revolution in which women fought for a world in which no was no long OK to shame women for showing some ankle on their own damn terms.
You are making several jumps in logic here and it sounds like you're deliberately trying to interpret this in the worst way possible.

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

And please, let's not dive into pure hyperbole here. People insisting "what next? Tracer wearing a burka?" Come on that is such a childish escalation of what is a very minor issue. It is a single pose of a single character. A single pose.

Expressing sexuality =/= weak or less value as a person but that is the statement they made in their public reasoning.
That is not the statement that they made.

I'm getting tired of the false dichotomies that this controversy has brought. I usually run to the defence of games like Senran Kagura and Dragon's Crown with their hyper-sexual character designs, in fact in this case I thought the original forum post was a bit silly (but not uncalled for). Now everyone's making this a discussion about free speech, female sexuality, censorship, feminism, and so on when it has absolutely nothing to do with those things.

What this controversy is about: Blizzard making an unpopular decision
What this controversy is not about: SJWs destroying video games and female characters not being able to be sexual anymore

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

SlumlordThanatos

Lord Inquisitor
Aug 25, 2014
724
0
0
Dizchu said:
Of course, this is why they scrapped the Widowmaker character. Oh, wait.
Widowmaker is allowed to be sexy because she's evil.

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

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

Dizchu

...brutal
Sep 23, 2014
1,277
0
0
SlumlordThanatos said:
Widowmaker is allowed to be sexy because she's evil.

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

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

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



The most likely scenario is that Blizzard wanted an over-the-shoulder pose, made one and then looked back and thought "err I dunno". Then when a fan pointed it out it confirmed their doubts and they decided to change it. This is part of the creative process.

Where Blizzard completely dropped the ball was with their insincere "we don't want to offend anyone" PR nonsense. I mean I know why they said it, it's what any business does. "We're sorry we did this, the customer's always right, we want to make our product inclusive etc." But it was completely counter-productive and now we have people quoting MLK, bringing up Nazi Germany and insisting that Islamic theocracy is taking over and female characters will be forced to wear the niqab.
 
Apr 24, 2008
3,912
0
0
ThatOtherGirl said:
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
As much as I appreciate that considering the moral implications of, or... I suppose "what could arguably be inferred" by x does have it's place. If we're doing the "won't somebody please think of the children?" thing, then my primary concern isn't "what does this piece of media say beneath the surface?" so much as it is "what kind of culture are we leaving for them?"
I touched on this in my post several pages ago. I think this is the important point in this entire conversation, though I think I am coming at it from a different point of view than you. I am not particularly concerned about the fact that Blizzard is making the change. What bothers me is the reasoning behind the original complaint and the initial, unthinking response Blizzard gave that basically endorsed the line of thinking as valid and correct.

What matters here isn't what actually gets into the final game. What matters is how we got there. The original feedback by fipps was many things. It was well worded, it was designed to be inoffensive and reasonably put as possible. I also think it was very sexist.

The core of Fipps issue with the pose was that a character they thought shouldn't be sexy was being mildly sexy, that this instantly "reduces her" to a sex symbol, that this sexuality conflicts with her other core character traits (kind, funny, good friend, ie, the archetypal good girl character), and that this sort of pose should be confined to characters who are defined by flaunting their sexuality.

This lands a bit too close to the mindset of "good girls shouldn't be sexy" for me. It isn't slut shaming, it is the far more insidious root that leads to slut shaming. It attempts to draw a line in the sand that says one kind of woman on the left side, other kind of woman on the right side, and all the women on the right are better (remember that he actually makes the argument that including a minor sexy pose reduced Tracer in his eyes.)

I don't like that. And I especially don't like that Blizzard agreed with the line of thinking.
We were indeed coming at it from slightly different angles, but I don't disagree with anything you said. Very good post, IMHO, and happy to claim an assist on it.

It kinda makes you wonder what the rest of the team making the game made of the decision.
 

Bocaj2000

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,082
0
0
BiH-Kira said:
dunam said:
Areloch said:
This topic's fairly beaten to death at this point and everyone's firmly entrenched in their opinions and it's not going to change anyone's mind on this, but for giggles I thought it'd drop in to link a quick Google search:

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

As a counterpoint to the people claiming that 'pants don't conform to the butt like that'. Real life seems to disagree.
I admire your dedication to research.
We can safely assume that the research was conduted purely to bring the point across. They had nothing else in mind except a birther future of gaming.

I have joined the research team and have dedicated another google search to further the development of realistic aestetics

https://www.google.com/search?espv=...0.0..0.0....0...1c..64.img..0.0.0.m1APnRYtmWM
 

SlumlordThanatos

Lord Inquisitor
Aug 25, 2014
724
0
0
Dizchu said:
This is the point that I keep going back to, because I think it is central to the outrage. Making the change for artistic reasons wouldn't have kicked up nearly the same amount of controversy, and some of the people talking about this affair realize this fact.

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

So that is why the bulk of the discussion is about people moaning that we're on the path towards removing sexuality from games entirely.