Blizzard "Trying Not to Oversexualize" Female Overwatch Characters

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

The idea that artists do not want to hear what people think about it and how we can improve is false.

You completely missed my point on this matter. I did not say that artists should completely ignore feedback, I suggested that artists should not be slaves to feedback, which I have a hard time thinking any artist would disagree with.

The biggest problem with widow maker is she does not look like a female super hero, She is LACKING curves where real strong, attractive, athletic women would have them.

There are several problems with this kind of thinking.
1. You automatically assume she is human. She could be some sort of alien where bone and muscle mass is different. She doesn't look human to me so as someone who can comprehend that this is a fictional reality, I am willing to accept that appearance does not always carry the same function between different races. While I understand this may seem like me bending over backwards, it should at least reinforce that 'some' people understand what 'fiction' is.

2. You can tell she has strong legs. Consider that the rifle she carries is a space-age super light alloy which would result in not-so muscular arms.

Female heroes should at least be equal to the male heroes in the same game.

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism Deal with it. I'm not saying that we should never have a monster-female character like a big ugly goblin, but the truth of the matter is no significant part of the market even wants that, and to put it in just to make a statement is the same kind of bullcrap "slaves to feedback" that is counter productive to an artist's passion. I am confident to predict that men and women artists alike would have more fun designing Widowmaker than a female version of Styx, just as male and female players would enjoy playing her more.

The characters do not even look as strong as real female high school students do in reality.

4. What high school did you go to?

Real female heroes are beautiful, sexy and strong as well and they are not representing the characters of both sexes equally here.

5a. I'm going to assume you mean "female heroes" as in fictional female heroes, in which case I laugh at your inclusion of the word "real" (You do understand this is fiction, right?). If you mean actual real-world heroes, no. They're not defined by how sexy they are, they are defined by what they've done.

5b. The judgement I detect with this that they are being judged by appearance, not character (which influences appearance). There are too many representations of men and women alike to be covered in a single game. I can see anyone enjoying the designs of at least one character based on personality. What makes you think you can speak for anyone other than yourself? Pick a favorite character that feels represents you, and naturally most of the rest won't represent you. The big issue is that people may find something they identify with and then choose to be insulted by having those that don't. It's like the weird guy/girl being ostracized by the "normal" people at school. Are you suggesting that every character that doesn't agrees with you shouldn't be in the game? How is it representing different people if you agree with all of them? That's fundamentally contradicting.

6. They are dressed different. The only ones sexualized are Mercy (female healer) and Widowmaker (femme fatale). Tracer looks normal (or are you saying that women who wear fitting pants are sexualized), Symmetra has a ROBOTIC ARM, and Pharah has beefy armor without emphasizing breasts (and if you bring up that she has a slight bulge up there, YES, she has boobs. That's how it works!). For general silhouettes, again refer to the education of sexual dimorphism. Even in the cases of Mercy and Widowmaker, to criticize based solely on appearance is judgmental. There are women who enjoy employing their bodies for the power they have over men, and there are women who enjoy supportive roles. I've personally met both types, so I know they exist whether you acknowledge them or not.


The point is you can't please everyone, and no one character is going to appeal to everybody. While you can have an ugly, female goblin, do you really want it? The irony is that many more would boo-boo poo-poo that character as a tasteless insult to women with little self-esteem. No content creator can win, there is only what is popular and not popular, and if gaming becomes sterilized for the sake of pleasing an angry mob, they will be less fun and more insulting to those who are mature enough to distinguish fantasy from reality.

It is a game. It is fiction. If you don't like it, don't play it. Stop looking at things you don't like and rejecting them 'just because'. You can only speak for yourself.

Have you bothered to read this thread?
Please check the spoilers on this thread to all of the pictures Of what REAL women and high school girls look like and get back with me. I am not comparing female muscles to males. I am comparing female muscles to females that has nothing to do with dimorphism. The fact that males were given male muscles and the females were not given female muscles is NOT dimorphism, women should be allowed to have strong athletic powerful women as well to play. When girls in real life are tougher than their characters it is not a dimorphism, it is portraying them as weak and the males as strong. Males and females are BOTH strong, and should be allowed to have characters that reflect that as well. Tracer does NOT look normal, again compare the muscle in her legs to the muscle in girls legs. We are not talking about " one character" we are talking about the majority of the female characters.

When they make a claim that they are not going to sexualize females, they are going to be called out when they cannot even bother then to give them the amount of mucscletone a high school female has when they buff out the males and think that is somehow not sexualizing them. Not giving females female muscle tone and giving males male muscle tone is a sexualization of their characters.

http://www.shortpacked.com/index.php?id=1556

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

And just to emphasize, the reason artists should be out to please themselves before fans is because you will never please everyone, but you can always please yourself. That's where the good art comes from.

Title of thread:Blizzard "Trying Not to Oversexualize" Female Overwatch Characters
SO they are drawing attention to this and then people are complaining when people call them out on it?

If only you are going to buy your art, then please away and ignore what all your customers say about it!
If you want others to actually enjoy your art and to improve, you ask people what they think. That is how we improve.

 

[Ethranoch]

Again you missed that point. Perhaps intentionally.

There is a difference between being receptive of feedback, and being a slave to it. Blizzard's artists are where they are because of passion. What do you think that passion is for? Doing what other people want? No. It's passion for doing what they love to do, and we as consumers are free to support that or not, and evidently we do.

Just because you aren't controlled by feedback doesn't mean you ignore it. This isn't an all or nothing situation. Please understand that. Feedback has obviously been accepted but they aren't going to completely unsexualize. I'll bring that up again in a moment.

No, you get back to me when you read my single post. You ignored most of what I wrote. The ultimate point is that Overwatch is fiction, and if you are mad about character design then you either can't differentiate fiction from reality or you are disappointed that Blizzard said they trying not to OVERsexualize their characters. Having zero sexualization in a game is boring, and if that's how you like it then most games made for mature people aren't going to be for you.

This has turned into a matter of "I don't like it, therefore it should conform to my values."

Which is why I again will say, "If you don't like it, don't play it." But I guess that would be me not taking your feedback, right? (Reality: I did, but I don't agree with it, and since I'm the one writing, I get to decide what goes in this box)

While I could reapply each point I made in the larger post to your ignorance, I'm going to avoid redundancy. They're there for you to read.

But in reference to your point of the muscularity of real women, how do you know Pharah isn't like that under her armor? Do you want her to strip to show it? Oh wait, then we'd just have another half-naked character. Well, maybe they should have made another character like that. Wait no, then there would be an emphasis on muscular women which may make the average woman feel misrepresented. Gee, if only everyone could be happy with everything all the time.

I've said what I wanted to say and my points have been made as clear as I can make them. If you choose to ignore them and shift focus then that's your problem.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Again you missed that point. Perhaps intentionally.

There is a difference between being receptive of feedback, and being a slave to it. Blizzard's artists are where they are because of passion. What do you think that passion is for? Doing what other people want? No. It's passion for doing what they love to do, and we as consumers are free to support that or not, and evidently we do.

Just because you aren't controlled by feedback doesn't mean you ignore it. This isn't an all or nothing situation. Please understand that. Feedback has obviously been accepted but they aren't going to completely unsexualize. I'll bring that up again in a moment.

No, you get back to me when you read my single post. You ignored most of what I wrote. The ultimate point is that Overwatch is fiction, and if you are mad about character design then you either can't differentiate fiction from reality or you are disappointed that Blizzard said they trying not to OVERsexualize their characters. Having zero sexualization in a game is boring, and if that's how you like it then most games made for mature people aren't going to be for you.

This has turned into a matter of "I don't like it, therefore it should conform to my values."

Which is why I again will say, "If you don't like it, don't play it." But I guess that would be me not taking your feedback, right? (Reality: I did, but I don't agree with it, and since I'm the one writing, I get to decide what goes in this box)

While I could reapply each point I made in the larger post to your ignorance, I'm going to avoid redundancy. They're there for you to read.

But in reference to your point of the muscularity of real women, how do you know Pharah isn't like that under her armor? Do you want her to strip to show it? Oh wait, then we'd just have another half-naked character. Well, maybe they should have made another character like that. Wait no, then there would be an emphasis on muscular women which may make the average woman feel misrepresented. Gee, if only everyone could be happy with everything all the time.

Either way I'm done here. I've said what I wanted to say and my points have been made as clear as I can make them. If you choose to ignore them and shift focus then that's your problem.

You are failing to address the issue that Blizzard themselves said they were trying not to over sexualize their characters, then THEY DID OVERSEXUALIZE THEIR CHARACTERS. It is the fact they said they were not that we are even discussing this issue. If you come out and say you are not going to kick puppies and then kick puppies people are going to call you out for not doing what you said you would do. THEY ASKED FOR IT. We do not complain about people responding to something they obviously asked for by claiming they were not going to do something. Complaining about people calling them out for something they went out of their way to say they wouldn't do doesn't make sense.

 

[Ethranoch]

I did address it. Paragraph 4.

To add, the problem with the word "oversexualization" is that the perception of "over"doing something is different from one person to another. A comparison that is actually accurate would be if I said that "I won't 'over'kick the puppies." This renders the entire topic moot.

They didn't oversexualize, they just sexualized. To mentally healthy people, that's not wrong.

I am amused that the extent of your dispute with what I've written comes down to semantics.

 

[FalloutJack]

Poke

You have to quote in order to respond directly to someone. Also, mockery is frowned upon here.

 

[Ethranoch]

You have to quote in order to respond directly to someone. Also, mockery is frowned upon here.

Thank you for the tip, and I apologize. This whole culture war and its fallacies are very frustrating to me.