New Overwatch Hero Is a Response to Body-Type Diversity Criticism

[Johnny Impact]

HAWT.

I won't be playing Overwatch unless I get it as a gift or all my friends beg me to buy it myself. That said, I like most of the character designs, including Zarya. Not only from a "u need moar duhversateeez" point of view but because I've got a thing for strong women personally. They don't get much representation, even when it's appropriate to the character. Pictures of Tifa always make me think, "SHE's a martial arts badass?? Those soft shoulders look more like a cosplayer!" After so many Barbie dolls I think it's great to see an actual female powerhouse. Even if she does fall straight into another stereotype, namely the huge Russian, we can't criticize too harshly without criticizing all the other characters. An angry dwarf with a hammer and an accent? A talking gorilla? Noboby's ever done THAT before......

 

[lordmardok]

Hey look it's Vi with a gun. Seriously. They didn't even change her color scheme. Just beefed her a little bit. Zayra is literally Vi from League of Legends with particle cannon.

 

[ccggenius12]

" I am heavy weapons gal, and THIS is my weapon. She weighs 150 kilograms and fires condensed plasma beams in 20 continuous streams per minute. It costs *cough* *cough* thousand dollars to fire this gun, for twelve seconds."

OT: I look forward to another FPS game that I will inexplicably play despite being terrible at it.

I don't see how putting in a body type just so you can say you have the body type is any different than adding a token black friend. Speaking of which, where's their token black friend?

Dude, you can't put a token black person in something wherein violence will be occurring to everyone, everyone knows that they'd just die first. Besides, then Blizzard would have to deal with people saying they're racist because they've put one black character in, which players are encouraged to kill with the overwhelmingly white cast.
ALTERNATIVELY: Winston is the closest we'll get to a black character, because racist undertones of an ape that thinks it's people. He even shares the first name with the token black guy from Ghostbusters.

 

[Garlador]

Hey look it's Vi with a gun. Seriously. They didn't even change her color scheme. Just beefed her a little bit. Zayra is literally Vi from League of Legends with particle cannon.

Don't you mean Fetch?

Or maybe you meant Anya Stroud?

Or perhaps you meant Kerrigan?

No offense, but you can find hundreds of girls that look like Vi (many that predate her) if you just google "Cyberpunk Girl".

That being said, I'm not seeing the similarities other than hair color and having a scar. In which case, I guess Siegried from Soul Calibur and Seifer from Final Fantasy are the spitting image of each other.

 

[Chriss_m]

I'm as anti-SJW as you can be, and I greiviously lament that it is their incessant hectoring that has spurred this change. Because, actually, I'd much rather the company had come to these conclusions themselves.

You see, as much as I can't stand the imposing zealots who make up the ranks of Social Justice Warriors, I do actually appreciate diversity. And in a game like this, there's really no reason not to represent as many different shapes, shades, and sizes as possible. And, in fact, this is the way toward diversity: companies not being kowtowed into censoring their current characters, or bowing to pressure to restrict the types of bodies women are 'allowed' to have in games (no tits, no hips, no thighs, etc); but instead, through encouragement, having them experiment and introduce as much diversity to character design as possible - but always through their choice.

So although I don't like how this has come about, I do like the diversity in character design. It keeps things fresh.

 

[Aerotrain]

The shape of the shoulders seems a little bit wonky when she flexes and her traps are looking kind of small for someone her size in poses where they shouldn't (could be the armor though). Other than that, pretty good overall and I like the powerlifting belt looking acessory that goes over the armor. It makes very little sense but it's a nice touch to show where they drew inspiration from. As a powerlifting fan, I'm happy with it.

Also they called her Zarya, like the first module of the ISS to go into space, because they feel like they're trying something new perhaps. Pretty cool detail there. Let's hope they give the character a fun personality.

 

[the December King]

I think the design is sound and the look is solid- hopefully this is appealing to people who like muscular women.

I don't personally like the look, and would never play her, however.

 

[Lazule]

*Is a direct response to these critics*
Is it really?

Anyway if its so or not. tbh I couldn't care less... I'm honestly not interested in Overwatch and there are some people out there who like that body type. Some dudes and gals have the strong woman fetish, which is alright.

Just as I have the petite girl, thin, small or flat chest preference.

But its not a "response" or something anyone should take as hurr durr serious business "politics" in video games. Good that they did, its their game, the devs have decided and the market decides. Its always fair, glad they did, good for em. *clap* *clap*

 

[Aetrion]

The fact that people are turning right around and start bitching about how she's just another stereotype just shows that trying to give any ground to the gender-terrorists is just stupid. These people will never be happy. You put tough, strong women in games and its instantly: "She's just a man with boobs". You put women with larger bodies in games and its instantly "Why is her face so pretty still?". Now this is wrong because she's Russian? Seriously?

I mean, I want to see a design for a female character that they approve of. Are there any concrete examples of a female character that is done right?

 

[Bocaj2000]

Oh... I thought they made this character because they genuinely wanted to, not because they thought they had to. That kinda puts a damper on things. I liked the character when I first saw her, but now I see it as pandering to an audience that is now complaining that she isn't good enough.

EDIT: For those who forgot, this is a game with a super-intelligent, genetically engineered gorilla. Does a Russian ex-bodybuilder really seem that unreasonable in this game?

 

[mechman123]

You know, another way to look at this announcement is that they were making the character from the get go, and the PR division saw revealing this character as a way to try to win people over or something given the current climate. Has everyone received it well....well of course not, but should anyone be surprised by that. =\
Anywho I just genuinely like the character.

SNIP

Thank you for saving me from posting a less coherent version of all of that. You earn a Awesome Award for doing Awesome. =D

 

[theNater]

The fact that people are turning right around and start bitching about how she's just another stereotype just shows that trying to give any ground to the gender-terrorists is just stupid. These people will never be happy. You put tough, strong women in games and its instantly: "She's just a man with boobs". You put women with larger bodies in games and its instantly "Why is her face so pretty still?". Now this is wrong because she's Russian? Seriously?

You know the people who were asking for different body types and the people complaining about Zarya are mostly different people, right?

Oh... I thought they made this character because they genuinely wanted to, not because they thought they had to.

Bob: I think I'll have a roast beef sandwich.
Alice: I'd be happier if you had the chicken sandwich.
Bob: Okay. Chicken it is!
Chris: Curse you, Alice, for forcing Bob to eat chicken!

Seriously, Blizzard has said repeatedly that they want to provide diversity. The idea that they are somehow being strong armed into doing it is just bonkers.

 

[EternallyBored]

The fact that people are turning right around and start bitching about how she's just another stereotype just shows that trying to give any ground to the gender-terrorists is just stupid. These people will never be happy. You put tough, strong women in games and its instantly: "She's just a man with boobs". You put women with larger bodies in games and its instantly "Why is her face so pretty still?". Now this is wrong because she's Russian? Seriously?

I mean, I want to see a design for a female character that they approve of. Are there any concrete examples of a female character that is done right?

Uh, you do realize the people here (on this site) that were posting about their disappointment with the roster at the original announcement have been largely supportive and glad for this character right? I was there for the original announcement threads, I even posted in some, and all the people I remember criticizing the roster are the ones posting about liking this character. The ones calling her a "man with boobs" seem to coming from the other side of the aisle, i.e. the people that aren't happy with Blizzard pandering to the SJW crowd.

Also, gender-terrorists? Really? That's the most ridiculous hyperbole I've seen since that intel tweet that compared GG to ISIS. I am saving that for next time I need to prove a point about how the "SJWs" and "anti-SJWs" have basically become twisted reflections of each other.

 

[ensouls]

I like it c: I don't really intend to play a lot of Overwatch but I do like the designs.

If I do have criticism about character designs, it's not so much going to be "look at this one game that objectifies women, or this one game that has no women," it's more a general criticism of games as a whole, and of course more specifically the ones where character design is a core concept. There's nothing wrong with any individual game having nothing but T&A or where all the characters are 20-something white guys with the same build or whatever. Arguably it might be kind of bad design depending on the game.

The issue is more an overall one where a lotta game designers default to certain things, probably without thinking about it, maybe intentionally, I don't know. It's really more bad/lazy design I think, than actual racism, sexism, etc. Hell it happens with fantasy races too, 99% of "elven" races are Tolkienesque archer waifs with a connection to nature. YAWN And certainly a lot of it is based on what they think will sell. And cribbing from popular games of the past.

Personally I like a good story and something new and interesting. And some varied visual designs to look at. I suspect a lot of the "feminism" arguments about games really boil down to, being sexy isn't the only way a woman can be (or look) strong or interesting. I'm all for more kickass old ladies and genuinely chunky guys.

Maybe it's because people are weird about visuals and games all get the Hollywood effect - we only want to watch attractive people so the protagonist has to be hot or at least young and generic.

 

[Aetrion]

Also, gender-terrorists? Really? That's the most ridiculous hyperbole I've seen since that intel tweet that compared GG to ISIS. I am saving that for next time I need to prove a point about how the "SJWs" and "anti-SJWs" have basically become twisted reflections of each other.

Terrorism - The use of violence or threats to coerce people for a political agenda.

How does this not fit when basically their entire MO is "Do what we want or we will collectively accuse you of being a racist, sexist evil person to threaten your employment and public image" ?

Also hello false dichotomy. Just because I'm against people using these kinds of tactics to stifle public discourse and coerce people to their side doesn't mean I define myself by my dislike of them or am part of some movement. I just want people to stop listening to people who use threats to get their way and are never going to be satisfied anyways.

 

[EternallyBored]

Also, gender-terrorists? Really? That's the most ridiculous hyperbole I've seen since that intel tweet that compared GG to ISIS. I am saving that for next time I need to prove a point about how the "SJWs" and "anti-SJWs" have basically become twisted reflections of each other.

Terrorism - The use of violence or threats to coerce people for a political agenda.

How does this not fit when basically their entire MO is "Do what we want or we will collectively accuse you of being a racist, sexist evil person to threaten your employment and public image" ?

Also hello false dichotomy. Just because I'm against people using these kinds of tactics to stifle public discourse and coerce people to their side doesn't mean I define myself by my dislike of them or am part of some movement. I just want people to stop listening to people who use threats to get their way and are never going to be satisfied anyways.

Your definition is off, from Merriam-Webster: the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. Calling someone a racist or sexist is not a violent act.

To commit terrorism is to attempt to inflict terror upon a target or populace. The definition of terror is: a state of intense fear.

Can you honestly, with a straight face, tell me that Blizzard is in any way in actual terror at the threats being leveled at them? That a multi-billion dollar company actually feels real terror over being called racist or sexist? They want to avoid it sure, but trying to avoid a PR backlash is not the same thing as feeling terror or being terrorized.

The problem with the way you use terrorism, is that trying to equate a bunch of random internet yahoos calling you names to the act of physical violence and murder for political gains is grossly melodramatic at best, and intellectually manipulative or dishonest at worst.

Even if the definition included mere verbal harassment, it cheapens the concept to use it to refer to something as petty as the ideologues that harass companies for ideological reasons. Even with the threat of ending their "employment", that cheapens the idea of terrorism to consider a job or business anywhere in the same ballpark as what we commonly term terrorism.

Yes, it is like the Intel tweet, I doubt the Intel guy defined himself by his dislike of GG or identified as part of some coherent movement, you've used emotionally charged terms linked with some of the worst atrocities going on in the world right now in order to paint a side you don't like as infinitely more sinister than they actually are. That may not have been your intention, but to an outside observer, it is every bit as over the top and repugnant as the Intel Tweet comparing GG to ISIS.

 

[Bocaj2000]

Oh... I thought they made this character because they genuinely wanted to, not because they thought they had to.

Bob: I think I'll have a roast beef sandwich.
Alice: I'd be happier if you had the chicken sandwich.
Bob: Okay. Chicken it is!
Chris: Curse you, Alice, for forcing Bob to eat chicken!

Seriously, Blizzard has said repeatedly that they want to provide diversity. The idea that they are somehow being strong armed into doing it is just bonkers.

Do NOT strawman me.

Blizzard's public statement has me questioning the reason behind the choice, not the choice itself. Here's why:

Diversity for the sake of diversity is dumb...
Just like innovation for the sake of innovation
Or convention for the sake of convention.

I'm not complaining about diversity/innovation/convention in games. I want it just as much as anyone else. But it should exist to suit the work it's in, not the other way around. Diversity/Innovation/Convention is the side effect of a series of choices made, NOT the main goal itself.

Also, your analogy kinda sucks... What Bob eats has no affect on Alice, so the issue shouldn't even exist. Alice is being controlling and Bob has a weak personality. Meanwhile Chris is being melodramatic over a small issue. None of them should be around each other for extended periods of time.

 

[Aetrion]

Eternally Bored: I'll gladly give you that the term is loaded, using it is hyperbole and what they are doing isn't immediately violent. You are the one claiming I'm comparing them to ISIS however, and that shows that you are assigning meanings to what I'm saying that go beyond definitions all the same. (And I don't even want to get into a debate about whether or not ISIS can be defined as terrorists without logically making all armies terrorists)


I mean, if I call them bullies does that mean they hang out in a schoolyard and beat up kids for lunch money?

If I say they are on a witch hunt does that mean they drag people to a pyre?

If I called them Daleks would that make them hate fueled robotic plumbers?



You can argue all day about what words should and shouldn't be used to describe something, but in the end that doesn't improve the level of the debate, it just derails it entirely. Just accept that metaphors are a thing in the English language, they aren't going away, and can even replace existing definitions over time.

 

[Dr.CritSpam]

I don't really know what to think about this. If Blizzard did this because the Overwatch team really wanted this character to be a part of their universe, than that's great. If they did this just to appease a crowd of "SJW's" then that sucks because they gave up their artistic integrity due to someone else complaining over nothing. If I were to take an educated guess, I'd say that Blizzard did it to pander to the "SJW" crowd mostly because A. She's a buff "I can do anything a man can do" character with bright pink hair. And B. Because pandering to this crowd is a safer bet (No games media site will bash Blizzard for being more inclusive, but many will bash them for not having this kind of character in the game).However, we can never really know what Blizzard's intentions really were.
Also, isn't it ironic that so called "Gaming academics" and feminists are praising this character when she's just a man with boobs (which is a trope in itself)? Seriously, just imagine this character with black hair and no boobs. You would have a perfect male counterpart.