New Overwatch Hero Is a Response to Body-Type Diversity Criticism
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
No, they're definitely going through a checklist too. That's why I had a parenthesis calling out publishers for executive meddling. Sure, on some level the devs think it's cool, but there were limits put in from the beginning. I hate that.Gizen said:
[quote/]The argument you're espousing is flawed on multiple levels, not the least of which being that games need to make money. This isn't the life work of some starving artist who's sacrificing everything to create his perfect vision, this is a product by a large corporation produced with the goal of making money. As such, there's a certain degree of giving the audience what they want that's mandatory. Then take into account that a game is not produced solely as the creative product of a lone individual, but by a large team of hundreds of people, each of which likely to have their own interests and thoughts on what qualifies as interesting or cool. Do you really think that not a single person working on Overwatch thought this concept looked good and that every single person on the entire development team is genuinely interested in this?[/quote]
1. Implying that only the safe, formulaic approach makes money. It doesn't. Otherwise we'd never innovate and would still be committing genocide a la Doom.
2. Game design for large studios is, by definition, design by committee. It's impossible to get everyone's ideas into a game. The idea is to get the ones that the majority likes, that the majority thinks are interesting and cool. No, not everyone will like the end result or be interested in it, but that will always happen, so why not try to get something good that (most of) the studio is genuinely interested and proud of out of it?
[quote/]Then there's the interview Chris Metzen (one of the creative leads at Blizzard) gave where he said that his desire to create more varied female characters came from his own daughter asking him why all the women looked like super models, which, you will find very few sources that can provoke a more genuine desire to do something different than that.[/quote]
And that's good. That's what I want, game devs to create varied things [i/]because[/i] they want to create varied things. But their statement read like they were trying to vary things up solely to please the crowd. To some extent that's fine, but letting the consumer base tell you what should be at the core of a character's design is just as bad as letting the publishers tell you.
[quote/]But then there's also this to take into account. Any one who's focused on creating, anyone who makes art of any kind, whether it be visual, or audio, or writing, if all you ever do is make the same thing you like non-stop, your work will eventually stagnate. Good artists force themselves out of their own comfort zone and force themselves to create things that maybe they normally wouldn't think to, and maybe might not even normally enjoy, because it forces them to utilize and improve different skills than they normally would. Not everything they make will be a hit out of the park, but in the long run it leads to improvement.[/quote]
Since I draw as a hobby, I know this. What you seem to misunderstand though is that while they may not like the things they create outside of their comfort zone, the end result is usually something they're proud of and would like utilized, so the end result is the same.
What I'm saying is that devs should listen to the consumers, but keep it secondary in their design decisions. If they come up with a lithe character that they like, they should add it. If they come up with a heavy-set design that works better and they like it as well, they should scrap the lithe one - remembering the consumers' demands - and add the heavy-set one instead. The consumers' opinions are heard, but don't influence the design decisions any more than just trimming down the potential designs - something that the devs have to do anyways.
I don't see the issue with this character. She will certainly appeal to les or body-builded straight.
In a more likeable twist, I think Eiger from Shadowrun Returns is a good example of "diversity" in videogame. She fills the russian trope, while bringing sensibility (for a female orc) with some kind of sex appeal.
If i want ugly females, I can look at Loadout...
...or most of Zelda female characters since OoT. (which I like btw, for its Grimm Brothers aesthetics).
In a more likeable twist, I think Eiger from Shadowrun Returns is a good example of "diversity" in videogame. She fills the russian trope, while bringing sensibility (for a female orc) with some kind of sex appeal.
If i want ugly females, I can look at Loadout...
...or most of Zelda female characters since OoT. (which I like btw, for its Grimm Brothers aesthetics).
I don't feel it's fair to discount this character as "pandering", since she's fairly well-designed and serves a distinct in-game purpose. Even if it is somehow "pandering", artists are entitled to create whatever characters they feel are best for whatever reasons they like. Even if that reason is to capitalize on the desires for more diversity, there's nothing inherently wrong with creating a game that caters to a niche, even if that niche is made up of the so-called "social justice warriors." The market isn't truly so oversaturated with Freshman Social Studies Class and Funtime Acceptance Simulators that we can't have a few female characters that weigh more than 150 pounds.
At the same time, though, I don't see the point in Blizzard drawing attention to it in this way. This sort of statement politicizes an otherwise innocuous and completely harmless character design and turns it into another internet argument.
IMO, diversity is a generally positive aspect in games that should be praised when done well. There's no harm to it, despite what some people may say. If it's appropriate for the setting, a woman fighting alongside a man in a medieval army shouldn't matter, nor should widespread acceptance of homosexuality in the Kingdom of Madeupistan. Frankly, if you can't suspend your disbelief and accept that a fictional man likes to kiss other fictional men, I doubt you'll be able to suspend it for the giant, three-headed dragon that breathes fire and eats the souls of the damned, and maybe video games aren't for you. (Historical settings are a different beast entirely.)
However, boasting about your game's "DIVERSITY" doesn't somehow make your studio a paragon of social justice. When a piece of art praises itself as being "diverse", I just find it annoying and self-absorbed. Whether or not something is adequately diverse is for us - the consumers - to decide. Not just including diversity, but normalizing it is what I consider to be true progress. I thought Fallout: New Vegas and Borderlands 2 were exceptional in that regard because showed me their gay and fat and black characters instead of telling me they were diverse.
You know why? Because including those sorts of people doesn't have to be be some kind of political statement. Sir Hammerlock is a crippled, black, gay man, and I'm okay with that, because he's awesome and hilarious and British somehow. I like him as a character despite being white and straight myself because of his personality, but he has the added bonus of giving people who are black or gay or crippled someone to identify with. If you want to make a political statement, make it a good one and don't sacrifice the quality of the game mechanics or story writing for more opportunities to promote an ideology. I'd be hesitant to call that "unethical", but it's generally lazy and bad.
Funny thing is, this game was incredibly diverse even before this character was added, and I didn't hear a single complaint from either side. It had characters from all over the world of both genders. That's what happens when you just let diverse things be diverse. I'd even to so far as to argue that there's a distinct gameplay advantage to diversity here, because the drastically different appearances of the characters allow players to instantly tell what they're going up against.
I won't comment on the "Husky Ruskie" stereotype... because if I'm honest, I find it kind of funny. I blame the various internet memes about Putin and the Heavy Weapons Guy from TF2.
At the same time, though, I don't see the point in Blizzard drawing attention to it in this way. This sort of statement politicizes an otherwise innocuous and completely harmless character design and turns it into another internet argument.
IMO, diversity is a generally positive aspect in games that should be praised when done well. There's no harm to it, despite what some people may say. If it's appropriate for the setting, a woman fighting alongside a man in a medieval army shouldn't matter, nor should widespread acceptance of homosexuality in the Kingdom of Madeupistan. Frankly, if you can't suspend your disbelief and accept that a fictional man likes to kiss other fictional men, I doubt you'll be able to suspend it for the giant, three-headed dragon that breathes fire and eats the souls of the damned, and maybe video games aren't for you. (Historical settings are a different beast entirely.)
However, boasting about your game's "DIVERSITY" doesn't somehow make your studio a paragon of social justice. When a piece of art praises itself as being "diverse", I just find it annoying and self-absorbed. Whether or not something is adequately diverse is for us - the consumers - to decide. Not just including diversity, but normalizing it is what I consider to be true progress. I thought Fallout: New Vegas and Borderlands 2 were exceptional in that regard because showed me their gay and fat and black characters instead of telling me they were diverse.
You know why? Because including those sorts of people doesn't have to be be some kind of political statement. Sir Hammerlock is a crippled, black, gay man, and I'm okay with that, because he's awesome and hilarious and British somehow. I like him as a character despite being white and straight myself because of his personality, but he has the added bonus of giving people who are black or gay or crippled someone to identify with. If you want to make a political statement, make it a good one and don't sacrifice the quality of the game mechanics or story writing for more opportunities to promote an ideology. I'd be hesitant to call that "unethical", but it's generally lazy and bad.
Funny thing is, this game was incredibly diverse even before this character was added, and I didn't hear a single complaint from either side. It had characters from all over the world of both genders. That's what happens when you just let diverse things be diverse. I'd even to so far as to argue that there's a distinct gameplay advantage to diversity here, because the drastically different appearances of the characters allow players to instantly tell what they're going up against.
I won't comment on the "Husky Ruskie" stereotype... because if I'm honest, I find it kind of funny. I blame the various internet memes about Putin and the Heavy Weapons Guy from TF2.
Some don't. But I'll give it slight pass for this game, since it is cartoony. If this were a more realistic styled game, her muscle mass would be ridiculous. Although female body builders do exist.Westaway said:
As a side note, I saw some people in this thread saying Zarya's muscles looked sexy to them. How long before we "objectify" her?
So every time you want to make a complaint about video game development you need to drop everything you're doing and learn to develop video games?ki11joyace said:
This character is an SJW...how? See, this is why that phrase has lost all meaning. People just throw it around way too freely.
Well then you should drop everything you're doing to learn to design video games if you don't like her hair. See how easily abused that argument is? And what about pink hair says "pandering to SJWs"?
LightningFast said:
I think part of the problem is that some people are never quite satisfied with the "amounts" of diversity. Like you said, Overwatch already had a diverse roster of genders and races, but SJWs found the "body diversity" lacking. I'd say this character may not be entirely pandering (unless she starts spouting off stereotypical Tumblr/SJW phrases in game) but there is a degree of pandering here considering how she came to be and what she is.
I'm reserving a bit of judgement until the game comes out. I'm hoping she might be something like the female version of TF2 Heavy, a bit dimwitted in a humorous way, but strong and cheerful. That could be a nice character.
I have heard one moron say that. According to him, Egyptians and Indians didn't count because they don't come from one of the handful of countries Britain hasn't invaded.Fappy said:
A weightlifter can do one thing better than anyone else, but a soldier requires a more jack-of-all-trades sort of fitness. They need the strength to deadlift their gear, sure, but they also need to be able to carry that weight while moving at a jog over long distances and travel through rough terrain.CrystalShadow said:
Here is a neat thing for you - "Zarya" indicates a glowing sky / sunrise / aurora / etc. in Russian. In the Russian space program it was the name of a supply craft to the, at the time, new international space station - a symbol of "a new era of international cooperation in space". Is the developer's choice of name a remark on embarking on a new era of character design?Steven Bogos said:
I do like her design. Kind of a mix between Vasquez from Aliens in how she holds her weapon and her stance, and Samantha Wright in her appearance and demeanor complete with the weight-lifting back story. In which case Blizzard could have just as easily made the character a competitor from Philidelphia and gotten Wright to read the lines. How cool would that be?
A word of concern though - I predict there will be an additional backlash (which seems to be playing out as I type and in a number of different forums) against her being pleasing to the eye. Though this character is not overtly sexualised/objectified, many would find her design to be that of an attractive female. I've already seen one headline with the author's subline ":I'm in love". I've already seen comments about her being too pretty. Which brings up a broader discussion.
Is there way to truly satisfy any given audience's expectations inclusivity?
For right or for wrong, it appears as though there always has been, and always will be fault to find.
Lazy as fuck. This just looks like a girl with the body of fucking Marcus Fenix. I can almost hear the people who designed her murmuring "are we diverse enough yet?" under their breaths. Stop it. If you're not feeling it, stop it. I love weird female characters in mobas/similar games. I love Lulu, Vi, Jinx etc from League. They fit their lore, they have personalities, they feel like actual characters that could actually exist in that world. This doesn't, it's nothing. It's the absence of character. That's what happens when you develop by trying to hit checkboxes set arbitrarily by silly people.
That may well be true, but an appropriate bodytype for that still wouldn't look much of anything like the kind of female characters we seem to get in games.Grumman said:
Look over those pictures and think about the diversity of form and size. Wee have boxers and martial artists, shotput, gymnastics, endurance runners swimmers, ice skaters, basketballers and many others, with many variations in size, shape, muscle tone, appearance, and so on.
So why do we see only one or two bodytypes most of the time, and often ones that don't make sense in context of what they do?
1) Its basically a female version of the TF2 heavy... wow, so original
2) I think she looks cool enough, but Unreal Tournament had super-butch women in their player character roster, and that was a long time ago, so... wow... so original
3) The only 'negative' thing I can see about this is that convos like this can crop up:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/b0a7f015cf0a9d8e5f65aaf93b013181/tumblr_nkwqlkH8dq1rpwlvxo1_1280.png
Artur Gies is a writer for Polygon
Micheal Hartman is the CEO of Frogdice, and has been making games for 20 years.
Guess which one of them is saying that you should NOT be allowed to make 'sexy' female character designs because it somehow depresses people.
I much more like the game dev saying that you should allow both kind of designs - the butch and sexy (heck, it is possibly to combine the two) female character designs, so everyone can have something. He says that to exclude one type of character design to cater to the preferences of just one group of gamers is selfish and unacceptable.
2) I think she looks cool enough, but Unreal Tournament had super-butch women in their player character roster, and that was a long time ago, so... wow... so original
3) The only 'negative' thing I can see about this is that convos like this can crop up:
http://41.media.tumblr.com/b0a7f015cf0a9d8e5f65aaf93b013181/tumblr_nkwqlkH8dq1rpwlvxo1_1280.png
Artur Gies is a writer for Polygon
Micheal Hartman is the CEO of Frogdice, and has been making games for 20 years.
Guess which one of them is saying that you should NOT be allowed to make 'sexy' female character designs because it somehow depresses people.
I much more like the game dev saying that you should allow both kind of designs - the butch and sexy (heck, it is possibly to combine the two) female character designs, so everyone can have something. He says that to exclude one type of character design to cater to the preferences of just one group of gamers is selfish and unacceptable.
You may want to review this 11-page thread from last November. This isn't Blizzard starting an internet argument, it's them stating what side of an existing internet argument they're on.LightningFast said:
*reads thread title*
Ah sh--... Tumblr'ette grannyglasses MarySue inbound....
*actually goes to Blizzard's website for the first time in 8 years*
...
...WAIT A MINUTE.... they remade my butch O.C. (do not steal!) waifu I created in 1997
And she gets a Gravity Well?? Oh I am definitely buying this game now
Ah sh--... Tumblr'ette grannyglasses MarySue inbound....
*actually goes to Blizzard's website for the first time in 8 years*
...
...WAIT A MINUTE.... they remade my butch O.C. (do not steal!) waifu I created in 1997
And she gets a Gravity Well?? Oh I am definitely buying this game now
Pretty sure he was trying to say if you don't like the game, vote with your wallet and support what you do like instead of constantly complaining and doing nothing to contribute to a solution to your problem beyond complaining about it. Or even better, making your own art and sending it in as an example of what you'd like to see. That used to be a mantra around here on the forums years ago, I always wonder where it went...erttheking said:
And to be fair, there's an abnormally large portion of the people clamoring for representation in games that have some of the most insane personal fashion sense. And I'm not talking like wearing one color of shirt only, couple tattoos, or a pierced ear(but seriously, just wear one color generic brand shirts, you'll save so much time, effort, and money on laundry.) I'm talking neon colored hair, gauged cheeks, multiple stud piercings all over their face, and can't forget the giant square plastic frame glasses. Nothing wrong with any of the pieces(except the glasses, seriously wtf is wrong with your faces that they don't ache all day long supporting them?), but when you've got them all together, you can normally point at the person and be right that they demand this kind of stuff.
Kinda funny when that it has elements of pretty much every "outcast" group in society piled into one though demanding that their sensibilities be catered to, but that's just me personally. But yeah, it is sorta reaching to call the character themselves an SJW, they're perpetuating a stereotype that's existed for a few decades after all.
I don't think there's really anything wrong with the character(except the face and the hair, dear god where did they get those? They look so badly out of proportion), but she's pretty generic to me, especially in a shooter setting that's already filled to the brim with muscles always getting big guns. Just once I'd love for some giant to have a Noisy Cricket instead of a minigun.
Huh, today I learned Hammerlock is a black guy...he looks and sounds like such a white Victorian era insufferable safari brat...LightningFast said:
This is all fine and good, other than the "In response to criticism" part. Pandering is the exact reason there is so little diversity in games to begin with; treat the disease, not the symptom.
Polling your audience isn't the way to create exceptional works of art, and as far as I'm concerned, your game could be the most inclusive fucking thing on the planet, but if it doesn't come from the heart, it does no more good for the medium than the most low brow cheesecake fest in the industry.
Contrary to popular belief, people don't connect to characters who look like them or bare superficial similarities, they connect to characters who behave in accordance with human nature; characters invested with passion and soul.
The world didn't weep for John Marston because he was a white, straight male and so were they, they shed tears in the name of a tragedy that befell a man who was alike to them not in appearance or or preference, but alike in the way of genuine humanity.
Polling your audience isn't the way to create exceptional works of art, and as far as I'm concerned, your game could be the most inclusive fucking thing on the planet, but if it doesn't come from the heart, it does no more good for the medium than the most low brow cheesecake fest in the industry.
Contrary to popular belief, people don't connect to characters who look like them or bare superficial similarities, they connect to characters who behave in accordance with human nature; characters invested with passion and soul.
The world didn't weep for John Marston because he was a white, straight male and so were they, they shed tears in the name of a tragedy that befell a man who was alike to them not in appearance or or preference, but alike in the way of genuine humanity.
