Well that is absolutely something, and I heartily approve of it.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50029056]Did you even read their post? How was the poster lunatic?
The poster complains about Tracer specifically, how they believe Tracers pose conflicts with Tracers character.
It's not about sexuality being bad, heck the poster even says they've no problem with Widowmaker for instance, because the sexuality is part of Widowmakers character.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/nYDyB.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Excuse me but
you know you're pulling the atoms themselves out of the straws when you think a more womanly and spicy pose can suddenly be a very particular characteristic.
especially when you're the only person thinking that aswell
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=greeley;50040249]This pisses me off so much. If this happened 5-10 years ago, nobody would bat an eye-lid.[/QUOTE]
And this is exactly why this is dumb as fuck.
We've got to the point where the slightest out of the ordinary action will be seen in a special light, and will most likely bother someone.
What are they gonna do about Widowmaker? I know its part of her "display of sexuality", but then again, she's WAY fucking worse than "a butt in tight clothes".
Are the parents gonna demand for a censor for her body model so that their kids can never see such depravity?
Better yet, are they gonna shout at everyone who wears slightly more revealing clothes out in public?
FYI, why is Widowmaker suddenly defined by her sexuality? She's an assassin, ok, but in what way will she used her looks as an advantage to kill someone to actually mean that her characteristics are defined by her sexuality?
Call it a theme if you want to.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50028621]Menial as fuck. Who cares that someone actually brought it up in the first place, none of you would have fuckin noticed the thing was even there if this hadn't happened anyway I expect. It's not a focal point of the game after all.[/QUOTE]
Nobody would have seen it as anything "out of character" or as a problem either, if it weren't for literaly 1 person who was shocked and appaled at "a butt".
And please don't make it out to be a simple "oh its just a little something that didn't fit her" because it really wasn't.
The person who spoke against it literaly brought "all the guns" to convince the devs into changing it, making it a "its gonna change the moral fiber of whoever plays it!" kind of thing.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;50041353]Nobody would have seen it as anything "out of character" or as a problem either, if it weren't for literaly 1 person who was shocked and appaled at "a butt".
And please don't make it out to be a simple "oh its just a little something that didn't fit her" because it really wasn't.
The person who spoke against it literaly brought "all the guns" to convince the devs into changing it, making it a "its gonna change the moral fiber of whoever plays it!" kind of thing.[/QUOTE]
I don't particularly give a fuck about the original argument against the buttocks. As there was a lot of it and fuck reading that mess.
But I am interested in the point that Blizzard did it after a single person mentioned it. A single person who has no actual authority. That doesn't happen unless they themselves were already somewhat toying with the idea of a new thing. It's a waste of development time and capital to do it on the whim of one person, but one person can be used as justification to the business if they already wanted to look at other possible animations.
Nobody would have noticed the butt at all if it was left in, but suddenly it's an abhorrent crime against the game when Blizzard agree that they can do better? The whole "sorry we offended you?(?!?!)" stuff is standard PR phrasing to make sure the user doesn't fly off the handle and that you don't sound to dismissive. It's not "caving" language, just a standard way to keep people chill.
[sp]Besides I think the original pose looked a bit dumb anyway, the bum sticks so far out her spine must be at quite some angle to achieve that. Plenty of other options for a back-facing pose that don't involve Yoga whilst still looking good.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Hanso;50041206]freethebooty[/QUOTE]
That's actually really good art.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50029056]Did you even read their post? How was the poster lunatic?
The poster complains about Tracer specifically, how they believe Tracers pose conflicts with Tracers character.
It's not about sexuality being bad, heck the poster even says they've no problem with Widowmaker for instance, because the sexuality is part of Widowmakers character.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/nYDyB.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
"this one pose completely changes everything about this character, everything about this character is now ruined and carries a negative connotation that applies even outside the context of the game to all of everything"
Textbook definition of "lunatic" reaction.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50041568]But I am interested in the point that Blizzard did it after a single person mentioned it. A single person who has no actual authority. That doesn't happen unless they themselves were already somewhat toying with the idea of a new thing. It's a waste of development time and capital to do it on the whim of one person, but one person can be used as justification to the business if they already wanted to look at other possible animations.
Nobody would have noticed the butt at all if it was left in, but suddenly it's an abhorrent crime against the game when Blizzard agree that they can do better? The whole "sorry we offended you?(?!?!)" stuff is standard PR phrasing to make sure the user doesn't fly off the handle and that you don't sound to dismissive. It's not "caving" language, just a standard way to keep people chill.[/QUOTE]
To me, it all sounds like they bended to progressive standards (if you want to call it that) just so nobody else would really bother them with it. The whole "we can do better" argument doesn't really flies right imo, especially with how fast they changed something as small as that.
But in the end, I do hope they can do something better of it. It's not a big loss, as long as things don't start being changed left and right because it offends that one guy who doesn't even knows what a video gamer is.
as said before, the problem about this is the principle of it, not the actual thing that was changed.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50041568]I don't particularly give a fuck about the original argument against the buttocks. As there was a lot of it and fuck reading that mess.
But I am interested in the point that Blizzard did it after a single person mentioned it. A single person who has no actual authority. That doesn't happen unless they themselves were already somewhat toying with the idea of a new thing. It's a waste of development time and capital to do it on the whim of one person, but one person can be used as justification to the business if they already wanted to look at other possible animations.
Nobody would have noticed the butt at all if it was left in, but suddenly it's an abhorrent crime against the game when Blizzard agree that they can do better? The whole "sorry we offended you?(?!?!)" stuff is standard PR phrasing to make sure the user doesn't fly off the handle and that you don't sound to dismissive. It's not "caving" language, just a standard way to keep people chill.
[sp]Besides I think the original pose looked a bit dumb anyway, the bum sticks so far out her spine must be at quite some angle to achieve that. Plenty of other options for a back-facing pose that don't involve Yoga whilst still looking good.[/sp][/QUOTE]
except the developers were already arguing about how tracer's pose didn't fit her character. the player base arguing about it was enough to persuade some people into agreeing that the post was a bad idea.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
starting screaming at social justice warriors when they unsexualize black widow
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;50042017]To me, it all sounds like they bended to progressive standards (if you want to call it that) just so nobody else would really bother them with it. The whole "we can do better" argument doesn't really flies right imo, especially with how fast they changed something as small as that.
But in the end, I do hope they can do something better of it. It's not a big loss, as long as things don't start being changed left and right because it offends that one guy who doesn't even knows what a video gamer is.[/QUOTE]
I can't see them changing other stuff willy nilly due to this. Blizzard are renown for the complete lack of actual fucks when it comes to their community. And considering the actual sex-appeal based character is still around? They're unlikely to do much.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;50042044]except the developers were already arguing about how tracer's pose didn't fit her character. the player base arguing about it was enough to persuade some people into agreeing that the post was a bad idea.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
starting screaming at social justice warriors when they unsexualize black widow[/QUOTE]
I uhh...think you might have missed some shit. I agree fully with Blizzard on replacing the animation. It looked fucking dumb.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50042061]I uhh...think you might have missed some shit. I agree fully with Blizzard on replacing the animation. It looked fucking dumb.[/QUOTE]
Shit I misread your post. Yeah I thought you were saying that "Blizzard normally doesn't listen to it's community, but they did this time so it must be sjws" but that was just the other guy you were quoting.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50041568]But I am interested in the point that Blizzard did it after a single person mentioned it. A single person who has no actual authority. That doesn't happen unless they themselves were already somewhat toying with the idea of a new thing. It's a waste of development time and capital to do it on the whim of one person, but one person can be used as justification to the business if they already wanted to look at other possible animations.[/QUOTE]
Or perhaps they were afraid of the PR backlash a controversy around that dumb pose would cause and decided the few man hours they invested in that pose wasn't worth the risk. So they removed it in case that one poster shouted loud enough to catch the attention of the usual clique.
[QUOTE=_Axel;50042188]Or perhaps they were afraid of the PR backlash a controversy around that dumb pose would cause and decided the few man hours they invested in that pose wasn't worth the risk. So they removed it in case that one poster shouted loud enough to catch the attention of the usual clique.[/QUOTE]
I doubt that the post would have gone anywhere if they had just ignored it. Most of the Blizzard forum for Overwatch is now salty as fuck over this change, making thread after thread "parodying" it. The original thread would have probably devolved into "lol ur a dum dum" for a few posts until a mod locked it.
The possibility of that one user actually somehow having a ~~feminist army~~ hiding in waiting, ready to bring a vengeful wrath upon a company that has given no fucks for PR in the past is unlikely. Blizzard have T&A for days in basically everything they make, and they're basically untouchable as none of this has ever really been removed.
This isn't indicative of a trend, it's a one off scenario that really stands out [B]because[/B] Blizzard took action for once. If they were known for listening to the community in general I could maybe understand the apprehension, but they usually just ignore basically everything.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50042222]I doubt that the post would have gone anywhere if they had just ignored it. Most of the Blizzard forum for Overwatch is now salty as fuck over this change, making thread after thread "parodying" it. The original thread would have probably devolved into "lol ur a dum dum" for a few posts until a mod locked it.
The possibility of that one user actually somehow having a ~~feminist army~~ hiding in waiting, ready to bring a vengeful wrath upon a company that has given no fucks for PR in the past is unlikely. Blizzard have T&A for days in basically everything they make, and they're basically untouchable as none of this has ever really been removed.
This isn't indicative of a trend, it's a one off scenario that really stands out [B]because[/B] Blizzard took action for once. If they were known for listening to the community in general I could maybe understand the apprehension, but they usually just ignore basically everything.[/QUOTE]
Maybe that's why people are pretty upset over it. out of all the community feedback, this is what they listen to?
I don't think anyone believes a user has a feminist army lying in wait. I think the far more likely scenario is a bunch of easily angered/offended posters who exist on the internet to shit on anything they don't like would have just swarmed around this concept because it's low hanging fruit and easy to "jack thompson-ify".
[QUOTE=_Axel;50042188]Or perhaps they were afraid of the PR backlash a controversy around that dumb pose would cause and decided the few man hours they invested in that pose wasn't worth the risk. So they removed it in case that one poster shouted loud enough to catch the attention of the usual clique.[/QUOTE]
do you really think that they give a shit about pr backlash about a sexualized female character?
A lot of the characters are stereotypes. Racial and/or gender stereotypes. People bitch about them but no one cares because the devs know it isn't a big deal because they know everyone is going to be offended, no matter what.
They added the embodiment of defying gender stereotypes (that buff pink haired woman idk her name) and people who hate sjw got upset but they didn't listen. They added widowmaker, a debatably sexy assassin. Many articles were written about how it made the game sexist but blizzard doesn't give a shit. They added a sexual pose for a non-sexual character. 1 person complains but that complaint really had no effect because the devs were already debating if the pose should even be in the game so they removed it.
Blizzard Devs only give a shit about themselves, which is a good thing in this case because it allows them to focus on making a game.
Goddamnit with this shit. A video game woman is sexy, so what? Should movies censor sexy women too?
Hey, ive got an idea. Why dont we make all women wear burqas while we're at it?
FUCK.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
Oh nevermind just read the post above me.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;50042412]do you really think that they give a shit about pr backlash about a sexualized female character?
A lot of the characters are stereotypes. Racial and/or gender stereotypes. People bitch about them but no one cares because the devs know it isn't a big deal because they know everyone is going to be offended, no matter what.
[B]They added the embodiment of defying gender stereotypes (that buff pink haired woman idk her name) and people who hate sjw got upset but they didn't listen. They added widowmaker, a debatably sexy assassin. Many articles were written about how it made the game sexist but blizzard doesn't give a shit. [/B]They added a sexual pose for a non-sexual character. 1 person complains but that complaint really had no effect because the devs were already debating if the pose should even be in the game so they removed it.
Blizzard Devs only give a shit about themselves, which is a good thing in this case because it allows them to focus on making a game.[/QUOTE]
This is actually a good point. People (mostly pro-GG folks) have been bitching about Zarya for awhile but Blizzard has flatly ignored them, and any attempt by journalists to bait out a response about Widowmaker has been countered with Blizzard saying that was their creative vision for a femme fatale assassin character. So there is no reason to suddenly thing that one forum post, as popular as it was, shifted the internal creative dynamic going on in the studio imo.
[QUOTE=_Axel;50042188]Or perhaps they were afraid of the PR backlash a controversy around that dumb pose would cause and decided the few man hours they invested in that pose wasn't worth the risk. So they removed it in case that one poster shouted loud enough to catch the attention of the usual clique.[/QUOTE]
I can't believe you are implying Blizzard is afraid of some kind of "SJW" cabal that's going to notice this pose and flip out. That's fucking /pol/ type posting, friend. If Blizzard was afraid of a PR disaster over the way they portray a female character they would have made many, MANY changes to World of Warcraft and Hearthstone a long time ago, but they haven't. Because they don't care.
This is a fairly mundane and insignificant decision. The outrage over this is much more ridiculous than from any perceived "SJW" or whatever the hot new boogeyman term is these days.
Another point to note; if the poster was really just trying to stir shit up and make Blizzard look like sexists (rather than just being a bit batty but providing the devs a good justification for a change they were playing with), they wouldn't have done it on the Overwatch forums. They would have instantly taken to Twitter or their blogging platform of choice and tagged some dudes in to get traction.
It wouldn't have been a multi-paragraph post explaining it, it would have been "there's a butt, sexists..." with a hashtag on the end.
The post isn't the work of "SJWs" or whatever, it's fairly clear. It's just a strangely verbose way of explaining their thoughts on why it doesn't fit the character.
[QUOTE=27X;50041979]"this one pose completely changes everything about this character, everything about this character is now ruined and carries a negative connotation that applies even outside the context of the game to all of everything"
Textbook definition of "lunatic" reaction.[/QUOTE]
You can extrapolate lunatic behavior from many argument when you misquote someone purposefully.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50042698]I can't believe you are implying Blizzard is afraid of some kind of "SJW" cabal that's going to notice this pose and flip out. That's fucking /pol/ type posting, friend. If Blizzard was afraid of a PR disaster over the way they portray a female character they would have made many, MANY changes to World of Warcraft and Hearthstone a long time ago, but they haven't. Because they don't care.
This is a fairly mundane and insignificant decision. The outrage over this is much more ridiculous than from any perceived "SJW" or whatever the hot new boogeyman term is these days.[/QUOTE]
It's a bit pushy to label me as a /pol/ member. There is precedent for this sort of conduct, not by Blizzard but by other western companies (Not to mention the Japanese ones).
You don't need to actually adhere to a group's beliefs to cater to them. Them not usually cracking down on sexuality doesn't necessarily mean they didn't remove this for the sake of pleasing a certain demographic.
I also find it strange that they claim they were already considering removing the pose when the original response to the post doesn't make any mention of that, and instead says they will remove it for the sake of "not making anybody uncomfortable":
[QUOTE]We want *everyone* to feel strong and heroic in our community. The last thing we want to do is make someone feel uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented.[/QUOTE]
Their update post seems more like damage control than anything.
[editline]1st April 2016[/editline]
If they really didn't think it fit the character their first response post would say something along the lines of "yeah it doesn't really conform to how we view the character, we'll make something better instead". Here they make it sound like it's a matter of making everyone feel included, and then say it was actually their own creative vision all along. It doesn't really make sense.
[QUOTE=paul simon;50042888]You can extrapolate lunatic behavior from many argument when you misquote someone purposefully.[/QUOTE]
I didn't misquote anything, and you know it, the poster [b]directly[/b] implied exactly this. eye candy pose= eye candy character = 100% negative association, even outside the framework of the game.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50042698]I can't believe you are implying Blizzard is afraid of some kind of "SJW" cabal that's going to notice this pose and flip out. That's fucking /pol/ type posting, friend. If Blizzard was afraid of a PR disaster over the way they portray a female character they would have made many, MANY changes to World of Warcraft and Hearthstone a long time ago, but they haven't. Because they don't care.
This is a fairly mundane and insignificant decision. The outrage over this is much more ridiculous than from any perceived "SJW" or whatever the hot new boogeyman term is these days.[/QUOTE]
Yeah what SJW cabal not like almost every major games journalism site communicates on secret mailing lists just to coordinate outrage campaigns or anything, that would just be absurd. Oh wait.
You know when it gets to the point where even your arguments from hyperbole can be refuted by direct example its time to reconsider your position. But, as others have stated, whether or not Blizz was concerned about journalists, users, LWs, or just wanted to score some quick points by apologizing over something they were going to change for an unrelated reason, is information we aren't privy to.
Why has this even become that big of a deal?
I'm pretty sure I won't be staring at Tracer's butt for any significant amount of time while playing Overwatch. If Blizzard changes it, then its their decision, they should be free to do as they wish with the characters and the game. 'Blizzard caving into SJW's' in this situation is hardly going to effect the gameplay.
[QUOTE=CasualTR;50060014]Why has this even become that big of a deal?
I'm pretty sure I won't be staring at Tracer's butt for any significant amount of time while playing Overwatch. If Blizzard changes it, then its their decision, they should be free to do as they wish with the characters and the game. 'Blizzard caving into SJW's' in this situation is hardly going to effect the gameplay.[/QUOTE]
Basically people were afraid Blizzard had spinelessly started to cater to singular people that felt things were unnecessarily and out of place sexualized, after a developer responded to a forum post which made it seem like the OP was the cause of change even though internally the team had already decided to change it prior to that.
While I certainly understand the concern about the developers possibly being too afraid to release the game and Overwatch universe as they'd want it, it was all just a big misunderstood case with way too harsh backlash.
Tracer's my fav character in OW. Only character I can get any sort of good streaks with. Butts are neat too and no puritan is gonna convince me otherwise.
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfUOL_wWsAAXJrS.jpg:large[/t]
Seems they DID change it. Who woulda thunk that it would be in the opposite direction?
I hope they change the other over-the-shoulder poses to be more animated like this one, it's a weird disconnect to have everyone else's to be more serious only to have hers be completely different.
[QUOTE=Magikoopa24;50076904][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfUOL_wWsAAXJrS.jpg:large[/t]
Seems they DID change it. Who woulda thunk that it would be in the opposite direction?
I hope they change the other over-the-shoulder poses to be more animated like this one, it's a weird disconnect to have everyone else's to be more serious only to have hers be completely different.[/QUOTE]
this is a good change
good on you blizzard for not caving in
[QUOTE=Magikoopa24;50076904][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfUOL_wWsAAXJrS.jpg:large[/t]
Seems they DID change it. Who woulda thunk that it would be in the opposite direction?
I hope they change the other over-the-shoulder poses to be more animated like this one, it's a weird disconnect to have everyone [B]else's to be more serious only to have hers be completely different.[/B][/QUOTE]
nah thats fine considering tracers personality imo
[editline]5th April 2016[/editline]
kinda glad they kept it in, in a sense though. im sure some group will take credit for throwing a nerd fit though
[IMG]https://40.media.tumblr.com/f933122ebf8462210f8ef53006a8b3cc/tumblr_inline_o56qq7Qm5u1t8nwob_540.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Magikoopa24;50076904][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CfUOL_wWsAAXJrS.jpg:large[/t]
Seems they DID change it. Who woulda thunk that it would be in the opposite direction?
I hope they change the other over-the-shoulder poses to be more animated like this one, it's a weird disconnect to have everyone else's to be more serious only to have hers be completely different.[/QUOTE]
this isn't in the opposite direction, it's way better
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
