Blizzard is censoring a pose from Overwatch, citing player feedback - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;50080594]Right, this Ignores the original response provided in the thread which said nothing of the sort, instead where they apologize for it, and talk about how they don't want people feeling uncomfortable or under-appreciated, which has nothing to do with the pose of the character unless you're following the idea that sexualization is a negative. :goodjob:[/QUOTE] May I direct you to my post [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1512310&p=50080572&viewfull=1#post50080572"]here[/URL] which you apparently missed. I'm not here to start a war with you, but you're apparently preparing for one, so I'll just leave you thinking about that. Maybe you'll realise people aren't perfect and say wrong things sometimes. Does that mean they're not allowed to attempt to correct that mistake and we should just hate on them for all eternity?

[QUOTE=Capsup;50080572]And yet here we are with a pose that's even more offending than the original one, albeit more in-line with Tracer's supposedly 'goofy' personality, which was exactly the plan that Kaplan laid out in his more detailed post. How about we stop taking everything at face value and realise that game developers make mistakes? His initial response was poorly written but he made up for it with his more detailed post. The guy made a mistake and tried to correct it. But lets forget about all that and just try to fry the guy over the fire for 'not wanting to offend anyone' because that's a REALLY bad goal to have, right? Jesus, sometimes I wonder if the gaming community ever grew up.[/QUOTE] The dev said in his more detailed post that he still stands by what he said earlier.

[QUOTE=Capsup;50080606]May I direct you to my post [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1512310&p=50080572&viewfull=1#post50080572"]here[/URL] which you apparently missed. I'm not here to start a war with you, but you're apparently preparing for one, so I'll just leave you thinking about that. Maybe you'll realise people aren't perfect and say wrong things sometimes. Does that mean they're not allowed to attempt to correct that mistake and we should just hate on them for all eternity?[/QUOTE] I'm aware of that post, even though it was being made while I made mine. I also decidedly don't give a shit. And yes, I'm always ready for a fight. I enjoy it. It doesn't actually change anything though, they can come back and add on to it later, but what was said originally still stands and still has meaning, it still says something. It was said for a reason, it's not like he just smashed his head against his keyboard and then, "Oops! It posted!"

[QUOTE=_Axel;50080615]The dev said in his more detailed post that he still stands by what he said earlier.[/QUOTE] I'd like to reiterate my previous point: is it such a bad goal to have? I think people understand it as a "We will cave in to anyone who opposes us" whereas it should probably be understood more as a "We strive not to make overly lewd or sexual poses in our T rated shooter". If you still think it's caving in to the SJW crowd, I suppose the team's actions speak more for themself than Kaplan's statement, don't you think?

[QUOTE=_Axel;50080549]The first response from the devs basically outright said they didn't want to offend anyone.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]We'll replace the pose. 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. Apologies and we'll continue to try to do better. [/QUOTE] So they did. But it doesn't rule out the possibility of them not being able to please everyone, and would primarily make the majority happy. They [B]apologized[/B] and said they'll [B]try[/B] not to make people uncomfortable in the future. But there's no promises. All-in-all it was just Jeff trying to score some PR- and friendliness points. :V

[QUOTE=Capsup;50080572] Jesus, sometimes I wonder if the gaming community ever grew up.[/QUOTE] did this happen before or after someone wrote an essay on the battle.net forums, claiming that a single pose for a character in a videogame had implications for the maturation of his daughter

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;50080628]... I also decidedly don't give a shit. ...[/QUOTE] :speechless: [editline]6th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080653]did this happen before or after someone wrote an essay on the battle.net forums, claiming that a single pose for a character in a videogame had implications for the maturation of his daughter[/QUOTE] Lol. We can definitely agree on the original post just being ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Capsup;50080643]I'd like to reiterate my previous point: is it such a bad goal to have? I think people understand it as a "We will cave in to anyone who opposes us" whereas it should probably be understood more as a "We strive not to make overly lewd or sexual poses in our T rated shooter". If you still think it's caving in to the SJW crowd, I suppose the team's actions speak more for themself than Kaplan's statement, don't you think?[/QUOTE] I'm not making a statement about them caving in to the SJW crowd or not, evidently that's not what they did in the end. But the pose they replaced it with was just as sexual (if not more) as the former, what I'm saying is that in any case they didn't act on what was said in that first post and their response was purely for PR reasons.

[QUOTE=Capsup;50080643]I'd like to reiterate my previous point: is it such a bad goal to have? I think people understand it as a "We will cave in to anyone who opposes us" whereas it should probably be understood more as a "We strive not to make overly lewd or sexual poses in our T rated shooter". If you still think it's caving in to the SJW crowd, I suppose the team's actions speak more for themself than Kaplan's statement, don't you think?[/QUOTE] Well if they don't want explicitly sexual or lewd poses, then they sure as shit fucked that up with the new pose by making it not just typically sexual, but literally sexual. It is a carbon copy of a pin-up girl. And, you know, Widowmaker's continued existence.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080382]read the last line jesus, i already said that you'll say your intentions were different[/QUOTE] That's because the intention [B]was[/B] different. (also I'm not Jesus) I was pointing out that his quote was not an actual quote, and somehow you interpret that as dishonesty. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080382]let's go through this "this one pose completely changes everything about this character" - "It just reduces tracer to another bland female sex symbol." "everything about this character is now ruined" - "This pose says to the player base, oh we've got all these cool diverse characters, but at any moment we are willing to reduce them to sex symbols to help boost our investment game" (interestingly enough the parody version manages to be less knee-jerk, as the original quote says that blizzard are, evidenced by the pose, at the drop of a hat willing to ruin all of their characterization for money)[/QUOTE] Just like some people here are afraid the characters will all start wearing burkhas, other people are afraid of the opposite development. Both parts are equally allowed to voice their opinion about this, just try to keep it civil ok? Debate shouldn't be toxic. The person says they don't think the "sexy" poses fit Tracer's character. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080382]"carries a negative connotation that applies even outside the context of the game to all of everything" - "I have a young daughter that everyday when I wake up wants to watch the recall trailer again. She knows who tracer is, and as she grows up, she can grow up alongside these characters."[/quote] The implications of this is really just something you have to leave for the imagination. Does it mean "think of the children!!", or does it mean "I want improvements in the character my daughter looks up to."? Both practically mean the same ("I want change!"), but one is a humble request while the other is an attempted attack on conscience. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080382]in one post on the overwatch forums, the poster manages to say that a SINGLE POSE, THE pose reduces tracer to a bland female sex symbol, that the pose suggests that blizzard did it to get money for creating sexy poses and that because his/her daughter watches the overwatch trailer, he/she implies that having the pose on tracer will affect how his/her daughter grows up i wouldn't go as far to call him a lunatic, but it's the most overly dramatic complaint about anything i've ever seen in a video game like, how anyone read the post and thought "this seems like a reasonable opinion to have", rather than "[B]what the fuck this person is losing their shit[/B] over a single pose and actually believes the pose will affect his UNDER THE AGE OF THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE GAME daughter's development", boggles my mind[/quote] The person was rational and humble throughout the entire post. They didn't lose their shit. Did you not read it? It was a respectful suggestion, not an angry rant. The people who lost their shit were those who reacted with anger. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080382]nobody needs to strawman the original post, because [B]it's so fucking batshit nuts that the insanity of the person that made it is clear as day[/B][/QUOTE] It was a completely rational post. Stop overreacting just because you disagree with the opinion of others.

[QUOTE=paul simon;50080148]Who are you to decide my intention? Maybe "misquote" doesn't mean what I think it means, and in that case it's just a misunderstanding of an English word on my part. But I believe with his quote that he exaggerated the original post beyond the intended meaning, and that's what I meant.[/QUOTE] The hell I did. This ranks up there with your antialiasing circular argumentation.

[QUOTE=27X;50080822]The hell I did. This ranks up there with your antialiasing circular argumentation.[/QUOTE] Oh? I can't recall that. That seems a bit weird to bring up as an argument in a completely unrelated case many months later. Do you have a link to the thread? [editline]o[/editline] Oh, I found both threads. No offence, but your arguing isn't exactly top tier in them, being seemingly based on misunderstandings or something. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1469644&p=47898733&viewfull=1#post47898733[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?p=49386650#post49386650[/url]

Tracer gets a pose that reflects her personality, people still get to see ass and even a bit of leg. Everyone wins?

[QUOTE=paul simon;50080797]That's because the intention [B]was[/B] different. (also I'm not Jesus) I was pointing out that his quote was not an actual quote, and somehow you interpret that as dishonesty. Just like some people here are afraid the characters will all start wearing burkhas, other people are afraid of the opposite development. Both parts are equally allowed to voice their opinion about this, just try to keep it civil ok? Debate shouldn't be toxic. The person says they don't think the "sexy" poses fit Tracer's character. The implications of this is really just something you have to leave for the imagination. Does it mean "think of the children!!", or does it mean "I want improvements in the character my daughter looks up to."? Both practically mean the same ("I want change!"), but one is a humble request while the other is an attempted attack on conscience. The person was rational and humble throughout the entire post. They didn't lose their shit. Did you not read it? It was a respectful suggestion, not an angry rant. The people who lost their shit were those who reacted with anger. It was a completely rational post. Stop overreacting just because you disagree with the opinion of others.[/QUOTE] you seem to get extremely hung up about individual words added for emphasis, rather than actually replying to the points being made [quote]"I was pointing out that his quote was not an actual quote, and somehow you interpret that as dishonesty"[/quote] it was dishonesty because you didn't confront the point he was actually making, but rather made it seem like he was attempting to deceive people - dishonesty. [quote] Just like some people here are afraid the characters will all start wearing burkhas, other people are afraid of the opposite development. Both parts are equally allowed to voice their opinion about this, just try to keep it civil ok? Debate shouldn't be toxic. The person says they don't think the "sexy" poses fit Tracer's character.[/quote] both are stupid assuming people are going to start wearing burqas is stupid, assuming that blizzard is making characters sexy for money is stupid both are irrational, and stupid [quote]The implications of this is really just something you have to leave for the imagination. Does it mean "think of the children!!", or does it mean "I want improvements in the character my daughter looks up to."? Both practically mean the same ("I want change!"), but one is a humble request while the other is an attempted attack on conscience.[/quote] who gives a shit what his daughter wants it's an appeal to a child, and that is literally it - it is there for emotional weight to his argument in essence "think of the children" [quote]The person was rational and humble throughout the entire post. They didn't lose their shit. Did you not read it? It was a respectful suggestion, not an angry rant. The people who lost their shit were those who reacted with anger.[/quote] respectful suggestion? he suggested that blizzard were sexualizing their characters for money, and intentionally sabotaged their characterization for money. sure it might be respectful in tone, but what he's actually suggesting is ridiculously disrespectful no, it wasn't reasonable, it was ridiculous - demonstrably ridiculous due to the reactions of players

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080944]you seem to get extremely hung up about individual words added for emphasis, rather than actually replying to the points being made[/QUOTE] I've pretty much presented all my points already, and it's not like I 100% disagree with every argument being made. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080944]it was dishonesty because you didn't confront the point he was actually making, but rather made it seem like he was attempting to deceive people - dishonesty.[/QUOTE] I don't like it when people make up quote or paraphrase when the source material is readily available. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080944]both are stupid assuming people are going to start wearing burqas is stupid, assuming that blizzard is making characters sexy for money is stupid both are irrational, and stupid[/QUOTE] I'd say the extreme opposite would be to turn it into a full porn game. In any case, sex sells, burkas don't. This is often used for a lot of argumentation that goes way beyond the realms of sanity, but it is a real thing. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080944]who gives a shit what his daughter wants it's an appeal to a child, and that is literally it - i[B]t is there for emotional weight to his argument[/B] in essence "think of the children"[/QUOTE] I agree with this part. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50080944]respectful suggestion? he suggested that blizzard were sexualizing their characters for money, and intentionally sabotaged their characterization for money. sure it might be respectful in tone, but what he's actually suggesting is ridiculously disrespectful no, it wasn't reasonable, it was ridiculous - demonstrably ridiculous due to the reactions of players[/QUOTE] It's not at all disrespectful to voice your opinion about character design that you don't agree with. Evidently Blizzard didn't find it disrespectful either, and they ended up changing it to something that I'm sure we can all agree fits. (maybe it even fits better)

[QUOTE=paul simon;50081031] In any case, sex sells, burkas don't. This is often used for a lot of argumentation that goes way beyond the realms of sanity, but it is a real thing. It's not at all disrespectful to voice your opinion about character design that you don't agree with. Evidently Blizzard didn't find it disrespectful either, and they ended up changing it to something that I'm sure we can all agree fits. (maybe it even fits better)[/QUOTE] the silver lining of that post is that it gave us a pose that is 100% better than the old pose you're right, it isn't disrespectful to disagree with a character design it IS disrespectful to say that the character design suggests blizzard are willing to disrespect their female characters for the 'sexy' crowd. i know that blizzard isn't the best when it comes to female representation, but overwatch isn't an example of a failure it seems that your opinion isn't as terrible as i thought, so i apologise if i was abrasive

It's certainly a much more fitting pose of the hyperactive crazy Tracer is. I really dunno why Blizzard went with such generic over-the-shoulder poses in the first place for this game. Maybe for one or two characters who take themselves seriously, but everybody else has some personality quirk they could work into the pose easily. At least her spine is at some nutso angle in this one.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50080886]Tracer gets a pose that reflects her personality, people still get to see ass and even a bit of leg. Everyone wins?[/QUOTE] not me because I still don't have an invite to the beta ;_;

[QUOTE=mooman1080;50078347]This is worth pointing out. [t]http://oi66.tinypic.com/1zcg1h3.jpg[/t] Take it as you will.[/QUOTE] I knew Blizzard would come around with an alternative. It's pretty dumb to complain about one freaking pose, especially one that isn't truly sexy unless your mind was in the gutter for most of your life. This ain't sexy per say, but it's cheeky. Now lets see Naughty Dog bring back Doughnut Drake.

[QUOTE=maddogsamurai;50081737]I knew Blizzard would come around with an alternative. It's pretty dumb to complain about one freaking pose, especially one that isn't truly sexy unless your mind was in the gutter for most of your life. This ain't sexy per say, but it's cheeky. Now lets see Naughty Dog bring back Doughnut Drake.[/QUOTE] Doughnut Drake should be replaced with [sp]Dino Drake, which is Nathan Drake wearing an absurd Barney-esque dinosaur costume with wild googly eyes.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50080886]Tracer gets a pose that reflects her personality, people still get to see ass and even a bit of leg. Everyone wins?[/QUOTE] nah now we bitch about them not having spine lol gotta keep the drama going