Am I Wrong to feel Vindicated by this 'Censorship'?

Recommended Videos

Angelblaze

New member
Jun 17, 2010
855
0
0
To put it in short, am I wrong to feel Vindicated by things like Blizzard removing the sexy tracer pose and other (ha), "attacks against freedom of speech"?

In long form, I previously posted that multiple times in recent history changes to 'desexualize' male characters and make honest changes when aesthetics and such don't fit aren't considered attacks against freedom of speech. (In a locked thread, I'll post in spoiler afterwards.)

People in that thread either agreed, or claimed that they, 'didn't know', 'can't fight every battle', 'this is a different argument'. Etc.

Well. Fair enough. But tell me, if others get to claim ignorance why exactly should I care about all this so called 'censorship'? See, the reason I ask this is because I'm being told that this is going to somehow be the death of Freedom of Speech in media, blah blah blah, you can turn your television and see Game of Thrones and Penny Dreadful and see all the tits you want, this supposed 'SJW' fight is condensed to gaming and heavy nerd culture frankly.

If you're going to say I'm wrong to feel that way, lets keep in mind all the joy the 'Gamergate' group has been having laughing at Polygon after the Steven Universe lesbian imagery was removed. I'm essentially doing the same thing: "You constantly complained until what I liked was removed, now I'm laughing from the sidelines while you suffer. You could have stopped this."

As far as I'm concerned, my Freedom of Speech died quite some time ago. Maybe it'll be brought back if some people decide they don't like how pro-female sexualized the FFXV boys are and maybe I can stand in solidarity with you. But for now it feels like I'm repeatedly being attacked, never defended but am expected to somehow defend everyone else.

Hell, if anything, I feel freaking just in my decisions, but maybe I'm wrong.

Tl;dr: Anyone angry about Blizzard's removal of the 'sexy tracer' pose probably put themselves in a 'No one Left to Speak for Me' situation and dear god am I enjoying the schadenfreude.

Tl;dr2: Gamers only care about the creative freedom they agree with. None otherwise.
Silvanus said:
Are you making the point that creative freedom (against public criticism) is only usually invoked in certain instances, those that suit the speaker's own wants?

If so, I agree entirely.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.874866-You-All-Depress-Me-Something-We-Need-To-Acknowledge#21987685

Edit: So, judging by the answers that are mainly split between vaguely abusive and vague agreeable, yes. I should feel vindicated. Not because a majority of you are okay with how I feel mind you but because I've now decided that none of you -- or us for that matter -- deserve freedom of speech.



New Tl;dr: Anime The Internet was a mistake.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
I still struggle to see this as censorship, considering that they changed it of their own free will. At least that's what they say and there's no strong evidence to them lying.

I certainly agree that there's hypocrisy though. I posted thread a link to the FF sexy boy who got put in less revealing clothing way back when, and the people who normally got angry when it happens to women didn't seem to care that much.
 

CritialGaming

New member
Mar 25, 2015
2,170
0
0
Personally, I am not angry about the Overwatch thing. I don't give a fuck about Overwatch and I wasn't going to play it anyway because it simply isn't my cup of tea. What upsets me is that people take the mantle upon themselves to enforce their will upon a game developer for things they don't like.

"I don't like this little thing, therefore you should change it or remove it or I'll be offended! RAWR!" This is what bothers me.

See when I don't like something in a game, art style, gameplay, genre, whatever...I don't play it. If I am playing a game I otherwise like, but something bothers me about the game, I don't do that part of the game, or if it is something I am forced to see (like Tracer's pose) what I do in that case is simple. I ask myself how big of a deal is it. That Tracer pose is not only an optional unlock, but it also is only one of a dozen other poses that people can select and it isn't even one of the more interesting or fun ones. In reality the odds of that pose being used or even seen by players is a fairly low % of my game experience.

Dislike or not, it really isn't a big deal and it only became a big deal because it got removed.

Funny that.

Tracer's butt is a no-no, but Widowmaker can exist in all her sexy ass glory.

Let me ask you a question.

If they had changed Tracer's bio to also include that she was a transgender person, would the butt pose be viewed as sexual exploitation, or empowering to those in the trans community because it shows that anyone can be empowered and comfortable in their bodies?
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
Eh, there will always be people who complain about stuff they disagree with...that's part and parcel with disagreeing with something in the first place. Is it wrong for you to feel vindicated over people not getting their way? Not really. I'm sure if Blizzard decided to say "No, we're going to keep Tracer's arse front and center, damnit!" then all those who didn't want it to be removed would feel vindicated while those who did want it to be removed would be the ones left feeling disgruntled.

The long and short of it is that you can't please everyone, someone's always going to be getting the shaft. I'm in the same camp as you that believes that true freedom of speech and artistic expression died a long time ago. This is the PC age where you will be absolutely crucified if you offend the sensibilities of anyone and refuse to do anything about it. This whole Tracer deal is a perfect example of it. I'm not certain how many complaints Blizzard received over the issue, but it seemed to have come from a single post on their forums. I haven't checked their forums to see how many people agreed with this post, but all it takes is one person to get the ball rolling.

Quite simply: those that are crying about "Those damn, dirty SJW's are ruining everything these days!" are fighting a battle that was already lost a few years ago.

I don't care one way or the other, the game designers are the ones that get to make the decision in the end. I'm not going to hold it against them if they decide to side with those complaining about sexy victory poses, nor will I get all worked up if they decide to keep such things in the game. If the game is fun and interesting that's all I care about.

One thing I will point out is how much fun it is to watch developers try to walk the line and please everyone. The Blizzard guy said in response to the complaint:
"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."
And then when the inevitable backlash hit, he "clarified" by directly contradicting himself:
We wouldn't do anything to sacrifice our creative vision for Overwatch, and we're not going to remove something solely because someone may take issue with it.
:p
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Re-reading that thread, its really funny! I still believe everything I said about Bayonetta just being porn with a plot, vs DoA Beach Volleyball just being a fuck scene. And it still boggles my mind people who think Bayonetta is a progressive game/character, but Yumi and Tifa are horrible stereotypes of over-sexualized gamer wank material.

But I'm amazed at how...caring I was, you know? I actually wanted to convince people of my point, whereas now a days...I dunno. The Internet and Video Game culture aren't worth the time to argue for anymore. The Titanic is sinking and here we are debating over the colors of flowers on the lower decks, no fully submereged and filled with Lovecraftian lurkers of the deep(corporations and Take Down strikes)

But good for you for feeling vindicated. Konrad Curze was vindicated in the end too, so here have an Assassin!


And a Vindicator!

Vindication all around!
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
To be honest, I'm still tickled by the fact that people genuinely believe that Blizzard just did this because one person voiced a very polite criticism. Blizzard wouldn't be doing shit if it didn't already line up with what they wanted.
I bought it up in the news thread about this but it was overlooked- me and plenty others moaned our collective asses off when the female worgen were made to look like Chihuahuas being stepped on. But Blizzard kept the derphounds. Because Blizzard does what Blizzard wants to do.


But yes I also remember the FF Mobius thing and I remember nobody giving a crap then but hey apparently ladies asses in video games are sacred because... ethics?
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
RJ 17 said:
One thing I will point out is how much fun it is to watch developers try to walk the line and please everyone. The Blizzard guy said in response to the complaint:
"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."
And then when the inevitable backlash hit, he "clarified" by directly contradicting himself:
We wouldn't do anything to sacrifice our creative vision for Overwatch, and we're not going to remove something solely because someone may take issue with it.
:p

The PR in this debacle is fucked, there's one thing I think we can agree upon. I don't think it's a direct contradiction, but there's clearly a bad case of foot in mouth going on.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
Holy hell guys, we settled this ages ago.

SOMEONE IS MAD AND I DON'T AGREE = CENSORSHIP
SOMEONE IS MAD AND I DO AGREE = CONSUMER REVOLT
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
BloatedGuppy said:
Holy hell guys, we settled this ages ago.

SOMEONE IS MAD AND I DON'T AGREE = CENSORSHIP
SOMEONE IS MAD AND I DO AGREE = CONSUMER REVOLT
Mass Effect 3's ending is my go-to case study for this. I don't even remember "censorship" ever being muttered during that fiasco.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
Fappy said:
Mass Effect 3's ending is my go-to case study for this. I don't even remember "censorship" ever being muttered during that fiasco.
The ME3 ending debacle was an argument between two camps, one endorsing authorial fiat and the other endorsing product quality control. People used language to imply authorial self-censorship was taking place, although it's been years so I cannot recall how frequently the word "censorship" was literally invoked.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
Well, it's not censorship. Criticism isn't censorship. It's free speech. You don't have freedom from free speech. People who are mad about criticism, let me ask you, what's the alternative? Silencing their right to speech? That actually would be censorship. Their making their voice heard. Make your voice heard also. But don't pretend that you're defending free speech. Your just defending people's right to agree with you.

As for the matter at hand, I'm mixed. I don't like it when things are changed from the creators original vision, stupid though it may be. That said, it's difficult for me to care when the best thing these people can come up with is a slightly different pair of panties on a character, or a more modest outfit on a 12 year old girl. You lose the high ground when you're trying to dress a child up in a stripper outfit. People want to know why their losing the PR war? This is it. Learn to pick your battles.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Fappy said:
Trust me, I was on the Bioware boards during the War. Censorship and the accusations of were everywhere! Even Bioware itself was saying they're not going to stifle the creativity of their writers and force an ending they didn't want to write. That's what censorship is. Silencing or rewriting for the mob.

Censoring the writers was a big part of the 'Leave this shit alone' camp.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
Silentpony said:
Fappy said:
Trust me, I was on the Bioware boards during the War. Censorship and the accusations of were everywhere! Even Bioware itself was saying they're not going to stifle the creativity of their writers and force an ending they didn't want to write. That's what censorship is. Silencing or rewriting for the mob.

Censoring the writers was a big part of the 'Leave this shit alone' camp.
By that time I had completely abandoned Bioware's forums (with the exception of the ME3 multiplayer board). I am sure that was ground zero for much of the discussion. I watched most of the debate from here, which IIRC 80%+ of the posters seemed to be in the "change it" camp. Most of the contrarians either liked the original ending or were just sick of seeing everyone acting so entitled.
 

EternallyBored

Terminally Apathetic
Jun 17, 2013
1,434
0
0
Houseman said:
Regarding the mass effect thing: I don't think that people saying "You did a terrible job; improve it" is censorship.

Censorship, in this context usually implies the removal or loss of something, not the improving of something. Is it censorship to fix the ubisoft invisible skin bug?

I don't see this alleged double standard.
One man's improvement is anothers removal, that you seem to think that a bug is equivalent to the ME3 ending is evidence of this. There are ME3 fans that view the change as worse than the original ending, and view those wanting to change it as censoring Bioware's artistic vision. The people that wanted the tracer pose change would call that an improvement as well.

I hated the ME3 ending, but it was still removing things that some people enjoyed, some people liked the sense of mystery and lack of explanation the Star Child gave, or liked that the Normandy crash was a cliff hanger, to change that was to remove the mystery and remove part of what they liked about it. Stuff was still removed, even if the overall change added more content in the end, the tracer change doesn't suddenly change context if they end up adding more poses than they removed.

Also, how is "you did a terrible job; improve it" any different from "I didn't like this; change it"? They are the same thing from different angles, to someone that liked the ME3 ending, the improvement was a change they didn't want that removed things they liked, to someone that didn't like it it was an improvement that made the game better. While a much smaller scale, someone believed that the Tracer pose didn't fit and changing it would improve the game, those that disagree see this as a detriment that changes the game for the worse.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
Houseman said:
Arguing about what is or isn't freedom of speech is missing the point, IMO. There's a difference between not being arrested for what you say and having your name dragged through the mud because people were offended.
If you create works and release them for public scrutiny...in most of these cases being discussed, release them for SALE no less...then people are free to consume said works, criticize said works, make statements about their creators, and generally behave however audiences behave. If I say Uwe Boll is a hack, and I "dragging his name through the mud"? If I say "Transformers 2 had some distressingly racist robots in it", have I unwittingly censored poor Michael Bay?

We have libel laws for a reason, and they exist to protect people from the worst excesses of public censure. Beyond that, you cannot silence criticism without literally becoming the voice of censorship yourself.
 

Secondhand Revenant

Recycle, Reduce, Redead
Legacy
Oct 29, 2014
2,566
141
68
Baator
Country
The Nine Hells
Gender
Male
Houseman said:
Regarding the mass effect thing: I don't think that people saying "You did a terrible job; improve it" is censorship.

Censorship, in this context usually implies the removal or loss of something, not the improving of something. Is it censorship to fix the ubisoft invisible skin bug?

I don't see this alleged double standard.

Arguing about what is or isn't freedom of speech is missing the point, IMO. There's a difference between not being arrested for what you say and having your name dragged through the mud because people were offended.
Oh so they should just improve her pants instead