Are we insulting game developers by crying "CENSORSHIP!!!"?

[The Jovian]

As I was browsing the Escapist forums in the fallout of the Blizzard "Tracer controversy" a question occurred to me. What is the average Blizzard employee's reaction to this? I mean most of the comments I heard from the "anti-change" camp basically boil down to, well this:

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.

Really?

How is anyone capable of exerting their will upon any developer? Just how is anyone capable of actually forcing a developer to changing anything about their game? And I'm not talking about a publisher, just a regular individual who may not even play the game anyway.

Seriously, I've heard comments that sound as if they think that someone broke into Jeff Kaplan's house kidnapped his family and threatened them with execution if he didn't change that Tracer pose, when what actually happened is that a mom said something in the forums and Jeffrey was (probably) like "oh s#!t maybe she's right, maybe Tracer's personality doesn't really fit with the pose since she's not a sexy character, let's change it, it's not like it matters anyway because we're not changing the game but let's not alienate potential customers here."

And it's not just this isolated incident, every time someone changed something because of "SJFIERJUILNFDW"s (my keyboard still refuses to type it), the internet basically reacts as if they just saw a lynch mob beating a 6-year old to death, when in reality the people said their piece (or peace, whichever's the correct saying), and the developer agreed with them.

This overblown overreaction to """""censorship""""" is devaluing the word so fast that it's inflation rate is fast approaching that of """""misogyny""""". Or to put it in non-economic terms, we are acting exactly like social jusfwefe... oh fuck it, those people. And every time we cry "CENSORSHIP!!!" like Joseph McCarthy cries "COMMUNISM!!!" after his second pint of beer, we end up looking just as unreasonable as... those people. As if we're completely incapable of accepting that sometimes developers will agree with someone other than us and tailor their games according to someone else's wishes.

I can only imagine how the average Blizzard developer feels about comments like this, comments that basically say "Those people a bullying my game developers into changing things against their will. We need to stop them because everybody knows that game developers will cave in to any criticism no matter how stupid it is."

Yeah that attitude will definitely feel insulting to game developers because they are not (usually) stupid and don't always take (bad) criticism into consideration. This overreacting attitude of ours is basically screaming that we think that they're either too stupid to know the difference between good criticism and bad criticism, too timid to defend their creative vision of the title (which trust me as an aspiring writer, no one wants to hear that they're too spineless to defend their creation), or (and this is the worst interpretation) too incompetent and indecisive to produce a good game.

Now admittedly either of those three is a possibility but unless we have actual evidence that someone coerced Blizzard (or anyone else for that matter) into changing any aspect of their game and its marketing (and I do mean coerced, as in "do it or we'll sue you" or "do it or go to jail" coerced), or that Blizzard is really run by idiots who don't know any better (which we'll know for certain once the game is out) can we please knock it off with this "Blizzard (or [insert studio name here]) is being coerced into censorship" nonsense. Censorship requires Blizzard's lack of consent to the change, otherwise it's not censorship, or coercion, or bullying, or enforcement of will, or whatever else you want to call it. Those people are average joes like you and me, so why is it that we think they can brow beat someone into doing something against their will? And better yet are we setting a bad precedent for game developers by constantly crying "CENSORSHIP!!!" every time they make a change we don't agree with?

My answer to the latter question is "yes" and I hope your answer (as in you the reader) is civil and not full of passive aggressive sarcasm and name-calling.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

Maybe? I don't know, there are nuances in these kinds of discussions that are often set aside, because there is a reactionary culture in both sides of the gaming culture politics camp. Can we say with certainty that developers taking something out of a game wasn't the result of bullying, since they put that something in for some reason? Can we say with certainty that developers taking something out of a game wasn't the result of re-evaluation and a change of heart? In these cases we only have their word to fall back on, but how reliable that is can be argued.

But are we INSULTING developers? You'd have to ask them, chances are each case is different and there's a little truth to everything. I didn't follow the Tracer thing, I think removing the pose is silly, but I couldn't tell you if somebody influenced them or they just had a change of heart. I can tell you, though, that Divinity: Original Sin did have to touch up its cover back in the day, because they were forced to by public outcry from some people, because the woman's mid-rif on the cover was exposed. The digital version of the game, at least on GOG, features the original cover since GOG wouldn't have any of it.

These situations aren't black and white. There's grey all over and a lot of things need to be factored in, before definitive responses can be provided, if they can be provided at all.

 

[spartandude]

The Western world has somehow run out of real problems like, hunger, homelessness, employment, terrorism, drug trafficking, that they have turned the focus into unbelievably mundane shit.

I know this post will belong more in the R&P section of the forums but.... My country (a western country) is largest reliance on food banks since the great depression, homelessness is increasing with some cities talking about making it illegal to "sleep rough". We are facing large problems with youth unemployment and zero hour contracts. Both France and Belgium have suffered pretty bad terrorist attacks lately and drug trafficking in America, along with the threat of terrorism, has been a huge drive in police militarisation. So I do very much disagree that the western world is so good we can only complain about games.

Let me ask you a question. Why did they put the time, effort and money into creating that pose? If they thought it was an unsuitable pose, how did that animation ever get out of pre-alpha testing? People like to bring up the, "Oh it's BETA! It's still in development. IT's no big deal." Content that had the intention of being replaced, doesn't make it this far into the development cycle.

Ever heard of Aliens: Colonial Marines? But seriously stuff gets taken out and added into games all the times at various stages through the dev cycle. Sometimes early on and last minute. Not to mention the pose is still in the game, just not for this particular character. Heck I'm pretty sure some male characters have it aswell, or atleast I've seen some screen shots. So it's not as if huge amount's of time has just been taken out.

The answer is. They never intended to cut the pose. They put it in the game because they wanted that pose there. And only the criticism of said pose caused it to become cut.

And that is the power people have. There is such a focus on being as PC as possible, as unoffensive as possible, that it has almost become a parody of itself. Developers cut content, forced or just doing so preemptively to prevent backlash, whether this is a pose or alt costume or butt slap, or even doubling the size of a pair of underwear!

One politely worded forum post was all it took to send the devs running? A bit insulting to the devs. But this massive shitstorm that's been a brewin' as a result hasn't forced them to put it back? That doesn't add up. You are also aware that this is a product... being sold. People will voice their opinions on things they don't like. Some big concerns, some small. If you make art or a product or both you will get positive and negative feedback.

IT's face-palmingly stupid. If the developer wanted putting a little bit of sexy into the game. What harm does it do? It is their art and if you don't like it, don't protest it, just don't buy it. It is such a simple solution. Don't fucking buy it.

First of all it's not just art but also a product. Even if it was just art it's not off limits to criticism. And why can't someone say something bad about it an still buy it? Or not buy it and say why not? Remember the original forum post which started this controversy was very politely worded and praised the game, just critiqued this one thing. And if hypothetically speaking I wrote a book I would be interested in the feedback on how I could improve it before publication or after so I could improve my next piece.

Why is Tracer's butt pose not okay, but all the naked cock in Spartagus okay? I am offended by perfectly chisled men with big ass dicks all flaunting about in my face. Oh but because I am a white man, it is impossible for me to be offended by anything. Impossible for me to be uncomfortable with my body image because I don't look like Nathan Drake, Kratos, Ryu, or any number of other male protagonists. No the sheer fact that I am a fucking guy, means that the rule of oppression don't apply to me. I can't be the victim, I can't be hurt, I don't have feelings or emotions.

That's why I have a problem with this bullshit. Because it is entirely one-sided, beat the shit out of men. Let men be perfectly formed and constantly shirtless. But god forbid you show a COMPLETELY COVERED woman's butt.

Ok this is where I put my hands up and admit I have nothing against Tracer's pose and do think it's removal is a bit questionable. However do you honestly think shows like Spartacus don't get complaints about the nudity? You would be surprised. I also don't agree with some of the more "stereotypical feminist" arguments (that you can't have any violence toward female characters, I criticism which the opposition thinks is being played way out of proportion). But if you are offended or just don't like the things you mentioned you absolutely should speak your mind. I say to all sides of the argument to do it but be civil. And it's really not one sided. It may seem so but when you have 1 Solid Snake's (gloriously formed) ass compared to 10 woman's you can understand why some woman are beginning to complain.

GO fuck yourselves seriously. You can all sit there and say this shit is not a big deal. "Oh it's just a stupid pose. Oh it's just a butt slap. Oh it's just bigger panties. It's all reasonable, it's all okay. Oh it's just side quests cut, that's fine. Side quests are just grinding anyway right?"

This is going to become a bigger and bigger thing. And I will be the one sitting here nodding and watching it happen.

Lets be a bit more civil shall we old bean? Again what has happened here is that one potential consumer offered a critique and Blizzard thought they had a point and changed their product accordingly. Keep in mind the pose is still in the game and used be other characters. They just thought maybe it didn't suit this one and that's fine.

What people behind all this "Censorship" (Which by the way, this fucking pose is not Censorship, it is an example of nipping a potential problem in the bud before it becomes an issue. Ironically this caused a whole different issue.) Anyway...What people don't realize is that they are preventing the very thing they ultimately want.

Right? Isn't the whole goal is to have more strong, independent and powerful female characters in gaming?

Again, one person offered a polite critique on a forum. Nothing about this is censorship. And yes it is about making powerful female characters. Some of them will use their sexuality as part of that power (Cat Woman is a good example, and Electra from the Netflix Daredevil) others don't (Korra from Avatar, Rey from Star Wars). They thought that this character doesn't.

But by pouncing on every single tiny little thing, you breed fear. Developers are linked to businesses, and their primary goal is to make money. As much as it should be about their art and their game, it is very clear that money rules everything. Look how quickly they removed the pose because they do not want to hurt their bottom line. And what they see, is that they cannot safely make a game with a female protagonist.

Ding ding ding we have a winner. This is a product. Also if they were so scared of hurting their customers they would have put the pose back in by now as so many more people have complained about it being removed.

So why bother with it? Keep the protagonist a sexy male because nobody can complain about that. It's safe because men can't be discriminated against, over sexualized, or abused.

This whole twisted morality is sickening.

Plenty of sexy male and female characters and nothing wrong with that.

But I do agree that it is sickening when people get discriminated against (whether their male, female, white black and so on) and people ignore it. When you feel like that's happening you should absolutely stand up and say something about it. Just don't think that when you disagree with other people doing it that it's censorship.

 

[Silvanus]

Look here is what this has become. This issue with anything that can even remotely be viewed as offensive is strictly a problem that occurs to Western game releases. The Western world has somehow run out of real problems like, hunger, homelessness, employment, terrorism, drug trafficking, that they have turned the focus into unbelievably mundane shit.

No, that doesn't add up. We are all on a forum right now commenting on minor cultural stuff, stuff we enjoy, stuff we don't. It's all relatively unimportant if we're comparing it to hunger or terrorism, obviously, but we do it nonetheless, because its a past-time and it relates to a hobby we're invested in.

Commenting on gender politics in a game is no different.

 

[The Jovian]

*Snip*

But let's say that they did intend to cut the pose. Had that been the plan, why ever implement the pose into the game? Why develop the animation required, the code required to trigger said pose?

The answer is. They never intended to cut the pose. They put it in the game because they wanted that pose there. And only the criticism of said pose caused it to become cut.

Or, alternatively they were throwing s#!t at the wall to see what sticks, if you look at the long dev cycle of Team Fortress 2 or Bioshock Infinite you'll see so many things that at one point were meant to be in the game but were ultimately cut, and why is that? Did someone pressure Valve and Irrational into changing their games too? No, what happened is that they refined their games by fixing mistakes that were only obvious in hindsight, mistakes that someone pointed out to them. Movies get reshoots for the same reason, the original ending of the first Balde movie was Blade fighting a CGI blood tornado (yes seriously) instead of that kickass sword fight the film ultimately ended up having as its climax.

And that is the power people have. There is such a focus on being as PC as possible, as unoffensive as possible, that it has almost become a parody of itself. Developers cut content, forced or just doing so preemptively to prevent backlash, whether this is a pose or alt costume or butt slap, or even doubling the size of a pair of underwear!

You don't know that. The reason why I started this threat was to highlight the fact that we do not know for certain what the thought process of the devs were when they decided to make changes to their games. Maybe they weren't scared of pissing off someone who apparently wouldn't even play it, maybe they simply agreed that they made a mistake and that they are fixing it.

IT's face-palmingly stupid. If the developer wanted putting a little bit of sexy into the game. What harm does it do? It is their art and if you don't like it, don't protest it, just don't buy it. It is such a simple solution. Don't fucking buy it.

And now you're the one who sounds angry. They are not protesting it they're criticizing it, the woman said that sexiness did not fit Tracer's character, not that sexiness was bad in general, if that were the case you'd think that they would've went after the other one (what was her name again? Widow-something?).

Why is Tracer's butt pose not okay, but all the naked cock in Spartagus okay?

1) What is "Spartagus", and 2) I'm pretty sure that you're making a false equivalency here. Because if you meant Spartacus you'd know that comparing a show meant for mature audiences to a game meant for general audiences is stupid on many levels. Also see my previous statement about sexiness not fitting her character.

I am offended by perfectly chisled men with big ass dicks all flaunting about in my face. Oh but because I am a white man, it is impossible for me to be offended by anything. Impossible for me to be uncomfortable with my body image because I don't look like Nathan Drake, Kratos, Ryu, or any number of other male protagonists. No the sheer fact that I am a fucking guy, means that the rule of oppression don't apply to me. I can't be the victim, I can't be hurt, I don't have feelings or emotions.

Neither one of those three main characters were meant to be eye candy for women so your point is invalid, find me a male character that's super-sexualized for no reason, whose sexiness doesn't match his personality and is used only for blatant fanservice and then you'd have a point. Otherwise this is a false equivalency.

That's why I have a problem with this bullshit. Because it is entirely one-sided, beat the shit out of men. Let men be perfectly formed and constantly shirtless. But god forbid you show a COMPLETELY COVERED woman's butt.

And now you're not even talking about the problem at hand.

GO fuck yourselves seriously.

And I'm pretty sure you've just earned yourself a warning. Sorry mate, but there's one thing to be angry and another thing to be an unpleasant individual.

You can all sit there and say this shit is not a big deal. "Oh it's just a stupid pose. Oh it's just a butt slap. Oh it's just bigger panties. It's all reasonable, it's all okay. Oh it's just side quests cut, that's fine. Side quests are just grinding anyway right?"

This is going to become a bigger and bigger thing. And I will be the one sitting here nodding and watching it happen.

Enough with the slippery slope fallacy. Nobody has ever said "change the gameplay mechanic" yet and even if they do, well let's just say it will serve as a perfect barometer of how much artistic integrity game devs have.

What people behind all this "Censorship" (Which by the way, this fucking pose is not Censorship, it is an example of nipping a potential problem in the bud before it becomes an issue. Ironically this caused a whole different issue.) Anyway...What people don't realize is that they are preventing the very thing they ultimately want.

Is pointless weaksauce fanservice what they want? I didn't know.

Right? Isn't the whole goal is to have more strong, independent and powerful female characters in gaming?

And apparently you think that a female character needs to be openly sexy in order to be "strong, independent and powerful." I'm pretty sure that strong characterization doesn't work that way.

But by pouncing on every single tiny little thing, you breed fear.

Citation needed.

Developers are linked to businesses, and their primary goal is to make money. As much as it should be about their art and their game, it is very clear that money rules everything. Look how quickly they removed the pose because they do not want to hurt their bottom line.

So what you're saying is that they're wrong to try and appeal to a different market because reasons.

And what they see, is that they cannot safely make a game with a female protagonist. Lara Croft recently got a makeover to make her more human, and yet people still said she was just a playable victim.

Maybe they went too far and made Lara too vulnerable and weak? Don't tell me it's not a possibility.

It is quite clear that people behind these protests and these complaints will never be sated. There is always something to pick up on, always something to be torn apart.

Again, you don't know that for certain so don't make such statements without evidence.

So why bother with it? Keep the protagonist a sexy male because nobody can complain about that. It's safe because men can't be discriminated against, over sexualized, or abused.

This whole twisted morality is sickening.

Well, if you don't like that Kratos is shirtless, maybe you should complain about it at God of War's official forum and maybe someone will listen to you and give him a woolly sweater to cover up those delicious nipples of his. Mmmm Kratos beef. Oh, sorry got distracted for a second.

In all seriousness your argument boils down to "I don't wanna" which by your own admission is not good enough to get a game altered.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

If things that are in the game at launch (or Beta, in this case), is stuff that the developers, spending all that time and money on, absolutly meant to have in the game and any change means changing something the devs wanted in and they're "caving" to demands...

Explain bugs, glitches, exploits.

 

[Dizchu]

I know everyone else has gone and picked this apart but a few things caught my attention.

Let me ask you a question. Why did they put the time, effort and money into creating that pose? If they thought it was an unsuitable pose, how did that animation ever get out of pre-alpha testing? People like to bring up the, "Oh it's BETA! It's still in development. IT's no big deal." Content that had the intention of being replaced, doesn't make it this far into the development cycle. Blizzard wasn't going to cut this pose, regardless of the PR statement Jeff Kaplan wrote. IF nobody had ever brought up the pose, I guarantee her pose would have gone all the way to launch.

Play some of Valve's games with the commentary on. You'll realise that A TON of perfectly acceptable stuff gets removed. But the reason they removed those things wasn't because they weren't "acceptable", it's because they wanted to release something they could be proud of. And as a result their games are extremely polished, well-paced and well-balanced.

Actually you don't even need to look at games. Look at the deleted scenes in huge blockbuster films. Even 3D animated films have deleted scenes. Look at albums that have b-sides or tracks that were recorded but unreleased. It happens.

IT's face-palmingly stupid. If the developer wanted putting a little bit of sexy into the game. What harm does it do? It is their art and if you don't like it, don't protest it, just don't buy it. It is such a simple solution. Don't fucking buy it.

If you didn't like Blizzard's decision, who don't you refuse to buy it?

Impossible for me to be uncomfortable with my body image because I don't look like Nathan Drake, Kratos, Ryu, or any number of other male protagonists. No the sheer fact that I am a fucking guy, means that the rule of oppression don't apply to me. I can't be the victim, I can't be hurt, I don't have feelings or emotions.

Why do you think this whole issue is about body image?

This is going to become a bigger and bigger thing. And I will be the one sitting here nodding and watching it happen.

The whole controversy is based around this slippery slope argument. An argument that has no evidence to support it.

To quote you:

Holy shit. Wow you are angry.

 

[Something Amyss]

How is anyone capable of exerting their will upon any developer?

Okay, you're going to need 53 candles, a wooden match, salt, some kind of paint...oh, you were being rhetorical.

*hides "occult for dummies under bed*

I don't know about the developers, but I think it cheapens the concept of censorship.

Maybe they went too far and made Lara too vulnerable and weak? Don't tell me it's not a possibility.

Keep in mind, this came in the wake of someone from Square Enix saying that Lara's rape would inform her character.

This doesn't actually happen in the game, which would have been a smarter thing to point out. But that's not what they did.

Look here is what this has become. This issue with anything that can even remotely be viewed as offensive is strictly a problem that occurs to Western game releases.

Except, off the top of my head, Fallout 3 had to be edited to remove nuclear references. The Mevius example I've been using from Final Fantasy was covered up at the response of a Japanese audience. Even the "petting" mechanic from Fire Emblem was poorly received in Japan. So that's both Japanese and Western games covered.

But let's go beyond that for a moment.

The Western world has somehow run out of real problems like, hunger, homelessness, employment, terrorism, drug trafficking, that they have turned the focus into unbelievably mundane shit.

I turn 36 next month. I have been playing games since the NES. This sort of "censorship" has existed for the last 30 years. Nobody cared in the 80s. Nobody cared in the 90s. Nobody cared in the 00s. Yes, it seems like the West has run out of problems if this is the line we're drawing.

I think it's great. In the 90s, it was considered possible that in the US, games might be banned or heavy edits would be required by law to be sold commercially. Look how far we've come. From having to fight for the existence of our hobby to nitpicking a practice that existed without fanfare for at least 30 years, and yet somehow is the fault of the modern age.

Look how little we have to complain about in gaming. Gaming is big business, it's borderline ubiquitous, and the biggest controversies are that unpopular features are removed or attire is altered to meet cultural standards (which happens to products imported into Japan, too). Hell, this isn't even a controversy because someone called the game sexist, or because there was a petition. It's a controversy because someone requested Blizzard think about their character and they agreed of their own volition.

Our controversies have gone from Congressional inquiries on video games to outrage that someone voluntarily changed something.

As someone who grew up in a time where anime was chopped to pieces and video games were frequently not even released to a Western market, I think this is freaking awesome.

Here's hoping our problems become even more trivial in the future.

 

[F-I-D-O]

Things change in game development.
An item in a game, which the lead said he and the artists already had qualms about, got removed.
Honestly, I think the problem is the idea that everything, no matter how minute, has to be in a game once it's shown. eVerything until release is in a state of flux, and doesn't change off of one forum poster's whims.
Developers get the final say with what's on the disk. Making a change willingly, even if its due to "one fan's request" isn't censorship. It's editing.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I argue it's the opposite. Calling them weak and pliable is the better option because the alternative is to call them hacks with no integrity. Sellouts who wish to make an extra buck at the expense of their vision or worse soulless labratory workers who use polling data to make games and don't even have a vision and we do know some of them design games like that.


To call censorship is to admit that the devs do have an actual vision, do give a deree of fucks about their game as a piece of art and not as a mere cash cow, aren't completely soulless businesmen. It's not much praise but it is the best thing available.

 

[Erttheking]

Holy shit. Wow you are angry.

Considering where your post goes, this comes off as hypocritical

Look here is what this has become. This issue with anything that can even remotely be viewed as offensive is strictly a problem that occurs to Western game releases. The Western world has somehow run out of real problems like, hunger, homelessness, employment, terrorism, drug trafficking, that they have turned the focus into unbelievably mundane shit.

You're on a gaming website. What did you expect people to talk about? Also I live in a country where women's reproductive rights are under attack, people are fighting for the right to discriminate against the LGBT community, and an over inflated sex doll might become president. Trust me, we got plenty of things to complain about.

Also, exclusively western? Japan censors incoming games all the time. There's no nuke in Fallout 3. Can we not act like Japan is morally superior to us? They aren't.

"Ewww look at this pose? Why is this pose in the game for Tracer? (And other characters including the men) It's offensive. Take it away."

That is not how the complaint was worded. At all.

Let me ask you a question. Why did they put the time, effort and money into creating that pose? If they thought it was an unsuitable pose, how did that animation ever get out of pre-alpha testing? People like to bring up the, "Oh it's BETA! It's still in development. IT's no big deal." Content that had the intention of being replaced, doesn't make it this far into the development cycle. Blizzard wasn't going to cut this pose, regardless of the PR statement Jeff Kaplan wrote. IF nobody had ever brought up the pose, I guarantee her pose would have gone all the way to launch.

So are you saying the Blizzard was lying when they said that they had been feeling conflicted about the pose? That comes off as something you can't really prove. And...yeah. It freaking makes it this far into the cycle. Content has been cut from games after going FARTHER into the games release. League of Legends completely redid Karma and Trundle, which was a hell of lot more work than just changing

But let's say that they did intend to cut the pose. Had that been the plan, why ever implement the pose into the game? Why develop the animation required, the code required to trigger said pose?

The answer is. They never intended to cut the pose. They put it in the game because they wanted that pose there. And only the criticism of said pose caused it to become cut.

Prove it The pose' existance is a very poor proof for it making it into the game.

And that is the power people have. There is such a focus on being as PC as possible, as unoffensive as possible, that it has almost become a parody of itself. Developers cut content, forced or just doing so preemptively to prevent backlash, whether this is a pose or alt costume or butt slap, or even doubling the size of a pair of underwear!

Yeah I've seen this argument brought up countless times, and people can never explain to me why people have so much power that a single politely worded complaint can get Blizzard to change their mind, but a torrent of hate can't. This is exactly what the OP is talking about. To think that, you must have absolutely zero respect for the developer.

IT's face-palmingly stupid. If the developer wanted putting a little bit of sexy into the game. What harm does it do? It is their art and if you don't like it, don't protest it, just don't buy it. It is such a simple solution. Don't fucking buy it.

You demonstrate perfectly the problem with the "Just don't buy it argument" It's said when people don't want to hear the criticisms of other people and want to tell them to shut up without actually telling them to shut up. This is without getting into how just not buying the game without saying why is an ineffective way of protesting something. "It's their art" the art that they're asking 40/60 dollars for. That argument falls apart when you start charging for your "art"

Why is Tracer's butt pose not okay, but all the naked cock in Spartagus okay? I am offended by perfectly chisled men with big ass dicks all flaunting about in my face. Oh but because I am a white man, it is impossible for me to be offended by anything. Impossible for me to be uncomfortable with my body image because I don't look like Nathan Drake, Kratos, Ryu, or any number of other male protagonists. No the sheer fact that I am a fucking guy, means that the rule of oppression don't apply to me. I can't be the victim, I can't be hurt, I don't have feelings or emotions.

Because Tracer's pose was criticized for not being in character. People keep acting like it was removed because sex = evil, despite that never being brought up anywhere. And now you're bringing up some white man stuff that has nothing to do with anything. Dude, stay on topic

That's why I have a problem with this bullshit. Because it is entirely one-sided, beat the shit out of men. Let men be perfectly formed and constantly shirtless. But god forbid you show a COMPLETELY COVERED woman's butt.

An argument that only works if both situations existed in a vacuum. They don't. Unless you're saying that people think it's never, under any circumstances, ok to show a woman's butt. Which is perfectly untrue.

GO fuck yourselves seriously.

I'd rather not thanks.

You can all sit there and say this shit is not a big deal. "Oh it's just a stupid pose. Oh it's just a butt slap. Oh it's just bigger panties. It's all reasonable, it's all okay. Oh it's just side quests cut, that's fine. Side quests are just grinding anyway right?"

This is going to become a bigger and bigger thing. And I will be the one sitting here nodding and watching it happen.

You know, for all the "bigger and bigger" people keep talking about, I've yet to actually seen it. Hell people act like it's worse than ever, when we have it freaking good compared to the 80s and 90s.

What people behind all this "Censorship" (Which by the way, this fucking pose is not Censorship, it is an example of nipping a potential problem in the bud before it becomes an issue. Ironically this caused a whole different issue.) Anyway...What people don't realize is that they are preventing the very thing they ultimately want.

They said that they didn't like the pose and considering changing it. Either prove that they were lying or don't bother getting angry at me for dismissing claims that it's censorship

Right? Isn't the whole goal is to have more strong, independent and powerful female characters in gaming?

No one said that.

But by pouncing on every single tiny little thing,

No one does that. No hyperbole please.

you breed fear. Developers are linked to businesses, and their primary goal is to make money. As much as it should be about their art and their game, it is very clear that money rules everything. Look how quickly they removed the pose because they do not want to hurt their bottom line.

Prove. It. You're making a lot of assumptions about the developer's motives. If you're telling me to go fuck myself, I want more than assumptions.

And what they see, is that they cannot safely make a game with a female protagonist. Lara Croft recently got a makeover to make her more human, and yet people still said she was just a playable victim. It is quite clear that people behind these protests and these complaints will never be sated. There is always something to pick up on, always something to be torn apart.

If developers are afraid of female driven games because of this (Which I consider unlikely because, despite what you say, not every female driven game is criticized and people can be made happy) then they're spineless cowards and I have no sympathy for them. And maybe Lara Croft wouldn't been criticized if she had had more of a personality than getting her shit kicked in.

So why bother with it? Keep the protagonist a sexy male because nobody can complain about that. It's safe because men can't be discriminated against, over sexualized, or abused.

Yeah, false. There are plenty of indie games out there with female leads, and shock of all shocks, they're not criticized for being sexist. I think you need to stop looking at this from a AAA perspective, considering they embody so much of what is wrong with gaming. This included. Also you need to stop thinking about things from the perspective of sensationalist news. They show a microscopic fraction of what goes on in gaming, and if you focus purely on that, you get a very incomplete image.

This whole twisted morality is sickening.

You base half of this morality that you're criticizing on strawman arguments and the other half on hyperbole. There's nothing to feel sick about.

 

[Trunkage]

These words censorship, sexism and misogyny are like religions. When used appropriately, they are effective and can help us live a better life. Unfortunately, too many idiots use it as an excuse to spread hatred.

 

[MysticSlayer]

How is anyone capable of exerting their will upon any developer? Just how is anyone capable of actually forcing a developer to changing anything about their game? And I'm not talking about a publisher, just a regular individual who may not even play the game anyway.

Easy: You make them choose between their creative vision and feeding their families. We don't even know if it was the artists and programmers that made the decision so much as the business people looking out for profits.

I don't have to physically hold your family hostage. All I have to do is raise a stink and make you think the game won't sell as well as possible (or well at all). To someone whose finances revolve around the game's success, that basically is holding their family hostage.*

Then again, we also don't know if they believed the original vision wasn't appropriate and needed someone to point that out to them.

*Note: I'm not saying we should buy games just to help feed a developer's families. We also have our own time and money to consider. I'm just pointing out that you can "force" a developer by bringing their finances into account. Sure, they don't have to go after the money, but I'm sure most of us know that they will, to some extent, look out for profits.

I can only imagine how the average Blizzard developer feels about comments like this, comments that basically say "Those people a bullying my game developers into changing things against their will. We need to stop them because everybody knows that game developers will cave in to any criticism no matter how stupid it is."

You can imagine, but you have no idea how they feel. Heck, you don't even know if they were the ones that made the decision.

The PR people won't come out and say it was all about money, because that looks bad to both sides. The developers won't come out because they risk getting fired.

Basically, we don't know everything that went on or how anyone at Blizzard genuinely feels about this. We know the narrative that they give us, but I'm sure things are much more complicated. I'm also sure that not everyone at Blizzard agrees on a single decision. It's a company, not a hive mind. They only have to act like a hive mind, not be one.

 

[CritialGaming]

I get heated about this stuff. I am sorry everyone.

Let me try this another way.

The complaint was that the pose did not fit Tracer's character. I will argue that it does. You see Tracer is a clever, bright, fun...spunky girl. I would argue that she strikes the butt pose as a playful way of mocking Widowmaker for doing the exact same thing. It shows that even against an enemy she is willing to be teasing and playful. Really she isn't doing anything out of character there. Of course this is also projecting character upon her, because we really don't know a whole lot about the character as there is no character development in the game. There is personality, but motives, beliefs, hopes, dreams, all the stuff that makes a fully flushed character are absent in Overwatch.

We have but a little history of character origins, but nothing to project upon any of these characters what they would and would not do.

From a game design stand point. Clearly the pose is simply a stock pose that they came up with, as it is applied to every other character in the game. Some still have it, others don't. In reality the butt pose for most characters was placeholder until they put in other poses for given characters.

However given how fucking fantastic Tracer's ass is...I am willing to bet that Blizzard would have left the pose in the full release, if nobody had said anything about it. You don't design asses that nice and not show them off.

Again. Sorry ya'll.

I just hate this removal of trivial shit for little to no reason.

Still not buying Overwatch, because I don't like FPS games, not because of an ass.

 

[Something Amyss]

Because Tracer's pose was criticized for not being in character.

A subject I could see contention with, by the way.

This is another instance where I think we're robbed of a real discussion when people start declaring censorship. A handful of people have made the case that either it does fit her character or that the character of these characters is really minimalist in the first place, or non-existent.

So maybe she does like to show off her ass when she wins. I mean, she really doesn't have much in the way of character as far as I can tell. I would say that this probably comes down to the fact that Blizzard agreed. That this specific character shouldn't be posing for rump shots. According to the people who are making the game and making the decisions, the correct interpretation is that this doesn't fit her character. But would still still argue that point.

That's not what's coming up, though. That's not what got attention. Web hits claim that the game was accused of sexism, or that SJWs are offended, and IIRC, there were claims of boycotts that have never even been hinted at.

If anything, this seems like it would be a good case for the argument of more options.

Don't mind me, I'm just rambling now.

 

[sky14kemea]

snip

Making a thread using a quote from another user when they're not aware is kind of in poor taste, especially when you reply to them in it.

Please try to keep that out of your thread OP's in future. Thanks.