Blizzad reveals new characters for Overwatch

[inmunitas]

*snip*

No, publishers already do think a female protagonists is a risky business venture, that's the real problem.

http://www.pcgamer.com/remember-me-publisher-female-hero/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/01/developer-publishers-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/

I know. I hate that.

It really doesn't connect to this though. I've already explained why in my previous post.

It does in that all this "inclusivity" nonsense (in regards to video game content) being pouted around is just superficial and doesn't solve actual problems. I'd rather the industry be more inclusive, then merely a thin veil of inclusivity.

[small]edit:
I'm not meaning you specifically of course, but the media in general[/small]

 

[SlumlordThanatos]

Wow, how original, A buff Russian who specializes in heavy weaponry and a cowboy.

It's funny, because Zarya looks almost exactly like Vi, a champion in League of Legends.

For comparison, a picture of Vi:

Spoiler

 

[Aeshi]

snip

As opposed to Blizzard, who, for almost the entirety of their existence, has ripped-off pop culture hits? (namely: Lord of the Rings, Alien, and Predator)

If you're going to ***** about something, at least be fair about it. Cripes.

Except they actually made significant alterations to the things they ripped-off for the most part, rather than just changing the colours/slapping a random accessory on (if not just copy-pasting them whole-sale) and calling it original like Valve did.

Do a side-by-side comparison of a Zerg and a Xenomorph and they'll look distinctively different even if they do look similar. Then see if the same can be said for "WCIII Dryad & Enchantress" or "WCIII Water Elemental & Morphling"

 

[Mutant1988]

*snip*

No, publishers already do think a female protagonists is a risky business venture, that's the real problem.

http://www.pcgamer.com/remember-me-publisher-female-hero/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/01/developer-publishers-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/

I know. I hate that.

It really doesn't connect to this though. I've already explained why in my previous post.

It does in that all this "inclusivity" nonsense (in regards to video game content) being pouted around is just superficial and doesn't solve actual problems. I'd rather the industry be more inclusive, then merely a thin veil of inclusivity.

[small]edit:
I'm not meaning you specifically of course, but the media in general[/small]

Whenever a company ever does something for the sake of diversity it is derided as unnecessary pandering.

How about just accepting the fact that you, the one pandered to by default, will not always be pandered to. There are other people too. And no, they might not be as many as "you", but they exist and some developers want their money to.

Solve actual problems? The usual suggestion from people like you is to do nothing at all.

How about - We put a diverse cast in games, get more diverse developers making games and more diverse people buying games? How do we go about this? An attitude change would be a good start.

The instant hostility against any king of catering to minority audiences needs to stop.
The poor treatment of women in workplaces (And in hiring practises) needs to stop.
The insulting tone against non-gamers (Women included) needs to stop.

And no, you can whinge about them catering to the demands of a minority if you want, but fact is - Blizzard want this too. Deal with it.

You think they are disingenuous in saying that they wanted a diverse cast? Well, that's a bold presumption you got there. Got anything to back that up with?

Superficial? Well then, how about we just cut out the male cast entirely then. But then that would be derided as feminist propaganda, wouldn't it? It's a lose/lose situation, isn't it?

 

[inmunitas]

*snip*

No, publishers already do think a female protagonists is a risky business venture, that's the real problem.

http://www.pcgamer.com/remember-me-publisher-female-hero/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/01/developer-publishers-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/

I know. I hate that.

It really doesn't connect to this though. I've already explained why in my previous post.

It does in that all this "inclusivity" nonsense (in regards to video game content) being pouted around is just superficial and doesn't solve actual problems. I'd rather the industry be more inclusive, then merely a thin veil of inclusivity.

[small]edit:
I'm not meaning you specifically of course, but the media in general[/small]

Whenever a company ever does something for the sake of diversity it is derided as unnecessary pandering.

How about just accepting the fact that you, the one pandered to by default, will not always be pandered to. There are other people too. And no, they might not be as many as "you", but they exist and some developers want their money to.

Solve actual problems? The usual suggestion from people like you is to do nothing at all.

How about - We put a diverse cast in games, get more diverse developers making games and more diverse people buying games? How do we go about this? An attitude change would be a good start.

The instant hostility against any king of catering to minority audiences needs to stop.
The poor treatment of women in workplaces (And in hiring practises) needs to stop.
The insulting tone against non-gamers (Women included) needs to stop.

And no, you can whinge about them catering to the demands of a minority if you want, but fact is - Blizzard want this too. Deal with it.

You think they are disingenuous in saying that they wanted a diverse cast? Well, that's a bold presumption you got there. Got anything to back that up with?

Superficial? Well then, how about we just cut out the male cast entirely then. But then that would be derided as feminist propaganda, wouldn't it? It's a lose/lose situation, isn't it?

Companies don't do anything for the "sake of diversity", they do it for profit and public relations. Games already have diverse casts and diverse people buying them, they've always have, some people on an idealogical crusade have just chosen to ignore that little inconvenient fact. Video game characters aren't real people, they don't "represent" any audience, research even shows this. You only push this "narrative" because it makes you feel better about yourself, not because it actually helps anyone.

 

[Mutant1988]

Companies don't do anything for the "sake of diversity", they do it for profit and public relations. Games already have diverse casts and diverse people buying them, they've always have, some people on an idealogical crusade have just chosen to ignore that little inconvenient fact. Video game characters aren't real people, they don't "represent" any audience, research even shows this. You only push this "narrative" because it makes you feel better about yourself, not because it actually helps anyone.

If it doesn't represent any audience then how come the majority of video game protagonists are white males in their late 20 or 30s?

It just ended up that way? Nope, I don't buy that. People make what they know. Because most developers are male white men (There's an issue too - How hostile the industry is against women), most games are about male white men (Or androgynous men or teenagers - Japan is a bit weird). Now, if they want to explore a different point of view or just use a different player model than the one they always use, they're welcome to do so.

The issue here is not that anyone is asking for every game to add token characters. This is about one game doing it, because the developers said they would do it and have now, with express intent, improved on the promised diversity. Why this would be objectionable, I do not know.

So really now, aren't you doing what you accuse "SJWs" of doing? Expressing offence at behalf of your preferred group over something entirely innocuous?

Afraid of the slippery slope? Oh no! What will we do without all those white 30-ish male characters. How will we survive!

 

[inmunitas]

Companies don't do anything for the "sake of diversity", they do it for profit and public relations. Games already have diverse casts and diverse people buying them, they've always have, some people on an idealogical crusade have just chosen to ignore that little inconvenient fact. Video game characters aren't real people, they don't "represent" any audience, research even shows this. You only push this "narrative" because it makes you feel better about yourself, not because it actually helps anyone.

If it doesn't represent any audience then how come the majority of video game protagonists are white males in their late 20 or 30s?

It just ended up that way? Nope, I don't buy that. People make what they know. Because most developers are male white men (There's an issue too - How hostile the industry is against women), most games are about male white men (Or androgynous men or teenagers - Japan is a bit weird). Now, if they want to explore a different point of view or just use a different player model than the one they always use, they're welcome to do so.

The issue here is not that anyone is asking for every game to add token characters. This is about one game doing it, because the developers said they would do it and have now, with express intent, improved on the promised diversity. Why this would be objectionable, I do not know.

So really now, aren't you doing what you accuse "SJWs" of doing? Expressing offence at behalf of your preferred group over something entirely innocuous?

Afraid of the slippery slope? Oh no! What will we do without all those white 30-ish male characters. How will we survive!

The majority of video game protagonists aren't "white males in their late 20 or 30" though, where do you even get that from?

Most developers in North America are "evil cis pigmen", the important context you seem to be missing. Being a racial minority in North America is pretty much synonymous with being poor. Due to North America being inherently right-wing, they don't have access to a good standard of education or basic healthcare, they don't have the luxury of even campaigning for "diversity" in a video game that requires expensive luxury hardware in order to play.

 

[Erttheking]

*snip*

No, publishers already do think a female protagonists is a risky business venture, that's the real problem.

http://www.pcgamer.com/remember-me-publisher-female-hero/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/01/developer-publishers-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/

I know. I hate that.

It really doesn't connect to this though. I've already explained why in my previous post.

It does in that all this "inclusivity" nonsense (in regards to video game content) being pouted around is just superficial and doesn't solve actual problems. I'd rather the industry be more inclusive, then merely a thin veil of inclusivity.

[small]edit:
I'm not meaning you specifically of course, but the media in general[/small]

And Zayra isn't the devs taking steps to be more inclusive...how? Superficial? Do you know how many devs have actually created female characters with a large body type in recent years? I can't think of many. So as far as I'm concerned this is a step in the right direction. Saying you want to do something then actually doing it isn't being superficial.

 

[Mutant1988]

Companies don't do anything for the "sake of diversity", they do it for profit and public relations. Games already have diverse casts and diverse people buying them, they've always have, some people on an idealogical crusade have just chosen to ignore that little inconvenient fact. Video game characters aren't real people, they don't "represent" any audience, research even shows this. You only push this "narrative" because it makes you feel better about yourself, not because it actually helps anyone.

If it doesn't represent any audience then how come the majority of video game protagonists are white males in their late 20 or 30s?

It just ended up that way? Nope, I don't buy that. People make what they know. Because most developers are male white men (There's an issue too - How hostile the industry is against women), most games are about male white men (Or androgynous men or teenagers - Japan is a bit weird). Now, if they want to explore a different point of view or just use a different player model than the one they always use, they're welcome to do so.

The issue here is not that anyone is asking for every game to add token characters. This is about one game doing it, because the developers said they would do it and have now, with express intent, improved on the promised diversity. Why this would be objectionable, I do not know.

So really now, aren't you doing what you accuse "SJWs" of doing? Expressing offence at behalf of your preferred group over something entirely innocuous?

Afraid of the slippery slope? Oh no! What will we do without all those white 30-ish male characters. How will we survive!

The majority of video game protagonists aren't "white males in their late 20 or 30" though, where do you even get that from?

Most developers in North America are "evil cis pigmen", the important context you seem to be missing. Being a racial minority in North America is pretty much synonymous with being poor. Due to North America being inherently right-wing, they don't have access to a good standard of education or basic healthcare, they don't have the luxury of even campaigning for "diversity" in a video game that requires expensive luxury hardware in order to play.

Here's the thing though - If video games are completely inconsequential to the pursuit of equality, why is it such a problem that there's more variety in characters?

You think people will just forget about all the other issues because they got a video game character to represent themselves? That's inane.

Diversity in video games furthers nothing but diversity in video games, and that's plenty enough and should not be this big of an issue.

As for the 20-30s white male thing, I think that might have changed since 2013.

 

[inmunitas]

Here's the thing though - If video games are completely inconsequential to the pursuit of equality, why is it such a problem that there's more variety in characters?

You think people will just forget about all the other issues because they got a video game character to represent themselves? That's inane.

Diversity in video games furthers nothing but diversity in video games, and that's plenty enough and should not be this big of an issue.

As for the 20-30s white male thing, I think that might have changed since 2013.

Nobody has a problem with variety in character design. What people have a problem with is the authoritarian approach that's being used in the media, the click-bait articles being written and their race-baiting headlines, it's just vile and putrid.

And Zayra isn't the devs taking steps to be more inclusive...how? Superficial? Do you know how many devs have actually created female characters with a large body type in recent years? I can't think of many. So as far as I'm concerned this is a step in the right direction. Saying you want to do something then actually doing it isn't being superficial.

"Do you know how many devs have actually created female characters with a large body type in recent years?"
Same number of devs that have actually created decent games that actually perform well and are actually fun to play more than once, so the same as it's always been basically. (Not many)

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

If you're going to reply to me, actually reply to my post and don't go off on an unrelated tangent please.

 

[Ishal]

I dunno. Guess I'm a little turned off by Zarya, but that's sort of the intent. She's in response to the criticism they got for body designs.

I'm not a fan of the heavy in TF2, so I'm not a fan of this. Plus the pink hair isn't really doing it for me.

Even though this isn't a MOBA, I still feel some of distinct MOBA vibes coming off it. The character models and the quirky, cartoony, happy-go-lucky attitude some have. I wouldn't be surprised if this game adds lots more characters down the line, just like MOBAS. I follow cosplay accounts on Twitter and it boggles my mind how many different League of Legends characters are cosplayed. It's gotten to the point where if I don't recognize the character, I've got a 50/50 shot it's from LoL.

So, I'm not really surprised by this. And I expect more down the line.

 

[kris40k]

I dunno. Guess I'm a little turned off by Zarya, but that's sort of the intent. She's in response to the criticism they got for body designs.

I'm not a fan of the heavy in TF2, so I'm not a fan of this. Plus the pink hair isn't really doing it for me.

Even though this isn't a MOBA, I still feel some of distinct MOBA vibes coming off it. The character models and the quirky, cartoony, happy-go-lucky attitude some have. I wouldn't be surprised if this game adds lots more characters down the line, just like MOBAS. I follow cosplay accounts on Twitter and it boggles my mind how many different League of Legends characters are cosplayed. It's gotten to the point where if I don't recognize the character, I've got a 50/50 shot it's from LoL.

So, I'm not really surprised by this. And I expect more down the line.

Well, my understanding of the rumors that have been surrounding the production is that Overwatch is what came out of the cancelled project codenamed Titan, basically dumped the MMO portion and kept the competative team-based shooter portion. Being that the setting appears to be a sci-fi/superhero type, and the success of F2P MOBA games with character and skin sales, I would not be surprised at all if Blizzard continues to grow the character line up long after release.

 

[Dragonbums]

Even though I don't see myself playing this game (if it's a sub model) I can definitely see myself getting involved with the characters. They got a lot of life in them. Also something tells me that Zarya's gravity pull is going to be nerfed in like 2 months.

 

[Phasmal]

it's great to see some body diversity for a female character

When has there not been? Nothing has changed.

In Overwatch? Many of the female body types are similar, compared to the wide diversity of male body types.
For instance:

Spoiler

So, yes, something has changed. And that's good.

Nothing to get upset about.

Not sure what the big deal is here. Outside of some random fat guy that hasn't been annonced and the dwarf all the guys have a similar body type too. The rest are either robots (fully covering power armor in the German dude's case) or animals.

There is no big deal. It's just more variety, which is nice.

Let me put it this way, if you cared about body diversity, you gained something.
If you didn't, you lost nothing.

Either way, it's a cool new character.

 

[Vigormortis]

Except they actually made significant alterations to the things they ripped-off for the most part, rather than just changing the colours/slapping a random accessory on (if not just copy-pasting them whole-sale) and calling it original like Valve did.

Do a side-by-side comparison of a Zerg and a Xenomorph and they'll look distinctively different even if they do look similar. Then see if the same can be said for "WCIII Dryad & Enchantress" or "WCIII Water Elemental & Morphling"

Uh huh. Because the Protoss don't look exactly like a Predator - right down to the dreadlocks and armor designs.

Spoiler

And the Terran certainly aren't blatant copies of just about everything from the space marines and the techno-industrial look from Aliens.

I'm not even going to get into how many things Warcraft rips, in whole, from Lord of the Rings.

I'm sorry, but you're being incredibly hypocritical about this. It's fine to criticize Valve for the character designs, I may even agree on a few of them, but to pretend Blizzard isn't just as egregious is just patently absurd.

 

[crypticracer]

Except they actually made significant alterations to the things they ripped-off for the most part, rather than just changing the colours/slapping a random accessory on (if not just copy-pasting them whole-sale) and calling it original like Valve did.

Do a side-by-side comparison of a Zerg and a Xenomorph and they'll look distinctively different even if they do look similar. Then see if the same can be said for "WCIII Dryad & Enchantress" or "WCIII Water Elemental & Morphling"

Uh huh. Because the Protoss don't look exactly like a Predator - right down to the dreadlocks and armor designs.

Spoiler

And the Terran certainly aren't blatant copies of just about everything from the space marines and the techno-industrial look from Aliens.

I'm not even going to get into how many things Warcraft rips, in whole, from Lord of the Rings.

I'm sorry, but you're being incredibly hypocritical about this. It's fine to criticize Valve for the character designs, I may even agree on a few of them, but to pretend Blizzard isn't just as egregious is just patently absurd.

Blizzard ripped off the Warhammer franchises far closer. I hate defending Games Workshop, but it's so obvious if your familiar with them.

tangent: ofcourse GW did rip off tolkien and aliens. With tolkien they decided to make it grimdark, and with aliens they decided to make it super duper absurd. I love Space Hulk but yeah, it's basically aliens the game, without any of the interesting characters.

 

[Aeshi]

Uh huh. Because the Protoss don't look exactly like a Predator - right down to the dreadlocks and armor designs.

Spoiler

And the Terran certainly aren't blatant copies of just about everything from the space marines and the techno-industrial look from Aliens.

See, the difference there is you had to go out of your way to bring up the couple things that make the Protoss similar to the Predator, whereas I had to go out of my way to bring up the couple of things that make DOTA2 models different to WCIII ones.

The Protoss may share the fondness for Wristblades and the Dreadlocks with the Predator[footnote]I'd say the armour design styles are distinct though. The Protoss's is more sleek (like a Beetle), whereas the Predator's is more segmented (like a Woodlouse)[/footnote], but that's basically all they have in common. The body structure is far different (particularly in the face & leg areas), and that's not even getting into the Technological & Cultural differences.

The Protoss is one or two tweaks away from being something that's, if not original (I doubt such a thing is truly possible any more) then something vague enough that you can't trace it to any one work. Whereas, say, Enchantress is one or two tweaks away from being a copy-paste of a Warcraft model.

The Marine example holds even less water. The only thing they have in common with the Marines from Aliens is that they're soldiers in space, the Marines from Aliens didn't have Powered Armour or Combat Mecha (the Power Loader was a civilian thing) for starters, and neither "soldiers in space" nor artstyles are really something you can copyright, and I'm pretty sure Aliens didn't invent the second one (though I could be wrong.)

 

[inmunitas]

Blizzard ripped off the Warhammer franchises far closer. I hate defending Games Workshop, but it's so obvious if your familiar with them.

tangent: ofcourse GW did rip off tolkien and aliens. With tolkien they decided to make it grimdark, and with aliens they decided to make it super duper absurd. I love Space Hulk but yeah, it's basically aliens the game, without any of the interesting characters.

Weren't WarCraft and StarCraft originally going to be Warhammer games until Games Workshop revoked their licence from Blizzard, then Blizzard just adapted what they had into something? Or is that just a myth?

 

[Ishal]

Well, my understanding of the rumors that have been surrounding the production is that Overwatch is what came out of the cancelled project codenamed Titan, basically dumped the MMO portion and kept the competative team-based shooter portion. Being that the setting appears to be a sci-fi/superhero type, and the success of F2P MOBA games with character and skin sales, I would not be surprised at all if Blizzard continues to grow the character line up long after release.

Yeah, that's true.

And to be honest that's kinda why I'm finding all this celebration, or to be a tad bit more accurate, sarcastic mocking of those who would disagree with the initial criticisms, a bit premature... and a lot silly.

Oh sure, they listened to fans and revealed a more diverse character. Great. Not my thing, but like I said, that's the idea. I just doubt that Blizzard went to the drawing board and whipped up this character right away. More likely they already had her, or something similar, and touched it up a bit with some minor changes.

Like, if this is going to be a FTP model like I suspect, then it stands to reason they'll do exactly as you say and grow the character line with patches, or character sets in a cash shop. Basically, it's cool Zarya is around now, but I feel like we would have seen her down the line anyway. And I expect to see more like her, criticism or no. Just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.