Blizzard Caves In To Pressure Over Overwatch Butt Pose

Seelenlos said:
If something doesn't fit a character it should be changed. The argument people were making isn't that they are against such poses but they are against it if it doesn't fit the image of the character. The OP in that thread even said as much when he mentioned another female character from that game. Mountain out of a molehill.
Click to expand...

It's fucking bewildering that so many people are literally asshurt and up in arms over something that isn't real in the first place. We've been profiting off of the sexualization of both men AND women spanning mediums other than videogames FOREVER. If you don't like it, don't fucking buy it.
 
tempertantrum said:
This is the kind of crass responses I've come to expect of a bunch of white males... at least a few of you are smart and subtle enough to see the irony of having unrealistic figures and then only complaining about the one pose. Some people in here seriously need to get out more and learn that things that are not a problem for you pose major problems for others, on a societal and systematic scale. Full disclosure, I am mixed race male, and a... gasp... feminist, which in no way means I have to be less of a man. Also it's important to keep in mind that when I see this, I also have to read into the portrayal of people of color in the media (including video games), which without SJWs would only be butlers and help. This kind of thing has a major impact on young people forming personal identities - show some compassion and get some awareness!
Click to expand...
It's not about the one pose. It's that apparently content creators are willing to change their artistic vision on the whims of a single outraged person. Self-censorship is a slippery slope on the road of cultural Marxism.
cageymaru said:
I didn't really have an issue with Blizzard and the original image. I thought it didn't cross the line. But I do have a problem with offensive material being ramrodded against any group because another group says that it's cool. That's asinine and the reason that companies are trying to clean up their image. The truth is that other groups besides single White males play games. They buy XBOX One, PS4, Nintendo, high end phones, and gaming PCs. A lot of companies want to an equal opportunity to collect revenue from all of those groups. You can't piss someone off and then tell them to buy your product. It just doesn't work that way.

Now as far as a work of art; I think the image was fine. Maybe these companies should consider having alternative victory pose unlocks? Sell it as DLC if the single White male demographic is offended by less T&A in games.
Click to expand...
Again, that would be fine if the majority of people were making complaints about the content were people who were interested and going to buy the game anyway. The problem is in these situations you always have a large silent majority (those who are happy and have nothing to complain about) and the loud minority (those who find anything and everything wrong and vocalize their issues). Unfortunately the latter drown out everyone else, which is what happened here. Before a company invests money into a project they are going to come up with a target audience and do market research on that demographic. The perpetually offended was obviously not in that demo.
Modred189 said:
Which is an argument that doesn't make any sense. Tracer has skin-tight, butt-cheat emphasizing tights on. Why is a shot emphasizing her butt somehow out of character?!
Click to expand...
The argument was that the backstory of Tracer could imply that she has the mind of a 12 year-old, and it's out of character for a 12 year-old to be making "sexually suggestive" poses like that. That was the last area the goalposts were moved to when I checked. Before that it was argued that such a pose is "presenting," even though the male players didn't see it that way and the "mother" who made the complaint had to femsplain it to them.
 
Last edited:
bds1904 said:
Lol, an apology for an animated booty, that's great. The game will be rated teen, and well, teens like booty. Boys and Girls alike.

For anyone that complains about the "objectification of woman" read here:
  1. Woman objectify themselves everyday. It's natural. Making ones self "look good" with makeup, cloths, etc. does one thing: Attract or keep a mate by showing them you are superior to others. Congratulations, you just put yourself on a pedestal and said "look at me, not her"
  2. Woman objectify men. Ever walk into a "trendy" clothing store that has both men's and woman's cloths? The pictures of the men generally don't have shirts, they are oiled up and they are ripped. We all know that a picture of a hot man does not attract men into the store. At least most men anyways. The same stands for advertising in general.
  3. Woman are scared to admit they objectify themselves or objectify men because they are naturally submissive. Stating you do something direct to get a direct result is an "alpha trait". Woman are naturally submissive because it lends to child rearing better. Flight is almost always a better option that fight.
Don't get me wrong, i'm all for woman's (and men's) rights but geeze, you see more scantily clad woman every day that that pic.
Click to expand...

1. Internalized mysogyny.
2. We exist in a patriarchy, it's only fair.
3.Lies LIES LIESS!!!!

Now, bathe in fetid mung and smegma! You cis white male bigoted SCUM!

Yea... This is the reaction you should expect.
 
Could of been worse, they could have done a big ole Kim K butt on her. :whistle:
 
i can only relate to video game characters who have enough backne as to remind me that i need to get the metal ruler out for the daily scraping

now if you'll excuse me, the crane is here to hoist me out of bed.

something something it's not a crime to have a greasy mouth and wear jorts something something genetic privilege.
 
Armenius said:
The argument was that the backstory of Tracer could imply that she has the mind of a 12 year-old, and it's out of character for a 12 year-old to be making "sexually suggestive" poses like that. That was the last area the goalposts were moved to when I checked. Before that it was argued that such a pose is "presenting," even though the male players didn't see it that way and the "mother" who made the complaint had to femsplain it to them.
Click to expand...
WTHF is "presenting?" That seems like another word for... posing. Which is what was happening. I am so damn confused... Do you have a link?
I went through page ~28 and couldn't find a reference.
 
Modred189 said:
WTHF is "presenting?" That seems like another word for... posing. Which is what was happening. I am so damn confused... Do you have a link?
I went through page ~28 and couldn't find a reference.
Click to expand...
I did a google search, and I still can't find it. Is this even a real term?
 
Admiral Equinox said:
It's fucking bewildering that so many people are literally asshurt and up in arms over something that isn't real in the first place. We've been profiting off of the sexualization of both men AND women spanning mediums other than videogames FOREVER. If you don't like it, don't fucking buy it.
Click to expand...

heh, "asshurt" heh heh. you said "ass".
 
Modred189 said:
WTHF is "presenting?" That seems like another word for... posing. Which is what was happening. I am so damn confused... Do you have a link?
I went through page ~28 and couldn't find a reference.
Click to expand...
I'll have to look for it after work. I'd provide a link to explain "presenting," but that would definitely be NSFW. In the context of humans, though, it's bending over and arching your back, "presenting" yourself as ready to propagate the species if you get my drift. Which Tracer is not doing in the offending pose.
 
Hey Blizzard how about standing up for freedom of expression, instead of bowing to these bored losers?
 
Armenius said:
I'll have to look for it after work. I'd provide a link to explain "presenting," but that would definitely be NSFW. In the context of humans, though, it's bending over and arching your back, "presenting" yourself as ready to propagate the species if you get my drift. Which Tracer is not doing in the offending pose.
Click to expand...
OH.
Then I know presenting very well. I have a MS in Evolutionary Biology, and had to study that in several species. Got it.

And no. That is NOT presenting.

See the thumbnail for the link to Anaconda on the previous page for an example of "presenting."
 
Modred189 said:
OH.
Then I know presenting very well. I have a MS in Evolutionary Biology, and had to study that in several species. Got it.

And no. That is NOT presenting.

See the thumbnail for the link to Anaconda on the previous page for an example of "presenting."
Click to expand...
I was thinking of saying it in the context of the animal kingdom, initially.

I must be psychic :ROFLMAO:.
 
Modred189 said:
OH.
Then I know presenting very well. I have a MS in Evolutionary Biology, and had to study that in several species. Got it.

And no. That is NOT presenting.

See the thumbnail for the link to Anaconda on the previous page for an example of "presenting."
Click to expand...
Presenting is basically what he said... presenting your "special" place to others... like bending over, or spread eagle or virtually anything ... and since it's virtually anything like that, it is only presenting if you see it as presenting, if you don't... then maybe you weren't looking hard enough.
 
pothb said:
Presenting is basically what he said... presenting your "special" place to others... like bending over, or spread eagle or virtually anything ... and since it's virtually anything like that, it is only presenting if you see it as presenting, if you don't... then maybe you weren't looking hard enough.
Click to expand...
What? No Wayne tech enterprise cape covering it up?
 
Its sad how desperate people are to try to self-aggrandize themselves for righting some trivial or non-existent wrong.
 
tempertantrum said:
This is the kind of crass responses I've come to expect of a bunch of white males... at least a few of you are smart and subtle enough to see the irony of having unrealistic figures and then only complaining about the one pose. Some people in here seriously need to get out more and learn that things that are not a problem for you pose major problems for others, on a societal and systematic scale. Full disclosure, I am mixed race male, and a... gasp... feminist, which in no way means I have to be less of a man. Also it's important to keep in mind that when I see this, I also have to read into the portrayal of people of color in the media (including video games), which without SJWs would only be butlers and help. This kind of thing has a major impact on young people forming personal identities - show some compassion and get some awareness!
Click to expand...

A modern "feminist" just forced Blizzard to repress a woman's depicted sexuality. How does that empower women? It doesn't. It sends a very clear message that expressing sexuality for women is wrong. That's the opposite of empowering and it is very controlling. That is the only real irony here.

Women are extremely sexually competitive. Women publicly raging mad over depictions of large bewbs or butts only serves to stifle the competition, not support some BS moral code. But what would I know? I'm just a crass white guy.
 
Rule 34, it doesn't matter what Blizzard does. Cause no matter how offended you are over that photo, someone has something worse online.

hqdefault.jpg
 
bds1904 said:
Lol, an apology for an animated booty, that's great. The game will be rated teen, and well, teens like booty. Boys and Girls alike.

For anyone that complains about the "objectification of woman" read here:
  1. Woman objectify themselves everyday. It's natural. Making ones self "look good" with makeup, cloths, etc. does one thing: Attract or keep a mate by showing them you are superior to others. Congratulations, you just put yourself on a pedestal and said "look at me, not her"
  2. Woman objectify men. Ever walk into a "trendy" clothing store that has both men's and woman's cloths? The pictures of the men generally don't have shirts, they are oiled up and they are ripped. We all know that a picture of a hot man does not attract men into the store. At least most men anyways. The same stands for advertising in general.
  3. Woman are scared to admit they objectify themselves or objectify men because they are naturally submissive. Stating you do something direct to get a direct result is an "alpha trait". Woman are naturally submissive because it lends to child rearing better. Flight is almost always a better option that fight.
Don't get me wrong, i'm all for woman's (and men's) rights but geeze, you see more scantily clad woman every day that that pic.
Click to expand...
You'd think they'd be ecstatic she's not wearing a battle thong, but nooo, they HAVE to find something to be offended about or their lives have no meaning. I wonder if they'd be as offended if it were a 400 lb butch dyke character in that pose...I know I would! (but for a whole different reason). And when do they ever whine about in game "beefcake"?
 
VIC-20 said:
A modern "feminist" just forced Blizzard to repress a woman's depicted sexuality. How does that empower women? It doesn't. It sends a very clear message that expressing sexuality for women is wrong. That's the opposite of empowering and it is very controlling. That is the only real irony here.
Click to expand...

Forced? What post did you read? The blue post made it sound like they were already on the fence about this before anyone commented.
 
Rumor has it this was just going to be a simple "We're swapping the art out because we have a different pose we like better for this character" deal.

If it had just been that, this thread would have five comments and 4 of them would be "Aww but I liked the other pose!"

But somebody foolishly injected politics into it. And now it's a shit storm.
 
Sovereign said:
Rumor has it this was just going to be a simple "We're swapping the art out because we have a different pose we like better for this character" deal.

If it had just been that, this thread would have five comments and 4 of them would be "Aww but I liked the other pose!"

But somebody foolishly injected politics into it. And now it's a shit storm.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but that's not how the issue was raised. It was raised in the context of crazy professional butt-hurt posters. IF they had responded with, "you know, folks, we had plans on switching this pose anyway because of some internal artistic consistency issues, so don't worry too much about it," then yea. But to come off ans pout on about inclusiveness and empowerment was... ill advised.
 
Seelenlos said:
Forced? What post did you read? The blue post made it sound like they were already on the fence about this before anyone commented.
Click to expand...

Read the very first comment in the thread. A lady claimed that the pose didn't fit with the character, reduces the character to a sex symbol, goes against making strong female characters and mentioned her daughter knows who the character is. Shitstorm ensues. Blizzard reacts many comments later. Shuts thread, announces some nice political BS decision which happens to side with the lady, reopens thread. Okay, maybe not lawsuit or threat forced, but I still think forced is a fair word.
 
Seelenlos said:
Forced? What post did you read? The blue post made it sound like they were already on the fence about this before anyone commented.
Click to expand...

This reply in the thread sums it up pretty well:

"Complete damage control. You did cave, then you locked the thread and ignored the issue for hours while you came up with this PR manifested reply."
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Where were these people when Miley Cyrus was licking hammers? Why is it that when a game developer turns the knob up to 2 they hear from the outrage machine, but when a pop starlet turns the knob up to 11 she is just being "empowered" and it is perfectly fine?
Click to expand...

Not sure where you were but there was a ton of outrage / shock surrounding Miley's "transformation".
 
Yakk said:
Replace everything by squares, big giant pixel squares. Was anybody offended by Atari 2600 games?

Unless of coarse you are offended by squares & thier color.
Click to expand...
On the atari they once had general custard bang a native american woman for beating the game. Maybe people felt his prize was rape.
 
MavericK said:
Not sure where you were but there was a ton of outrage / shock surrounding Miley's "transformation".
Click to expand...


Well, yeah, but mostly by the Fox News types. I'm wondering where the SJW's who are always attacking video games were.
 
again political correctness be damned. its a video game, its not real, wimmins just wanna nyahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh blah blah bullshit. Im over it.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Careful with using all caps... Might offend someone. :D
Click to expand...

TBH at this stage the best way to not offend someone is probably do absolutely nothing. Say nothing, write nothing, create nothing, let the cultural world stagnate completely because there is bound to be someone offended...

Sometimes I do wonder if some people say they are offended are actually offended, or just saying that to get their point across...
 
Steve said:
Are we really at a point where......
Click to expand...

Steve, let me tell you. It's so bad that even the gays are discriminating against the gays for not knowing what it's like to be gay. The millennials are so fucked. And they are doing to themselves.

The fact that society is moving towards gay acceptance so long as its packaged as a white-stream issue is a form of privilege. Of white privilege. Of white gay male privilege.

Before all you white apologists, well-intentioned liberals, Bernie Standers, and snowchasers flood my mentions with some bullshit, lemme explain.

Privilege refers to the unearned benefits and advantages that come by way of appearance. White and white-appearing folk carry privilege in this white supremacist social paradigm we live in. Intersectionality complicates that white privilege, in that other systems of oppression (heteronormativity, patriarchy, ableism, classism, etc.) may limit one’s access to the privilege they’re both with.

It’s like a bank account and white supremacy is the bank; if you’re a white cisgender straight man, you’re born with $100 in your account. But, if you’re a gay white cisgender man, you’re born with $80.
Click to expand...
 
I always say this: I have NO issue with tons of sexuality in games. I love it. Objectification is FINE, some people (notice I said 'people' and not 'women') even desire it for themselves! but its got to be equally dished out...

If you have THIS in your game:
jpg


Then you also need THIS:
a02968ee38a0dc0ed8f6ee79f9cd076e.jpg


Unreal Tournament did this really well.

250px-Unrealtournament222retrofront.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top