Blizzard On Representation In Games: “We Build Games For Everybody”

Would this game sell more if it had sexy bimbo bikini armor? I don't think so.
Will it sell less without sexy bimbo bikini armor? I think so.

WoW is generally regarded as having had the most diverse player demographic of any online game, and it certainly didn't suffer for that. Hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of women played and paid for WoW.

Why piss off such a large and growing paying demographic they already have in the fold, just to look even more like every other online shooter in the market? That would be insane.
 
I do not want to see video games having to include all types of people in real life, video games are not meant to be a representation of real life.

Hell how often do you see an ugly obese chick being the main protagonist in movies or TV shows? Hollywood movies are way more superficial than video games. I don't understand why these people can't go bother Hollywood and leave video games alone.
 
speaking in regards to games for everybody in terms of graphics based on hardware requirements, why is it a game like dragon age inquisition can scale up from low to high graphics settings for people depending on the gear they have ?

so sure audience suitability ratings may be more wide ranging, but i find their graphics policy rather abysmal. just disappoints that they won't allow people with high end gaming rigs to get much mileage from hardware spec scaling. well not as much as other titles allow e.g. my DAI example.
 
Ducman69 said:
1) Most women DO NOT WANT TO LOOK LIKE BULLDYKES! Ever worked in a motorcycle gear department? Whats the number one priority for virtually EVERY female? Back armor? Ventilation? Reflective material? Pockets? Durability of the material?

Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. Do I look SEXY in it? Every. Single. Time.

If you give them a jacket that they think looks too masculine because it has shoulder and elbow armor that makes their arms look masculine or doesn't hug the waist and accentuate the hips, they take it off immediately.

Most of the top sellers don't come down far enough, they don't have sleeves long enough, and they don't have any armor whatsoever, and the neck is often a deep V with a zipper so it will open itself on impact. So this idea from loudmouth feminists that the armor isn't realistic? Its what most women would want to wear, sacrificing safety for sex appeal.

Secondly, how many of these feminists complain that the women are UNREALISTICALLY STRONG? On average women run slower than men, have less endurance than men, have drastically reduced upper body strength, and much higher body fat to muscle ratios, while weighing often near half as much at a healthy weight. Why don't we let feather-weight male boxers fight heavy-weight male boxers? Because the fight would be over in half a second, its not fair.

So if you really want to depict women in games more accurate, make sure that they run slow as crap, get tired quickly, and limit them to lighter armor and weaponry, making it hugely unfair for them to engage in combat.

Cmon feminists! Where's the push for realism! And if we're using a medieval setting, the woman should be at home with a child on her breast, two little ones running around, while she sweats in the kitchen making food while the male warriors go on quests.
Click to expand...

Translation: Waaaaah, I'm a motorcycle person and women don't conform to my idea of how the should think and act so they're wrong! >.<
 
Is this why I am finding games bland these days? More effort in catering to people's special needs than making good games?

Humans suck. Skynet can't happen fast enough.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Translation: Waaaaah, I'm a motorcycle person and women don't conform to my idea of how the should think and act so they're wrong! >.<
Click to expand...
Mmmmhmm. Think of another modern day analogy to "armor" that is better than my example, which is quite literally motorcycle armor designed for protection.

Women themselves choose "skimpy armor" nine times out of ten, for the sake of sex appeal. So the idea that sexy armor puts off female gamers at large is nonsense, since people generally want to play an idealized fantasy version of themselves. So most normal females don't mind, the guys sure as heck don't mind looking at something attractive, so there is no victim, except one created by loud mouthed feminists that make up a tiny minority (but majority in journalism) that needs to STFU.

Especially since as stated they worry about "realism" very selectively, the same as the feminists that are very selective about the "equality" they demand. If they really want to be treated equally, remind them of that the next time a woman hits a man as giving him carte blanche to punch her back in the face. After all, if a guy punches a guy, its fair to punch back. If the guy is smaller, he should have thought of that before hand. ;)
 
Ducman69 said:
Mmmmhmm. Think of another modern day analogy to "armor" that is better than my example, which is quite literally motorcycle armor designed for protection.

Women themselves choose "skimpy armor" nine times out of ten, for the sake of sex appeal. So the idea that sexy armor puts off female gamers at large is nonsense, since people generally want to play an idealized fantasy version of themselves. So most normal females don't mind, the guys sure as heck don't mind looking at something attractive, so there is no victim, except one created by loud mouthed feminists that make up a tiny minority (but majority in journalism) that needs to STFU.

Especially since as stated they worry about "realism" very selectively, the same as the feminists that are very selective about the "equality" they demand. If they really want to be treated equally, remind them of that the next time a woman hits a man as giving him carte blanche to punch her back in the face. After all, if a guy punches a guy, its fair to punch back. If the guy is smaller, he should have thought of that before hand. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can blame women for this since Blizzard is male-operated and they're the ones making equality decisions. Also, face punching has not anything at all to do with clothing style in video games.
 
They are responding to the very vocal feminazis that we empower in our media in recent years. You don't look at the guy with the mop and blame him for wiping piss off the floor, you blame the person pissing all over the place. Put the blame where it belongs.
 
Ducman69 said:
They are responding to the very vocal feminazis that we empower in our media in recent years. You don't look at the guy with the mop and blame him for wiping piss off the floor, you blame the person pissing all over the place. Put the blame where it belongs.
Click to expand...

It it were urine, I'd agree with you. There are some extremist feminists out there who take things too far just like there are extremist Republicans or extremist nutters in every other thing humans do. However, moderate middle of the road sorts generally ignore them rather than getting upset about their stupidity as extremists generally only garner the attention of their polar opposite and equally nutty opposition.

However, since the mainstream is waking up and changing things, I'd say that the viewpoints you're opposed to are likely less extreme or insane than you think. I see a lot of things that feminists have been doing over the years as very good things. Women can own property, vote in elections, work at paying jobs, and live independently of men. They can even go full lesbo if they want (with is sort of strange to me, but hey, whatever). Some of this stuff is trivial, like video games, and not worth worrying much about, but if we must discuss the trivial stuff, I'd think that it's reasonable to say that if mainstream society wants to do something, then the people disagreeing with what's culturally accepted are crazy-cakes (yes, that applies to everyone who advocated change including the people that protested in the past and people trying to change things now). All of them are labled crazy at some point, but sooner or later, forces greater than a single Ducman change the direction of the world at large and people on all the various sides of the crazy-because-you're-not-mainstream fence have to just deal with it.

Soo...the best advice I can give you is...

CupiM.gif
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I see a lot of things that feminists have been doing over the years as very good things. Women can own property, vote in elections, work at paying jobs, and live independently of men.
Click to expand...
Did you just wake up from a cryotube or something? That's not what feminists in the last decade have been fighting for. And those women, who are now long since dead, weren't feminists either, they were mostly egalitarians. The feminists of today have nothing to bitch about (with retards like Hillary saying that women are the true victims of war since their fathers, husbands, and sons die... nice logic), so they start inventing things to be offended about to continue the tradition of victim culture that modern liberals espouse... the latest just happens to be attacking the "video game patriarchy".
 
you realize there are many vets on this board? and it's veteran's day?

and you want to try and say some bullshit about veteran's moms, wives, and daughters?
you really don't understand how to make a good argument, do you LOL
 
Ducman69 said:
Did you just wake up from a cryotube or something? That's not what feminists in the last decade have been fighting for. And those women, who are now long since dead, weren't feminists either, they were mostly egalitarians. The feminists of today have nothing to bitch about (with retards like Hillary saying that women are the true victims of war since their fathers, husbands, and sons die... nice logic), so they start inventing things to be offended about to continue the tradition of victim culture that modern liberals espouse... the latest just happens to be attacking the "video game patriarchy".
Click to expand...

The overreaction to feminism is, in pretty much every way, shape, and form, much more extreme than feminism itself. The irony is lost on the perpetrators but not on the observers.
 
jimmyb said:
You are totally out of touch with what the majority of contemporary feminists are.
Click to expand...
Two words: "bored bitches"

And why should anyone be a "feminist"? Is it OK for a modern man to be a "masculanist" and promote male equality where women are given preferential treatment? If its about equality, you can't be either, you'd be a humanist or egalitarian not focused on a gender specific promotion agenda.

I need masculanism, because hyper-muscular supermen set unrealistic unattainable goals causing body image issues.

I need masculanism, because I should not automatically ahve to pay for a dinner because of my gender.

I need masculanism, because I should be treated equally to a woman who slaps a man, when I hit a woman.

I need masculanism, because I refused to be accused of rape because she decided later that she shouldn't have slept with me.

I need masculanism, because I shouldn't be labeled a sex offender for public nudity while a woman flashing her breasts in protest or celebration is applauded

I need masculanism, because men and women should both be registered for the draft

I need masculanism, because men and women should be held to a single consistent standard for all jobs that require physical fitness tests

I need masculanism, because a man shouldn't be labeled a "deadbeat" for quiting his job and staying at home while a woman is a "homemaker"

I need masculanism, because a woman shouldn't get default custody of her children, even when she has much lower income to serve as a provider

Victim mentality, am I doing it right? :D
 
mope54 said:
you realize there are many vets on this board? and it's veteran's day? and you want to try and say some bullshit about veteran's moms, wives, and daughters
Click to expand...
That is a quote from Hillary, and if you can't understand how stupid that sounds, that women are more affected by war because MEN die? Think about that. Actually fighting along side people dying or yourself dying has a fairly DIRECT effect. To say that women are the true victims of that is so batshit retarded, it shouldn't have to be explained. But in classic feminist fashion, try to paint somone pointing out the stupidity of feminists as being the "bad" one. Its like if you farted in the room, and then get mad when someone points out it stinks and tells you to stop that.
 
Ducman69 said:
Two words: "bored bitches"
Click to expand...
The irony is that you calling them that, among other things such as nazis and lesbians, is in large part why people still identify as feminists.

Your characterization of people who identify as feminists is so incredibly inaccurate, but it sets up a nice imaginary position for you to pretend that you're a victim of something terrible.

Ducman69 said:
Victim mentality, am I doing it right?
Click to expand...
Yes you are.
 
Blizzards announces more mature character design --> ducman feels victimized and whines about it online
 
Ducman69 said:
That is a quote from Hillary, and if you can't understand how stupid that sounds, that women are more affected by war because MEN die? Think about that. Actually fighting along side people dying or yourself dying has a fairly DIRECT effect. To say that women are the true victims of that is so batshit retarded, it shouldn't have to be explained. But in classic feminist fashion, try to paint somone pointing out the stupidity of feminists as being the "bad" one. Its like if you farted in the room, and then get mad when someone points out it stinks and tells you to stop that.
Click to expand...
you're welcome to go test out your theory...there's a lot of veterans around today so you shouldn't have any trouble walking up to one and explaining how the women back home do bear the cost of the wars they fought in...see what happens and let us know how it went right after you check yourself out of the ER
 
mope54 said:
you're welcome to go test out your theory...there's a lot of veterans around today so you shouldn't have any trouble walking up to one and explaining how the women back home do bear the cost of the wars they fought in...see what happens and let us know how it went right after you check yourself out of the ER
Click to expand...
I'll ask my dad, brother, sister, and brother in law if they agree with Hillary that the TRUE victims of war are women, minimizing the direct effect on men. I'm sure they will agree with your twisted feminist ideals. ;)
 
BTW, did you know that the TRUE victims of rape are men, because its their sisters, mothers, and daughters being raped. If only women could get over themselves and accept that they aren't the real victims. :(
 
why don't you just ask in general instead of poisoning the well

just ask a simple, "hey should we honor women today too? or do they not do much for our vets?"
 
or better yet, don't bother them because the point is not who are the "true" victims, that's your fucked logic that this is some kind of battle between the senses.

the point I was making to you was that you appear to be clueless about your audience here and your points get lost in your rhetoric because you can't fathom how insensitive to people your comments come across
 
It sounds to me like Ducman69 isn't minimizing the pain war causes women, or suggesting that the wives and mothers and daughters of slain soldiers don't deserve to be honored.

He takes issue with Hillary's statement that "women are the true victims of war". That statement is frankly absurd. Dying in gruesome fashion at the hands of the enemy makes you a God damn victim, even if you're a white man, even if you rank oh-so-highly on the imaginary scale of privilege.

Put your idiotic extremism to rest, at least today, and honor the men and women who have suffered and died to give us this nation and this world.
 
Is it really an outlandish statement? You die in combat and your wife has to mourn, then raise your kids without you. Forever.

Did you die in combat and this offends you?
 
I'd also like to note that he regularly goes on these insane rants about being a victim of feminism, and totally derails the conversation from the OP.
 
mope54 said:
or better yet, don't bother them because the point is not who are the "true" victims
Click to expand...
You realize that was my ENTIRE POINT... Hillary make a fucktarded feminist statement.
mope54 said:
the point I was making to you was that you appear to be clueless about your audience here
Click to expand...
Thank you mope for designating yourself the Queen of [H], and I recognize your authority to speak on behalf of the forum. Kind of eerie how similar that is to the minority of very vocal feminists in the media that have elected themselves the voice of the people, only to find the silent majority couldn't disagree more. ;)
Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you're right, I misquoted the nuance of "true" with "primary". That means those dead fathers, husbands, and sons actually fighting and dying in war are secondary by definition. The point, if lost, is about the absurdity of feminists.

Real+bravery+is+suicide+god+damnit+cumblr_4cad46_5277475.jpg


Feminism is my target, if that is not painfully obvious, and not our brave soldiers (come from a military family and moved every 2 years of my youth for it, FYI, but nice try to deflect on a tangent).
 
maverikv said:
You don't think female armor, for example, is a weird and easily addressable problem?

I'm embarrassed when I'm playing an otherwise artfully made game and my wife is in the room when someone walks on screen in a plate armor bikini.
Click to expand...

I know several women who play WoW that seem to have no problem with it beyond the joke that its unrealistic. Which you know, is obvious. Welcome to fantasy island! They often spend time farming old gear to create sets. I've often heard "this is my characters slutty armor set" or something similar from them. Blizz made many people happy with the gear transmog system, male and female.

Is your wife embarrassed by books out on the store shelves like "50 shades of grey" when you are around? Or the latest Danielle Steel novel? Cosmo magazine? I remember some thinking it was silly that stores were being asked to put dark plastic covers on the magazine racks to block the often sexy women on the covers of Cosmo (and risque headlines on whats in the issue) but not for men's "lad mags" (they'd already gotten playboy etc. out of stores).
 
jimmyb said:
Show us on the doll where feminism touched you.
Click to expand...
They touched me on my gaming culture and national pride, realizing most of these tards were bred right here at home and are poisoning "mah freedomz" with political-correctness gone amok, to where publishers have to be careful not to make female characters "too sexy" and walk on eggshells to avoid offending anyone.

Wonderful mainstream games of my youth like Street Fighter could never be produced in this day and age, as its just not PC enough, and Chun Li would probably have to be fat and wear pants.

That said, as I pointed out in the other thread I'm excited about the game, I think the artwork is great, and all, but the comments about all this political correctness and feminism makes me want to chew glass shards.
 
how fittingly ironic that you would choose Street Fighter as a banner to charge under

you don't even know the history about the games you use as examples.
was that you in another thread using WoW as a shining example of games where people don't pay real money for in-game items?

it's humorously pathetic how twisted your logic becomes in all these threads
 
Its shocking to me how enraged people get by innocuous declarations like "We aren't going to dress our game's characters like hookers anymore because women play too"
 
Ducman69 said:
They touched me on my gaming culture
Click to expand...
You do not have a monopoly on how games are made. Blizzard wants to cater to a broader audience by avoiding comically sexual characters - many people think this is a good thing.

You're playing the victim card far more than any feminists I know.
 
No, Blizzard is giving its rubber stamp of approval to self-censorship, to please extreme feminists allied with the politically-correct movement. Tellingly, these same extremists are the ones defending womens' imagined right to receive zero male attention while wearing whatever they want, whenever they want in real life.

Are they simply adding less sexualized armor for the female characters? No. That would be perfectly reasonable. Instead, they are telling their artists and designers to STOP making armor that could be perceived by a snivelling and pathetic minority as offensive.
 
Their artists create what they are told to create friendo. This is commissioned art, and commissioned artists follow the direction of who is paying them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top