Blizzard to Remove "Sexy" Tracer Pose in Overwatch - Update

| 29 Mar 2016 08:08
tracer over the shoulder

Blizzard has responded to controversy surrounding a victory pose from Overwatch's Tracer.

Update: Jeff Kaplan has clarified his earlier statement:

While I stand by my previous comment, I realize I should have been more clear. As the game director, I have final creative say over what does or does not go into the game. With this particular decision, it was an easy one to make-not just for me, but for the art team as well ... We wouldn't do anything to sacrifice our creative vision for Overwatch, and we're not going to remove something solely because someone may take issue with it.

You can read his full statement here.

Original Story: A few days ago on the Blizzard forums, a post was made by a user named "Fipps". The user praised Overwatch's female cast of heroes, but was critical about a particular in-game pose by Tracer. It's recommended that you give the entire thing a read for yourself to understand the topic.

"So I wanted to start off by saying, I think the development team has done a pretty great job with the cast of female hero's in Overwatch. They are diverse, interesting, and compelling. From Mei to Zarya to Widowmaker the female cast reflects a large spectrum of personalities and player fantasies," Fipps stated.

Fipps first complimented Blizzard on what they thought the team did right. But later in the post, Fipps says "Then out of seemingly no where we have this pose," linking to this image.

Fipps talks about this aspect of one hero of Overwatch for the rest of the post, arguing that Tracer's pose reduces her to a "female sex symbol" symbolically. "What I'm asking is that as you continue to add to the Overwatch cast and investment elements, you double down on your commitment to create strong female characters. You've been doing a good job so far, but shipping with a tracer pose like this undermines so much of the good you've already done," Fipps said in closing.

Today, the thread received a response from the Game Director for Overwatch, Jeff Kaplan. "We'll replace the pose. We want everyone to feel strong and heroic in our community. The last thing we want to do is make someone feel uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented. Apologies and we'll continue to try to do better."

This responsive decision by a game developer is one in a series of recent controversies. Last November, a slap animation was removed from R. Mika in Street Fighter V, and in January of this year it was discovered that a petting mini-game was one of many localization changes made for the Western release of Fire Emblem Fates.

Overwatch's customization system is optional, and the cosmetic rewards aren't a mandatory feature. When leveling up your character, you earn loot boxes that have an array of skins, sprays, victory poses, and voice emotes options that you can acquire.

Source: Original Post
Response

Post Comment

You must be logged in to post. Log In

Rebel_Raven:
I think he might have liked not being in a movie where he has to call someone a motherfucker, or bitch. :P
Plus the purple lightsaber was introduced.

Apparently the purple saber is meant to indicate that Mace was a former sith.
He probably called SOMEONE a motherfucker or a bitch somewhere in the Star Wars lore.
Joking aside, I still think he could've done a better performance, even without doing his usual shtick.

Yeah, I hope Indivisible gets finished soon. I backed it. I'm liking the roster because it is diverse, and colorful. I'm liking that a woman is in the lead. All in all, it seems great.

That's not the only reason to back the game. I feel like you missed the point I was making.

Overwatch has a phenomenal roster, not just because of world wide representation, but because they've thought outside the box for the usual roles women are slotted into in these sorts of games, I.E. Glass Cannon, Healer, Support.
There's several high firepower women with unique abilities, and seemingly some durability, too. I'm looking forward to D.Va especially.

D.Va and Zarya are the tanky ones I think.

Honestly, if people are to stop praising diversity, it really needs to become very common, IMO. The novelty factor is too high, IMO. It feels so rare that it grabs attention, IMO.

Diversity is a natural result of variety. With creativity, comes variety. From variety, comes diversity.
The only people bringing attention to it are the people who fixate on it to begin with.

Maybe, but I still see them at the forefront of, really, both sides. Mostly, though, the people against inclusivity.

Then your perceptions might be a bit skewed to favor one side over another. Honestly the best stance you can really take in these kinds of things is to be neutral and tackle things on a case-by-case basis. Not everyone is going to give you a reasonable discussion, but conflict comes from a lack of understanding, or an abundance of ignorance. Some people might be more willing to listen if they understand things from a different perspective.

Ideally we shouldn't slash the nose to spite the face, but there's just too many people on either side that think they can silence the other side by being uncivil, ad are very eager to try it out.
It's hard to be reasonable when almost every last person wants to do everything from insult to threaten one's well being. not everyone can handle that, and it's very different when it's on the internet because it's a very large mob of individuals as opposed to a handful of people.

Well that's why areas of reasonable discussion exist. Like the Escapist! *wink*

I think the only way to have a civil discourse is to have it in a heavily moderated location that's very willing to bounce the idiots. It's why the Escapist is one of my favorite places. Sure there's the ID10T bug here and there, but it's mostly civil.

I wouldn't go so far as "heavily moderated," but I agree that anything not contributing to discussion has no place IN the discussion.

The idea of an agenda isn't likely to be dropped because it's our nature to want monsters, and want people to rally against, and often enough paint them in the worst light imaginable. Plus there's the whole "gay agenda" people want to throw around. Sadly it seems kinda one sided since not many people call out the "straight agenda" but that might be a good thing.

First time I heard of this "gay agenda thing." I don't even thing I've heard of that being a thing in any gaming community I've been in.

It's not really the devs, IMO. It's the producers more than anything. I've seen it time and time again where a female protagonist becomes a male protagonist to suit the demographics and the demographics have created a lot of roadblocks.

But who do you blame for that? The producers who want to see a return on their investment, the devs for going along with the producers, or the gamers for...I dunno, being there?

Dontnod had trouble finding people to produce their games because the idea of a female protagonist offended the people they talked to, and the female protagonist kissing a guy scene was cut from remember me, for instance.

If by "they offended" you mean "they offended their marketing and research teams who do nothing but go off raw sales data."
Square was cool with it though.

Or Ubisoft's notorious "women are too hard to animate" line in unity despite Liberation existing, female multiplayer characters existing, and eventually Syndicate showing otherwise.

Ah but those women walk with a hip sway, so clearly the animation departments couldn't animate women properly, amirite?

Ok, ok, I know we had an agreement, just making a joke.

I think that within the context of that though, I imagine they simply meant they didn't know HOW to animate a female character properly, like the nuances of the movements and such compared to a male character. Consider something like Assassin's Creed for example; male and female characters would have slightly differing physical builds, so they would have to move differently too.

I think there's more to their claims than what people think. It's not some big conspiracy.

The problem with "just business," "demographics," and other excuses for this sort of behavior don't make things any better. At least not for me. Likely because people rely on it so much, and it doesn't really change anything.

They're not excuses. The marketing and research teams crunch the numbers and give out the most profitable direction for a game to take. The publishers then request changes based on the market data. If anything the real answer is to give power and control to the devs instead of the publishers, or for devs to crowdfund.

As to WHY producers/publishers rely on those raw numbers so much?

It really is just a case of them being greedy asshats. They don't want to put cash into something that won't make them MAXIMUM SPIDE--I mean, profits.

Of course, but people are more likely to get news from these polarized sites than any other.

Or sites that are skewed towards specific sides, like Kotaku or theMarySue.

Okay "don't" is a bit of a strong stance, but generally, they don't. Rarely they do.
Jim Sterling, and dontnod mentioned the issues producers have with women getting romantic. A guy play a woman kissing a dude, and that makes the producers uncomfortable so they try to force developers away from it.

I think that's a reflection of our social expectations.
Men are typically expected to take the lead in romance.
It's reflected in romance novels and such too, even in Twilight. The male characters are expected to act, to pursue, to embrace, etc.

I do agree that today's society probably isn't ready for a strong male pursuit... then again we do have Twilight, Fifty Shades of Gray, and who knows what else. Maybe if it was well written it'd be received better?

Well keep in mind that it's not "strong pursuit." What the boss in Saints Row is doing to Pierce is called "sexual harassment." I was pointing out that on Pierce it's played for laughs (because he's Pierce and therefore the cosmos' bitch) but it's also reflective of our double standards in society. If the genders were swapped it would be considered an outrage.

Which is the case for almost every game, unfortunately.

Oh come on.
That is such a weak generalization.
I'm actually genuinely disappointed.
In an age where story is becoming something more and more desired from our games, you're just going to up and disregard all the progress that's been made with such a broad statement.
Come on, man. Don't do that.

Well, lets be fair. A lot of these games, in fact a lot of games across the board rarely get advertised on TV, where most people would see the advertisement. This can create a void of information among the people who're not on the pulse of gaming, which is probably a lot of people.

Well I think that's because it's typically reserved to most largely watched channels, as well as gaming channels, so it's kind of like a marketing echochamber; they only want to advertise to the people that will actually buy it.

I don't think grandma's gonna have any interest in DOAX.

It's "equal" in the sense of choice, but not necessarily in gameplay, writing, etc., and it being a stand in for female protagonists likely won't fly well. At least not with me. It creates limitations that games without choice wouldn't have, IMO.

Well that's kinda speculative, but I won't disagree that offering the choice can sometimes limit a game. Advances in technology will slowly let us get past that limit though.

It replacing female only leads is not likely to fix much of anything, and wouldn't really be fair if most of the games are still male leads only.

I don't see how. I mean, you're being given the option, the choice, that breath of air from a male protagonist.

And there have been games with female only protagonists.
You give an example yourself.
Senran Kagura.
Not counting indie titles like 99 Spirits, or more well known budget titles like Shantae (started on the gameboy color, yo).
You have the options. They ARE there. Introducing more female protagonist selectables into something that would otherwise be a male protag game would increase positive reception to them.

And need I point out that Fem!Shep to my knowledge was way more well received than Male!Shep?
This thing you are talking about is already going on. You are being presented with options. You just need to look for them.

Ah.
Well, let be fair, Senran Kagura isn't known for armor. :P

You'd think ninjas would wear sturdier, more protective clothing.
And quite frankly if Senran Kagura gets a free pass, why did Divinity need to get crucified?
Why does any game where the goofy impractical fantasy armor is revealing or such need to get crucified for it?

the problem is we can't get away from "agenda pushing" because a lot of anti-inclusive gamers feel that ANYTHING that doesn't directly pander to them is someone pushing an agenda.

the problem is we can't get away from "agenda pushing" because a lot of anti-gaming feminists feel that ANYTHING that doesn't directly pander to them is someone being sexist.

We really don't need to have this exchange. Not because I disagree that the people out there you claim to exist exist, but rather because I think at this point it's just coming back to the whole "there are assholes on both sides" thing.

I haven't seen many pro-inclusive players claiming that there's agendas out there, but I don't doubt they exist.

I'm pro-inclusive and I think there's a lot of agendas out there against gaming. Mostly these "we need inclusiveness" crowds who make accusatory statements to try and get devs to make changes to games that they'll never play.

And I think when the producers, skewed focus groups, etc. get out of the way of Developers it will be present in a more natural way.

On this we agree. Crowdfunding was one such attempt, but I think that's a double edged sword for a lot of reasons I won't go into here.

Possibly the case with the particular era I complain about. It wasn't a huge issue when there was more reliance on sprites, IMO.

Actually, fun fact, in order to make games with sprites that could ever be competitive in a AAA market, the sprites would be more expensive to make than 3D models. Look at King of Fighters 13, and you can imagine why they decided to start making the next KoF 3D (albeit the models look awful). Retro graphics might still sell, but usually they end up being used by indie devs because those devs don't have the tech, time or cash to make a AAA title.

Eh, for me there's a pretty clear line between roles of men, and women, even still.
Men can basically be anything.
Women basically have to be mages, archers, support, glass cannons, rogues, etc. It only really has a chance to change in create a character games, Koei games, and games where they take the lead. Women are rarely the "heavy units" even if there's technology that guys use that should, logically work just as well for women.

Well I mean, that depends on the game. I mean Effie in Fire Emblem is a tanky swole lady who legit is my one-shot monster and tank extrodinaire, and D.Va is going to be very tanky, and then there's Zarya (hopefully I spelled that right) and even in Dragon's Crown we had the Amazon (hey, asside from her assets, she had some amazing muscles).

This is from years and years, a decade or two if I might say, looking at how women are depicted.

Ma'am, you are talking to a 90's kid who has been in on gaming for a long time. There were many times where I was perfectly fine with playing a woman if the option was presented, and many times where there were great female characters depicted quite positively. Mostly in RPGs, but still, they were depicted as interesting characters with complex stories.
Just because you aren't playing a woman, doesn't automatically discount their value as a character.

The tactics generally are pulled by publishers/producers. The Developers often have to go with it.
I can't say the mindset hasn't been in developer circles, but most instances like Dontnod's struggle to get female protagonists realized, Ubisoft's excuses for not including women, WWE games restricting female created characters, Naughty Dog having to combat skewed test groups, and so forth have been basically squarely in the producers/publisher's court.

Wait, WWE restricting female characters? In what way?
Because if you say "not letting them fight male wrestlers" I'm going to tell you that you're being silly.

If I'm shitting on anyone, It's the people that do crush developer creativity. I know there's good people in every stage of the gaming industry, but I'm not going to pretend there aren't bad people in every stage.

I'd start with publisher CEOs before I assumed anything of the devs.

My perceptions are based around who you -have- to play as more than anyone else, and who gets the glory, etc.
But I digress, we're not going to really agree on this topic, I'm sure.

"Who gets the glory"
Do you know what being a hero even IS? What it MEANS?

I agree that we're not going to agree on this. I mean, I'm pretty cynical, but geez.

Basically, yes I'm cynical, and jaded, yes. Red Ranger's the leader, the star, and gets most of the camera time. I'm not saying there aren't good teams, but if they are good teams, there needs to be a more level amount of attention shown to them all.

Well at least you're admitting that you're cynical. Thank you for being honest.
That being said, I disagree. The Red Ranger is not "the star," nor does he get more camera time. Quite frankly the only reason he would is because he's giving orders to the other rangers, who then follow his instructions. The relationship between leader and subordinate is the trust the subordinate has in a leader to guide their abilities efficiently. A bad leader doesn't have many followers, or if they still have followers, they don't have many loyal ones.

That's what a leader does. He assesses the situation and provides instruction to the team. To that end, thinking about it, in an RPG like FF7, the leader isn't really Cloud, but YOU the player, because you are the one telling the team what to do in battle. YOU get all the glory by beating the game; destroying the villain, saving the world.

It just seems like the majority of everything revolves around Cloud, so he's the center of most everything.
Yeah, some characters don't directly feed into making Cloud's own story looking better, I agree.
Still, this is just one game, here. I do love FF7, though.

Well firstly, the only real substantial ties Cloud has to the main plot is the relationship to Sephiroth, which is complicated. I mean, Sephy messes with him a lot, and Cloud's own hang ups and uncertainties are exploited to move the narrative forward. Plus, eh, Cloud apparently is feminine enough to pass as a woman pretty well, so...close enough?

Ok, joking aside, the save the world plot? Everyone has a stake in that. Everyone wins by saving the world.

And yeah, this is just one game, but it's also a game many people consider to be one of the best RPGs in history, so I figured the best example was one of the most critically acclaimed RPGs of all time.

Not when people expect others to be happy with it above playing the sort of characters they want to play as. I can take it as a side dish, but I want to play as women as my main course. It's all about balance. Give, and take. Make me happy, and I'm more likely to overlook what doesn't make me happy.

But we're not at a restaurant. We're at a buffet.

Honestly, talking about games that came out on ancient consoles that aren't active as a whole is sort of moot, really. Sprite heavy consoles were in a more diverse, wonderful era that I hope gaming returns to, or surpasses.
In a different conversation, a different topic, I wouldn't see much of an issue, though.

Well it's easiest to hold up critically acclaimed titles as examples, but I get you on this.
TBH though I don't think any of the current age is going to push gaming in that direction.
If anything, I smell stagnation on the rise, and it's not going to be because of the anti-inclusive crowd.

More okay because it wasn't so common for a very long time.
I'll admit it's some stereotypes in play. Women get to be emotional, and get to react differently, but there's also themes of motherhood, and so forth.

Oh god please don't tell me you liked Other M.
But honestly, I disagree with this. Stereotypes never helped anything, creatively or otherwise. I mean "women get to be emotional" in the age where Hot-Blooded is a common personality trait associated with men who tend to get emotional?

Manly tears is a trope for a reason.

And a woman could go through an entire game with the same "reactions" as a man (hence those selectable gender options I keep banging on about) depending on the game.

I won't argue that female protags aren't exactly common. The options are there though.

Good games are rare. Acceptable games are more common. :P

Good games are pretty common if you ask me. Excellent games are rarer. Mediocre games though? Yeah, those are everywhere.

The first two sentences are the long and short of my goals in seeing gaming change. :P
Of course there's the usual goals of having fun, immersion, exploring a world, etc.

But that gender tho.

You have read the list of game characters, yeah? Nothing stops me, per say. It's just that I get tired of playing as a dude all the time because I essentially have to to enjoy a certain style of game, or style of story. It doesn't mean I don't.

But yo, that gender tho.

Very few jojo games come stateside,

It must be the work of an enemy stand.

though even when they are made. I do agree we need more Jojo.

See, and you thought the sexualization was exclusive to women.
You can have your beefcake and we can have our cheesecake.
I don't think we can mix that though...well, Dragon's Crown already did, but eh.

Still seems like a cash cow that wasn't cashed in on, and I think the style of romance could be done more.

Are you suuuuuure about that?

Are you really, really sure?

We have multiple yes/no prompts here for a reason? Are you sure?

Congratulations! You have fetishized the concept of objectification. Like, REAL objectification. Wear your hypocrisy on your sleeve, you crazy sparkly vampire lover you!

Joking aside, while the root of Twilight is the standard romance novel trope of "male pursues" I would like to point out that Twilight is a story about a plank of wood becoming a vampire's property and how the two of them try to deal with sparkling and furries.

Oh and there's a c-section performed with Edward's teeth. Romance novel of the year.

It may spark unhappy people, but it'd almost as easily be dirty little secret, and may get more dollars from groups most people overlook.

Er, I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch what you're saying here, say again?

I mean more women watch porn than society would lead us to believe, and there's a solid romance novel market out there.

Women watch more lesbian porn than we do.
No, really, last I checked the stats said women watch lesbians a lot for some reason.

The Saboteur which went as far as to have a topless DLC on consoles.
Basically every god of war game, and one is on the horizon. Main character often has snusnu, and we often see women topless if not naked.
GTA as a whole.
Red Dead Redemption.
Basically every rockstar game, really.
Not a lot of western games spring to mind regardless of levels of fanservice, really, but I feel it's safe to say we're more likely to see it over fanservice aimed at women.

Oh, and add Duke Nukem to the list!*Ducks*
Honestly, I liked the PC, and PSX games well enough.

Eh, GTA is debatable because that content is there, but purely optional (and is only fanservice if you actually find GTA women in any GTA before the newest one titillating).

Can't speak about Red Dead or Saboteur, Rockstar's library also included the Warriors which had no real blatant fanservice to speak of, so I think that's an unfair generalization of Rockstar, Duke Nukem (the original) had like one example with strippers you could give money to for a 2-frame animation and Forever had maybe like, one fanservice scene and a LOVELY BOATLOAD OF NOPE everywhere else.

Publisher/Producer BS lend to this feeling more than anything.

Well that doesn't apply to every game every made. Not every game was made with a female character in mind from the start, and not every game with a male protag was made that way because of publishers/producers. Most certainly the producers have the final say, but that doesn't mean creators don't create male characters of their own accord.

Estival Versus is on Vita, though, isn't it? Granted it's a noticeable drop from PS4 grade. I might be wrong, but I doubt it because the majority of Senran Kagura games seem to be on sony handhelds.

But does it have a good framerate?

I don't entirely disagree with your assessment, but still, quiet changes almost never happen. If they do, then it's not quiet for long.

Or maybe they do, and we just don't know about them.
*X-files music*
So long as there's patch notes, quiet changes will always happen.

It's easy to be drowned out, and overlooked because of the assholes, though.
I don't disagree that that should be the reason civil discussion happens. I come for that when I open up the Escapist. May not always look like that, but it's a lot of the reason I come here.

Well Fipps wasn't drowned out.
Blizz listened to him.

You're right. It just feels like a battle because I've been in the discussion for so long.

I even made the mistake of pointing out "sides" earlier. But honestly if you've been in too deep for so long, maybe take a step back for a while, come back fresh.

Fair enough. Just saying that because a character wasn't Bi before doesn't mean it can't happen.

Just saying that attraction doesn't come out of nowhere either.

More like his gift of armor piercing ammo. Guy knows the way to this gal's heart. :P
Garrus is interesting on so many levels. Pretty much everything in game, and the fact that Bioware made an actual attempt to keep him fanservice for women, and frankly it worked. Worked way more than the green guy, IMO who was more blatant.
then again, I was also kinda irritated when Zaeed, may his VA rest in peace, wasn't a love interest. Something about the tough old bastard with stories appeals to me.

I think Garrus was more interesting because it's an inter-species relationship. The physiology of many of the alien races aside from the Asari make for a rather complicated romance.

And if I recall Zaeed was a DLC character in ME2? I think they just couldn't be arsed to give him anything. Remember, Bioware was (and I think still is) under EA. Not the most exemplary company.

Les!Shep snip

I still don't think they intended to have Fem!Shep as a lesbian.
Asari is a weird place because they're technically able to have intimate relations with any gender of any species, despite appearing female, so...

Samara was more romantic than not, IMO, but I'll readily agree that perception is key here. I still regard Morinth as one since you don't have to endure death by snusnu, and it's more romance option than women get in a lot of other games. :P

Although the death by snu snu still applies.

Hopefully it is changing.
Jojo kinda stands alone in that regard, sadly.

What, no love for Fist of the North Star, or Bang Shishigami from Blazblue?
Those rippling muscles are on display pretty frequently there.
And there's a pretty large following for Takumi from FE:Fates, as well as Ryoma, I think. Ladies got that Hoshido Fever.

No, I mean we're all human. A neonazi, for instance, can be a gamer as much as any tolerant person. The gaming community is made up of people of all walks of life, and it's one of the few common grounds so many people have between eachother. the gaming community can't exist without the people that make it up.
That said, humanity is a mixed bag. Men, women, old, young. The bigots, heroes, etc. that we see in reality could be the people we play with online as much as anyone else.
But that said, I realize this might bring in real life politics, and I really really really want to stay away from that.

Well the problem that people have IS the fact that people are bringing in real life politics to gaming, more specifically gender politics. They don't want gaming to be political.

Honestly I think at this point it would be best to continue through PMs if you want to continue the discussion. I'm worried that this discussion might be getting a bit off course from the OT and becoming something a bit more broad, so if you want to continue we can do it through PMs if you like.

LawAndChaos:

Rebel_Raven:
Which is great, IMO! No complaints here.

I especially like the reference to it being a pilot pin-up pose. It's actually a really clever decision on their part.

Agreed. Tracer is/was a test pilot, wears the bomber jacket, etc.

I don't know about that. Mace Windu, and Aayla Secura were nice, too, imo. Thanks to the prequels Disney infinite has 3 incarnations of Samuel L Jackson as Mace Windu, Nick Fury, and Frozone. :P

But Mace Windu was so dull though. I would've rather seen Samuel play a Sith and really go crazy, because he's really good at that acting-wise. Seeing him play a character that just cuts loose is a lot of fun to watch, even in bad films like the Spirit.

I think he might have liked not being in a movie where he has to call someone a motherfucker, or bitch. :P
Plus the purple lightsaber was introduced.

Yeah, I can only imagine the state of being some of these assholes are in. An "SJW" won in getting a change made, but that change is still sexy.

Like I said, this sets a good precedent, so maybe people can calm down and ease up a bit.

I hope so. I hate feeling like I'm watching a warzone when these things happen.

Well, you do seem like you want to get in on the diversity conversation. I'm just letting you know why it's so difficult. I'm not denying there are no extremists on the side of wanting diversity. Personally, I can't think of a single argument as to why I should want gaming to go back to the bland straight white brunette guy model that's been adhered to for a while, that's thankfully loosening it's grip, so I might be one of those extremists in being solid in my stance.

Well I feel that it's a complex thing, representation. There's a balance that needs to be in play, but at the same time I feel the focus on diversity is watering down the focus on the real purpose or intent of a game.
Like, I keep coming back to it, but Indivisible is an example of variety producing diversity. Because there's so many characters in the game, they have to make each character distinct, so there's dozens of differing body types and races, much like how Overwatch has numerous heroes of varying ethnicity and nationalities. By making each character distinct, diversity springs forth naturally from that.

But instead of praising the character design, the fun gameplay or anything, I don't want to see people praising a game because of its inclusivity and diversity, not because it's not praiseworthy, but because it shouldn't be the only thing people focus on. Making these factors the leading positives for any piece over the other aspects makes me cringe so hard my face withdraws into my head (this is my favorite expression lately, don't mind me overusing it).

Yeah, I hope Indivisible gets finished soon. I backed it. I'm liking the roster because it is diverse, and colorful. I'm liking that a woman is in the lead. All in all, it seems great.

Overwatch has a phenomenal roster, not just because of world wide representation, but because they've thought outside the box for the usual roles women are slotted into in these sorts of games, I.E. Glass Cannon, Healer, Support.
There's several high firepower women with unique abilities, and seemingly some durability, too. I'm looking forward to D.Va especially.

Honestly, if people are to stop praising diversity, it really needs to become very common, IMO. The novelty factor is too high, IMO. It feels so rare that it grabs attention, IMO.

And I totally get that. I see the onslaught of assholes every month, or so. Heck, this was twice this month, or more. I can't expect anyone to fight it.

I think this is the consequence of having such large groups. The bigger your group, the more assholes you have.

Maybe, but I still see them at the forefront of, really, both sides. Mostly, though, the people against inclusivity.

It's simply because when you enter a conversation on most areas of social media, the assholes greet you at the door, and dog you every step of the way, save for odd spots like the Escapist. That's why they're the face.

But should we slash the nose to spite the face?
TBH I understand and sympathize. There's always going to be assholes, but that doesn't necessarily mean you have to go in the front door. The more reasonable folk always leave the back door unlocked. Alternatively you could sneak into someone's bedroom through the window.
There's always going to be a place that's open to reasonable discussion, just as there's always going to be places that shut down these conversations because some folks go on the defensive as a knee-jerk reaction.

Ideally we shouldn't slash the nose to spite the face, but there's just too many people on either side that think they can silence the other side by being uncivil, ad are very eager to try it out.
It's hard to be reasonable when almost every last person wants to do everything from insult to threaten one's well being. not everyone can handle that, and it's very different when it's on the internet because it's a very large mob of individuals as opposed to a handful of people.

Why do we treat it like a political movement? People think there's agendas at play, really. The Gay Agenda, and stuff like that. That there's groups that want to make gaming into something another group doesn't want. We're a tribal species, so we create lines in the sand, and borders, and, well, you get the idea.
The problem with muting, and what not is people can bypass it, and bluntly, it's no doubt a lot of trouble to go through and mute 9,999 people to see the 10,000 person being civil.

Fair enough. I still think that's a bit of an exaggeration, numbers wise, but TBH I think the only way we can have a 100% civil discourse is by dropping any notion of an "agenda" at all. I think part of that is tackling things on a case by case basis rather than claiming there's any sort of overarching problem beyond there not being enough female protagonists. It's when people bring up that whole "gaming perpetuates misogyny" narrative and so on and so forth that people get mad against. People don't want a discussion with anyone "holding an agenda."

I think the only way to have a civil discourse is to have it in a heavily moderated location that's very willing to bounce the idiots. It's why the Escapist is one of my favorite places. Sure there's the ID10T bug here and there, but it's mostly civil.
The idea of an agenda isn't likely to be dropped because it's our nature to want monsters, and want people to rally against, and often enough paint them in the worst light imaginable. Plus there's the whole "gay agenda" people want to throw around. Sadly it seems kinda one sided since not many people call out the "straight agenda" but that might be a good thing.

Yeah, there's people out there that don't want politics involved in gaming. Don't want talks of inclusion, they just want gaming to stay the course. They look at gaming before and see it in rose tinted glasses. Mostly because they were almost completely pandered to.

Well again I think this is a consequence of demographics. Because gaming was so male-dominated in the past, it's hard for devs to let go of the past, and I think a lot of people don't care about inclusion and don't see the problem because there isn't anything explicitly exclusive (or rather intended to be exclusive) beyond pandering to the majority, which a lot of people simply state "is just business."

Even so, there are people who appreciate female protagonists too. My first character in FF14 was a female Lalafell based off an NPC from one of my DnD groups. She's adorable and badass, and the first character I got to level 60.

It's not really the devs, IMO. It's the producers more than anything. I've seen it time and time again where a female protagonist becomes a male protagonist to suit the demographics and the demographics have created a lot of roadblocks.
Dontnod had trouble finding people to produce their games because the idea of a female protagonist offended the people they talked to, and the female protagonist kissing a guy scene was cut from remember me, for instance.
Or Ubisoft's notorious "women are too hard to animate" line in unity despite Liberation existing, female multiplayer characters existing, and eventually Syndicate showing otherwise.
That's just a short list of things that I've noticed over the years.

The problem with "just business," "demographics," and other excuses for this sort of behavior don't make things any better. At least not for me. Likely because people rely on it so much, and it doesn't really change anything.

Nah, facebook, an youtube largely. I think we'd get more done if every community were like the escapist. It's a lot of communities I'm looking at.

Well there's your problem. Social media sites and a video site that doesn't even understand fair use are ill places for intellectual discussion.
Plus a lot of other gaming journalism sites have already stated where their intentions lie and therefore are unfit places for gaming discussion as well.
The only other places I could think of is like, I dunno...NeoGAF? Which I hear is a shitty place for discussion as well, so, I dunno.

Of course, but people are more likely to get news from these polarized sites than any other.

Well, flirting, and doing sexy things kinda leads to another can of worms. The fact that male leads often get sex, and romance, but female leads don't. The industry's sorta still wrestling with the idea of women as player characters getting romance outside of games like Mass Effect, or when it's attached to the playable guy.
Then we have Bayonetta who I'm okay with.
I agree this should happen more.

Female leads don't get romance? I thought Bayonetta was totes in a relationship with that one comedy relief dude. Although that could be a bit weird, considering how witches age...

I think as well that's a struggle with female sexuality and that vocal minority piping up and screaming "strong independent women don't NEED NO MAN, MMMHMM."

But I think we're agreeing about sexy things and that there is a time and place for them.
Playing a female voice 2 boss in Saints Row 3/4 (the vaguely Russian voice) has her flirting with Pierce constantly, and it makes him extremely uncomfortable, played for laughs. Yet if the role was reversed and Pierce were a woman being flirted with by a man and making her uncomfortable, no one would be playing that for laughs. I think that a lot of gaming reflects the social double standards we see as well, so I agree we should discuss sex and fanservice in games at a bit more length.

Okay "don't" is a bit of a strong stance, but generally, they don't. Rarely they do.
Jim Sterling, and dontnod mentioned the issues producers have with women getting romantic. A guy play a woman kissing a dude, and that makes the producers uncomfortable so they try to force developers away from it.

I do agree that today's society probably isn't ready for a strong male pursuit... then again we do have Twilight, Fifty Shades of Gray, and who knows what else. Maybe if it was well written it'd be received better?

Because it wears thin seeing women as NPCs, and supporting characters, and never taking charge in a game. It really is.

Well then that's a case of poor writing more than anything.

Which is the case for almost every game, unfortunately.

Yeah, it would be nice, but I see them on the horizon so i'm not really bent out of shape. Mirror's edge, Dishonored 2, the new tomb raider, and a few more, and they're being advertised, and they're closer to AAA. There's been recent releases like bayonetta 2, Senran Kagura in general, and so forth. I'm not terribly mad.

This is why people feel that a lot of the criticism about representation is unnecessary. I don't think there's been any sort of pushback against female protagonists for a long time, unless they are replacing a character people like.

Like, imagine if they tried to replace, I dunno, let's say, Nathan Drake with some random woman. People would be mad, but not because it's a woman, but instead because Nathan is no longer in the story. It's like how people would lose their shit if Shia La Boef had played Indiana Jones instead of Harrison Ford in Crystal Skull.

Well, lets be fair. A lot of these games, in fact a lot of games across the board rarely get advertised on TV, where most people would see the advertisement. This can create a void of information among the people who're not on the pulse of gaming, which is probably a lot of people.

What's fair about only being able to play as a woman if you can also play as a guy?

That's pretty fair if you ask me. It means you have more options. It means you have the choice to be whichever.
That's equality, if you ask me; both genders being represented equally, and giving you the option to choose one or the other.

It's "equal" in the sense of choice, but not necessarily in gameplay, writing, etc., and it being a stand in for female protagonists likely won't fly well. At least not with me. It creates limitations that games without choice wouldn't have, IMO.
It replacing female only leads is not likely to fix much of anything, and wouldn't really be fair if most of the games are still male leads only.

One series out how many? Elder Scrolls was pretty decent about not putting women in impractical armor just to be sexy. A few other series, too.

Well I was kinda just being all huffy like "Oh DARK SOULS never had this problem!"
Plus Dark Souls is the best example off the top of my head.
A lot of Eastern games are more guilty of the impractical armor thing than western ones lately though. Hyperdimension Neptunia and Senran Kagura come to mind.

Ah.
Well, let be fair, Senran Kagura isn't known for armor. :P

Yeah, but in Divinity, the women were wearing metal plate armor with exposed midriffs. Not only does it leave massive meaty bits exposed, there's no support for the extra weight up top. If you thought having large boobs was a backache, imagine adding 30+ lbs of armor on top of that with no support coming from what should be armor connecting the chest to the midsection, and waist?

Well yeah, I was agreeing with you that it's impractical. I'm just giving an example where that midriff stuff would make sense, is all. Like being a thief or something, where the clothing would merely restrict your movement unless you were wearing a skin tight jumpsuit.

I know, I just wanted to ran a little more. lol

I can't remember if I brought up Divinity or not. It may be an old wound, but it does need time to close.

I think gamers just need a breather from any sort of "agenda pushing." People are afraid that gaming is going to get watered down and turned into the "feminist game dev tree" which always ends with "congratulations! You have created a walking simulator." I think at this point gaming can just be left on its own, with female protagonists being more prevalent being the main point of discussion.

the problem is we can't get away from "agenda pushing" because a lot of anti-inclusive gamers feel that ANYTHING that doesn't directly pander to them is someone pushing an agenda.
I haven't seen many pro-inclusive players claiming that there's agendas out there, but I don't doubt they exist.

Well, I'd like to think there's a difference between pressuring a creator, and asking for something. Just recently I looked at the Battleborn roster, and noticed that there was no heavy weapons/armor woman in the entire roster, so I simply asked for one. The staff said they'd look into it. Others sorta lured me into a conversation like we're having now, there was some asshole that got shut down quick.

I'm all for diversity, but I'm not looking for a check list. I'm, in fact, looking forward to seeing the industry break completely free of the checklist it has now as far as leads go.
Straight, white, male, brunette.

It's happening, though. Slowly but surely, and I recognize that, so take that complaint however you will.

Only as long as we can still have those options. Remember, we need to add, not remove. I'm glad we both agree things are coming along, though. I think that's part of why people are so fierce now. "Things are already on the right track, STFU" I think is the reason the assholes are so common; it's already happening, and any sort of pressure to speed it along will inevitably be met with pushback.

Oh, the pushbacks always been there in my experience. It's just now they're more right than they were before. Still, there's progress to be made, IMO.

Yeah, I'd really have liked it to happen more naturally. After the girl power crash in the late 90's, and the rise of the straight white brunette guy checklist it was only a matter of time before we got to this point.

Yeah, it's that whole "it's more meaningful if it's done willingly" situation. Plus when it happens naturally the change is colored by the creators and the community rather than by any outside force.

And I think when the producers, skewed focus groups, etc. get out of the way of Developers it will be present in a more natural way.

Fair enough. I'd recommend keeping with that since lots of people tried to make similar, and longer lists, and I'm still not convinced otherwise.

TBH I still think there was never any problem with any female protagonists in the past.
There just weren't that many because, again, demographic. People needed to make money devving a game back then, especially with how expensive development was (and still is).

Possibly the case with the particular era I complain about. It wasn't a huge issue when there was more reliance on sprites, IMO.

Because i'm tired of being forced to play as a dude if I want to enjoy certain subjects in gaming. Most games with character choices also force you to switch characters at times, and also the scripts become a little formulaic, as does the roles both men and women play. When it's just a woman then things get interesting as you get to see women do things normally relegated to the male counterpart.

Ah, but those are just women with balls, dontchaknow.

Joking aside, I don't see the problem with women in the "male" role, because that isn't the "male" role. It's the "protagonist" role. I think making it clear that it's not the "male" role but the "protagonist" role is an important distinction.
Furthermore having multiple characters gives you the option to experience a story from multiple perspectives. There's nothing innately wrong with having multiple characters, and nothing wrong with having a woman or a man be the only protagonist in a story. I do agree however that having the options available to YOU, the player, are important.

Eh, for me there's a pretty clear line between roles of men, and women, even still.
Men can basically be anything.
Women basically have to be mages, archers, support, glass cannons, rogues, etc. It only really has a chance to change in create a character games, Koei games, and games where they take the lead. Women are rarely the "heavy units" even if there's technology that guys use that should, logically work just as well for women.
This is from years and years, a decade or two if I might say, looking at how women are depicted.

It hasn't come up until recently because, honestly, it feels like there hasn't been too much in the way of places to voice these concerns in public. Also there's shady tactics in play to keep women from gaming, and keep them out of gaming that have come to light in the last few years. Everything came together in the boiling point.

Where was this?
I never saw any tactics to exlu--

*sigh*

No. I know what this is.
See, this is the thing.
People come in with these narratives and these preformed perceptions, and I'm just going to say, no.
I have no idea where you heard there was some shady tactics in play to keep women from gaming. I have never heard of this. Not anywhere. And that in and of itself is so veritably insulting, to every game dev who's ever made a game, that it's actually disturbing.
You know, if you're shitting on publishers, or producers, than fine. They're only interested in money anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me if they pulled some shit. But I don't want to hear anything about game devs doing questionable bullshit like that when I know for a fact the place where garbage like that would ever happen would come from the people on the top.

The tactics generally are pulled by publishers/producers. The Developers often have to go with it.
I can't say the mindset hasn't been in developer circles, but most instances like Dontnod's struggle to get female protagonists realized, Ubisoft's excuses for not including women, WWE games restricting female created characters, Naughty Dog having to combat skewed test groups, and so forth have been basically squarely in the producers/publisher's court.
If I'm shitting on anyone, It's the people that do crush developer creativity. I know there's good people in every stage of the gaming industry, but I'm not going to pretend there aren't bad people in every stage.

Honestly, I played the hell out of FF7, and I really do enjoy it, even now. I want to play the upcoming remake, and I REALLY want to see the new Tifa design! I hope it's not her Advent Children look, rather her FF7 style.
Tifa's actually one of my favorite gaming women, and I glommed on to the rare opportunity where she could go chocoboracing on her own.
When I see a really great female NPC, I want to play as her, and experience the world through her. RPGs don't really allow for that because you're often put in the role of the guy, and the game makes sure you know it.

Well Cloud's the hero, and a lot of the story is about him. He's the one connected to the villain, he's the one who tried to get into soldier to fulfill his childhood promise to Tifa. He goes through a TON of shit in FF7 that leaves him broken and in a wheelchair. And he's not portrayed as a perfect hero either. His introduction paints him as an aloof asshole, and you can choose whether or not to remember the childhood promise in dialogue. He is easily manipulated, and gives in to despair late in the game, and Tifa has to pull him out of it and bring him back from the dark place he was in.

The game never "makes sure you know it." The game says "here's Cloud. He's a mercenary and also kind of a dick. He is your avatar in this world, as well as a character of his own. Now enjoy the story and play the game."

I still stand by that you are getting really hung up on gender and accusing the game of making statements that are coming from your own perception of the game.

The ONLY time where his gender is a thing is ONE, SINGLE, PART of the game where he's forced to cross-dress. That's it. It's not conducive to him as a character, it's just there as a narrative device to move the plot forward. And his motive for getting in there to "save Tifa" is HIS objective; in reality Tifa was just fine, and was only going in there to infiltrate the Don's mansion (which by trying to go save her you actually end up messing up if you got the best items).

My perceptions are based around who you -have- to play as more than anyone else, and who gets the glory, etc.
But I digress, we're not going to really agree on this topic, I'm sure.

Like I said with FF7, you're given the inescapable conclusion you're meant to play as Cloud, and he is your avatar. Everyone else is there to make him look good in the end. He's the one that'll save the world. Advent Children really drives that home.

Advent Children was a piece of shit film sequel.
And you have a very cynical outlook on teamwork, don't cha?
The power rangers only exist to make the red ranger look good.

I can't say I disagree in regards to Advent Children.

Basically, yes I'm cynical, and jaded, yes. Red Ranger's the leader, the star, and gets most of the camera time. I'm not saying there aren't good teams, but if they are good teams, there needs to be a more level amount of attention shown to them all.

It's true in many RPGs.
Everyone else's Arc is a sub-story to the main protagonists.

And the main protagonist's is to save the world.
That's it.
Cloud's own character arc is in and of itself a sub-arc of coping with his angst and understanding the truth of who he is.
Barret is dealing with demons from his past and his conflict with raising a child as a single parent, whilst also being the leader of a terrorist organization.
Aeris has to cope with being the last of her kind, as well as coming to terms with a sacrifice she realizes she needs to make to save everyone.
Red XIII has to deal with his past, learning the truth about his father, and returning to his homeland.
Vincent Valentine has to struggle with his history with Shinra and his unrequited love choosing someone over him for the sake of science, as well as a twisted and mutated body.
Cid spends his arc trying to achieve a dream of going to space, and coping with the fact that he at one point had to choose between his dreams and someone he cares about to do it, thanks to his own headstrong nature and carelessness.

The only 3 characters I can't think of having a sub-arc were Yuffie (who's apparently struggling to live up to her family's expectation and restore Wutai to its former glory), Cait Sith (a mole with a robot) and Tifa (who's mostly just struggling with trying to be the Team Mom of the group and watch in horror as the man she loves dives farther and farther off the deep end until he's literally a vegetable).

This all going on behind the "Sephiroth is trying to destroy the world," thing. And that's not even mentioning the stuff going on in Shinra, or some of the other sub-plots surrounding things like what happened to Nibelheim.

It just seems like the majority of everything revolves around Cloud, so he's the center of most everything.
Yeah, some characters don't directly feed into making Cloud's own story looking better, I agree.
Still, this is just one game, here. I do love FF7, though.

It just isn't good enough.

And it never will be, will it?

Not when people expect others to be happy with it above playing the sort of characters they want to play as. I can take it as a side dish, but I want to play as women as my main course. It's all about balance. Give, and take. Make me happy, and I'm more likely to overlook what doesn't make me happy.

FF6 was so very long ago. A classic to be certain, but, it hasn't done much for me lately. I hate the mentality, but I've had to take it because people keep trying to point me to playing the rare retro classic that I've already played. I don't mind revisiting, but I really do need something modern. Luckily the gaming climate is more likely to provide that these days.

Then the point of complaining is moot.

Honestly, talking about games that came out on ancient consoles that aren't active as a whole is sort of moot, really. Sprite heavy consoles were in a more diverse, wonderful era that I hope gaming returns to, or surpasses.
In a different conversation, a different topic, I wouldn't see much of an issue, though.

I can't. I don't always want to explore a world from a male point of view, with a male personality, and so forth.

But you'd be okay if it was from a woman's POV with a "woman's personality." What the hell is that even, I thought personality was determined by the individual, but hey if you want to stereotypes, then I guess Street Fighter 5 is right up your alley (and their stereotypes aren't even that bad compared to some stuff I've seen).

More okay because it wasn't so common for a very long time.

I'll admit it's some stereotypes in play. Women get to be emotional, and get to react differently, but there's also themes of motherhood, and so forth.

Especially when the guys can be so badly written that all they do is be violent, and get women, and do typical guy things. I want variety.

Then start playing good games instead. Like, jeez, what have you been playing?

Good games are rare. Acceptable games are more common. :P

I don't feel excluded when I play a gender neutral robot. I feel excluded when women are excluded in the long run, you see. I can enjoy playing as a guy now and then. Batman (especially if he's voiced by Kevin Conroy), John Marston, the GTA guys, Jacob Frye, to name a few. I can enjoy well done characters regardless of nature, BUT there's a limit to how long I can go without a female avatar to play as in a modern game. Being forced to play as a guy is grating over time thanks to the drought of playable women for the longest time.

See now this I can understand as being a fair stance to take. You just want to have a female protagonist now and then. So then what's stopping you from playing games where they aren't the ONLY protagonist or just a selectable protagonist?
Does having the male option there simply put you off so much you can't even play the game?
And there are more options now than there used to be, as well, which means there are more options open to you. Not only that, there are more on the way.

The first two sentences are the long and short of my goals in seeing gaming change. :P
Of course there's the usual goals of having fun, immersion, exploring a world, etc.

You have read the list of game characters, yeah? Nothing stops me, per say. It's just that I get tired of playing as a dude all the time because I essentially have to to enjoy a certain style of game, or style of story. It doesn't mean I don't.

Male fan service? Dare I dream of the day when every other guy, and basically every male protagonist dresses/acts like:


We have Jojo games though...
And TBH I would totally be cool with more Jojo. We need MOAR JOJOS. A lot of people love Jojo, even dudes. It's that whole "MANLY" thing that's actually got a bit of backing to it. Even if it could be perceived as "gay" the general attitudes towards things like Jojo is that it's awesome, and the posing itself is badass, even if the poses are considered "gay" by some.
So I don't see why there isn't going to be more of that stuff.
Oh but wait do we need more female protagonists or more of these male protagonists?
Hm...well like I said, why not both?

Very few jojo games come stateside, though even when they are made. I do agree we need more Jojo.

I'm all up for more of both!

Because Twilight is kinda shit, and was only popular because it was literally something to wet housewives' panties despite the fact that it fetishized abusive relationships.

Oh and it was ploddingly written too.

Still seems like a cash cow that wasn't cashed in on, and I think the style of romance could be done more. It may spark unhappy people, but it'd almost as easily be dirty little secret, and may get more dollars from groups most people overlook.
I mean more women watch porn than society would lead us to believe, and there's a solid romance novel market out there.

Which games?

The Saboteur which went as far as to have a topless DLC on consoles.
Basically every god of war game, and one is on the horizon. Main character often has snusnu, and we often see women topless if not naked.
GTA as a whole.
Red Dead Redemption.
Basically every rockstar game, really.
Not a lot of western games spring to mind regardless of levels of fanservice, really, but I feel it's safe to say we're more likely to see it over fanservice aimed at women.

Oh, and add Duke Nukem to the list!*Ducks*
Honestly, I liked the PC, and PSX games well enough.

IMO.
So in other words, you FEEL that it was INTENDED to drive women off.
But that's, like, just your opinion, man.
If it bothers you, you can't just assume it was the author's intent to drive you off.

Publisher/Producer BS lend to this feeling more than anything.

I wish it was on Vita, honestly. My wallet went with the Wii U, and I'm not sure I like the choice I made anymore.
Well, I do have a lot of good games for it, at least. Shame Nintendo's been kinda going full retard.

Estival Versus is on Vita, though, isn't it? Granted it's a noticeable drop from PS4 grade. I might be wrong, but I doubt it because the majority of Senran Kagura games seem to be on sony handhelds.

Yeah, I do agree that there's been some questionable moves on Nintendo's part.

Senran Kagura last I checked is a series that frequently has games "just come out."
As in, there is little to NO advertising for them at all.
I didn't even know Deep Crimson existed until I saw it in store and snatched it up.
The only reason I was cautious about Deep Crimson is that the first Senran Kagura had framerate issues and was E-shop only.
Bayonetta is a character that is still frequently touted as a shitty combat sex toy and is judged by people who have never played the game before as a character that "takes off all her clothes to power up."
Others call Bayonetta a "crappy button mashing game with tits and ass."

Honestly, few games get much advertisement at all outside of game magazines, and youtube adverts before videos.
Eh, personally I like Bayonetta as a character. I won't deny it's probably because she stands alone more often than not in various fields of female representation, but I had fun with the games.
I got her Smash Bros DLC.

The general consensus I saw surrounding the face rework was a resounding "meh" by many. As in, no one really felt it was a big deal. Some wanted the duckface to stay because they thought it was funny, or charming.

I don't entirely disagree with your assessment, but still, quite changes almost never happen. If they do, then it's not quiet for long.

I already made my point about this.
Gamers are on the defensive and there are lots of assholes at the front door.
That doesn't mean reasonable discussion is impossible.
In fact this whole Tracer thing proves that devs are willing to listen to everyone, regardless of majority opinion anyway, so people can still have this discussion with the people that actually make the changes.
Unless you are banned from the discussion, you can still have your voice among the screaming masses.

It's easy to be drowned out, and overlooked because of the assholes, though.
I don't disagree that that should be the reason civil discussion happens. I come for that when I open up the Escapist. May not always look like that, but it's a lot of the reason I come here.

It's not a "battle."
It's a disagreement.
Making it a "battle" turns it into some righteous crusade for both sides. Which is dumb.

You're right. It just feels like a battle because I've been in the discussion for so long.

You have to be IN the closet, first.

Fair enough. Just saying that because a character wasn't Bi before doesn't mean it can't happen.

As everyone knows, the REAL man to go for is Garrus for those calibrations.

More like his gift of armor piercing ammo. Guy knows the way to this gal's heart. :P
Garrus is interesting on so many levels. Pretty much everything in game, and the fact that Bioware made an actual attempt to keep him fanservice for women, and frankly it worked. Worked way more than the green guy, IMO who was more blatant.
then again, I was also kinda irritated when Zaeed, may his VA rest in peace, wasn't a love interest. Something about the tough old bastard with stories appeals to me.

Never found that one.

Diana Allers is the character.

Aaaaah, you got me there.
So I guess Fem!Shep really is into women.
I still say that the only lesbian relationship she had prior to that was Liara. Unless Ashley was an option in ME1, I stand by the notion that Fem!Shep having interest in women is kinda contradictory to her character.

Ashley wasn't an option in ME1, IIRC. And her starting point as a xenophobe wouldn't have helped if she was, but she did kinda grow out of it. Her me3 character model also got more... impressive, IMO.
But yeah, it was just Asari in ME1 IIRC.

Samara and Morinth actually are non-romantic options until ME3 if I recall correctly. I don't know if that's true or not; I did do their loyalty missions and such, but never really seemed to have romantic options.
Oh, and Morinth I DO NOT count as a romance option, because, yeah, uh, you kinda DIE when you do it with her. And she wants to do it with you because she's a serial killer who gets off on it, not because she has a romantic interest in Shepherd.

Samara was more romantic than not, IMO, but I'll readily agree that perception is key here. I still regard Morinth as one since you don't have to endure death by snusnu, and it's more romance option than women get in a lot of other games. :P

Surprise! Not all women are lesbians in Mass Effect. Crazy, right?

Yeah, surprise kinda wore off after me1, though. lol
A lot of women were straight in the game, and I was okay with it more than anything.

Really? I thought she was in ME3.
Geez, I need to recheck.

...actually, I don't think I can pick the game up again.
Bad taste in my mouth. Not from the gay pairings, just from the ending.
I'll take your word for it.

I understand your feelings for the endings. I don't really share them, mind you, but I do have sympathy.
Still, the Citadel DLC is the true ending for me.

Yeah, this is kinda true. I think that's changing though. I mean, Jojo does well enough despite being VERY homoerotic.

Hopefully it is changing.
Jojo kinda stands alone in that regard, sadly.

[quote][quote]I mean all the ugliness in the world does exist in the gaming community because they're inhabited by the same people.

You mean men?

I jest. Obviously you mean assholes.
Communities have varying degrees of toxicity to them. The competitive nature of gaming and the wounds left by things like GamerGate, Anita, etc. have all left gamers in this weird divide of people terrified of change, people embracing that change, and people who just want to stir shit up regardless of their side. Oh, and the people who just don't give a shit and wish everyone would shut up and let gaming do its thing.

The truth is what I think you mean is that all the ugliness in the gaming community is because they all follow a similar MENTALITY. The notion of them being the same people makes it sound like you're declaring people within the community "acceptable targets" because they act vitriolic or obnoxious in their responses.

No, I mean we're all human. A neonazi, for instance, can be a gamer as much as any tolerant person. The gaming community is made up of people of all walks of life, and it's one of the few common grounds so many people have between eachother. the gaming community can't exist without the people that make it up.
That said, humanity is a mixed bag. Men, women, old, young. The bigots, heroes, etc. that we see in reality could be the people we play with online as much as anyone else.
But that said, I realize this might bring in real life politics, and I really really really want to stay away from that.

Rebel_Raven:
Which is great, IMO! No complaints here.

I especially like the reference to it being a pilot pin-up pose. It's actually a really clever decision on their part.

I don't know about that. Mace Windu, and Aayla Secura were nice, too, imo. Thanks to the prequels Disney infinite has 3 incarnations of Samuel L Jackson as Mace Windu, Nick Fury, and Frozone. :P

But Mace Windu was so dull though. I would've rather seen Samuel play a Sith and really go crazy, because he's really good at that acting-wise. Seeing him play a character that just cuts loose is a lot of fun to watch, even in bad films like the Spirit.

Yeah, I can only imagine the state of being some of these assholes are in. An "SJW" won in getting a change made, but that change is still sexy.

Like I said, this sets a good precedent, so maybe people can calm down and ease up a bit.

Well, you do seem like you want to get in on the diversity conversation. I'm just letting you know why it's so difficult. I'm not denying there are no extremists on the side of wanting diversity. Personally, I can't think of a single argument as to why I should want gaming to go back to the bland straight white brunette guy model that's been adhered to for a while, that's thankfully loosening it's grip, so I might be one of those extremists in being solid in my stance.

Well I feel that it's a complex thing, representation. There's a balance that needs to be in play, but at the same time I feel the focus on diversity is watering down the focus on the real purpose or intent of a game.
Like, I keep coming back to it, but Indivisible is an example of variety producing diversity. Because there's so many characters in the game, they have to make each character distinct, so there's dozens of differing body types and races, much like how Overwatch has numerous heroes of varying ethnicity and nationalities. By making each character distinct, diversity springs forth naturally from that.

But instead of praising the character design, the fun gameplay or anything, I don't want to see people praising a game because of its inclusivity and diversity, not because it's not praiseworthy, but because it shouldn't be the only thing people focus on. Making these factors the leading positives for any piece over the other aspects makes me cringe so hard my face withdraws into my head (this is my favorite expression lately, don't mind me overusing it).

And I totally get that. I see the onslaught of assholes every month, or so. Heck, this was twice this month, or more. I can't expect anyone to fight it.

I think this is the consequence of having such large groups. The bigger your group, the more assholes you have.

It's simply because when you enter a conversation on most areas of social media, the assholes greet you at the door, and dog you every step of the way, save for odd spots like the Escapist. That's why they're the face.

But should we slash the nose to spite the face?
TBH I understand and sympathize. There's always going to be assholes, but that doesn't necessarily mean you have to go in the front door. The more reasonable folk always leave the back door unlocked. Alternatively you could sneak into someone's bedroom through the window.
There's always going to be a place that's open to reasonable discussion, just as there's always going to be places that shut down these conversations because some folks go on the defensive as a knee-jerk reaction.

Why do we treat it like a political movement? People think there's agendas at play, really. The Gay Agenda, and stuff like that. That there's groups that want to make gaming into something another group doesn't want. We're a tribal species, so we create lines in the sand, and borders, and, well, you get the idea.
The problem with muting, and what not is people can bypass it, and bluntly, it's no doubt a lot of trouble to go through and mute 9,999 people to see the 10,000 person being civil.

Fair enough. I still think that's a bit of an exaggeration, numbers wise, but TBH I think the only way we can have a 100% civil discourse is by dropping any notion of an "agenda" at all. I think part of that is tackling things on a case by case basis rather than claiming there's any sort of overarching problem beyond there not being enough female protagonists. It's when people bring up that whole "gaming perpetuates misogyny" narrative and so on and so forth that people get mad against. People don't want a discussion with anyone "holding an agenda."

Yeah, there's people out there that don't want politics involved in gaming. Don't want talks of inclusion, they just want gaming to stay the course. They look at gaming before and see it in rose tinted glasses. Mostly because they were almost completely pandered to.

Well again I think this is a consequence of demographics. Because gaming was so male-dominated in the past, it's hard for devs to let go of the past, and I think a lot of people don't care about inclusion and don't see the problem because there isn't anything explicitly exclusive (or rather intended to be exclusive) beyond pandering to the majority, which a lot of people simply state "is just business."

Even so, there are people who appreciate female protagonists too. My first character in FF14 was a female Lalafell based off an NPC from one of my DnD groups. She's adorable and badass, and the first character I got to level 60.

Nah, facebook, an youtube largely. I think we'd get more done if every community were like the escapist. It's a lot of communities I'm looking at.

Well there's your problem. Social media sites and a video site that doesn't even understand fair use are ill places for intellectual discussion.
Plus a lot of other gaming journalism sites have already stated where their intentions lie and therefore are unfit places for gaming discussion as well.
The only other places I could think of is like, I dunno...NeoGAF? Which I hear is a shitty place for discussion as well, so, I dunno.

Well, flirting, and doing sexy things kinda leads to another can of worms. The fact that male leads often get sex, and romance, but female leads don't. The industry's sorta still wrestling with the idea of women as player characters getting romance outside of games like Mass Effect, or when it's attached to the playable guy.
Then we have Bayonetta who I'm okay with.
I agree this should happen more.

Female leads don't get romance? I thought Bayonetta was totes in a relationship with that one comedy relief dude. Although that could be a bit weird, considering how witches age...

I think as well that's a struggle with female sexuality and that vocal minority piping up and screaming "strong independent women don't NEED NO MAN, MMMHMM."

But I think we're agreeing about sexy things and that there is a time and place for them.
Playing a female voice 2 boss in Saints Row 3/4 (the vaguely Russian voice) has her flirting with Pierce constantly, and it makes him extremely uncomfortable, played for laughs. Yet if the role was reversed and Pierce were a woman being flirted with by a man and making her uncomfortable, no one would be playing that for laughs. I think that a lot of gaming reflects the social double standards we see as well, so I agree we should discuss sex and fanservice in games at a bit more length.

Because it wears thin seeing women as NPCs, and supporting characters, and never taking charge in a game. It really is.

Well then that's a case of poor writing more than anything.

Yeah, it would be nice, but I see them on the horizon so i'm not really bent out of shape. Mirror's edge, Dishonored 2, the new tomb raider, and a few more, and they're being advertised, and they're closer to AAA. There's been recent releases like bayonetta 2, Senran Kagura in general, and so forth. I'm not terribly mad.

This is why people feel that a lot of the criticism about representation is unnecessary. I don't think there's been any sort of pushback against female protagonists for a long time, unless they are replacing a character people like.

Like, imagine if they tried to replace, I dunno, let's say, Nathan Drake with some random woman. People would be mad, but not because it's a woman, but instead because Nathan is no longer in the story. It's like how people would lose their shit if Shia La Boef had played Indiana Jones instead of Harrison Ford in Crystal Skull.

What's fair about only being able to play as a woman if you can also play as a guy?

That's pretty fair if you ask me. It means you have more options. It means you have the choice to be whichever.
That's equality, if you ask me; both genders being represented equally, and giving you the option to choose one or the other.

One series out how many? Elder Scrolls was pretty decent about not putting women in impractical armor just to be sexy. A few other series, too.

Well I was kinda just being all huffy like "Oh DARK SOULS never had this problem!"
Plus Dark Souls is the best example off the top of my head.
A lot of Eastern games are more guilty of the impractical armor thing than western ones lately though. Hyperdimension Neptunia and Senran Kagura come to mind.

Yeah, but in Divinity, the women were wearing metal plate armor with exposed midriffs. Not only does it leave massive meaty bits exposed, there's no support for the extra weight up top. If you thought having large boobs was a backache, imagine adding 30+ lbs of armor on top of that with no support coming from what should be armor connecting the chest to the midsection, and waist?

Well yeah, I was agreeing with you that it's impractical. I'm just giving an example where that midriff stuff would make sense, is all. Like being a thief or something, where the clothing would merely restrict your movement unless you were wearing a skin tight jumpsuit.

I can't remember if I brought up Divinity or not. It may be an old wound, but it does need time to close.

I think gamers just need a breather from any sort of "agenda pushing." People are afraid that gaming is going to get watered down and turned into the "feminist game dev tree" which always ends with "congratulations! You have created a walking simulator." I think at this point gaming can just be left on its own, with female protagonists being more prevalent being the main point of discussion.

Well, I'd like to think there's a difference between pressuring a creator, and asking for something. Just recently I looked at the Battleborn roster, and noticed that there was no heavy weapons/armor woman in the entire roster, so I simply asked for one. The staff said they'd look into it. Others sorta lured me into a conversation like we're having now, there was some asshole that got shut down quick.

I'm all for diversity, but I'm not looking for a check list. I'm, in fact, looking forward to seeing the industry break completely free of the checklist it has now as far as leads go.
Straight, white, male, brunette.

It's happening, though. Slowly but surely, and I recognize that, so take that complaint however you will.

Only as long as we can still have those options. Remember, we need to add, not remove. I'm glad we both agree things are coming along, though. I think that's part of why people are so fierce now. "Things are already on the right track, STFU" I think is the reason the assholes are so common; it's already happening, and any sort of pressure to speed it along will inevitably be met with pushback.

Yeah, I'd really have liked it to happen more naturally. After the girl power crash in the late 90's, and the rise of the straight white brunette guy checklist it was only a matter of time before we got to this point.

Yeah, it's that whole "it's more meaningful if it's done willingly" situation. Plus when it happens naturally the change is colored by the creators and the community rather than by any outside force.

Fair enough. I'd recommend keeping with that since lots of people tried to make similar, and longer lists, and I'm still not convinced otherwise.

TBH I still think there was never any problem with any female protagonists in the past.
There just weren't that many because, again, demographic. People needed to make money devving a game back then, especially with how expensive development was (and still is).

Because i'm tired of being forced to play as a dude if I want to enjoy certain subjects in gaming. Most games with character choices also force you to switch characters at times, and also the scripts become a little formulaic, as does the roles both men and women play. When it's just a woman then things get interesting as you get to see women do things normally relegated to the male counterpart.

Ah, but those are just women with balls, dontchaknow.

Joking aside, I don't see the problem with women in the "male" role, because that isn't the "male" role. It's the "protagonist" role. I think making it clear that it's not the "male" role but the "protagonist" role is an important distinction.
Furthermore having multiple characters gives you the option to experience a story from multiple perspectives. There's nothing innately wrong with having multiple characters, and nothing wrong with having a woman or a man be the only protagonist in a story. I do agree however that having the options available to YOU, the player, are important.

It hasn't come up until recently because, honestly, it feels like there hasn't been too much in the way of places to voice these concerns in public. Also there's shady tactics in play to keep women from gaming, and keep them out of gaming that have come to light in the last few years. Everything came together in the boiling point.

Where was this?
I never saw any tactics to exlu--

*sigh*

No. I know what this is.
See, this is the thing.
People come in with these narratives and these preformed perceptions, and I'm just going to say, no.
I have no idea where you heard there was some shady tactics in play to keep women from gaming. I have never heard of this. Not anywhere. And that in and of itself is so veritably insulting, to every game dev who's ever made a game, that it's actually disturbing.
You know, if you're shitting on publishers, or producers, than fine. They're only interested in money anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me if they pulled some shit. But I don't want to hear anything about game devs doing questionable bullshit like that when I know for a fact the place where garbage like that would ever happen would come from the people on the top.

We don't have to talk Sarkeesian if you don't want to. Frankly, I'd like to avoid it as well. She's a powder keg, and immensely polarizing.

Glad we agree.

Of course not. We have Lightning for that! :P

Zing!

Honestly, I played the hell out of FF7, and I really do enjoy it, even now. I want to play the upcoming remake, and I REALLY want to see the new Tifa design! I hope it's not her Advent Children look, rather her FF7 style.
Tifa's actually one of my favorite gaming women, and I glommed on to the rare opportunity where she could go chocoboracing on her own.
When I see a really great female NPC, I want to play as her, and experience the world through her. RPGs don't really allow for that because you're often put in the role of the guy, and the game makes sure you know it.

Well Cloud's the hero, and a lot of the story is about him. He's the one connected to the villain, he's the one who tried to get into soldier to fulfill his childhood promise to Tifa. He goes through a TON of shit in FF7 that leaves him broken and in a wheelchair. And he's not portrayed as a perfect hero either. His introduction paints him as an aloof asshole, and you can choose whether or not to remember the childhood promise in dialogue. He is easily manipulated, and gives in to despair late in the game, and Tifa has to pull him out of it and bring him back from the dark place he was in.

The game never "makes sure you know it." The game says "here's Cloud. He's a mercenary and also kind of a dick. He is your avatar in this world, as well as a character of his own. Now enjoy the story and play the game."

I still stand by that you are getting really hung up on gender and accusing the game of making statements that are coming from your own perception of the game.

The ONLY time where his gender is a thing is ONE, SINGLE, PART of the game where he's forced to cross-dress. That's it. It's not conducive to him as a character, it's just there as a narrative device to move the plot forward. And his motive for getting in there to "save Tifa" is HIS objective; in reality Tifa was just fine, and was only going in there to infiltrate the Don's mansion (which by trying to go save her you actually end up messing up if you got the best items).

Like I said with FF7, you're given the inescapable conclusion you're meant to play as Cloud, and he is your avatar. Everyone else is there to make him look good in the end. He's the one that'll save the world. Advent Children really drives that home.

Advent Children was a piece of shit film sequel.
And you have a very cynical outlook on teamwork, don't cha?
The power rangers only exist to make the red ranger look good.

It's true in many RPGs.
Everyone else's Arc is a sub-story to the main protagonists.

And the main protagonist's is to save the world.
That's it.
Cloud's own character arc is in and of itself a sub-arc of coping with his angst and understanding the truth of who he is.
Barret is dealing with demons from his past and his conflict with raising a child as a single parent, whilst also being the leader of a terrorist organization.
Aeris has to cope with being the last of her kind, as well as coming to terms with a sacrifice she realizes she needs to make to save everyone.
Red XIII has to deal with his past, learning the truth about his father, and returning to his homeland.
Vincent Valentine has to struggle with his history with Shinra and his unrequited love choosing someone over him for the sake of science, as well as a twisted and mutated body.
Cid spends his arc trying to achieve a dream of going to space, and coping with the fact that he at one point had to choose between his dreams and someone he cares about to do it, thanks to his own headstrong nature and carelessness.

The only 3 characters I can't think of having a sub-arc were Yuffie (who's apparently struggling to live up to her family's expectation and restore Wutai to its former glory), Cait Sith (a mole with a robot) and Tifa (who's mostly just struggling with trying to be the Team Mom of the group and watch in horror as the man she loves dives farther and farther off the deep end until he's literally a vegetable).

This all going on behind the "Sephiroth is trying to destroy the world," thing. And that's not even mentioning the stuff going on in Shinra, or some of the other sub-plots surrounding things like what happened to Nibelheim.

It just isn't good enough.

And it never will be, will it?

FF6 was so very long ago. A classic to be certain, but, it hasn't done much for me lately. I hate the mentality, but I've had to take it because people keep trying to point me to playing the rare retro classic that I've already played. I don't mind revisiting, but I really do need something modern. Luckily the gaming climate is more likely to provide that these days.

Then the point of complaining is moot.

I can't. I don't always want to explore a world from a male point of view, with a male personality, and so forth.

But you'd be okay if it was from a woman's POV with a "woman's personality." What the hell is that even, I thought personality was determined by the individual, but hey if you want to stereotypes, then I guess Street Fighter 5 is right up your alley (and their stereotypes aren't even that bad compared to some stuff I've seen).

Especially when the guys can be so badly written that all they do is be violent, and get women, and do typical guy things. I want variety.

Then start playing good games instead. Like, jeez, what have you been playing?

I don't feel excluded when I play a gender neutral robot. I feel excluded when women are excluded in the long run, you see. I can enjoy playing as a guy now and then. Batman (especially if he's voiced by Kevin Conroy), John Marston, the GTA guys, Jacob Frye, to name a few. I can enjoy well done characters regardless of nature, BUT there's a limit to how long I can go without a female avatar to play as in a modern game. Being forced to play as a guy is grating over time thanks to the drought of playable women for the longest time.

See now this I can understand as being a fair stance to take. You just want to have a female protagonist now and then. So then what's stopping you from playing games where they aren't the ONLY protagonist or just a selectable protagonist?
Does having the male option there simply put you off so much you can't even play the game?
And there are more options now than there used to be, as well, which means there are more options open to you. Not only that, there are more on the way.

Male fan service? Dare I dream of the day when every other guy, and basically every male protagonist dresses/acts like:


We have Jojo games though...
And TBH I would totally be cool with more Jojo. We need MOAR JOJOS. A lot of people love Jojo, even dudes. It's that whole "MANLY" thing that's actually got a bit of backing to it. Even if it could be perceived as "gay" the general attitudes towards things like Jojo is that it's awesome, and the posing itself is badass, even if the poses are considered "gay" by some.
So I don't see why there isn't going to be more of that stuff.
Oh but wait do we need more female protagonists or more of these male protagonists?
Hm...well like I said, why not both?

Or like the guys from the Twilight Movie series, which is odd in that despite it's popularity, there hasn't been a real game made from the movie license?

Because Twilight is kinda shit, and was only popular because it was literally something to wet housewives' panties despite the fact that it fetishized abusive relationships.

Oh and it was ploddingly written too.

Fanservice is pretty heavy in western games, too.

Which games?

And a stronger desire to keep women from being playable, IMO.

IMO.
So in other words, you FEEL that it was INTENDED to drive women off.
But that's, like, just your opinion, man.
If it bothers you, you can't just assume it was the author's intent to drive you off.

Senran Kagura's not going to be released? Why 3 (Technically 4 as 1 is 2 games) have been released in only a few months, if not more! Estival Versus basically just last week!


And I'm frikking excited to get my hands on Estival Versus on ps4. I have burst, and Deep Crimson.

I wish it was on Vita, honestly. My wallet went with the Wii U, and I'm not sure I like the choice I made anymore.
Well, I do have a lot of good games for it, at least. Shame Nintendo's been kinda going full retard.

See, the climate of gaming is changing. Games like Senran Kagura, and Beyonetta 1 and 2 can appear on the normally family friendly Nintendo systems. Games like Senran Kagura can just come out!

Senran Kagura last I checked is a series that frequently has games "just come out."
As in, there is little to NO advertising for them at all.
I didn't even know Deep Crimson existed until I saw it in store and snatched it up.
The only reason I was cautious about Deep Crimson is that the first Senran Kagura had framerate issues and was E-shop only.
Bayonetta is a character that is still frequently touted as a shitty combat sex toy and is judged by people who have never played the game before as a character that "takes off all her clothes to power up."
Others call Bayonetta a "crappy button mashing game with tits and ass."

It's more about the inability to quietly make changes than anything.

The general consensus I saw surrounding the face rework was a resounding "meh" by many. As in, no one really felt it was a big deal. Some wanted the duckface to stay because they thought it was funny, or charming.

Because they're acting poorly? Have you seen them lately? It's really just the assholes, but like I said, when people want to talk representation in gaming, they generally run into the assholes first, and they give the first impressions of who they'll be talking to in these discussions, and often enough, they're the only ones they get to talk to. Not every place is as clean and well maintained as The escapist. The assholes don't want reasonable discussion. They want to shut down any and all criticisms. And, again, they're often the first, and only people gamers run into when they want to talk about things.

I already made my point about this.
Gamers are on the defensive and there are lots of assholes at the front door.
That doesn't mean reasonable discussion is impossible.
In fact this whole Tracer thing proves that devs are willing to listen to everyone, regardless of majority opinion anyway, so people can still have this discussion with the people that actually make the changes.
Unless you are banned from the discussion, you can still have your voice among the screaming masses.

Hey, I'm just letting you know it exists. I'm not expecting you to do anything. It's just breaking news in the battle between people wanting inclusion vs the people that don't.

It's not a "battle."
It's a disagreement.
Making it a "battle" turns it into some righteous crusade for both sides. Which is dumb.

Male shep can come out of the closet, dangit! :P

You have to be IN the closet, first.

Plus there's mor than just Kaiden, IIRC. And lets face it, Kaiden was terrible all around.

As everyone knows, the REAL man to go for is Garrus for those calibrations.

Femshep had several lesbian love interests. The reporter played by Chobot (Not the one you can punch as part of the running gag)

Never found that one.

Chambers from ME2

Aaaaah, you got me there.
So I guess Fem!Shep really is into women.
I still say that the only lesbian relationship she had prior to that was Liara. Unless Ashley was an option in ME1, I stand by the notion that Fem!Shep having interest in women is kinda contradictory to her character.

Liara, and the consort from ME1 (Though it doesn't last, obviously), Samara, and Morinth who are all Asari. Kinda bummed Aria wasn't an option because I liked her.

Samara and Morinth actually are non-romantic options until ME3 if I recall correctly. I don't know if that's true or not; I did do their loyalty missions and such, but never really seemed to have romantic options.
Oh, and Morinth I DO NOT count as a romance option, because, yeah, uh, you kinda DIE when you do it with her. And she wants to do it with you because she's a serial killer who gets off on it, not because she has a romantic interest in Shepherd.

It frustrated me that Tali was not an option, really. She really was my favorite.

Surprise! Not all women are lesbians in Mass Effect. Crazy, right?

Jack wasn't a romance option for Femshep ever, IIRC. I've explored all of the options. Jack just doesn't roll that way.

Really? I thought she was in ME3.
Geez, I need to recheck.

...actually, I don't think I can pick the game up again.
Bad taste in my mouth. Not from the gay pairings, just from the ending.
I'll take your word for it.

I'm pretty sure there's more than a fair share of people hating on the LGBT just because they're LGBT. Well, Lesbians get some slack because they're a well established part of the general male fantasy.

Yeah, this is kinda true. I think that's changing though. I mean, Jojo does well enough despite being VERY homoerotic.

I mean all the ugliness in the world does exist in the gaming community because they're inhabited by the same people.

You mean men?

I jest. Obviously you mean assholes.
Communities have varying degrees of toxicity to them. The competitive nature of gaming and the wounds left by things like GamerGate, Anita, etc. have all left gamers in this weird divide of people terrified of change, people embracing that change, and people who just want to stir shit up regardless of their side. Oh, and the people who just don't give a shit and wish everyone would shut up and let gaming do its thing.

The truth is what I think you mean is that all the ugliness in the gaming community is because they all follow a similar MENTALITY. The notion of them being the same people makes it sound like you're declaring people within the community "acceptable targets" because they act vitriolic or obnoxious in their responses.

LOL it has been replaced with pin-up girl pose. The very definition of being objectified as sexual tension relief for men :D Please complain some more, maybe next replaced will be a 'nude' shot... of a friggin fictional cartoon characer. Oh noes it is being oooopreeseed it is sooo trrrriggerring!

LawAndChaos:

I think it's a glitch, too, but that doesn't mean we're right. :P
Honestly, I feel like it was a matter of the pose's sex appeal coupled with the personality of the pose clashing with tracer's personality.

I will point out that any seductive behavior on Widowmaker's part doesn't really fall in line with her character either. Sniping is an incredibly impersonal method of assassination, and she's a walking corpse. I think the Black Widow motif on her isn't representing her character, but her backstory more than anything.

Besides they made Tracer's new pose even more sex appeal-y, and not only that, it falls in line with Tracer's character, according to them.

Which is great, IMO! No complaints here.

Palpatine has that sort of voice doesn't he?

Palpatine is the only good thing about the prequels.

I don't know about that. Mace Windu, and Aayla Secura were nice, too, imo. Thanks to the prequels Disney infinite has 3 incarnations of Samuel L Jackson as Mace Windu, Nick Fury, and Frozone. :P

Bluntly, I'm more looking at the Escapist (A gleaming oasis of civility, IMO thanks to the dedicated moderation staff), Facebook, and Youtube. Of course I can't name and shame, but I will say that my rant reflects the tone used by the majority of the "gamers" upset with tracer's change, among other things I'll get into later in this post.

Ah, ok, thanks for the clarification.
But honestly most of the outrage I see is the fact that everyone's pissed or relatively annoyed that people "couldn't handle a butt." The controversy is overblown, sure, but it stands in line with the genuine concern most gamers have that people who don't actually care about video games are trying to force changes based on their ideologies into video games. So as previously stated, any "victory" for them is a "defeat" for gamers. Of course that's dumb, but that's what we've come to.

Yeah, I can only imagine the state of being some of these assholes are in. An "SJW" won in getting a change made, but that change is still sexy.

Those "few folks" are drowning out any hope of seeing the more civil people. Infact they pretty much have drowned it all out. People enter conversations on the topic at hand, and these people are first and foremost the people seen by the people entering the conversations. They're setting the tone. They're basically the majority of people involved in the topic. So, they are the face of the gaming community.

That applies to both sides. It's unfair to act like the onus of blame is all on the gaming community. The vocal minority of both sides of the argument have left gaming on the defensive while also looking unwelcoming. Neither side wants to clear the bats out of the belfry, though.

Well, you do seem like you want to get in on the diversity conversation. I'm just letting you know why it's so difficult.
I'm not denying there are no extremists on the side of wanting diversity. Personally, I cam't think of a single argument as to why I should want gaming to go back to the bland straight white brunette guy model that's been adhered to for a while, that's thankfully loosening it's grip, so I might be one of those extremists in being solid in my stance.

I suppose policing might be a harsh term, and again, I don't expect anyone to really attempt this because I know it's like trying to drink an ocean.
I'm not really saying to silence them, I'm saying maybe, if one were to actually attempt the massive feat, is try hard to show that these people aren't the only representatives of gaming. That there are people out there that can be civil. Maybe call someone out when they're being an asshole even if they are on your side. As much as it sucks, going along with what the asshole is saying is more or less giving credibility to them.

Well I suppose this is a case of them feeling like it's not their responsibility to fight against every zealous asshole that hops into a conversation. Plus the current atmosphere surrounding gaming is that people are expecting to just be disregarded, disrespected or dismissed because they are a gamer.

And I totally get that. I see the onslaught of assholes every month, or so. Heck, this was twice this month, or more. I can't expect anyone to fight it.

I'm not chastising "gamers" I'm chastising the assholes. I'm basically giving them a shout out to let them know they're being assholes, see?

Actually thinking about it, why do assholes suddenly become gaming reps? Just because they are part of a gaming community or play games?
Plus anyone can be labelled an asshole simply for being critical nowadays, so what even constitutes an asshole?

Gaming at its core doesn't have an ideology, it's a hobby. So why do we need to act like a political movement?
A lot of the general attitude surrounding gaming is "when someone's being a dick they're not worth dealing with, ignore them." I think that mostly comes from the fact that in our current age of gaming we are used to mute and silence options to keep those sorts of people out of our fun. Furthermore there have been cases of one side completely shutting down the discussion entirely rather than wanting to hear gamers' side of things, so there is no other option appearing to them except to keep to themselves and put up as many defensive walls as possible to keep "SJW" stuff out of games.

Yes, essentially gamers felt like they needed to turn the place into a "safe space." Funny, right?

It's simply because when you enter a conversation on most areas of social media, the assholes greet you at the door, and dog you every step of the way, save for odd spots like the Escapist. That's why they're the face.

What constitutes an asshole?

Why do we treat it like a political movement? People think there's agendas at play, really. The Gay Agenda, and stuff like that. That there's groups that want to make gaming into something another group doesn't want. We're a tribal species, so we create lines in the sand, and borders, and, well, you get the idea.
The problem with muting, and what not is people can bypass it, and bluntly, it's no doubt a lot of trouble to go through and mute 9,999 people to see the 10,000 person being civil.

Yeah, there's people out there that don't want politics involved in gaming. Don't want talks of inclusion, they just want gaming to stay the course. They look at gaming before and see it in rose tinted glasses. Mostly because they were almost completely pandered to.

We must have seen different comments.

I didn't see any outrage over it, honest.
I'm not going to assume there wasn't any, but I really didn't see any.
I probably missed them.
Still, I mean, if you're talking about specifically in the Escapist, that's like, just one community, man.
We can't base the whole of gaming off one community.

Nah, facebook, an youtube largely. I think we'd get more done if every community were like the escapist. It's a lot of communities I'm looking at.

I never said, or never wanted to imply sexuality makes a character shit automatically, as evidenced by later in my post. I honestly don't mind fan service, and I don't feel a character can only be sexual, or only well written. They can assuredly be both, but that certainly doesn't mean sexualized characters are all we should get.

And I never said or implied that sexualized characters are all we should get.
And in the case of Overwatch, we don't.
The truth is that there are options out there that many conveniently ignore for the sake of continuing to rally against games for not representing enough or representing them properly.
And again, what's wrong with sexuality?
I'm not talking taking it to the extreme with dental floss bathing suits or thongs or whatever, I'm talking flirting, or doing sexy poses or dances, or simply having some interest in sexuality at all.
You see this is why so many gamers mischaracterise the argument as "ALL WOMEN IN BURKHAS HERP DERP," because any semblance of female sexuality is often put under the microscope and criticized for being there.

And to me personally, characters are either blank slates to project onto, or characters within a story that are following a plot for that character, so I'm not the sort of person to talk to about representation when I already feel that a character's gender should take a backseat to how well they're written.

Well, flirting, and doing sexy things kinda leads to another can of worms. The fact that male leads often get sex, and romance, but female leads don't. The industry's sorta still wrestling with the idea of women as player characters getting romance outside of games like Mass Effect, or when it's attached to the playable guy.
Then we have Bayonetta who I'm okay with.
I agree this should happen more.

It's usually criticized because it doesn't fit the theme, really. Like tracer, or the bare midriff armor, and such.

Not in large numbers. Hell, not even on a yearly basis. Rarely good ones.
I'm not saying the games didn't exist, I'm saying that they're far too rare.
A lot of those characters listed you don't play as.

They're still there. And in RPGs you are technically playing as a party, not just one character. Plus I don't see why they NEED to be playable, so long as they're good examples of well-written female characters.

Because it wears thin seeing women as NPCs, and supporting characters, and never taking charge in a game. It really is.

Let me put things in to focus. I'm mainly referring to games where you can play as a woman from start to finish. Bonus points if you don't have the choice to play as a guy because the game revolves around the female character(s). yeah, you can call it moving the goal posts, and I probably should have elaborated earlier, but that's what I expect from games with female protagonists.
Yeah, I get the point of this vid. It doesn't make things better.

So you want more games that focus purely on a female protagonist, and not give the option for anything other than female?
Ok, I see, I getcha perfectly.
You don't want to count games that have women as an playable option because...any game that has the option to play as both men and women is somehow not supporting women, simply because male protagonists are more common?

Even though there were at the time more men playing games than women?

Well ok.

Yeah, it would be nice, but I see them on the horizon so i'm not really bent out of shape. Mirror's edge, Dishonored 2, the new tomb raider, and a few more, and they're being advertised, and they're closer to AAA. There's been recent releases like bayonetta 2, Senran Kagura in general, and so forth. I'm not terribly mad.

What's fair about only being able to play as a woman if you can also play as a guy?

Nothing's wrong with sexuality in and of itself. It's a tool for conveying ideas.
The problem comes in when that's all that you get. I'm not wanting it gone. I'm wanting it toned down some, or used better.
Seeing a guy walk around in a suit of armor that is pretty practical, and fantastic, and then seeing women stuck in impractical armor that no sane person would wear into battle -all the time- is kinda unfair, and lopsided.

Dark Souls never had this problem.

One series out how many? Elder Scrolls was pretty decent about not putting women in impractical armor just to be sexy. A few other series, too.

Having one's guts spilling out because the midriff is unprotected is pretty life threatening, so I'd imagine any sane person would want to prevent that from happening. Especially when they take great pains to cover up other areas.

See now this makes logical sense. I can only imagine the midriff exposure being a thing if it was for ease of movement and flexibility, but that would only work if you're playing a class that would logically require that, like a thief.

Yeah, but in Divinity, the women were wearing metal plate armor with exposed midriffs. Not only does it leave massive meaty bits exposed, there's no support for the extra weight up top. If you thought having large boobs was a backache, imagine adding 30+ lbs of armor on top of that with no support coming from what should be armor connecting the chest to the midsection, and waist?

It kinda screws with immersion, and it's a little insulting that women are often only able to look sexy in their armor and not really have an option to look practical when trying to dress in full plate. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying why is it the only thing that can really happen?
Granted this sort of thing is getting a little more rare.

And yet people still complain about it even though it's going away. Well color me shocked.

I can't remember if I brought up Divinity or not. It may be an old wound, but it does need time to close.

Why would one want to argue against inclusiveness? I doubt those arguments would win me over.
you can thank the loud, obnoxious face of the gaming community for the lack of desire to talk. Having 1 civil person among thousands of people resorting to every sort of slur imaginable won't be doing that civil person any favors.

Because diversity is a natural result of variety. When you argue for inclusiveness you are arguing for a diversity checklist. "Oop, better make sure I have this and this and this, gotta make sure everyone's represented." It gives meaning to things like race and gender when those things shouldn't be a big deal. It should be the creator's choice to make their characters and playables how they want, and if they want to change something more power to them to do so.

But nobody wants to see creators be pressured into making changes because everyone was angry at them for not being inclusive.

Well, I'd like to think there's a difference between pressuring a creator, and asking for something. Just recently I looked at the Battleborn roster, and noticed that there was no heavy weapons/armor woman in the entire roster, so I simply asked for one. The staff said they'd look into it. Others sorta lured me into a conversation like we're having now, there was some asshole that got shut down quick.

I'm all for diversity, but I'm not looking for a check list. I'm, in fact, looking forward to seeing the industry break completely free of the checklist it has now as far as leads go.
Straight, white, male, brunette.
It's happening, though. Slowly but surely, and I recognize that, so take that complaint however you will.

Inclusivity is showing up more, and more, yeah. It wasn't always there, but it's getting there, and I'm at a pretty happy place with the current state of things, aside from some rare event like this pose issue, and a few other things.

It's a shame that we had to shake up the entirety of gaming and attempting to hold it up as "problematic" to do it, eh?

Yeah, I'd really have liked it to happen more naturally. After the girl power crash in the late 90's, and the rise of the straight white brunette guy checklist it was only a matter of time before we got to this point.

Well, first off, yes, Red Ninja was a terrible game. It had potential, but it basically wasted it.

Secondly, this list isn't all that great. Kinda weird you'd pick 2 of 13 years when gaming doesn't only occur in them, and 2 years doesn't negate my experiences.

Well I'm only one person, and I didn't want to spend about 2-2 & 1/2 hours just making a response to a forum post containing like every single example over the course of 13 years.

I'll freely admit laziness on my part.

Fair enough. I'd recommend keeping with that since lots of people tried to make similar, and longer lists, and I'm still not convinced otherwise.

Let me put this into perspective.
Think back to your days gaming in 2000 to 2013. All the resources you had back then, you still have them, and no more.
The lists of playable women, and if you don't mind me narrowing the scope a bit, games starring these women, are the ONLY games you get to play. Period. If you don't have the system the games are on, you don't get to play those. Are you happy with that selection?

Why does it only have to be games exclusively with women protagonists?
"I don't count anything that doesn't have ONLY a female protagonist as representing women."
And it's funny because yeah, I agree with you that it might've been limited, sure. Although a lot came about in 13 years, all things considered. How many consoles did we see in that time, not counting PC? I mean in 2000 we still had the PS1, which was back when gaming was still primarily male-dominated.

But then nobody said anything until not too long ago, when gaming was really starting to develop and grow, and variety was becoming the norm, and by extension diversity. But of course then the regressives came out to essentially attempt to set gaming backwards under the guise of "improving gaming diversity." I really, really, REALLY don't want to even bring Sarkeesian up, but from what I've seen she was the one that turned the conversation into something to clash against. Had she not attempted to paint gaming in a negative light in such an intellectually dishonest manner, the conversation would've likely come about on its own, or alternatively we would've seen more female protagonists over time through civil discourse instead of making misogyny accusations.

Because i'm tired of being forced to play as a dude if I want to enjoy certain subjects in gaming. Most games with character choices also force you to switch characters at times, and also the scripts become a little formulaic, as does the roles both men and women play. When it's just a woman then things get interesting as you get to see women do things normally relegated to the male counterpart.

It hasn't come up until recently because, honestly, it feels like there hasn't been too much in the way of places to voice these concerns in public. Also there's shady tactics in play to keep women from gaming, and keep them out of gaming that have come to light in the last few years. Everything came together in the boiling point.

We don't have to talk Sarkeesian if you don't want to. Frankly, I'd like to avoid it as well. She's a powder keg, and immensely polarizing.

If the answer is even remotely close to "no" then I think we might have an understanding.
Because I can just about guarantee that games with only male leads are far more varied in gameplay, subject, and basically everything that really matters.
I'm not saying I only play games with female leads, or anything like that, I'm just trying to make a point in how readily accessible they are, the quality of them, and the presentation of the female leads.

So what you're saying is, Cloud should've been a girl...

Of course not. We have Lightning for that! :P
Honestly, I played the hell out of FF7, and I really do enjoy it, even now. I want to play the upcoming remake, and I REALLY want to see the new Tifa design! I hope it's not her Advent Children look, rather her FF7 style.
Tifa's actually one of my favorite gaming women, and I glommed on to the rare opportunity where she could go chocoboracing on her own.
When I see a really great female NPC, I want to play as her, and experience the world through her. RPGs don't really allow for that because you're often put in the role of the guy, and the game makes sure you know it.

When most of the female cast members mainly exist only to make the male cast members look good, largely by suffering so the main guy can save them, yes, it diminishes things. It'd be nice to not always see women crammed into supporting roles.

Terra was a woman, and FF6 followed EVERY character in the party, even giving you the choice of who to follow when everyone got split up.
Every character in RPGs has a story to tell and an arc to follow. This is why I argue for every party member being a main character in their own way, even though there's a single "hero" main character for the player to directly interface with.
Plus "supporting roles" are just as important as the "main role." This pisses me off to no end when people see women in the supporting role and casually dismiss it offhand like it means fucking nothing.

Like I said with FF7, you're given the inescapable conclusion you're meant to play as Cloud, and he is your avatar. Everyone else is there to make him look good in the end. He's the one that'll save the world. Advent Children really drives that home.
It's true in many RPGs.
Everyone else's Arc is a sub-story to the main protagonists.
It just isn't good enough.
FF6 was so very long ago. A classic to be certain, but, it hasn't done much for me lately. I hate the mentality, but I've had to take it because people keep trying to point me to playing the rare retro classic that I've already played. I don't mind revisiting, but I really do need something modern. Luckily the gaming climate is more likely to provide that these days.

A few good supporting roles doesn't erase everything else because the good ones are very much in the minority.
It's nice, sometimes, to play as the woman, and have all the power to save the world, and freedom to do whatever the game allows, and generally be in the role that the main, generally male, lead has.

Then maybe you should stop getting hung up on gender and focus more on playing the character, maybe.
Do you feel excluded when you are expected to play as a gender neutral robot in a game, since you are unable to play as a human? Or if it were a male robot, would you still feel excluded because the robot identifies as male?

I can't. I don't always want to explore a world from a male point of view, with a male personality, and so forth. Especially when the guys can be so badly written that all they do is be violent, and get women, and do typical guy things. I want variety.

I don't feel excluded when I play a gender neutral robot. I feel excluded when women are excluded in the long run, you see. I can enjoy playing as a guy now and then. Batman (especially if he's voiced by Kevin Conroy), John Marston, the GTA guys, Jacob Frye, to name a few. I can enjoy well done characters regardless of nature, BUT there's a limit to how long I can go without a female avatar to play as in a modern game. Being forced to play as a guy is grating over time thanks to the drought of playable women for the longest time.

Of course not. It's sorta strange that the girls in Senran Kagura are among the best written. That sorta sidestepps my point, though. Like I said before, sexualization doesn't automatically make a character shitty. Senran Kagura is also not the only way women get presented in modern gaming.There is the Evie Frye, and rebooted Lara Croft, and more than a few other women that aren't presented like the Senran Kagura girls. There's a balance here. It certainly helps that the Senran Kagura games are oddly well written considering the level of fan service. Most games with the presentation of Senran Kagura rarely have the writing to back it up.

I don't get what adding fan service would do to help the situation. The pushback is there because people are sick of it being so prevalent in gaming.

And not everyone shares that sentiment, hence the pushback against the pushback.
Adding male fanservice would equal the field just fine. In games where the fanservice fits the tone, at least.
Not every game needs fanservice, but as far as I know fanservice has only been prevalent in Japanese games, waaaaaaaay more than American ones.

Well, so much for Senran Kagura then. I guess we know which devs are going to decide to not release their next game in the west next.

Male fan service? Dare I dream of the day when every other guy, and basically every male protagonist dresses/acts like:



Or like the guys from the Twilight Movie series, which is odd in that despite it's popularity, there hasn't been a real game made from the movie license?

Fanservice is pretty heavy in western games, too. And a stronger desire to keep women from being playable, IMO.

Senran Kagura's not going to be released? Why 3 (Technically 4 as 1 is 2 games) have been released in only a few months, if not more! Estival Versus basically just last week!


And I'm frikking excited to get my hands on Estival Versus on ps4. I have burst, and Deep Crimson.
See, the climate of gaming is changing. Games like Senran Kagura, and Beyonetta 1 and 2 can appear on the normally family friendly Nintendo systems. Games like Senran Kagura can just come out!
Correct me if I'm wrong in this, but I take it you've never really heard of Senran Kagura? That says a lot. If you watch the trailers, games like those would make those dirty SJWs explode violently, and get rendered into pools of acidic goo, yet there's basically no controversy around them. And they're great games, even with the intense fanservice.

Just saying it's there.

Just saying. Duckface. Quack quack.
The bitching was likely because uncanny valley way more than anything to do with sexyness or female sexuality.
Unless you want to argue the duckface implied she had BJ lips, or something.

It's more about the inability to quietly make changes than anything.

Well, when the face of gamers heads away from people screaming bloody murder, and going on witch hunts, and throwing "sjw" and "feminist" around in seriousness, people will give gamers a break. Letting a horde of drunken uncles greet the guests at a civil dinner isn't going to make people ignore the drunken uncles in favor of the few civil people inside.

Where the hell IS this even? As far as I've seen gamers are just being gobbed back into the pit of social outcasts from whence they came. Back when gaming was still young it was considered "for nerds" and anyone who played it was undeserving of respect or understanding from society.

DnD had satanic accusations thrown at it, and gaming was accused of inciting violent behavior in players.
Now the narrative has changed to gaming causing misogyny, and yet it's all gamer's fault for going on witch hunts and screaming bloody murder? The chicken didn't come before the egg here. A precedent was set that CREATED this atmosphere of witch hunting and vocal rage.

It seems to me that you're just affirming "no, it's always gamer's fault, it's always been their fault, they never wanted a reasonable discussion about anything from the start." I have some serious doubts about that.

Because they're acting poorly? Have you seen them lately? It's really just the assholes, but like I said, when people want to talk representation in gaming, they generally run into the assholes first, and they give the first impressions of who they'll be talking to in these discussions, and often enough, they're the only ones they get to talk to. Not every place is as clean ,and well maintained as The escapist. The assholes don't want reasonable discussion. They want to shut down any and all criticisms. And, again, they're often the first, and only people gamers run into when they want to talk about things.

About the topic I mentioned earlier, I was getting to? The new Baldur's Gate has a trans character in it. The drunken uncles are loose, and raising hell over it. It's like Mass Effect's LGBT relationships all over again, mostly. I don't see Baldur's gate being banned in several countries for LGBT content, but hey, I'm probably wrong on that.
So, yeah, there's more drama over people not wanting inclusiveness in a game, and blemishing the face of the "gamers" community and no doubt there's too few people trying to fight the fire. So, yeah, you'll have to pardon me if my view on the people I lump into "team 1" isn't getting any higher.

Well excuse me, I guess I'll go sit in my corner for not doing anything about something I didn't know anything about, since my failure to tell them to shut up means I am part of the problem.

And Mass Effect's LGBT content was criticized because there had been up to that point no hint that Male!Shepard had any sort of interest in a homosexual relationship.
Female!Shepard is debatable because you could pursue a relationship with Liara regardless of your gender, but that was more because Asari are justified in-universe as being the galaxy's universal remote (because they turn everyone on, ya get it? Ya get it!?
...ok, I'll show myself out.) but Fem!Shep never pursued any sort of lesbian relationship outside of her.

You could even argue this is evidence of pushback against compromising established character for the sake of pandering to LGBT communities. You could argue "well that's your choice, isn't that what ME is about?" But at the same time not only Shepard, but other characters suffer for this change as well. With every character now potentially having a romantic interest in Shepherd, it essentially rewrites characters into having an interest in Shepherd even if there was no established chemistry or interest in prior installments of the game.

Jack in ME2 made it very clear she has no interest in Fem!Shep, yet she does in ME3?

A good example too is a romantic interest between someone like Kaidan and Male!Shep for instance, when there was no chemistry in ME1 (he wasn't in 2 unless you saved him, and even then he only has a brief appearance) between them makes a romantic relationship rather rushed.

There were probably people bitching about the gay stuff itself, but I don't think people were hating on it simply because it was gay. There were perfectly valid reasons to be critical of it.

Hey, I'm just letting you know it exists. I'm not expecting you to do anything. It's just breaking news in the battle between people wanting inclusion vs the people that don't.

Male shep can come out of the closet, dangit! :P Plus there's mor than just Kaiden, IIRC. And lets face it, Kaiden was terrible all around.

Femshep had several lesbian love interests. The reporter played by Chobot (Not the one you can punch as part of the running gag), Chambers from ME2, and Traynor in ME3, all human women.
Liara, and the consort from ME1 (Though it doesn't last, obviously), Samara, and Morinth who are all Asari. Kinda bummed Aria wasn't an option because I liked her.
It frustrated me that Tali was not an option, really. She really was my favorite.

Jack wasn't a romance option for Femshep ever, IIRC. I've explored all of the options. Jack just doesn't roll that way.

It really was refreshing to have lesbian options, might I add.

I'm pretty sure there's more than a fair share of people hating on the LGBT just because they're LGBT. Well, Lesbians get some slack because they're a well established part of the general male fantasy.
I mean all the ugliness in the world does exist in the gaming community because they're inhabited by the same people.

Sorry for the multiposting, my internet flipped out.

Falling:
[quote]snip

Well the notion of creating a "SJW" bogeyman is debatable, yes. Looking at some of Fipps' posts however does at the very least leave it up in the air at best.

Had the OP not even mentioned the booty or the "sexiness" of the pose and focused on how it didn't really fit for the character I bet dollars to donuts the discussion would've been more civil. But Fipps themselves stated "they were turning Tracer into another bland sex object."

The implications are right there; the pose turns Tracer into "another bland sex object." If it was just about the pose being bad and not fitting her character, why even bother bringing that up at all? Why was it worth mentioning?

I will agree all in all that this could've been a publicity stunt by Blizz. And the fact that they really want people to like their game is a plus. But stirring up contreversy in such a way is questionable when they could've just handled it better and taken the high road in all this.

It's a no-win scenario for Blizz. If they admit they agreed with Fipps, they're "pandering to SJWs." If they admit they did it for controversy, then they just used a sore spot in the gaming community and exploited gamer's fears and reservations to make some quick PR.

Perception is reality to a lot of people, remember. There is no way to perceive this negatively without being considered naive. Unless of course, the trolling itself is lauded, which considering the gaming community is likely. At the end of the day there was even a couple formal apology threads about people who flipped out over the pose, and a lot of people laughing everything off.

I think this result will set a good precedent and reassure gamers that "no, the SJWs aren't coming for your vidya."
This can reopen discussion about representation in a reasonable manner, without gamers trying to duck into the safe space they felt they "needed."

I think it's a glitch, too, but that doesn't mean we're right. :P
Honestly, I feel like it was a matter of the pose's sex appeal coupled with the personality of the pose clashing with tracer's personality.

I will point out that any seductive behavior on Widowmaker's part doesn't really fall in line with her character either. Sniping is an incredibly impersonal method of assassination, and she's a walking corpse. I think the Black Widow motif on her isn't representing her character, but her backstory more than anything.

Besides they made Tracer's new pose even more sex appeal-y, and not only that, it falls in line with Tracer's character, according to them.

Palpatine has that sort of voice doesn't he?

Palpatine is the only good thing about the prequels.

Bluntly, I'm more looking at the Escapist (A gleaming oasis of civility, IMO thanks to the dedicated moderation staff), Facebook, and Youtube. Of course I can't name and shame, but I will say that my rant reflects the tone used by the majority of the "gamers" upset with tracer's change, among other things I'll get into later in this post.

Ah, ok, thanks for the clarification.
But honestly most of the outrage I see is the fact that everyone's pissed or relatively annoyed that people "couldn't handle a butt." The controversy is overblown, sure, but it stands in line with the genuine concern most gamers have that people who don't actually care about video games are trying to force changes based on their ideologies into video games. So as previously stated, any "victory" for them is a "defeat" for gamers. Of course that's dumb, but that's what we've come to.

Those "few folks" are drowning out any hope of seeing the more civil people. Infact they pretty much have drowned it all out. People enter conversations on the topic at hand, and these people are first and foremost the people seen by the people entering the conversations. They're setting the tone. They're basically the majority of people involved in the topic. So, they are the face of the gaming community.

That applies to both sides. It's unfair to act like the onus of blame is all on the gaming community. The vocal minority of both sides of the argument have left gaming on the defensive while also looking unwelcoming. Neither side wants to clear the bats out of the belfry, though.

I suppose policing might be a harsh term, and again, I don't expect anyone to really attempt this because I know it's like trying to drink an ocean.
I'm not really saying to silence them, I'm saying maybe, if one were to actually attempt the massive feat, is try hard to show that these people aren't the only representatives of gaming. That there are people out there that can be civil. Maybe call someone out when they're being an asshole even if they are on your side. As much as it sucks, going along with what the asshole is saying is more or less giving credibility to them.

Well I suppose this is a case of them feeling like it's not their responsibility to fight against every zealous asshole that hops into a conversation. Plus the current atmosphere surrounding gaming is that people are expecting to just be disregarded, disrespected or dismissed because they are a gamer.

I'm not chastising "gamers" I'm chastising the assholes. I'm basically giving them a shout out to let them know they're being assholes, see?

Actually thinking about it, why do assholes suddenly become gaming reps? Just because they are part of a gaming community or play games?
Plus anyone can be labelled an asshole simply for being critical nowadays, so what even constitutes an asshole?

Gaming at its core doesn't have an ideology, it's a hobby. So why do we need to act like a political movement?
A lot of the general attitude surrounding gaming is "when someone's being a dick they're not worth dealing with, ignore them." I think that mostly comes from the fact that in our current age of gaming we are used to mute and silence options to keep those sorts of people out of our fun. Furthermore there have been cases of one side completely shutting down the discussion entirely rather than wanting to hear gamers' side of things, so there is no other option appearing to them except to keep to themselves and put up as many defensive walls as possible to keep "SJW" stuff out of games.

Yes, essentially gamers felt like they needed to turn the place into a "safe space." Funny, right?

We must have seen different comments.

I didn't see any outrage over it, honest.
I'm not going to assume there wasn't any, but I really didn't see any.
I probably missed them.
Still, I mean, if you're talking about specifically in the Escapist, that's like, just one community, man.
We can't base the whole of gaming off one community.

I never said, or never wanted to imply sexuality makes a character shit automatically, as evidenced by later in my post. I honestly don't mind fan service, and I don't feel a character can only be sexual, or only well written. They can assuredly be both, but that certainly doesn't mean sexualized characters are all we should get.

And I never said or implied that sexualized characters are all we should get.
And in the case of Overwatch, we don't.
The truth is that there are options out there that many conveniently ignore for the sake of continuing to rally against games for not representing enough or representing them properly.
And again, what's wrong with sexuality?
I'm not talking taking it to the extreme with dental floss bathing suits or thongs or whatever, I'm talking flirting, or doing sexy poses or dances, or simply having some interest in sexuality at all.
You see this is why so many gamers mischaracterise the argument as "ALL WOMEN IN BURKHAS HERP DERP," because any semblance of female sexuality is often put under the microscope and criticized for being there.

And to me personally, characters are either blank slates to project onto, or characters within a story that are following a plot for that character, so I'm not the sort of person to talk to about representation when I already feel that a character's gender should take a backseat to how well they're written.

Not in large numbers. Hell, not even on a yearly basis. Rarely good ones.
I'm not saying the games didn't exist, I'm saying that they're far too rare.
A lot of those characters listed you don't play as.

They're still there. And in RPGs you are technically playing as a party, not just one character. Plus I don't see why they NEED to be playable, so long as they're good examples of well-written female characters.

Let me put things in to focus. I'm mainly referring to games where you can play as a woman from start to finish. Bonus points if you don't have the choice to play as a guy because the game revolves around the female character(s). yeah, you can call it moving the goal posts, and I probably should have elaborated earlier, but that's what I expect from games with female protagonists.
Yeah, I get the point of this vid. It doesn't make things better.

So you want more games that focus purely on a female protagonist, and not give the option for anything other than female?
Ok, I see, I getcha perfectly.
You don't want to count games that have women as an playable option because...any game that has the option to play as both men and women is somehow not supporting women, simply because male protagonists are more common?

Even though there were at the time more men playing games than women?

Well ok.

Nothing's wrong with sexuality in and of itself. It's a tool for conveying ideas.
The problem comes in when that's all that you get. I'm not wanting it gone. I'm wanting it toned down some, or used better.
Seeing a guy walk around in a suit of armor that is pretty practical, and fantastic, and then seeing women stuck in impractical armor that no sane person would wear into battle -all the time- is kinda unfair, and lopsided.

Dark Souls never had this problem.

Having one's guts spilling out because the midriff is unprotected is pretty life threatening, so I'd imagine any sane person would want to prevent that from happening. Especially when they take great pains to cover up other areas.

See now this makes logical sense. I can only imagine the midriff exposure being a thing if it was for ease of movement and flexibility, but that would only work if you're playing a class that would logically require that, like a thief.

It kinda screws with immersion, and it's a little insulting that women are often only able to look sexy in their armor and not really have an option to look practical when trying to dress in full plate. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying why is it the only thing that can really happen?
Granted this sort of thing is getting a little more rare.

And yet people still complain about it even though it's going away. Well color me shocked.

Why would one want to argue against inclusiveness? I doubt those arguments would win me over.
you can thank the loud, obnoxious face of the gaming community for the lack of desire to talk. Having 1 civil person among thousands of people resorting to every sort of slur imaginable won't be doing that civil person any favors.

Because diversity is a natural result of variety. When you argue for inclusiveness you are arguing for a diversity checklist. "Oop, better make sure I have this and this and this, gotta make sure everyone's represented." It gives meaning to things like race and gender when those things shouldn't be a big deal. It should be the creator's choice to make their characters and playables how they want, and if they want to change something more power to them to do so.

But nobody wants to see creators be pressured into making changes because everyone was angry at them for not being inclusive.

Inclusivity is showing up more, and more, yeah. It wasn't always there, but it's getting there, and I'm at a pretty happy place with the current state of things, aside from some rare event like this pose issue, and a few other things.

It's a shame that we had to shake up the entirety of gaming and attempting to hold it up as "problematic" to do it, eh?

Well, first off, yes, Red Ninja was a terrible game. It had potential, but it basically wasted it.

Secondly, this list isn't all that great. Kinda weird you'd pick 2 of 13 years when gaming doesn't only occur in them, and 2 years doesn't negate my experiences.

Well I'm only one person, and I didn't want to spend about 2-2 & 1/2 hours just making a response to a forum post containing like every single example over the course of 13 years.

I'll freely admit laziness on my part.

Let me put this into perspective.
Think back to your days gaming in 2000 to 2013. All the resources you had back then, you still have them, and no more.
The lists of playable women, and if you don't mind me narrowing the scope a bit, games starring these women, are the ONLY games you get to play. Period. If you don't have the system the games are on, you don't get to play those. Are you happy with that selection?

Why does it only have to be games exclusively with women protagonists?
"I don't count anything that doesn't have ONLY a female protagonist as representing women."
And it's funny because yeah, I agree with you that it might've been limited, sure. Although a lot came about in 13 years, all things considered. How many consoles did we see in that time, not counting PC? I mean in 2000 we still had the PS1, which was back when gaming was still primarily male-dominated.

But then nobody said anything until not too long ago, when gaming was really starting to develop and grow, and variety was becoming the norm, and by extension diversity. But of course then the regressives came out to essentially attempt to set gaming backwards under the guise of "improving gaming diversity." I really, really, REALLY don't want to even bring Sarkeesian up, but from what I've seen she was the one that turned the conversation into something to clash against. Had she not attempted to paint gaming in a negative light in such an intellectually dishonest manner, the conversation would've likely come about on its own, or alternatively we would've seen more female protagonists over time through civil discourse instead of making misogyny accusations.

If the answer is even remotely close to "no" then I think we might have an understanding.
Because I can just about guarantee that games with only male leads are far more varied in gameplay, subject, and basically everything that really matters.
I'm not saying I only play games with female leads, or anything like that, I'm just trying to make a point in how readily accessible they are, the quality of them, and the presentation of the female leads.

So what you're saying is, Cloud should've been a girl...

When most of the female cast members mainly exist only to make the male cast members look good, largely by suffering so the main guy can save them, yes, it diminishes things. It'd be nice to not always see women crammed into supporting roles.

Terra was a woman, and FF6 followed EVERY character in the party, even giving you the choice of who to follow when everyone got split up.
Every character in RPGs has a story to tell and an arc to follow. This is why I argue for every party member being a main character in their own way, even though there's a single "hero" main character for the player to directly interface with.
Plus "supporting roles" are just as important as the "main role." This pisses me off to no end when people see women in the supporting role and casually dismiss it offhand like it means fucking nothing.

A few good supporting roles doesn't erase everything else because the good ones are very much in the minority.
It's nice, sometimes, to play as the woman, and have all the power to save the world, and freedom to do whatever the game allows, and generally be in the role that the main, generally male, lead has.

Then maybe you should stop getting hung up on gender and focus more on playing the character, maybe.
Do you feel excluded when you are expected to play as a gender neutral robot in a game, since you are unable to play as a human? Or if it were a male robot, would you still feel excluded because the robot identifies as male?

Of course not. It's sorta strange that the girls in Senran Kagura are among the best written. That sorta sidestepps my point, though. Like I said before, sexualization doesn't automatically make a character shitty. Senran Kagura is also not the only way women get presented in modern gaming.There is the Evie Frye, and rebooted Lara Croft, and more than a few other women that aren't presented like the Senran Kagura girls. There's a balance here. It certainly helps that the Senran Kagura games are oddly well written considering the level of fan service. Most games with the presentation of Senran Kagura rarely have the writing to back it up.

I don't get what adding fan service would do to help the situation. The pushback is there because people are sick of it being so prevalent in gaming.

And not everyone shares that sentiment, hence the pushback against the pushback.
Adding male fanservice would equal the field just fine. In games where the fanservice fits the tone, at least.
Not every game needs fanservice, but as far as I know fanservice has only been prevalent in Japanese games, waaaaaaaay more than American ones.

Well, so much for Senran Kagura then. I guess we know which devs are going to decide to not release their next game in the west next.

Just saying it's there.

Just saying. Duckface. Quack quack.
The bitching was likely because uncanny valley way more than anything to do with sexyness or female sexuality.
Unless you want to argue the duckface implied she had BJ lips, or something.

Well, when the face of gamers heads away from people screaming bloody murder, and going on witch hunts, and throwing "sjw" and "feminist" around in seriousness, people will give gamers a break. Letting a horde of drunken uncles greet the guests at a civil dinner isn't going to make people ignore the drunken uncles in favor of the few civil people inside.

Where the hell IS this even? As far as I've seen gamers are just being gobbed back into the pit of social outcasts from whence they came. Back when gaming was still young it was considered "for nerds" and anyone who played it was undeserving of respect or understanding from society.

DnD had satanic accusations thrown at it, and gaming was accused of inciting violent behavior in players.
Now the narrative has changed to gaming causing misogyny, and yet it's all gamer's fault for going on witch hunts and screaming bloody murder? The chicken didn't come before the egg here. A precedent was set that CREATED this atmosphere of witch hunting and vocal rage.

It seems to me that you're just affirming "no, it's always gamer's fault, it's always been their fault, they never wanted a reasonable discussion about anything from the start." I have some serious doubts about that.

About the topic I mentioned earlier, I was getting to? The new Baldur's Gate has a trans character in it. The drunken uncles are loose, and raising hell over it. It's like Mass Effect's LGBT relationships all over again, mostly. I don't see Baldur's gate being banned in several countries for LGBT content, but hey, I'm probably wrong on that.
So, yeah, there's more drama over people not wanting inclusiveness in a game, and blemishing the face of the "gamers" community and no doubt there's too few people trying to fight the fire. So, yeah, you'll have to pardon me if my view on the people I lump into "team 1" isn't getting any higher.

Well excuse me, I guess I'll go sit in my corner for not doing anything about something I didn't know anything about, since my failure to tell them to shut up means I am part of the problem.

And Mass Effect's LGBT content was criticized because there had been up to that point no hint that Male!Shepard had any sort of interest in a homosexual relationship.
Female!Shepard is debatable because you could pursue a relationship with Liara regardless of your gender, but that was more because Asari are justified in-universe as being the galaxy's universal remote (because they turn everyone on, ya get it? Ya get it!?
...ok, I'll show myself out.) but Fem!Shep never pursued any sort of lesbian relationship outside of her.

You could even argue this is evidence of pushback against compromising established character for the sake of pandering to LGBT communities. You could argue "well that's your choice, isn't that what ME is about?" But at the same time not only Shepard, but other characters suffer for this change as well. With every character now potentially having a romantic interest in Shepherd, it essentially rewrites characters into having an interest in Shepherd even if there was no established chemistry or interest in prior installments of the game.

Jack in ME2 made it very clear she has no interest in Fem!Shep, yet she does in ME3?

A good example too is a romantic interest between someone like Kaidan and Male!Shep for instance, when there was no chemistry in ME1 (he wasn't in 2 unless you saved him, and even then he only has a brief appearance) between them makes a romantic relationship rather rushed.

There were probably people bitching about the gay stuff itself, but I don't think people were hating on it simply because it was gay. There were perfectly valid reasons to be critical of it.

Piecewise:

erttheking:

Piecewise:
Snip

I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.

You stood on your tip toes on one foot and shoved your other foot up your butt and held that for 3 seconds?

It's an accomplishment I suppose.

I missed the part where she shoved her own foot up her rear.

but let's not act like the whole discussion isn't frequently hijacked by the vocal minority

I certainly hope it was a vocal minority, because it certainly feels like a majority yammering at Blizzard over a pretty harmless suggestion. (And without fail, the initial post is psychoanalyzed or mischaracterized to create an SJW boogeyman that never existed except in one's panicky imagination. The central issue was that Blizzard didn't execute the pose very well. I don't know if I'd call the initial pose sexy as such, but I thought it was a poor pose and was fine with it gone.)

However, I think it's viewing the entire issue too much through the lens of gaming culture war to think that Blizzard was trying to trick people, manipulating them into an outrage. (Doesn't say much for modern gamers if we are so predictably susceptible to provocation that that a company could rely upon it for their marketing- particularly considering how cursory their initial response was 'we're sorry' and then close the thread, rather than big announcements saying 'look at us, aren't we so progressive.' Seems a pretty low key method to provoke a controversy for marketing purposes.) I think their motive is a little more plain: they really, really want people to like them and their game. Have you listened to some of their interviews? Metzen was literally (in the proper sense) choking back tears describing an 8 year old kid that was asking about more backstory for Winston. They want people to like this game, their first new IP in decades.

erttheking:

Piecewise:
Snip

I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.

You stood on your tip toes on one foot and shoved your other foot up your butt and held that for 3 seconds?

It's an accomplishment I suppose.

LawAndChaos:

Rebel_Raven:
Paraphrasing is hard to take because it's based off of memory which can skew, or bias one way or the other.

Well I mostly paraphrased because it was either that or regurgitate the entire long ass post. I just figured I'd take some of the core tenets of the criticism Fipps was giving to get the basic point across.
I didn't paraphrase from memory. I reread Fipps OP beforehand, and read through the thread in question. Fipps frequently backpedaled or evaded certain counterpoints throughout before Kaplan's announcement.

I'd have gladly read the copy/paste.

Still, that's ONE incident, and strangely there's lots more T&A around. Again, I ask, in all seriousness, does Blackwidow's Butt enlarge when she puts on her goggles?]http://hackerbot.net/blog/54-game-characters/366-widowmaker-overwatch Forget the nature of the page, the gif of her inflating butt is what I'm after to make my point.
I know she has a neckline that plunges harder than a barrel off of Niagra falls.

I think that's a glitch. Also, there have been people (myself included) kinda going "eh" at Widow's design. TBH as a character who's intended to be a (literal) cold-blooded assassin, you'd think she'd do something about that neckline. Ofc tight suits are quite practical for movement, so that aspect of her is just fine.

I think though that it's the presence of other sex appeal that makes people question why THIS sex appeal specifically is a problem. On the surface it makes no sense.

I think it's a glitch, too, but that doesn't mean we're right. :P
Honestly, I feel like it was a matter of the pose's sex appeal coupled with the personality of the pose clashing with tracer's personality.

I find your faith in the loud members of the gaming community, nevermind the people firmly against "feminists" and "SJWs" a bit disturbing.

Ah, but the dark siiiiiiiiiiiede...

Ugh, it's hard to translate Palpatine's voice into text.

Palpatine has that sort of voice doesn't he?

Sure, that's probably how you, or I would act, but to pretend we're the template for facebook users, youtubers, twitter users, and heck, some escapists is kinda absurd (They actually made a poll on the pose! No respect for the developer's acts, there, IMO), IMO.

Well honestly there's the possibility they felt the devs weren't having respect for them, so this brings up the "eye for an eye" problem I once mentioned somewhere else. But reading through the thread, I barely saw that much outrage at all. Maybe I wasn't there to see it at the time. All that's there now are posters being critical of Fipps original critique and trying to poke holes in it.

Bluntly, I'm more looking at the Escapist (A gleaming oasis of civility, IMO thanks to the dedicated moderation staff), Facebook, and Youtube. Of course I can't name and shame, but I will say that my rant reflects the tone used by the majority of the "gamers" upset with tracer's change, among other things I'll get into later in this post.

If they weren't the face of the gaming community on this matter, I wouldn't implicate that I think they are at all.

Broad strokes for a few folks.

Those "few folks" are drowning out any hope of seeing the more civil people. Infact they pretty much have drowned it all out. People enter conversations on the topic at hand, and these people are first and foremost the people seen by the people entering the conversations. They're setting the tone. They're basically the majority of people involved in the topic. So, they are the face of the gaming community.

I don't doubt there's a very quiet, very under the radar sizable amount of reasonable people out there, but the issue is they're quiet. they're not policing the idiots, they aren't calling out the assholes, or much of anything, are they? Not that I expect them to take action, mind you, but they certainly aren't doing anything to change the face of gamers on this issue.

Well gamers are dead, don'tchaknow?

Joking aside,
honestly "policing the idiots" sounds a lot like we should be silencing them, which I don't agree with. I mean jesus, "policing" them, really? I guess we should form a safety committee, then. You can't expect people to go across the vast internet and call every single person out for "being an asshole."
In fact, you chastising gamers in such a way for "not policing the idiots" sounds to me like an excuse to paint all gamers as "just as bad as the assholes" or "worse than the assholes."

I suppose policing might be a harsh term, and again, I don't expect anyone to really attempt this because I know it's like trying to drink an ocean.
I'm not really saying to silence them, I'm saying maybe, if one were to actually attempt the massive feat, is try hard to show that these people aren't the only representatives of gaming. That there are people out there that can be civil. Maybe call someone out when they're being an asshole even if they are on your side. As much as it sucks, going along with what the asshole is saying is more or less giving credibility to them.

I'm not chastising "gamers" I'm chastising the assholes. I'm basically giving them a shout out to let them know they're being assholes, see?

I mean look at the Chun Li boob jiggle glitch. It certainly wasn't normal that only p2's Chun Li would have wobbley DOA boobs while P1 didn't. People pitched a fit over the news it was going to be fixed, and there were suggestions that Chun Li should keep the DoA boob wobble. Just that instance for example.

Last I checked people were making jokes about how it should be kept and that a large number of people agreed that it needed to be fixed.
As far as I know the only real outrage came from R.Mika's butt slap being removed and a dynamic camera angle getting changed for what people considered were frivolous reasons. I don't even remember any outrage over what everyone agreed was just a really funny glitch.

We must have seen different comments.

Why would we want to question a Developer's desire to improve a character cosmetically and have her be more true to her personality over posing in painted on pants? Sure if it changed her stats, I could see a long, massive discussion, but this is just a pose.

Then why did it need to be removed if it's just a pose? Why deny players the option?
I don't think we're going to get anywhere back and forthing in such a way.

In the name of character integrity, and better writing, IMO. Still, I agree we're probably not going anywhere.

See, while you have a point in the notion that maybe they didn't want to change the pose, it certainly doesn't negate the point that maybe they did want to change her pose after all.

So we're at an impasse, then.

Looks that way.

Again, people, often arguing against inclusion in the long run, say that if women were to be added, they have to be well written! Well, this is their argument, yet they don't want tracer to be better written. They want to keep the pose that shows her butt.

No. No, no, no, no, no.
This is not a zero sum game.
Sexuality does not make a character automatically shit.
The argument was that the pose somehow contradicted established traits about Tracer's personality. A lot of people disagreed because the critic was basing their argument on their own perception of the character, filling in the blanks that Blizzard left.
This is what people took umbrage against.

I never said, or never wanted to imply sexuality makes a character shit automatically, as evidenced by later in my post. I honestly don't mind fan service, and I don't feel a character can only be sexual, or only well written. They can assuredly be both, but that certainly doesn't mean sexualized characters are all we should get.

I say this after years, and years of trying to make a case for more women in videogames, especially as player characters, which has more or less happened.

Because games with women in them never happened until all the progressives began to do their part to improve gaming.

Not in large numbers. Hell, not even on a yearly basis. Rarely good ones.
I'm not saying the games didn't exist, I'm saying that they're far too rare.
A lot of those characters listed you don't play as.
Let me put things in to focus. I'm mainly referring to games where you can play as a woman from start to finish. Bonus points if you don't have the choice to play as a guy because the game revolves around the female character(s). yeah, you can call it moving the goal posts, and I probably should have elaborated earlier, but that's what I expect from games with female protagonists.
Yeah, I get the point of this vid. It doesn't make things better.

Yeah, the "Pander to me" crowd is on all sides, but honestly, it just seems way more two faced on the "Team 1" example. They're often people defending the developer's desire to, say, show midriff and have fantasy over function female armor while having the best of both worlds on guys, or, say, to keep Tracer's pose, and generally fight tooth and nail to keep sexuality no matter what.

What's wrong with sexuality? And there is best of both worlds on girls too, depending on the game. Fantasy is just that--fantasy. Why should I have to deal with someone shouting in my ear how gross my character is in an MMO for wearing something "impractical" that exposes her midriff? Why should I put up with people shouting at me about my "virtual male privilege" in how I can have both sexy and practical clothing?

A lot of the common arguments aren't about adding in more options, but rather about removing the fanservicy stuff. And sometimes about removing characters altogether.

Nothing's wrong with sexuality in and of itself. It's a tool for conveying ideas.
The problem comes in when that's all that you get. I'm not wanting it gone. I'm wanting it toned down some, or used better.
Seeing a guy walk around in a suit of armor that is pretty practical, and fantastic, and then seeing women stuck in impractical armor that no sane person would wear into battle -all the time- is kinda unfair, and lopsided.
Having one's guts spilling out because the midriff is unprotected is pretty life threatening, so I'd imagine any sane person would want to prevent that from happening. Especially when they take great pains to cover up other areas. It kinda screws with immersion, and it's a little insulting that women are often only able to look sexy in their armor and not really have an option to look practical when trying to dress in full plate. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying why is it the only thing that can really happen?
Granted this sort of thing is getting a little more rare.

At least the people that want inclusiveness seem to be more honest in that they want more inclusiveness, and not try to boot people out, and that, IMO, inclusivity would spice things up in the gaming world.

Except when they try to shunt everyone with a dissenting opinion out of the conversation, which also happens when you disagree with the "honest" side.
Oops.
And inclusivity is already present. Diversity is a natural result of variety. I don't know why people feel that now, in the current year when we have a bajillion games available to everyone who is willing to play them that we need to be "inclusive" when there is almost literally something for everyone.

Why would one want to argue against inclusiveness? I doubt those arguments would win me over.
you can thank the loud, obnoxious face of the gaming community for the lack of desire to talk. Having 1 civil person among thousands of people resorting to every sort of slur imaginable won't be doing that civil person any favors.

Inclusivity is showing up more, and more, yeah. It wasn't always there, but it's getting there, and I'm at a pretty happy place with the current state of things, aside from some rare event like this pose issue, and a few other things.

Minus the men are drooling apes part, yeah. You want to show me how gaming between, say, 2000, and 2013 wasn't filled with women as objects, macguffins, unplayable, and so forth in mainstream gaming over, say, the sort of characters we have lately?

Well in case the video wasn't enough, I'll do a quick check to find some examples, from, I dunno, 2000, 2005? Just a couple years as a snapshot, if that's fair?


And in 2010 we had Bayonetta. Oh, but because she does sexy dancing and poses we should disregard her since she's sexy so she's clearly a shit character.

Well, first off, yes, Red Ninja was a terrible game. It had potential, but it basically wasted it.

Secondly, this list isn't all that great. Kinda weird you'd pick 2 of 13 years when gaming doesn't only occur in them, and 2 years doesn't negate my experiences.
Let me put this into perspective.
Think back to your days gaming in 2000 to 2013. All the resources you had back then, you still have them, and no more.
The lists of playable women, and if you don't mind me narrowing the scope a bit, games starring these women, are the ONLY games you get to play. Period. If you don't have the system the games are on, you don't get to play those. Are you happy with that selection?
If the answer is even remotely close to "no" then I think we might have an understanding.
Because I can just about guarantee that games with only male leads are far more varied in gameplay, subject, and basically everything that really matters.
I'm not saying I only play games with female leads, or anything like that, I'm just trying to make a point in how readily accessible they are, the quality of them, and the presentation of the female leads.

We still have women wearing impossibly skimpy clothes, but ya know what? It's not all that's being put out there, and I'm actually okay with the balance.

Let's not get self-congratulatory here.
This progressivism in gaming hasn't been around as long as gaming has, and older games had less men and women and more animals and mascot characters.

RPGs introduced diverse casts, and while they did have a lot of male protagonists, they were only the protagonists insofar as the game took place from their POV. This didn't diminish the other characters unless the writing was bad; Terra in FF6 is perceived to be the "main character" but that doesn't lessen

When most of the female cast members mainly exist only to make the male cast members look good, largely by suffering so the main guy can save them, yes, it diminishes things. It'd be nice to not always see women crammed into supporting roles.
A few good supporting roles doesn't erase everything else because the good ones are very much in the minority.
It's nice, sometimes, to play as the woman, and have all the power to save the world, and freedom to do whatever the game allows, and generally be in the role that the main, generally male, lead has.

Hell, I play Senran Kagura in general, and while I don't openly in public, I'm open to saying I play it, and enjoy it. I like the dragon's crown Sorceress. I want DoAX3 in NA. I don't mind the fan service, it's that just until lately, within the past few years it really hasn't felt like there's been much more to women in games than that.
Hell, I wouldn't have minded the skinship minigame in fire emblem. Honestly, I think they might have broken the relationship system when they took it out because there's endless heart earning.

Would you argue that the Senran Kagura girls have no character? Sorceress is part of an arcade game that references DnD quite a bit so she, like every other playable in DC, is a blank slate anyway. DoAX3 is not coming to NA, whether because they feared actual backlash or because they wanted to stir up press, I dunno. But the current atmosphere surrounding gaming contributed to their decision.

There is a big pushback against fanservice among the inclusive crowd, because "misrepresentation" or whatever.
The truth is, we need to ADD, not to REMOVE.

Also I do think they broke the MyRoom mechanics by removing the game, because now it acts kind of...weird, sometimes.

Of course not. It's sorta strange that the girls in Senran Kagura are among the best written. That sorta sidestepps my point, though. Like I said before, sexualization doesn't automatically make a character shitty. Senran Kagura is also not the only way women get presented in modern gaming.There is the Evie Frye, and rebooted Lara Croft, and more than a few other women that aren't presented like the Senran Kagura girls. There's a balance here. It certainly helps that the Senran Kagura games are oddly well written considering the level of fan service. Most games with the presentation of Senran Kagura rarely have the writing to back it up.

I don't get what adding fan service would do to help the situation. The pushback is there because people are sick of it being so prevalent in gaming.

You missed Chun Li's boob wobble to say the least which I think lends proof to my argument. :P
Also Karin, and Cammy's face remodeling.

People complained because Cammy looked like she had a duckface. And I think most of the complaints there came from Japanese players more than American ones. I didn't even know Karin's face got a remodel at all.

Just saying it's there.

snip

Yes, and clearly painting large numbers of gamers who like fanservice as intellectually bankrupt morons, perverts, or misogynists will definitely help increase the demand for more female protagonists.

Wait.

Not gonna debate the whole Kaplan thing; I've already stated that he handled it poorly and let his initial message get misconstrued as "caving" to Fipps, so in the end regardless of whether he was virtue signalling or not (I changed my stance on this a couple posts up), he should've at least been transparent about what was going on with this one pose from the get go.

Well, when the face of gamers heads away from people screaming bloody murder, and going on witch hunts, and throwing "sjw" and "feminist" around in seriousness, people will give gamers a break. Letting a horde of drunken uncles greet the guests at a civil dinner isn't going to make people ignore the drunken uncles in favor of the few civil people inside.

About the topic I mentioned earlier, I was getting to? The new Baldur's Gate has a trans character in it. The drunken uncles are loose, and raising hell over it. It's like Mass Effect's LGBT relationships all over again, mostly. I don't see Baldur's gate being banned in several countries for LGBT content, but hey, I'm probably wrong on that.
So, yeah, there's more drama over people not wanting inclusiveness in a game, and blemishing the face of the "gamers" community and no doubt there's too few people trying to fight the fire. So, yeah, you'll have to pardon me if my view on the people I lump into "team 1" isn't getting any higher.
The response to this, much like Blizzard's response to Tracer, is that they're going to put more emphasis on the trans character.

Piecewise:
Snip

I did. I lasted three. With practice it'd probably be easier to do for longer.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You asked if it was just you, and I confirmed that it was just you.

Falling:
[quote]-snip-

I think that's still part of the overreaching prudishness of people and believing that anything that makes someone uncomfortable is perceived as bad for everyone, regardless of intent. I will not debate that yeah, taking it to the opposite extreme isn't good either, but let's not act like the whole discussion isn't frequently hijacked by the vocal minority, which twists a narrative to the point where everyone feels the need to be on the defensive.

The vocal minority on one side says that sexy stuff is bad, and as a result gamers get defensive when the sexy stuff is criticized because now they are expecting anything sexy to be criticized and called for removal (even in the case of a relatively tame pose like the original OverTheShoulder Tracer had).

The vocal minority on the other says people should just deal with that dental floss swimsuit and like it because fuck their feelings. This puts the critics on the defensive because they expect their hand to be swatted away from that slider.

This isn't just one side being antagonistic, no matter how hard someone tries to paint it that way. This is two vocal minorities turning the more reasonable sides against each other while both groups are also eating each other from the inside out and sabotaging the potential for rational discussion.

Gaming has been growing to the point where we can have both focus on story over gameplay or vice versa, and with that comes diversity through variety. While there are games that become formulaic, this doesn't stop creators from trying new things and indie devs from creating more games.

Yet somehow nobody is happy. Everything is still wrong and bad and needs to be fixed.

That being said I do agree that while there was nothing wrong with the old pose, there was no reason not to change it either; the devs have that creative freedom.

However it seems to me now that it was all a big trick making people think they caved to "SJWs" and with the atmosphere surrounding gaming everyone believes that any victory for "SJWs," no matter how small, will lead to the elimination of fanservice as a whole.

I'm not saying that is correct, that is merely my theory, both on what's happened and on the reason why things like this seem to always blow up.

And damn, that pose is actually more "sexy" than the original too. Inb4 it's "still bad and needs changing."
Gotta admit if it really was a trick, kudos on Blizz. They legit trolled everyone.

It's a shame I can't play Overwatch right now, cuz I'd totally buy it now.

erttheking:

Piecewise:
So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...

Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.

Considering that the new pose still shows her butt but people like it because they claim it's in character, I'm pretty sure it's just you.

I thought her character was "Spunky" not "Gravity defying"

Seriously, try to do that pose and hold it for more than half a second.

Piecewise:
So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...

Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.

Considering that the new pose still shows her butt but people like it because they claim it's in character, I'm pretty sure it's just you.

Lightknight:

Areloch:
So they went with basing her new pose on a pinup then:

image

I got a good hearty laugh out of that. Apparently the intent is to imply her past as a pilot by having a bomber pinup painting pose. I guess it kinda works? Though her old pose wasn't bad in my opinion either because it had that whole 'cheeky snark' attitude to it.

Both options would be better than one in my opinion.

That said, wonder if the person that started the entire thing is gunna be mad they're still 'reducing her to a sex symbol', only they're doing it more explicitly now because her pose is based on a classic pinup painting.

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Overwatch was either trying to generate buzz or implementing a social experiment.

I don't know if the pinup was the inspiration. I'd find it hard to believe that that is the only scenario where a person has posed in that way. But either way, they've always had Tracer's ass in prominence, even in the first trailer. Unless people can tell me how pointing your gun and butt at your opponent (aka the camera) is a tactical advantage of any kind.

And yes, it stands to reason that they could always include the other one. But seeing what they replaced it with I actually totally believe them now when they say they just weren't happy with the first stance.

For the most part this pose fits a bit more with Tracer's character. Its more of a call back to 1940's pinup girls that would often get painted on planes, and tbh I think a big portion of Tracer's character design is based on those ww2 airplane pinup girls. It was a logical choice to make, I just hope they made it for the right reasons, and not to capitulate to people like Fipps who would be offended unless she walked out in a burka.

Areloch:
So they went with basing her new pose on a pinup then:

image

I got a good hearty laugh out of that. Apparently the intent is to imply her past as a pilot by having a bomber pinup painting pose. I guess it kinda works? Though her old pose wasn't bad in my opinion either because it had that whole 'cheeky snark' attitude to it.

Both options would be better than one in my opinion.

That said, wonder if the person that started the entire thing is gunna be mad they're still 'reducing her to a sex symbol', only they're doing it more explicitly now because her pose is based on a classic pinup painting.

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Overwatch was either trying to generate buzz or implementing a social experiment.

I don't know if the pinup was the inspiration. I'd find it hard to believe that that is the only scenario where a person has posed in that way. But either way, they've always had Tracer's ass in prominence, even in the first trailer. Unless people can tell me how pointing your gun and butt at your opponent (aka the camera) is a tactical advantage of any kind.

And yes, it stands to reason that they could always include the other one. But seeing what they replaced it with I actually totally believe them now when they say they just weren't happy with the first stance.

So you remove one pose...but the female characters are still wearing skin tight body suits, meaning you see their ass constantly anyways.

The award for most pointless controversy goes to...

Also, is it just me or do people purporting to be feminists these days have a very lousy view on the capacities of women? Seeing cartoon butts is gonna undermine a girl's well-being? Better get my fainting couch and smelling salts ready, just in case some bawdy language reaches her delicate ears and she swoons.

Continue reading 535 comments on the forums.
Recommended Games
Dragon Oath
categories: fantasy
Kings Road
categories: fantasy
Lineage 2
categories: 3d, fantasy