Not sure if serious. In the game it's from the back.
Her breast is still pretty emphasized there.
Not sure if serious. In the game it's from the back.
Her breast is still pretty emphasized there.
http://bustedhalo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Moes-Bar-Church-People-Switch-Places-During-The-Apocalypse-In-The-Simpsons-Movie.gif[/IM][/QUOTE]
Ha!
I guess the times where you had the freedom to create whatever type of character you wanted and make them with any characteristics you wanted, be it sexy or not, are over.
Fan reaction (apparently a very vocal minority in this case considering the pools and petitions) always wins in the end and the companies can't really ignore them anymore, they need to cater to everyone.
Puritan America wins again...
This.
I dont even know what to think... its okay to shoot people in the face or do violence on them with weapons... but a butt is NOT OKAY... what? He didnt care that men were shooting women (or women shooting men, or men shooting men, or humans shooting monkeys) but yoga-pants-butt is where we flip our shit? I dont get it...
So she's meant to appear as though she's looking behind herself is what you're saying and that what you posted earlier was disingenuous in regards to where her eyes were directed?Not sure if serious. In the game it's from the back.
Not showing the female characters butt in a sexualize manner?
Blizzard seems to think so.
until someone makes a thread about how widowmaker makes them feel less heroic.Widowmaker is still in the game.
You didn't answer my questions at all. So does that mean all characters? What's your stance on the widow maker pose? You keep saying you aren't for puritanical practices but I'd like to get your opinion of what that means.
It's just sad how easily people are offended these days.
Well theres mei,mercy,d'va etc.For the characters that are its appropriate for. Widow Maker is one such character that I feel is appropriate but even still people dislike her for being sexulized. There's nothing puritanical in asking for female characters to more than doa extreme characters.
For the characters that are its appropriate for. Widow Maker is one such character that I feel is appropriate but even still people dislike her for being sexulized. There's nothing puritanical in asking for female characters to more than doa extreme characters.
But if you read most of these posts people are saying shes not sexualized. Shes being coy. But for some reason because you can see a woman from behind in skin tight clothing then suddenly its sexual. And no she doesn't have a "please stare at my ass" look in her eyes or pose that suggests that. The majority seems to feel the same. And I'm not saying that to speak up against censorship. I'm saying that because as an adult grown male I never looked at this pose and thought "look at her trying to show off her ass". I look at certain games and think "yea they know what they're aiming for" but this pose to me isn't that.
Mercy is probably about halfway between Widowmaker and Tracer on the sexuality scale. If you look at her costumes or her Halloween outfit in the Recall trailer it's clear she is meant to be much more flirty than Tracer, but not "I left half my armor at home, and let me put up my kiss spray," like Widowmaker.
No strong defense for it to go either but i love how both sides like to dismiss each other keep going.Oh, so there's no strong defense for the pose to stay and instead we're going to try and make some weird leaps in logic to link guns as being hypocritical?
Well, some of them are actually gay and lesbian, but I mean this more in the sexiness sense.Nirolak, my man!
Well, some of them are actually gay and lesbian, but I mean this more in the sexiness sense.
I didn't bring up DOA and that extreme case that was you to try and shortcut the discussion. I'm trying to pinpoint your point of view with actual examples and all you do is dodge them. You have a very strong opinion on the matter so I figured you'd have a clear set of dos and donts since you are clearly for this change.For the characters that are its appropriate for. Widow Maker is one such character that I feel is appropriate but even still people dislike her for being sexulized. There's nothing puritanical in asking for female characters to more than doa extreme characters.
It bugs me that someone can post "this doesn't fit with my interpretation of the character so it shouldn't exist in a game," and despite a clear majority of the comments disagreeing with that person, the dev removes the option from the game. If it's a selectable option, the more sensible response is "cool, it's not required, so don't use it if you don't want."
I mean... Tracer wanting to look cute and striking a pose like that seems EXACTLY like Tracer to me, based on everything I've seen of Tracer. The "hey, she's spunky and wholesome" thing just seems like really fucking weird projection.
Unlock it via the konami code.No strong defense for it to go either but i love how both sides like to dismiss each other keep going.
Options hurt no one
Well, some of them are actually gay and lesbian, but I mean this more in the sexiness sense.
Mercy is probably about halfway between Widowmaker and Tracer on the sexuality scale. If you look at her costumes or her Halloween outfit in the Recall trailer it's clear she is meant to be much more flirty than Tracer, but not "I left half my armor at home, and let me put up my kiss spray," like Widowmaker.
I think if they noticed they had something like this pose for Mei or Zarya, it would also be removed though, because again it doesn't fit those characters' personality.
Oh, so there's no strong defense for the pose to stay and instead we're going to try and make some weird leaps in logic to link guns as being hypocritical?
I see girls at the gym and the beach with a lot less on posing. Should we ban/ask them to stop?
People bitch about every little things these days.
I see girls at the gym and the beach with a lot less on posing. Should we ban/ask them to stop?
People bitch about every little things these days.
I guess the times where you had the freedom to create whatever type of character you wanted and make them with any characteristics you wanted, be it sexy or not, are over.
Fan reaction (apparently a very vocal minority in this case considering the pools and petitions) always wins in the end and the companies can't really ignore them anymore, they need to cater to everyone.
Puritan America wins again...
Oh, so there's no strong defense for the pose to stay and instead we're going to try and make some weird leaps in logic to link guns as being hypocritical?
That's going too far next you'll demand reasonable armorHow about designing your character so they have real pants so this isn't an issue.
Meanwhile, normal people:
no not the butt pose
After Mika's CA booty spank got removed. Any other booty being patched out has no match. 😤
But sad that they did it.
I didn't bring up DOA and that extreme case that was you to try and shortcut the discussion. I'm trying to pinpoint your point of view with actual examples and all you do is dodge them. You have a very strong opinion on the matter so I figured you'd have a clear set of dos and donts since you are clearly for this change.
So if Blizzard changes widow maker's pose you'd be against it then? Even though it's in the same game, where the same kid can be "exposed to it"
I guess the times where you had the freedom to create whatever type of character you wanted and make them with any characteristics you wanted, be it sexy or not, are over.
Fan reaction (apparently a very vocal minority in this case considering the pools and petitions) always wins in the end and the companies can't really ignore them anymore, they need to cater to everyone.
Puritan America wins again...
It bugs me that someone can post "this doesn't fit with my interpretation of the character so it shouldn't exist in a game," and despite a clear majority of the comments disagreeing with that person, the dev removes the option from the game. If it's a selectable option, the more sensible response is "cool, it's not required, so don't use it if you don't want."
But you just said you were ok with it! So what removal of anything are you against? Will you just side with any instance no matter what?I wouldn't mind it.
Well, I'm seeing one side trying to somehow link this to guns to create a better defense, while the other is leaping to... nothing? Agreeing that Widowmaker still having the pose is fine?No strong defense for it to go either but i love how both sides like to dismiss each other keep going.
Options hurt no one
It is a optional pose for a character. OPTIONALBig difference between real-life people going out in public to do stuff of their own volition and a fictional character.
But when you read their response they didn't come to that conclusion at all. Instead it's about not offending anyone.No one is asking to take butts away. They're asking for character personalities to stay within their realm in a personality driven game. It took 3 days for Blizzard to seemingly shrug and come to the same conclusion.