-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
RPS ambushes Blizzard director for objectification of women in Heroes of the Storm
- Thread starter usea
- Start date
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I think he still enjoys having a huge segment of games aimed specifically at pleasing what they think are his sensibilities, which is more then can be said for lots of, say, 20-something women with 75k in student loan debt.
Haunted
Member
To reiterate because I think it's getting overlooked: Followup article from Nathan Grayson.
I've never played a Diablo game. I'm not following your post. What are you trying to say?
edit: just realized that's not true. I played the Diablo 3 beta for a bit. It was like an hour or two long.
Smushroomed
Banned
Rps added to the trash
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
But it seems to happen all the time.
And, she can enjoy many products that are specifically targeted towards her demographic. Men and women aren't the same and it's okay to make products towards a specific demographic.
Riposte
Member
I'm not a female, so whatever, but I actually would prefer a MMO (etc.) without gendered sexualized options, largely because I think it makes for better art and world design (and a game where it does fit is likely not aesthetically to my taste in the first place). I'm was quite bothered when fan-servicey armor started to pop up in FFXIV towards the end of the the first version and has become quite prevalent in the A Realm Reborn (even going as far as having more than half the female characters start dressed in skimpy clothes, Miqo'te being the worst and that has gone on to infect Lightning Returns lol). (I say "gendered" because, it is clear when men get to wear pants and girls where tiny skirts while having the same piece of armor equipped that some sort of sexual dimorphism is at play. I was never against the mighty subligar, for example.) This is mainly because I dislike the aesthetic of armor design sacrificing sense (sometimes by literally transforming) for obtrusive sexy appeal. Yeah, this is made worse when it is my character of some imagined personality or my party members who have to wear this stuff (in that respect, the choice isn't there). Also probably bothered me in FFXIV more because that world have some verisimilitude (with a sweet pinch of style) going on. (Some of ARR's design choices really clash with the previously nuanced Eorzea.)
They did ask a question about a "design choice", though maybe they thought they didn't nor were they satisfied it could be answered as such.
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
That's unfortunate. It's a good site.
Dougstyles
Banned
I know people hate the capitalist argument, but that's what it is. Video games target men in both content and advertising because men make up a vast majority of the market. Why is this a problem?
RPS doing real journalism, gets called out not doing journalism. FML
Get real, these are just as important questions, if not even more important than asking what the gameplay will be like. You're just gonna get a premade PR answer anyway and until the game releases, there will be enough videos, beta impressions and interviews by other sites.
Really, this thread just tells me once again, that the topic of sexism and how it works is something we should talk more about on GAF, not less. Just scanning through the pages it is clear to me, how many people still just don't "get" what the problem really is.
People disagreeing with you doesn't mean we don't understand you. You do not have a monopoly on being right.
Are you just trolling or do you have an actual point to make? You already said she was female. It seems like a random thing to say.
Oh you know what else, firetrucks are red. LOOK AT THEM
Why don't they have any women on their staff? It's a male dominated industry, why isn't their site doing anything about it other than using words? Put money where your mouth is, unless I'm missing something that they're not showing on their site.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/about/
Imperfected
Member
You don't get a choice in whether or not you send messages with art. You either have control over the message it sends, or you let go and have it say things about you that you might not have wanted to put out there. The fact that they don't "mean" to send a message doesn't stop a message from being sent.
I don't think anyone is saying that they intend to send the message "all women should dress promiscuously if they want to be important and powerful". If they're accidentally sending that message, though, wouldn't it be prudent to let them know so that they can decide for themselves whether or not that's something they want their art to be saying?
That's what I like about the DoA team. They know what their fanbase is interested in, and have no problems admitting their pandering. And there's absolutely no issue with that.
It's kind of self destructive behaviour, I think some feminist won't be happy until sexualised content is stopped across the board, which then would have a contradictory effect of having their rights taken from them.
Believe it or not some woman like to appear sexy and show off their bodies, just as men do.
I can't help but feel the feminist movement has become less about equality and more about insecurity.
Professor Lich
Member
They look similar to me!
I don't see why a roller derby costume is that bad here. Considering what a roller derby is and what a MOBA is, I find it to be somewhat in context. Only issue I have is it looks weird with that painted on bra or whatever it is.
My initial reaction to this is to just say, "Put Illidan in a speedo and call it even!" but I feel like that really doesn't get us too far. I agree with that artists should be able to make whatever they want, but that means they should be able to be criticized about whatever they make.
Shake Appeal
Member
Art is, like, free, man. They should be able to represent... whatever. It's just the character design. They have no obligation to push back against centuries of male superiority predicated on violence and subjugation. That's not their job. They're videogame goddamn artistes who only regurgitate the patriarchy because, like, people want to buy it. End of.
Anyway, it's not objectifying. It's just their choice to represent whole groups of people who are unlike them in accordance with the laziest, most predictable imagery possible. It's like when people drew Jews having big noses or Irish looking stupid or blacks being lazy... no one meant anything by that. And if they did, it was still, like, art man. It was their vision and it didn't suggest anything about Jews or Irish or blacks. That's all in the past now, of course. We're smarter than that now.
I mean if someone drew a picture of me as an over-privileged developed-world likely-white guy who never even had to try to understand the experience of someone who wasn't born on third base like me, I wouldn't be offended. Lighten up. They were just doing some art, man. Look, if I'm so "privileged", how come I'm so poor?
Anyway, if women are objectified, men are objectified too. All those sculpted male torsos, intended for consumption by an overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly straight audience? They're the exact same. My experience is totally equivalent with women who grow up in an unequal, unjust world that treats them as objects for lust and tends to rape them.
At the end of the day, just, an... an... artistic vision of those people. Women, I mean. And Blizzard are entitled to their vision, am I right? It's not like they're saying that women can be represented solely as sex objects, or that only sexually attractive women can be powerful. No one should have to defend their reductive, out-of-touch, sexualized, objectifying art, man. Just let the geniuses at Blizzard work. If you don't like it, don't buy it. The market will decide what's moral.
(Why do RPS have to be so smug? It makes me uneasy. I wish they'd stop.)
Anyway, it's not objectifying. It's just their choice to represent whole groups of people who are unlike them in accordance with the laziest, most predictable imagery possible. It's like when people drew Jews having big noses or Irish looking stupid or blacks being lazy... no one meant anything by that. And if they did, it was still, like, art man. It was their vision and it didn't suggest anything about Jews or Irish or blacks. That's all in the past now, of course. We're smarter than that now.
I mean if someone drew a picture of me as an over-privileged developed-world likely-white guy who never even had to try to understand the experience of someone who wasn't born on third base like me, I wouldn't be offended. Lighten up. They were just doing some art, man. Look, if I'm so "privileged", how come I'm so poor?
Anyway, if women are objectified, men are objectified too. All those sculpted male torsos, intended for consumption by an overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly straight audience? They're the exact same. My experience is totally equivalent with women who grow up in an unequal, unjust world that treats them as objects for lust and tends to rape them.
At the end of the day, just, an... an... artistic vision of those people. Women, I mean. And Blizzard are entitled to their vision, am I right? It's not like they're saying that women can be represented solely as sex objects, or that only sexually attractive women can be powerful. No one should have to defend their reductive, out-of-touch, sexualized, objectifying art, man. Just let the geniuses at Blizzard work. If you don't like it, don't buy it. The market will decide what's moral.
(Why do RPS have to be so smug? It makes me uneasy. I wish they'd stop.)
They actually upped the breast size for DoA5 after initial feedback.
That's the real bargain of the entertainer: to serve your customers in whatever capacity you can in exchange for their cash.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Do you think video games are an artistic medium? Its fine if you don't, although I disagree, but if you do and also don't think that an entire medium, an entire form of expression, being aimed squarely at one set of demographics isn't a problem then, well, you and I view things very differently
Real questions? Like 'how awesome is your game going to be?' and 'please tell me your pr talking points?'
I think someone like Geralt from the witcher series (who is muscular, but anything but a meathead) is much more of a male power fantasy than Marcus from Gears of War.
Same goes for characters like James Bond who I'm sure would many describe as male power fantasy.
I do find it hilarious he's going after Blizzard for sexualizing characters when his Twitter cover is of Gurren Lagann, which has a character who has big tits and is in a bikini for much of the series.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_banners/14522617/1372905868/web
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_banners/14522617/1372905868/web
Uhh didn't you read his post, the all knowing hand of the free market has made its decision, maybe you should just get over it!???
They don't really give the same vibe, at all; ZWEI has a more traditionally handsome face, half-unzipped lowcut leather pants with a bulge and feels obviously designed to be attractive to women.
Why do women dress the way they do on Halloween or when going to night clubs?
The only thing that makes me sad is Beyond Good and Evil sold like cold turds. It featured a fully-clothed, unsexualized, strong, female lead, and it was actually a great game. Sex sells, I guess. I vote with my dollars, and at least I chipped in towards this cause, instead of just making snarky posts. PEACE.
JordanN
Banned
How do you prove a message is being sent?
If I draw a circle and square, what message am I sending without saying it? Math is awesome because it relates to geometry? Or that I want to ban bikes because they're made up of those shapes?
You can interpret art anyway you want but to say there's an actual hidden meaning without one being said or thought up by the creator is again, a leap of logic. It seems like an assumption, when from the beginning, there could easily be none. There could be ignorance about these issues sure, but nothing stealthy from the art team.
Professor Lich
Member
Fair enough, I just thought it was funny that on the same page two people posted pictures of bare chested, muscle built men. Both who I think can turn into animals? Just a silly coincidence really.
Also, while I really can't say being a dude, I've seen that, 'designed to be attractive to women,' scope go wrong in some other threads somewhere. People were saying that they found it somewhat insulting that their needs could be summed up with, 'muscles and a bulge.'
But again, I don't remember where I saw it, so I could of imagined it.
The fantasy genre is known for over the top female character designs. It's clearly because most writers in the genre are male and they just make characters that they find appealing. I've just been replaying the Witcher 2 (a game in the fantasy genre) and that game has some suspect characters and activities. If they were more women out there designing fantasy characters I'm sure there would be more diversity in the character designs.
But those guys at RPS were just trying to push their own agendas by politicising the issue and suggesting the character designs go against empowerment. They may not be to everyone's taste but no one is trying to subjugate anyone. Many women dress up and do cosplay at conventions - no problem for them at all. The majority of women don't have issue with this stuff at all. Empowerment comes from educating yourself and getting a good productive job. Not from whingeing about awful one dimensional characters.
But those guys at RPS were just trying to push their own agendas by politicising the issue and suggesting the character designs go against empowerment. They may not be to everyone's taste but no one is trying to subjugate anyone. Many women dress up and do cosplay at conventions - no problem for them at all. The majority of women don't have issue with this stuff at all. Empowerment comes from educating yourself and getting a good productive job. Not from whingeing about awful one dimensional characters.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
...because people map the content onto concepts in their mind? Someone creates something with the deliberate intention of activating concepts in the mind of someone else. A second person perceives the creation and has, with their own spin of course, those concepts evoked. Transmission of thought the only way we know how. That's about as fundamental of a definition of a "message" as I think I could express
Everything we make with the intention of being thought about by other people has an intrinsic message, even if the message is "this is what I, the creator, think about the things being depicted"
Yes, you're missing that many times, they have invited female guest writers, writing exactly about this phenomenon.
I don't think you can blame a relativly small PC gaming centric website, not to have a female writer. How many applicants are there? How many pass their criteria in writing skills?
Dougstyles
Banned
With how often we see stuff like Dragon's Crown, KoFXIII, and Lollipop Chainsaw called out -- all featuring sexualized women who also happen to be very powerful in their respective games -- I don't even think that statement is up for debate. Though I'm not sure insecurity is exactly the right word.
It's precisely because I think it's art that I don't have a problem with objectification or sexualization. Don't like it? Don't blame the creators or their audience -- they're getting along just fine. Focus on creating content that is targeted for a new audience. Of course, we then get back to the capitalism problem.
None qualified enough to be on staff? Not one women is a good enough writer for a full time spot, yet they are good enough to write the female centric articles as guests so that these guys don't look like huge hypocrites. If they have a problem with the role of women in the video gaming community, do something about it other than being an ass in interviews.
No you're right. In the same sense, men get objectified into the same "bulky muscle man, often shirtless to show off his great abs" category. Which is just as stupid.
Dude what? Do you even know what the concept of a guest writer is? These are females who write for other homepages or work fulltime somewhere else. They don't WANT to work fulltime writing articles for RPS. That's why they only write a article every once in a blue moon, when they have the time for that.
Imperfected
Member
Let's try this another way.
Let's say I made an FPS game. I decide as part of the game that every allied character in the game will be white, and every enemy character will be black. I do this because I want it to be easier to differentiate allies and enemies at-a-glance, and have no intention of sending any sort of social message by doing so.
Did I mean to send a message? No. Would I appreciate someone tapping me on the shoulder and saying, "Hey guy, people might take this the wrong way, you know?" FUCK YES.
Was League of Legends trying to send the message that heroic women all have large breasts? No, they were just trying to make the character silhouettes read as being "feminine" from a fixed isometric viewpoint, and breasts are an easy signifier for that. Did female players of the game receive the message that big breasts are associated with being important and heroic as a woman? Yes. Did the character designs of the game improve as a result of them being made aware of this unintentional mixed messaging? In my opinion, yes, it most certainly did. (The two most popular female characters they've created this year were a direct "answer" to the "problem".)
Shake Appeal
Member
Perhaps because society and culture (of which videogames are a small but not insigifnicant part) have, from the day they arrived on the planet, taught them that this is the principal means by which they will be attractive to and valued by a majority of potential partners?
ElectricBlue187
Member
False dichotomy.
While I'm sure you will have fringe cases where individuals reject women being sexualised in any form, the majority of the opposition comes from those who have a problem with the objectification which seems to come hand in hand with the majority of sexualised female designs in games. You'd surely still find some criticism in any sexual female character or design, but it is important to divide that into those who have a problem with women being objectified (which in my experience is where the majority of feminist critique comes into play), and those who have a problem with female sexuality in itself, since those are for the most part entirely different camps.
Want to know how diverse Blizzard actually is with female characters in their games? Look no further than World of Warcaft and two of the most important female characters, Jaina Proudmoore and Lady Sylvannas Windrunner.
Jaina is dressed conservative (though with an exposed midriff), which might be normal considering her class (a high mage). More attention is given, though, to what she goes through, especially lately seeing Garrosh lay waste to her home town of Theramore and her becoming blinded by revenge, forgetting of her desire for peace (she once had an intimate relationship with Thrall, former leader of the Horde before he joined up with the Earthen Ring after the Shattering). I haven't played WoW after 5.3, so I don't know of how her story is currently, but she is seen as strong willed (and seriously, you didn't want to mess with her if you were going to raid on Theramore on a PvP server prior to Mists: she's not fucking around).
With Sylvannas, though, she's a lot more sexualized that Jaina is, as you can see, but many think she's allowed to because she's a complete and total badass. Hunter class and has an entire history with being Undead and serving as a Scourge under the Lich King. She can also be very manipulative, and not even the Horde really trust her (Garrosh hates her, though by the end of Mists, he becomes very exposed for the sack of crap he is).
Simply put, I think Blizzard is one of those companies that doesn't think that sexualized dress code doesn't mean the woman who's in the threads is any less of a person. Maybe the RPS interviewer should've looked at all the women they've made in WoW to know that Bowden is completely correct in how they design characters. It's all within their context (you wouldn't expect the hunter class in WoW to wear plate armor, would you?).
Jaina is dressed conservative (though with an exposed midriff), which might be normal considering her class (a high mage). More attention is given, though, to what she goes through, especially lately seeing Garrosh lay waste to her home town of Theramore and her becoming blinded by revenge, forgetting of her desire for peace (she once had an intimate relationship with Thrall, former leader of the Horde before he joined up with the Earthen Ring after the Shattering). I haven't played WoW after 5.3, so I don't know of how her story is currently, but she is seen as strong willed (and seriously, you didn't want to mess with her if you were going to raid on Theramore on a PvP server prior to Mists: she's not fucking around).
With Sylvannas, though, she's a lot more sexualized that Jaina is, as you can see, but many think she's allowed to because she's a complete and total badass. Hunter class and has an entire history with being Undead and serving as a Scourge under the Lich King. She can also be very manipulative, and not even the Horde really trust her (Garrosh hates her, though by the end of Mists, he becomes very exposed for the sack of crap he is).
Simply put, I think Blizzard is one of those companies that doesn't think that sexualized dress code doesn't mean the woman who's in the threads is any less of a person. Maybe the RPS interviewer should've looked at all the women they've made in WoW to know that Bowden is completely correct in how they design characters. It's all within their context (you wouldn't expect the hunter class in WoW to wear plate armor, would you?).