-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
RPS ambushes Blizzard director for objectification of women in Heroes of the Storm
- Thread starter usea
- Start date
Oh ok, so show me a picture of two wolves in the wild and without looking at its genitals how about you distinguish between the male and the female for me please?
That is unfortunate, but no one is under any moral obligation to fix that for you. I love JRPGs on consoles, and there are less of them every year. No one is under a moral obligation to make that for me. They make it if it has a good chance of being profitable, end of story. With the rise of indie gaming, the barriers have never been lower for greenlighting any project that caters to a niche audience so I suggest you start there. All of the complaining could be channeled into something positive and creative, like Kickstarting a game you guys might actually like.
It's not my job or ANYONE's job to make sure you have a game in every genre that fits your taste perfectly. Games are not made on government funding with a mandate for equality. They are profit driven products made in a capitalist society.
If you want to beg a developer for content you want, then go for it. But to pretend like you have any moral right to content designed for you is arrogant and absurd. You have as much moral right to modestly dressed MOBA characters as I have a moral right to console JRPGs.
It doesn't bother a lot of women, and supposedly 50% of gamers are women now. I know personally many women who love designs like that. Yuna in FFX-2, and on. My girlfriend is interested in Metal Gear for the first time because of Quiet.
Conservatives do not speak for all women. These designs don't bother all women. And these designs are not doing anything that is on a lower moral plane than what you want. Sexuality isn't evil. Actually, a very good case can be made that suppressing sexuality is far more evil than natural, biologically driven urges to reproduce, and art that celebrates that.
I don't care about how they should look per se, I'm commenting on how they do look. What do you think the designers were doing when they were making those character models? Like I said, they surely weren't trying to make the sexes look similar in any particularly rational or logical fashion. Thus, they were clearly trying to do something else.
More to the point, who are they trying to appeal to, and how?
Not at all. But that's not an excuse to willfully close your eyes to bias in media
Not at all. But it's fairly obvious that the differences between them were crafted with an eye towards appealing/pandering to men, which isn't necessarily a bad thing per se, but may be when we're already awash in a sea of media that does exactly that, with the side effect of reinforcing some negative and exclusionary attitudes and ideas.
Sexuality isn't evil, but I'd argue misogyny and objectification is -- and, that's why the discussion needs to be had. Talking about these things isn't bad ... and, everyone may end up agreeing that there's nothing wrong with it. If you were truly confident that there wasn't a problem, the conversation wouldn't be an issue. But, people immediately get defensive and start throwing out slurs -- I suspect that because, inside, they've got a clue they're on the wrong side.
Regardless, simply accepting the status quo as being best is ridiculous is every situation. Better to discuss and explore -- the more people that talk about the issue, about what they like and dislike, about what makes them uncomfortable and what turns them on, the better we can approach these things.
Trust me, I'm not suggesting we neuter art and expression (me, I'm all over the Dragon's Crown art ... I love it) -- I'm just saying the discussion isn't threatening.
I'm not even sure what you are saying here. How someone is dressed makes them respectable or not?
theSlacker
Member
Honestly, even though I disagree with their point, and believe that one of them may have brain damage, the "it's fantasy so whatever" counter point isn't a good one.
Also their issue isn't that the female characters are dressed revealingly, or are over sexualised, but that they are made in a way, they believe, to make them more attractive to men. Don't mention that both genders happen to be over exaggerated in that art style. This apparently doesn't count since when it is done to men it is a "male power fantasy" and not the same unrealistic, unhealthy and unfair standard as when it is done to women.
Oh well, moving on.
Perhaps respectable was the wrong word. Sensible might be better. If I were a woman, even if I liked sexy clothes, I wouldn't march into a battle where I might die wearing a metal bikini. Just saying.
And my original point was that women might feel uncomfortable playing as a character that was designed to be appealing to horny teens.
EventHorizon
Member
What is the ultimate point here? Male characters tend to be overly muscular too. Who thinks these characters are trying to portray reality at all? Is the argument that we should mandate that fictional characters look a certain way? I would assume that the answer to that question is no since that would be a huge overstepping of government authority into personal freedom.
If the ultimate goal is to start a discussion then I can appaud the attempt, but know that the audience for these games prefer the aesthetics they way they are. That is after all why the characters look the way they do in the first place. Tastes can obviously change. However my guess is that the basic formula of men = muscles/more masculine and women = sexy/more feminine, where masculine and feminine are an exaggeration of gender norms, will be here for a long while.
If the ultimate goal is to start a discussion then I can appaud the attempt, but know that the audience for these games prefer the aesthetics they way they are. That is after all why the characters look the way they do in the first place. Tastes can obviously change. However my guess is that the basic formula of men = muscles/more masculine and women = sexy/more feminine, where masculine and feminine are an exaggeration of gender norms, will be here for a long while.
Its called sexualised.
Just because you dont beat off to it doesnt mean its not happening.
If you dont think there is a conscious effot to try and make the females 'sexy' then I dont know what to tell you. And theyre not doing it to empower them.
It's almost like men and women have different body features!
(wiki contains NSFW image) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_physiology
Ok, I agree. But if they don't want to make a non-sexualized character, should they be forced to? Sex sells, especially to male gamers. Research and surveys have shown that making 'alien' characters more feminine or sexual draws more male gamers in. It's why Cortana in Halo looks the way she does, it's why Liara, despite being an asexual being, looks like a human model with her face based on an actress, it's why James Cameron used Zoe Saldana and her curves and face to make her character in Avatar seem more appealing.
People know the answer to all these questions, and yet want to feign ignorance as to why it happens.
TemplaerDude
Member
I mean, god forbid someone take his job, this hobby and the prevalent issues surrounding it these days at all seriously.
And I don't like playing gigantic, hulking male characters like their Orc models. So I don't play an Orc, I can roll undead, troll, goblin, etc. instead. Just like Tauren, Orc, Troll and Pandaren female models are larger and bulkier if someone doesn't like the smaller female models.
I'm saying that there are other ways to distinguish genders then just adding boobs, different colour pallets, different body sizes, clothing, face designs, heck, even making them pink and giving them a bow is preferable to just giving boobs to something that clearly isn't human.
Or maybe some do? Don't talk for a whole group, it never works well.
is there any basis for this assumption? I hear this being thrown around all the time, but I've never ever actually met someone expressing this. I could imagine some hard core feminist doing this but I don't really think anyone will weep over them not playing games anyway.
As usual, I'm sympathetic to what the RPS folks are saying, but I wish that the tone of discussion around this topic could change. I feel like we could have pretty good conversations about this if the tone wasn't so confrontational. Making it confrontational puts people on the defensive, and turns what should be a popular topic ("How do we enable more people to enjoy the games that we love?") into a never-ending series of arguments that ultimately benefits no one.
My problem with that interview was that the guy clearly went in there with an agenda when Browder was likely under the assumption that he was just there to talk about the game in a traditional sense.
If RPS wanted to have an honest and fair discussion about the subject then they should have attempted to reach out to Blizzard and specifically request an interview where they discuss the topic in a professional manner. This is currently one of the industry's most hot-button topics, you don't just casually slide in questions about it during an interview that has nothing to do with it and expect thoughtful answers. Of course Browder went on the defensive and gave half-assed answers, it's a sensitive topic that requires more than just off-the-top-of-my-head responses. This isn't something you just have a quick chat about, it's something that you sit down and have a conversation/dialogue about.
Yes, it's great that things like this are being discussed and debated, but RPS' way about getting Blizzard to talk about this was all wrong.
If RPS wanted to have an honest and fair discussion about the subject then they should have attempted to reach out to Blizzard and specifically request an interview where they discuss the topic in a professional manner. This is currently one of the industry's most hot-button topics, you don't just casually slide in questions about it during an interview that has nothing to do with it and expect thoughtful answers. Of course Browder went on the defensive and gave half-assed answers, it's a sensitive topic that requires more than just off-the-top-of-my-head responses. This isn't something you just have a quick chat about, it's something that you sit down and have a conversation/dialogue about.
Yes, it's great that things like this are being discussed and debated, but RPS' way about getting Blizzard to talk about this was all wrong.
Dougstyles
Banned
I honestly don't know what to tell you. The only female design that is even remotely sexy in a traditional sense is the Draenei.
You also need to consider that exaggerating features goes a long way towards differentiating the models, especially considering the WoW isn't exactly the prettiest game around.
...has an all male writing staff. Takes the issue seriously until they have the opportunity to do something about it themselves.
Umm...which race? I've never seen it, though I would have to be actually looking to notice. I guess that should say something here.
They're based on real world dances. The female Tauren's is the Macarena. What do you expect them to do with it?
How do you figure?
Thrall, Wyrnn, Chen Stormstout, Malfurion, etc., are "muscle neanderthals"? Thereazene is "quaint and dainty"? I'm not sure if you really know all that much about Warcraft lore, because I'm sure you would know better than to say that if you did.
When I was in my raiding guild, a lot of the people in it were female. WoW is played by a lot of different types of people of both genders. Please know what you're talking about before speaking.
Great, don't count the ones that would disprove your point, but anything that does? Fair game! And they sexualized the Orc females?
Basing your entire judgment of a character off of one piece of artwork, when you clearly have never played a Warcraft game before or know much about Warcraft lore, or about any of the classes and what type of armor they use at all. Not to mention that you completely left out who I was comparing her to.
Arthas pre-Lich King, Varian Wrynn, Illidan Stormrage. I mean, seeing as how I'm a straight male myself, I wouldn't really call a male "sexy". Maybe good looking or wanting to BE them.
Do me a favor and go look up any of the raid runs from Method or Paragon or someone else, and tell me that any of the males are two times the size of the females. Might want to factor in classes and armors people are wearing. Men who are just wearing bulky armor because they are warriors or Pallies versus women who are mages or locks don't count.
Except your condemnation of everything not only completely missed my point, but also gave complete proof that you didn't know the source material.
For one, I mentioned the midriff, and two, look at her character model in the game, and you will see where I'm coming from. Plus, keep in mind who I'm comparing her to.
And both of you completely missed the point, anyway. The females also carry a firm sense of independence and strength that is shown in their back stories in the lore. You realize that a woman might choose to show a bit of skin as a sign of them being independent? Why do we condemn if we even see a bit of skin on a female? Are you saying females do not have the right to dress the way they want to dress, or that developers don't have any right to show that kind of independence on ANY of the female characters they create, and if they do, then it's automatically "fulfilling a sexual fantasy" for them?
When did showing any skin become a sign of oppression?
Sex sells to everyone, including women. We are humans, sex is a major part of our lives. Books, movies, games, commercials, shows, everything uses it. Is it right? Maybe not, but people gobble that shit up.
Again, these are humanoid creatures. Females have breasts and hips. Thats the easiest way to make the genders in a video game where you can play as kung fu using giant pandas easily identifiable. I doubt blizzards main goal when creating the female orc or female panda was to turn on a bunch of wow players.
Blizzard over sexualizes characters in their video games. But you are using the wrong example.
Completely OT but you don't happen to be the Markot from the IGN WoW forums, do you?
Dr_Boris_Goltz
Banned
I personally don't think it's too ridiculous to have overly sexualized females in a game with such a weird sci-fi/fantasy setting. Everything is overly sexualized or made to look exaggerated in some fashion.
I think sexualization should fit its setting. Like if I'm watching a dumb movie like Charlie's Angels, I expect over-sexualization of the leads, because that's part of the mass appeal to a mass market film.
If say, The Last of Us had Tess showing her thong and a ton of cleavage, THAT would strike me as extremely offending.
I think sexualization should fit its setting. Like if I'm watching a dumb movie like Charlie's Angels, I expect over-sexualization of the leads, because that's part of the mass appeal to a mass market film.
If say, The Last of Us had Tess showing her thong and a ton of cleavage, THAT would strike me as extremely offending.
Now compare the NSFW image in the wiki link to the ones you just quoted and spot the difference.
50 Shades of Grey, one of the fastest selling books of all time, overwhelmingly purchased by women.
http://www.businessinsider.com/by-the-numbers-the-50-shades-of-grey-phenomenon-2012-6
FAR more explicit than ANYTHING in any video game, let along a Blizzard game. That's mainstream America.
Game of Thrones, one of the most watched shows in the world now, completely mainstream. Rape, incest, nudity, prostitution, graphic sex. In fact, that's a large part of why it has a large female viewing audience. If it was all straight fantasy, politics and action, it wouldn't have as big of a female audience.
theSlacker
Member
Damn, was going so good, but fell into the trap. People can now just easily disregard your entire post by pointing to that as proof positive of the male characters being power fantasies, which means over exaggerating or exposing their bodies doesn't mater.
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
Can we please not go out on a limb to defend Blizzards depiction of female characters after what they did to Kerrigan? I really couldn't give a shit if orc female models only appeal to fetishists after they ruined one of the few decent female characters in gaming.
As for the issue at hand I feel like if Browder simply stuck to justifying the vision of the game instead of claiming moronic shit like nothing mattered because he wasn't running for president then things could have gone fine. In fact I think it would have been pretty easy to tear Nathan arguments apart.
As for the issue at hand I feel like if Browder simply stuck to justifying the vision of the game instead of claiming moronic shit like nothing mattered because he wasn't running for president then things could have gone fine. In fact I think it would have been pretty easy to tear Nathan arguments apart.
None of the pictures in the wiki have tails. Am i doing it right?
Linking that page an using it as a comparison was a bad example. Bring real world anatomy into WoW wont end well.
You could always, you know, not make the sexes easily distinguishable. Or, at the very least, not dismiss that option as absurd so quickly that you don't even consider it.
I doubt the changes were explicitly done to "turn them on," but they were certainly done to make them more aesthetically pleasing to men. Otherwise, how do you explain the changes in the female WoW models between alpha and release?
Imperfected
Member
They are, certainly. Battle Bunny Riven is almost certainly the most popular skin available for her, though that might have changed if her Championship skin wasn't limited. The fact the player base is 85% male makes sexualized skins pretty easy to sell. The non-sexualized female champions like Diana sell perfectly well, though.
I'm sure some do, but not all do, and thats the problem. It excludes a lot of women from getting into gaming. I'm not saying sexualised characters should go away, but you can't deny that a large majority of female characters in gaming are sexualised, and if you dont want to play as a sexualised female it limits your options. For example, if you play a moba, but don't want to play as a sexualised woman because you, as a woman might find it gross (and before you ask, I typically don't, I am a straight guy after all) it limits the number of playstyles you can play as.
EscapingJail
Member
They are sexualized because they have boobs? I don't get it.
Not exactly when you consider some of the females that were in my guild. Keep in mind that I kind of, you know, PLAYED WoW for a while. More than what I can say for who I responded to.
And Arthas before becoming LK was a "power fantasy"? How about Wyrnn? The latter is powerful because he IS kind of, you know, the King of Stormwind! Maybe if I said Lich King, perhaps it would be a different story. Maybe Illidan was a bad choice when you bring in the power fantasy bit, but he wasn't asking for who fit the power fantasy bit. He was asking for "sexy" male characters. He never specified "sexy male characters that don't satisfy a male power fantasy". Difference there, and since there wasn't the rule, anyway...!
Then again, every major character in Warcraft lore has a lot of power in their own right, so in a sense, the entire GAME is a power fantasy.
(EDIT: You DO bring up an interesting issue, though: why do people always want to try to "trap" people in these arguments. It's like they cannot win an argument any other way than to troll them without giving any other valid arguments. If you really have to troll or "trap" to disprove someone about anything, then you've proven that your own argument was pretty fucking weak to begin with).
If you think people don't sexualize Diana...
Clothes and whether someone is completely "covered up" head to toe is not the only factor in sexualization. Hell people sexualize horses.
RPS: But its not even about a message. The goal is to let people have fun in an environment where they can feel awesome without being weirded out or even objectified. This is a genre about empowerment. Why shouldnt everyone feel empowered? Thats what its about at the end of the day: letting everyone have a fair chance to feel awesome.
Browder: Uh-huh. Cool. Totally.
I like how he blew the guy off. Better than he deserved. Empowered? For fucks sake.
Browder: Uh-huh. Cool. Totally.
I like how he blew the guy off. Better than he deserved. Empowered? For fucks sake.
People should see the covers on the books my mom reads. Shirtless, perfectly toned male torso in blue jeans with the head cut off above the rugged, strong chin. Sometimes they are wearing a thin, unbuttoned shirt blowing in the wind.
That covers 90% of them.
theSlacker
Member
No, actually, you could do that if that is what appeals to you. I mean instead of trying to force someone else you change their vision since it doesn't cater to what you want or think is right.
Not quoting everyone that made this kind of response, but it is the massive sized different each of the genders of each race, and how the feminine qualities have been amplified on the females. Doesn't mater that part of the reason for that size difference is that the male characteristics have been amplified on the male characters as well though, since that is power fantasy.
I really gotta move on...
You've spouted this talking point the entire thread, and somehow didn't discover in all that time that they do have women who write for them? Cara Ellison. Look her up.
Not a big fan of that idea. It's a great thing that the females and males are so different from each other, different sizes, different features, way different animations, from walking to attacking, they are completely unique. It adds a huge amount of variety to the game.
There are a lot of people like me who prefer one gender over another for each race, like I hate male pandas, but like the animations and size of the females ones, prefer male undead, female draenie, female Belf and Nelf, Male Human, and so on.
From a pure gameplay point of view, your idea would be very boring.
Yeah but there are SOME "non-sexualized" characters in moba's. You are going to be hard pressed to find a game that has zero sexualized characters. I see why it can be bothersome, and believe me I am not arguing that there isn't a problem. But sexualization isn't a black and white line. Everyone has there own opinion on it, and when it is too much.
I'm not trying to force anyone to change anything. I'm saying the designers and consumers of WoW would be well served by being minimally aware of the gender bias inherent in these designs. I couldn't care less whether they deign to act upon such knowledge; it isn't really their responsibility to even try to change such huge endemic issues by themselves.
And there's no call to be so defensive.
I generally agree. I just think it'd be nice if these issues were given a bit more than lip service sometimes. It'd go a long way.
And hey, these guys are far better at design than I am. They're certain to come up with better ideas.
Yes, when I visit my mom and see her reading her kindle I don't even ask what she is reading anymore. Most of the time when I used to she just responded "smut".