Overwatch (preferable widowmaker)
Guess I'll be the first to light the fire.
Blizzard issued copyright bullshit for all the Overwatch SFM content and had the authors remove the models from the Steam workshop...
Have fun with that.
its more about the people who complained about the sexy pose than them caring about porn. i mean these people were crying boycott over a female character looking good imagine what theyd do over the pron
>All that ridiculous SJW complaining over a video game pose
>People will inevitably make comics the depict Amelie's brainwashing and mindbreak
>They'll do the same for Lena
>An brainwashed version of Tracer will be available as a skin eventually
best part is that they replaced it with an even more sexualized pose
>"...Widowmaker's presentation hasn't caused nearly so much a stir."
Bullshit, the usual suspects were bitching about her the moment her big purple rump showed up.
When it became obvious complaining about Widow wasn't going to change anything they abandoned trying and seemingly designated her the "whore," character only in nicer terms. She's a lost cause. No use in trying, she's the T&A bitch and nothing but now.
Whereas Tracer is supposed to be more than that to them which entails no allowable sexuality at all, even if it's something as simple and playful as the original pose. She's to be saved from being a "whore," character because to these people any sexuality automatically puts a character in that role. It's the Madonna-Whore complex ironically being embraced by the people who are supposedly trying to destroy it.
>"...and clearly the Overwatch team felt the same way."
That was a major part of the contention. Jeff didn't say anything about the pose not fitting Tracer's character, he framed it, and I'm paraphrasing, in a way that conveyed, "We don't want to offend anyone, we want to make everyone feel powerful and welcome. We apologize for it and we'll do better."
The original complaint was grounded a lot more in the sensibilities of a moral guardian trying hard not to make their complaint look like such and adding in the aforementioned initial response from Jeff, it's hard not to see the message a lot of people did.
That video is tip-toeing around that issue to make the contention about something it never was while also misconstruing what a lot of the original complaint was. Sadly I expect that, and much worse, from Dan and the increasingly biased nature of Extra Credits these days.
> not posting the better version
>Bullshit, the usual suspects were bitching about her the moment her big purple rump showed up.
We clearly need this
>Sadly I expect that, and much worse, from Dan and the increasingly biased nature of Extra Credits these days.
I too have noticed the growing trend for them to take a stance one way or another instead of actually delivering the facts and showing things from all angles, which is unfortunate because at the moment they're really the only group that provides that style of content.
I think the most glaring example of this was in their video about The Division, and how it's so socially tone deaf that it could be classified as dangerous. Their information seemed correct and I was able to easily digest what they said in the video, but I got the same sensation I had when I sat through my American Government class with a homosexual women's rights activist my Freshman year of college.
All the things that were said seemed legitimate on the surface, but if I tried to peel back that surface layer all I'd find was a slap to the face in the form of SJW agenda and liberal bias, perverting and twisting the entire message.
Taking request involving Mercy and her ass. I need ideas
Her standing straight up with her legs together looking back with one eyebrow raised wondering why you're staring at her
Yeah. Quite frankly this was the first time I even got any info on what the controversy was (all I knew was that they changed the pose, that's it) and it left a real taste of "let me spin this shit as hard as I can, so that it would seem reasonable and not at all batshit insane."
I saw nothing wrong in the original pose nor found it a bad pose from some faggy design standpoint. I'd really love someone to just take the outline of the pose and take it to various designers and ask if they agree with the assertion given in the video. Just people who have no knowledge if or interest in the controversy.
Not that I hate the new pose, but if the reason for changing it had simply been the designers changing because they didn't like it, nobody would have given two fucks. But when they're being forced to change it because of someone somewhere doesn't like it, it's a bad reason, no matter the outcome.
" had simply been the designers changing because they didn't like it, nobody would have given two fucks"
Kaplan said that's why they agreed so quickly to change it. It was on that mini-documentary series. Honestly if anyone has any qualms about any of the tracer stuff they should just watch that video.
It starts to make more sense when you take into account that people like Leigh Alexander have been consultants for Extra Credits episodes dating quite a ways back and Dan has shown he's not above blatantly making random shit up if it serves his agenda as the Totalbiscuit kerfluffle proved.
The thing is, I have no doubt that it was changed for the reasons stated: The designers really didn't think it fit her that much. Jeff said as much in his second follow up response to the original complaint thread.
The problem is twofold though. First; that video is trying as hard as it can to wash away the moral guardian flavor of the original complaint. Second; Jeff's initial response to said complaint didn't even mention whether the pose fit Tracer's characterization or that the team was debating it. His post was nothing but "Sorry for offending you, we'll do better."
Pic related is his initial response with the follow up below it. Taking into account the original post's "I'm offended but trying hard to make it look otherwise," facade and the first response from the lead dev no less, it's not hard to see why the internet exploded with people screaming Blizz had capitulated to censorious SJWs.
And when Dan & EC decide to sanitize that away to sooth any dissent their particular bias or agenda might cause they don't win themselves any favors.
They can watch the video and dig deeper at the same time.
>tfw love being the team heal whore. used and then discarded like the worthless slut i am.
You are far from alone, this is my dream. Zarya is mi waifu and we are going to cuddle and snuggle and bicker and have the most lovingist sex and make like 12 babies together.
Just got the combat voice remark "Do you even lift?" when killing a Winston. Nearly jizzed my pants.
>being able to tell fit from fat is not murrica
Zarya is thicc, Mei is just fat. Both are lowest tier.
D.va = Widowmaker = Mercy = Tracer > Pharah = Symetra > Piss > Shit > Your mum > Zarya > Mei
would you fucks stop arguing and post more porn?
after a hard day of "healing" the team it's good to relax, in the appropriate attire for a healer of course
tfw cant upload the widowmaker futa
Tracer (I like short hair and her attitude, I'd destroy the happy go lucky with my dick) > Symetra > D.Va > Mei >> Mercy >>>>>>>>>>>>> Zarya = Phara
Honestly I love all of them but mercy, zarya and phara. Mercy's alright, but zarya and phara are fucking shit
Symetra is gorgeous dude, just go look in her victory poses at dance.
>still whining about butthurtgate when it was such a non-event it was likely a inside job anyways
Anyone with the indivdual animations of Widowmaker, Mercy and D.va from this pic?
Muh afro american brother
She does indeed deserve much more appreciation
Posting some Pharah
Hi /aco/, New/Drawfag here from the old mercy thread. I just finished my 2nd / 3rd images and I would like your thoughts on them.
I am really new to this so I am trying to improve my skills.
Follow up pic, really proud of this one!
What the fuck, this? Fucking triggered betas and fatties need some real problems to worry about.
>Writing a review in essay form
It was some forum post.
Like two, maybe three paragraphs long.
The people reacting to the post made a bigger deal of it than the post did, and only because Blizzard took note that it was out of character and agreed.
It wasn't a good pose in the first place anyway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmLkVtqjf1A
And Blizzard was really only acknowledging that they agreed with it, it basically came down to "Yeah, we weren't that crazy about it, either," and they literally had another pose sitting by that they replaced it with.
>phew, my argument is shit but since you made a small mistake completely unrelated to our discussion I no longer have to defend it
Someone taking the time to write all that needs better things to worry about than 'perceptions of womyn in gaming,." The posters main argument off the bad was female objectification bullshit.
Blizzard is a large company in the business of making money. Diverting resources to calming vocal minorities only shows they did it out of fear.
You realize you're positng in a thread containing SFM. Not sitting around, they are movable models not a digital painting.
>weren't that crazy about it either
>had a better one "sitting by"
Do you people read your posts before you hit submit?
>You realize you're positng in a thread containing SFM. Not sitting around, they are movable models not a digital painting.
You realize they hav preliminary stages where they draw the poses, right?
And Blizzard's initial reaction said nothing about whether the pose fit her character, all they did was apologize for offending delicate moral sensibilities and lock the thread for a day. >>557446
It's baffling why some posters here seem to think they can insult everyone's intelligence and spin complete bullshit when the truth is right there in this thread for anyone to see.
You wouldn't have given two shits if Blizzard didn't take note of the complaint.
>And Blizzard's initial reaction said nothing about whether the pose fit her character, all they did was apologize for offending delicate moral sensibilities and lock the thread for a day
I'm reading that screenshot and it's pretty clear from what they're saying that Blizzard didn't like the pose much either. Because it was out of character.
>It's baffling why some posters here seem to think they can insult everyone's intelligence and spin complete bullshit when the truth is right there in this thread for anyone to see.
Yes, I also have no idea why you would literally give me a picture that proves what I'm saying and then pretend I shouldn't pay attention to half of it just because you said "initial reaction".
No. How about YOU fuck off and make your own thread somewhere else where you can continue to spew bullshit out of your stupid mouth. I came here to see porn not you faggots wasting post.
Firstly, the person you're quoted and the post you quoted are two different people.
Secondly, maybe you should look at the dates on Jeff's posts. His initial reaction was nothing but "Sorry for offending you," and a lock to the thread.
It was only after everyone saw that bullshit and started calling Blizzard out for apologizing to SJWs that his follow up was posted a day later. His second post starts with "Well that escalated quickly..." for a reason.
>You wouldn't have given two shits if Blizzard didn't take note of the complaint.
Uh, yeah, that's kind of the whole fucking point. Nobody would care if someone voiced their stupid opinions, it was Blizzard taking a few morally outraged posters seriously, apologizing to them and then promising to let their opinions dictate content that caused the shitstorm. And it brewed for a whole fucking day before Jeff chimed in again and by then the 'damage control,' effect was already in place.
All he needed to do was state from the very beginning that the team was looking for alternative poses or that the one already there was still being decided upon. Instead he went full "We're sorry for offending you."
The fact he didn't say anything about the team debating poses until a giant shitstorm forced him to a day after he felt a simple apology was enough of a response certainly does leave a very 'damage control,' taste in the mouth.
>Secondly, maybe you should look at the dates on Jeff's posts.
No, because you're only pretending that's relevant to split hairs.
"Oh, his reaction doesn't count, only the one I'm outraged about does because it came earlier". No. I'm not going to pander to your false sense of outrage made possible only by selective reading.
>"Oh, his reaction doesn't count, only the one I'm outraged about does because it came earlier".
That's not what the argument is and you'd know that if you didn't engage in the same selective reading you're complaining about.
The dates are incredibly relevant. If Jeff's first post had looked more like the second without bothering to acknowledge "offense," there wouldn't have been a shitstorm of outrage. There was one precisely because of his first response and the subsequent radio silence for a day and a half, which is more than long enough for the internet to lose its mind.
Either Jeff was casually speaking what he considers the truth in the first response without thinking it would garner such a response and the second is nothing but damage control or he's incompetent enough to think apologizing to moral guardians and omitting extremely pertinent information was a suitable response in the first place.
You're ignoring the relevant post dates and the first response entirely and then hypocritically charging me with selective reading for supposedly ignoring the second when I've previously stated I think part of it is the truth. The only one ignoring information and arguments here is you, anon.
It is perhaps worth noting that the pose:
A) Was not exactly a great pose
B) Said nothing other than "Hey, look at my ass", and therefore
C) Was pretty much completely out of character for Tracer
Check out Extra Frames's video on the subject, they do a really good job explaining the issue. It wasn't a good pose. Blizzard isn't stupid. They wouldn't put in the work necessary to change a pose if it was just the complaint of one guy that it was "offensive". And that wasn't the point of his argument, either! His entire argument? "It's out of character, it says nothing about tracer. It reduces her to a sex object. It's out of character." Forget offensive, it's just bad game design, a rare example where the graphic design just isn't great. The new pose? Obviously better. Obviously more in-character. She looks sexy, but it also says something about her and fits in with her overall presented persona.
The fact that people are throwing such a shit-fit over this is utterly puzzling to me.
>A) Was not exactly a great pose
Subjective. Personally I like the new one more, but there are people who liked the old one too.
>B) Said nothing other than "Hey, look at my ass", and therefore
Subjective. This point also contradicts with your next...
>C) Was pretty much completely out of character for Tracer
...since the new pose doesn't strip any of the sexuality away that the previous one had while also being a full on pinup pose. How are you arguing that the new pose works for her when your second contention was her prominent ass which is still there? The new one is certainly more playful, but it isn't any less sexual so approving of it while arguing the previous one was OOC for being too sexual is contradictory.
>Check out Extra Frames's video on the subject, they do a really good job explaining the issue.
No they don't. It's whitewashing to make the issue go away when it's clear they didn't even understand why people were upset to begin with. The video has been spammed twice in this thread, stop plugging it.
>Blizzard isn't stupid. They wouldn't put in the work necessary to change a pose if it was just the complaint of one guy that it was "offensive".
They're the same as any other major media company, plenty of stupid, plenty of clever. I think they honestly were debating the pose, but that's what makes Jeff's first response so colossally retarded, that he omitted that info and apologized to someone who was offended by the Tracer pose.
And stop trying to twist the original complaint into something it wasn't. Complaining about a simple victory pose reducing a character to a sex object is being offended and I won't forget about that part of the complaint because that's the only part Jeff saw fit to respond to initially. He didn't say anything about poses, characterization or anything of the sort, he apologized for offending someone. He only started talking about whether it fit her character after the shitstorm began.
>That's not what the argument is
The argument is about what he said.
You're nitpicking by purposefully ignoring half of what he said, and acting like only the "initial reaction" is the only valid reaction worthy of examination.
Get out of here with your intellectually dishonest shit.
Where did I ignore half of what he said? I'm talking into account both posts, the dates of their posting and the contextual circumstances surrounding them. It's important to note that his second post reaffirms what he said in the first which means examining the second entails doing the same for the first. Maybe you should read the whole post next time instead of just six words eh?
I've said repeatedly that I think the explanation Jeff gave in the second post has truth in it, that they were really debating the pose and whether it was suitable and I've said repeatedly that I think the new pose is better.
However I'm also saying it's extremely telling that Jeff's initial reaction was solely an apology directed at the pearl-clutching nature of the original complaint and not him divulging his team's thoughts on replacing the pose until the fanbase had become enraged.
With that taken into account along with the dead silence of a locked thread it's not all that surprising a lot of people saw the subsequent post as nothing but damage control.
Acting like those people are completely irrational while you whitewash what really happened, plug videos made by extremely biased parties and hypocritically ignore information while chastising others for supposedly doing the same is the real intellectual dishonesty here.
>...since the new pose doesn't strip any of the sexuality away that the previous one had while also being a full on pinup pose. How are you arguing that the new pose works for her when your second contention was her prominent ass which is still there? The new one is certainly more playful, but it isn't any less sexual so approving of it while arguing the previous one was OOC for being too sexual is contradictory.
You just said it. It's more playful. It's more in motion. It fits a character who is constantly moving all of the time. It says, "even when I'm standing still at the end of the match, I'm still hyperactive and moving". And yes, it emphasizes her butt - any pose looking at tracer from behind will show off her butt; she has a very nicely-sculpted butt with a deep crack. But it does so in a way that says things other than "look at my butt", which was pretty much the entire point of that last picture.
>No they don't. It's whitewashing to make the issue go away when it's clear they didn't even understand why people were upset to begin with.
Why are people upset to begin with? I seriously don't understand. Oh, they removed a pose because someone thought it was offensive and out of character, and they agreed. What, exactly, is the problem here?
Didnt fucking Maxim rip on this too?
I dont even play Overwatch or MOBAs or whatever. But here you have a game so popular, normalfags are flooding search engines over it.
And instead of taking advantage of this (holy shit all we need is a 3d artist and a contract with Blizzard?!?), faggots are calling it "a problem".
Expect to see more of this shit, especially with that failed shit over Tracer.
>Wasting the post limit on bullshit more useless than a reaction image
If you didn't read it then there was no reason to let anyone know other than you like being a space-wasting passive aggressive bitch.
Yeah, I'll concede that your point makes sense in that the revised pose, while still as sexual, fits her more than just sticking her butt out.
The original complaint however described the sexuality reducing her to nothing but a sex object, an altogether different contention than simply "this doesn't fit her." If all they wanted was a more lively and playful pose they could have very well asked for it, but they instead used the same language so many people bitching about offensive TnA have before.
People were upset because there's this feeling hanging over the game industry that there are certain people with very specific political agendas who have no qualms about forcing their very sensitive moral standards into places most people feel they do not belong. Blizzard itself has a spotty track record of sometimes paying these people more than what most would consider undue attention.
When someone chimes in to complain about a simple victory pose offending them, proceeds to face opposition for nearly the entire discussion, and is then surprisingly vindicated by a small response from the lead dev apologizing for making the offense before shutting the debate down the fanbase understandably sees little more than a tiny group of busybodies representing their subjective offense as a societal ill in need of remedy while dictating their own moral sensibilities to everyone else.
The issue has been building for quite some time with numerous examples of small groups of very loud, very political complainers getting their way and imposing their views. Watching Blizzard just roll over for a particularly silly issue just broke the camel's back.
Calm down everyone. Look, I have a OC fresh from the oven. It is worthy for this thread?
Mercy butt is always worthy.
>been building for quite some time with numerous examples of small groups of very loud, very political complainers getting their way and imposing
Except they didn't roll over, they did change the pose to suit the character. They removed none of the sexuality and if anything bolstered it with the pose itself. It's not caving it, however I will admit the initial response was total caving... total pandering to an idiot, and I agree it need not have been addressed that way. If anything it should have been a "Your opinion is noted. Thread Closed"
>Except they didn't roll over, they did change the pose to suit the character. They removed none of the sexuality and if anything bolstered it with the pose itself.
Oh I know. I've said over and over that I think Jeff was telling the truth when he said they were already contemplating a revised pose.
I was just explaining why people were pissed to begin with. It looked like they were completely rolling over based on the initial response and subsequent silence for a day and a half and the fact it took a colossal mess of outrage to get a proper explanation certainly lends some credence to those who saw nothing but damage control.
It's unfortunate, because any other response, like the one you suggested, would have been better than what Jeff actually did.
Pharah showing off her pussy and feet. Or just looking sexy with some sort of underclothes like a sports bra and shorts or even a ZSS-esque bodysuit since people like to compare her to Samus.
Pretty much anything of Pharah really, depending on you skill in how far you want to go. She needs more art.
How? Each of those posts came with a relevant picture so they didn't take up anymore room than a simple dump of content would. Others are still posting ITT so obviously some posters aren't intimidated by or incapable of ignoring the text.
the problem with the face is that the eyes are a bit too big -- nvm
fixed it hopefully.
Made it better at least.
Learn from my 2 minute fixation.
3/3 and sauce:
>let a non-autist tell things how they actually happened: a baby fight over a bland ass pose nobody gave a shit about (confirmable by the fact that it quickly beame about tracer's ass, except the original stupidly-worded complaint never cited tracer's ass as the issue and even complimented widowmaker's) and was replaced by a pose that's better in literally every way, including sex appeal
>A) Was not exactly a great pose
There's other shitty poses there as well, so why aren't they changing them as well?
>B) Said nothing other than "Hey, look at my ass"
There's other characters showing their asses as well, so why aren't they getting remodeled?
>and therefore C) Was pretty much completely out of character for Tracer
They changed her pose into a fucking WW2 pinup decal. How is that more in line with her character? It's not like the old pose was her sticking her ass at the camera and making a duck face.
>Check out Extra Frames's video on the subject, they do a really good job explaining the issue. It wasn't a good pose.
According to one guy. Who shows 3 characters in somewhat similar pose of looking over the shoulder and decides that the Tracer pose is wrong, because of reasons. The line he draws from her head to her leg is night identical to the line on McCree, only mirrored. But it's wrong, because he says it is.
Sure, let me draw some lines and this line here is bad but this identical line here is good. Why does the line even go down her right leg? Why not her left leg? It goes down the left leg on both the dudes.
McCree and Tracer's lines are different
They are mirrored
McCree's line makes him pop his dick out
When you mirror it, it makes Tracer's pop her ass out
I hope you're pretending to be an idiot
The other two have their legs closer to their shoulder width, it's really more like the line goes right down their center, while Tracer's pose is spreading her legs much more prominently so you can't follow down in the same way.
Well, McGree is holding his hand over his gun, and his body motion indicates he's anticipating grabbing it. The gun is on his hip and prominently displayed.
They do not line up at all you fucking spaz.
MFW I had no idea this a game or anything until just the other day in a store.
I saw it in the vidya game section. I almost blurted out something like "holy shit they made a game based on that SFM porn characters!"
I bet you have a Tumblr account where you blog about feminism every day.
Why does anyone care about the tracer pose when the one they replaced it with is sexier anyway
Because the SJEWs. People lose their shit if they catch even a whiff of PC pandering (or worse, that a content creator might have genuine PC leanings), even if it's legitimate criticism and the results of the second pass are better. Doesn't matter because you gave in to the filthy SJEWs.
Honestly, it's even worse than SJW nonsense.
He might have some legitimate knowledge on the subject of character creation, but let's be honest here, that video is leaving out a lot of what the argument ended up being about because it casts their bias in a negative light.
And if you know anything about the EC crew, their bias is incredibly easy to spot, it's virtually written right there on the wall. They're not above consulting with people who are as biased as biased can get, nor do they seem to problems outright lying about people they don't like.
Zarya's sexy too. Don't be that guy.
Because like most internet controversies it happened in real time so looking at the mess that happened before the new pose came to light doesn't make much sense.
You're misrepresenting the problem and the reason why people were upset.
There's a lot of moralizing and pearl-clutching coming from that crowd and worse, it's getting content cut and censored from media. So when the Overwatch fanbase sees what looks like the lead dev caving in to silly demands quite obviously coming from that same moral guardian perspective it just looks like another instance of such. Was it overblown? You could say so, yes. It's a problem that's been brewing for a while however, and it likely formed a last straw for many people at the time. It's quite understandable why the outrage happened if you look at how it happened.
I think people being more than a little upset at small groups of politically active busybodies who thrive off making themselves victims and parading examples of supposed societal evils, usually removed completely from context, to push their own selective agendas is not all that surprising or such a bad thing.
>that video is leaving out a lot of what the argument ended up being about because it casts their bias in a negative light.
It's being left out because these arguments have no currency in what a technical and compostional discussion. Maybe it's convenient for EC that a discussion of the facts lets them side-step the "real issue", and I'll even give you that it could potentially make some of the video disingenuous.
However, what he's saying there are well understood principles of animation and character design. There was nothing about his analysis that surprised me, or came across as odd, or off, because it was all so in line with principles I'm familiar with (as an animator myself). It's why I have no patience for >>571164 who doesn't know, and doesn't seem to care.
>You're misrepresenting the problem and the reason why people were upset.
No, I'm really not.
I think TJ said it best, it's not about SJWs and anti-SJWs. It's about people who want nuance in the conversation, and people who don't. Hell there are people who want a conversation, and people who don't - there are people who want to hear all of the ideas make an informed decision and get things right, and there are dogmatic people who want brainless blanket obstruction.
I can see the circumstances of it, and completely understand their outrage. That does not make it well placed. They let feelings override good judgment, and they became part of outrage culture. There's no getting around that. For one thing, the demand wasn't even that silly - it's painfully obvious that pose was out of character to anyone that took a second to think about it. So I'm forced to conclude that the people angry at Blizzard for taking this criticism seriously did not take a second to think about it. I have no respect for that.
You can't have it both ways. If the video is supposed to address the composition of Tracer's poses and argue which is the better of the two then it did a fine job.
That however does not have anything to do with what the outrage was centered on. Even the people who were adamantly against changing the pose can admit the second is no worse or even multitudes better.
The contention lies with the wording of the original complaint. It didn't simply say the pose was a poor representation of Tracer as a character, it described it as reducing her to a sex object. Gleaming over that important facet because you might agree with their position on the pose being poor is an example of eschewing the very nuance you say you want in this conversation.
And that facet is only further reinforced by the manner and way in which Blizzard chose to initially respond to it. If Blizzard saw the complaint in that light, why would anyone else painting it as such be brainless obstruction?
People were angry that Blizzard did exactly what you decry, letting feelings override judgment, because their initial response to reserved moral hand-wringing was to assuage damaged sensibilities and apologize for the offense. Only later did it become apparent that they were still undecided on the merit of the pose itself; information that could have easily been part of the first reaction had they themselves seen that issue as more important than the moral conundrum of a sexist pose.
Ignoring all of that to discuss the technical issues of one pose versus another is misrepresenting what the outrage was about. EC's bias makes it quite clear they're ignoring that important information to downplay and discredit the point behind the argument in the first place.