Rob Pardo Leaving Blizzard Entertainment

Abandon ship

Originally Posted by Delondial

I don't believe I said homosexuals did make up much of the population. However many developers have admitted to developing for that demographic, to the exclusion of female audiences (which I also said lacked good representation along with various minorities). Also, while it may be a moot point, you've posted an estimate of American LGBT communities. Aside from the glaring issues with such estimates, I did stress multinational a few times in that piece. Please take some time to calm down and read a bit more carefully. The gays aren't coming for you.

And steady on with those accusations.

i think his point is, that if it's not necessary to add homosexual romances in the game, then why does it need to be included? because homosexuality needs to be verified in a game that has, for the most part, no need for such things. because it isn't necessary; it doesn't mean its wrong to not include it, because in this game, its irrelevant

Originally Posted by jason1975

While I can appreciate Pardo's contribution to WoW, he's clearly a sign of the problem at Blizzard.

As a COO myself, I'll tell you when you have a corporate culture (dismissive of women) that is so out of whack with your customer base (45% of gamers are women), either you do something about it or you become yesterday's news.

Hopefully this is Blizzard doing some serious top level bloodletting. I'd love to see them replace Pardo with a woman.

Again, anyone who has any experience with corporate culture could tell you what a Cluster-you-know-what Blizzard's has obviously become when you get remarks like the ones that have been made over the past year, and the company's PR Dept doesn't even bother to try to address it. If these guys worked for Coke, GM, or Apple they'd have been likely been marched out to the media and made to apologize, then either quietly sidelined or outright terminated.

This ain't the 1980s. Or even the 2000s. Women are increasing their gaming market share and are beginning to shun companies that treat them badly. Any business analyst would look at these guys and immediately see a big gushing red flow of unrealized sales.

Adapt or die, Blizzard. Adapt or die.

I'd love to see what would happen to this game if it received a female lead designer, please let it happen for the sake of hilarity.

Originally Posted by Infernix

He was straight up fired. He's not leaving for another job.

I dont think so

Originally Posted by Lolercaust

I don't agree with adding homosexual characters or storylines purely for the sake of pushing boundaries or getting respect from progressive communities. If Blizzard sees fit to add a homosexual character, I trust them to do so in a way that fits logically into the story, and I would enjoy experiencing such a story. I get enough of the LGBTQ movement shoved down my throat as it is so if WoW is going to give me the same business it better be palatable.

One way to determine if your argument holds water is to flip the point of view and see where it lands. Like this:

"I don't agree with adding heterosexual male characters or storylines purely for the sake of pushing boundaries or getting respect from male fanboi gamers. If Blizzard sees fit to add a male heterosexual character, I trust them to do so in a way that fits logically into the story, and I would enjoy experiencing such a story. I get enough of the male heterosexual dominant culture shoved down my throat as it is so if WoW is going to give me the same business it better be palatable."

So what did we learn about the original argument from this exercise?

1. It assumes that Male Heterosexual characters are the default value.
2. It assumes that only having male heterosexual characters is somehow a "neutral" value, rather than affirming a particular world view (in this case that only male heterosexual's are important and have stories anyone would be interested in).
3. It's naively at odds with the real world (50% of which are women)

Take the long weekend and give it a think . . . happy 4th.

Originally Posted by jason1975

One way to determine if your argument holds water is to flip the point of view and see where it lands. Like this:

"I don't agree with adding heterosexual male characters or storylines purely for the sake of pushing boundaries or getting respect from male fanboi gamers. If Blizzard sees fit to add a male heterosexual character, I trust them to do so in a way that fits logically into the story, and I would enjoy experiencing such a story. I get enough of the male heterosexual dominant culture shoved down my throat as it is so if WoW is going to give me the same business it better be palatable."

So what did we learn about the original argument from this exercise?

1. It assumes that Male Heterosexual characters are the default value.
2. It assumes that only having male heterosexual characters is somehow a "neutral" value, rather than affirming a particular world view (in this case that only male heterosexual's are important and have stories anyone would be interested in).
3. It's naively at odds with the real world (50% of which are women)

I have no idea what you're trying to communicate here.

Take the long weekend and give it a think . . . happy 4th.

I have more important things to think about, but I appreciate the recommendation.

Originally Posted by jason1975

One way to determine if your argument holds water is to flip the point of view and see where it lands. Like this:

"I don't agree with adding heterosexual male characters or storylines purely for the sake of pushing boundaries or getting respect from male fanboi gamers. If Blizzard sees fit to add a male heterosexual character, I trust them to do so in a way that fits logically into the story, and I would enjoy experiencing such a story. I get enough of the male heterosexual dominant culture shoved down my throat as it is so if WoW is going to give me the same business it better be palatable."

So what did we learn about the original argument from this exercise?

1. It assumes that Male Heterosexual characters are the default value.
2. It assumes that only having male heterosexual characters is somehow a "neutral" value, rather than affirming a particular world view (in this case that only male heterosexual's are important and have stories anyone would be interested in).
3. It's naively at odds with the real world (50% of which are women)

Take the long weekend and give it a think . . . happy 4th.

What does any of this have to do with Warcraft or the game itself?

Originally Posted by Darkrulerxxx

i think his point is, that if it's not necessary to add homosexual romances in the game, then why does it need to be included? because homosexuality needs to be verified in a game that has, for the most part, no need for such things. because it isn't necessary; it doesn't mean its wrong to not include it, because in this game, its irrelevant

There are plenty of themes one doesn't NEED to add to a game. But I am having a hard time understanding why we're suddenly on a "tight ship" when asking for a bit of flavor. One NPC has a delivery quest, bring their love letter to the other. Done.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we need to fill some imaginary quota of homosexuality/ minority "stuff". I just find it unnerving how defensive folks get when inclusion is even brought up. As if putting some content in would break some sort of "free expression" clause. It sounds a bit like an "I wouldn't like it, so why put it in?" sort of mentality.

Originally Posted by Protar

This is the article people are upset about: http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/22/574...zzard-nintendo

And you know he's the lead creative designer of Blizzard. So bigotry is hardly unexpected given the state of female characters in their games.

I started skimming by the time I got about half way through (it's late, and I've read enough articles of this tone before...) but it sounds to me that the only thing he's guilty of is complacency, not sexism or homophobia. The article kind of smells of "he's not with us, so he's against us".
I feel fairly neutral, that is to say neither negative nor positive, about the view he expressed. They make stuff they like, and by extent cater to people who also like those things, all while avoiding the potential circus show that "social commentary" can be. It's not "helping the cause", but I can't really fault him for it either. The devs are making stuff they themselves like, and that's actually usually considered a really good thing that results in great, inspired games.
The article writer isn't wrong, you can indeed "have both", but Pardo isn't wrong either, his approach makes sense too.
Not to mention how frail I find the "over sexualized female characters" argument. When I see fangirls squealing over pretty boy/hot Fire Emblem characters on boards, hear female friends talk about "getting moist" over Garen's or Jarvan's (League of Legends) biceps, have my girlfriend telling me how cute the characters/outfits are, or see a game like Tera, look at the lingerie-armor clad female characters and think "wow.. er, well damn that's pretty bad", but then see the band-boy faced, perfectly sculpted muscles of various kinds(dependent on race, some bulging, some toned, some slim but fit, etc), open chested leather armor clad male characters and think "wow.. er, well damn, that not a whole lot better", it really weakens that argument.
That said, the higher ups at Blizz have plenty of bad things floating around about them, bigotry would fit the list just fine. If there are some particular incriminating quotes from him about it though, I'd be nice to see them (if such quotes are in that article/video[I didn't watch it, only read the article] and I simply over looked them, then I'm an idiot and sorry for wasting your time).

Originally Posted by Granyala

Me too.
Contrary to cheesy US movies, when your life and world is on the line, sexuality is (or rather should be) one of the last things in your mind.
Humping the queen comes AFTER you save the world and since in Warcraft a new menace arises instantly whenever you've put one down, that poor queen will have to exercise a lot of patience.

Alextrasza rhonin vareesa krasus neltharion jaina kalec arthas varian thrall aggra moira voljin the fire druid...

all major characters whos hetero love stories greatly effected the way things are now

Originally Posted by sizzlinsauce

I would like to point out something very important here. do you notice the most popular versions of world of warcraft he was design / lead design of?

Lead Designer

World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade
World of Warcraft
Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos
StarCraft: Brood War

Designer

World of Warcraft: Warlords of Draenor[5]
Diablo II
Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition
StarCraft
Diablo III


I'm willing to bet he was silently ousted for more EA-milk the customers for their money tactics that we see today.

you will be missed rob. thank you for the good times.

So the guy that designed Vanilla and TBC, the MMOs that changed the history of MMOs and the most successful ones is leaving?

Originally Posted by shadycharacter1

What does any of this have to do with Warcraft or the game itself?

There was an Off/Topic Warning further up, but it got lost in the transition. He's pointing out the previous poster's admittedly limited perspective. Warcraft is implied through previous posts as well.

Originally Posted by Arewn

I started skimming by the time I got about half way through (it's late, and I've read enough articles of this tone before...) but it sounds to me that the only thing he's guilty of is complacency, not sexism or homophobia. The article kind of smells of "he's not with us, so he's against us".
I feel fairly neutral, that is to say neither negative nor positive, about the view he expressed. They make stuff they like, and by extent cater to people who also like those things, all while avoiding the potential circus show that "social commentary" can be. It's not "helping the cause", but I can't really fault him for it either. The devs are making stuff they themselves like, and that's actually usually considered a really good thing that results in great, inspired games.
The article writer isn't wrong, you can indeed "have both", but Pardo isn't wrong either, his approach makes sense too.
Not to mention how frail I find the "over sexualized female characters" argument. When I see fangirls squealing over pretty boy/hot Fire Emblem characters on boards, hear female friends talk about "getting moist" over Garen's or Jarvan's (League of Legends) biceps, have my girlfriend telling me how cute the characters/outfits are, or see a game like Tera, look at the lingerie-armor clad female characters and think "wow.. er, well damn that's pretty bad", but then see the band-boy faced, perfectly sculpted muscles of various kinds(dependent on race, some bulging, some toned, some slim but fit, etc), open chested leather armor clad male characters and think "wow.. er, well damn, that not a whole lot better", it really weakens that argument.
That said, the higher ups at Blizz have plenty of bad things floating around about them, bigotry would fit the list just fine. If there are some particular incriminating quotes from him about it though, I'd be nice to see them (if such quotes are in that article/video[I didn't watch it, only read the article] and I simply over looked them, then I'm an idiot and sorry for wasting your time).

Just cus wome are sexually attracted to attractive men doesnt mean that EVERY single area of fantasy doesnt exploit a womans body. And a thousand times more than men.

jaina is one of the most respectable powerful and intelligent world leaders on their planet....yet wears a giant boob window no one with her personality would wear

Originally Posted by Delondial

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we need to fill some imaginary quota of homosexuality/ minority "stuff". I just find it unnerving how defensive folks get when inclusion is even brought up. As if putting some content in would break some sort of "free expression" clause. It sounds a bit like an "I wouldn't like it, so why put it in?" sort of mentality.

I would rather Blizzard tell a story that they made up and want to tell than one that has a character of every creed and sexual orientation that they were asked to tell in order to seem progressive.

man this is almost like metzen leaving.

im honestly shocked at this. first he leaves wow at the end of bc and gets put on titan. then he leaves titan and goes back to wow during mists of pandaria and warlords of draenor and then he just leaves before wod even comes out O-O

seems very strange, you would think he would stay on atleast for wod run.

hes been with warcraft since almost the begining. this is seriously huge. some big shoes to fill at blizz.

Originally Posted by ForestWalker

-Raises hand.- I'm not really on the side of forcing sexuality on characters... The main story characters often are heterosexual buuut the amount of fucks this gay guy gives is about.. 0. It is a game, a story, and honestly I feel happy just playing as I do.

Question: Is it considered forcing if half the fandom reads the character as gay in the first place? There a handful of NPCs that many players read as a couple due to the way they interact. (Or in the case of one "couple" having the same last name despite being different races)

Originally Posted by Delondial

There are plenty of themes one doesn't NEED to add to a game. But I am having a hard time understanding why we're suddenly on a "tight ship" when asking for a bit of flavor. One NPC has a delivery quest, bring their love letter to the other. Done.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we need to fill some imaginary quota of homosexuality/ minority "stuff". I just find it unnerving how defensive folks get when inclusion is even brought up. As if putting some content in would break some sort of "free expression" clause. It sounds a bit like an "I wouldn't like it, so why put it in?" sort of mentality.

Yep just alter one prinoun in quest text and switch the models gender. Bamf done.

Originally Posted by tristannarutofan

Just cus wome are sexually attracted to attractive men doesnt mean that EVERY single area of fantasy doesnt exploit a womans body. And a thousand times more than men.

jaina is one of the most respectable powerful and intelligent world leaders on their planet....yet wears a giant boob window no one with her personality would wear

Okay, then let me ask you this:

Who gives a shit?

Originally Posted by Lolercaust

I would rather Blizzard tell a story that they made up and want to tell than one that has a character of every creed and sexual orientation that they were asked to tell in order to seem progressive.

Ok. The person u quoted feels the same way....

like he said its just weird how people get defensive. Like its a big deal

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by shadycharacter1

Okay, then let me ask you this:

Who gives a shit?

Who wouldnt? Everyone who likes good fantasy, storytelling, and thinks of women as people care. I know that

Originally Posted by tristannarutofan

Ok. The person u quoted feels the same way....

like he said its just weird how people get defensive. Like its a big deal

- - - Updated - - -



Who wouldnt? Everyone who likes good fantasy, storytelling, and thinks of women as people care. I know that

So women who dress however they want are not people?