Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ...
8
16
17
18
19
LastLast
  1. #341
    Immortal mistuhbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Quel'Thalas
    Posts
    7,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondercrab View Post
    I don't think citing dozens of examples of comparably sensitive content in the game is really helpful to the discussion at hand, do you?
    The fact of the matter is that we're dealing with an area of the game that happens to be under development and completely subject to change right now, and that someone *did* feel strongly enough about it to raise the issue.
    In this particular, comparatively unique case, it was acted upon, likely because the situation and the timing of it seemed appropriate to the developers.

    Exaggerating and making a checklist of theoretical what-ifs doesn't really come into play unless they're issues that players demonstrably care about.
    Except of course when there is The exact same situation, only the male is being hit on

    Yet nobody complains about that...
    Theron/Bloodwatcher 2013!

    Quote Originally Posted by Alsompr View Post
    Teasing, misdirection. It's the opposite of a spoiler. People expect one thing? BAM! Another thing happens.

    I'm like M. Night fucking Shamylan.

  2. #342
    I am Murloc! Alenarien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Antrim, Northern Ireland
    Posts
    5,496
    Quote Originally Posted by Alewen View Post
    You know after some thinking. I gotta ask this question. Alright, so if Ji Firepaw saying to a female that she is gorgeous, is super offensive to the point Blizzard MUST remove it. What about in undercity where humans are being experimented on with the plague? Of the poor young women that are wearing next to nothing, begging and pleading to be freed. Why is such cruelty not offensive but a female character being complimented on beauty, is offensive?
    There's a human female NPC in the Undercity who is the mind slave of a Male Forsaken ( http://www.wowpedia.org/Theresa ). Apparently that's less offensive than a flirting panda.

    What ever happened to priorities?
    Last edited by Alenarien; 2012-04-12 at 07:27 PM.
    "Can your blood atone for genocide, orc? Your Horde killed countless innocents with its rampage across Stormwind and Lordaeron. Do you really think you can just sweep all that away and cast aside your guilt so easily? No, your kind will never change, and I will never stop fighting you." - Grand Admiral Proudmoore

  3. #343
    Quote Originally Posted by thundercles View Post
    You keep missing the point. Literally ANYTHING can be considered offensive to somebody, somewhere. So we should just constantly edit and censor ourselves to avoid perchance offending someone who is being irrational?.
    anything can be offensive to someone sure, but most things aren't to anyone.

    the dialogue was definitely not explicitly sexist. however it can be (and was) associated with a certain kind of sexism. don't get me wrong, even if it was sexism (we don't know the particular intent of the development team) it was a watered down, vague kind of objectification, the kind of attitude that would be absolutely fine in a situation where the parties are on an equal footing. I think it was this association with the wolf-whistling or arse-grabbing that some women are subject too that probably lead the original poster to make her complaint, and rather than have anyone else make this same association Blizzard changed it, because it definitely wasn't a cornerstone of the guys character development.

  4. #344
    Quote Originally Posted by Skytotem View Post
    I don't think the comment on looks is necessarily inappropriate for his character in general. However, I think it makes for a terrible first interaction. - The OP of the original protest thread.

    Jeez guys, she wasn't trolling, she wasn't 'screaming' that she was offended or anything, she made a reasonable post.


    It's not like Ji is OHMYGOD SO BLAND because of ONE dialogue change.

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...3904851?page=1
    Reasonable post, fundamentally-flawed underlying argument, imo.

  5. #345
    Quote Originally Posted by mistuhbull View Post
    Except of course when there is The exact same situation, only the male is being hit on

    Yet nobody complains about that...
    Exactly, and that's the point here: nobody complains about it. Presumably because nobody had a problem with it.
    In this situation, someone *did* have a problem with it, and that was followed up upon.

  6. #346
    I thought the line seemed a little lech-ey, but thats called having character in an npc, sylvanas is full on crazy and as a person i really dislike her for what she does- but that makes her all the more engaging a character. i dont think they should have changed it i think Ji is meant to be a little bit of a dick that way. Not as much as gallywix, but still just kind of off putting self assured with the flaws in his character.
    Last edited by dope_danny; 2012-04-12 at 07:28 PM. Reason: asd

  7. #347
    The Insane
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Where Thrall and the Horde needs me to be
    Posts
    15,526
    Quote Originally Posted by mistuhbull View Post
    Just because he's immature doesn't make him a terrible character. I like that Ji is so excitable with all the super serious zen Pandaren.

    His line was in perfect tune with his character, saying the first thing that comes to his mind. In this case his first thought about the girls was ooh pretty.
    Fair enough, I'll alter my statement to "His dialogue is terrible"

    Amazing sig, done by mighty Lokann

  8. #348
    Quote Originally Posted by Skytotem View Post
    I don't think the comment on looks is necessarily inappropriate for his character in general. However, I think it makes for a terrible first interaction. - The OP of the original protest thread.

    Jeez guys, she wasn't trolling, she wasn't 'screaming' that she was offended or anything, she made a reasonable post.


    It's not like Ji is OHMYGOD SO BLAND because of ONE dialogue change.

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...3904851?page=1
    The "it's just *one* line, get over it" response could have worked just as well in the opposite direction. But instead of the poster of that thread just shrugging it off, we got: "I think it represents a break in Blizzard's ability to make me feel as valued as a female character as much as a male character is."

    My reaction to hearing that someone feels their playtime is undervalued or their gender is marginalized because their character is called gorgeous was: "...what?"

  9. #349
    I am Murloc! Alenarien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Antrim, Northern Ireland
    Posts
    5,496
    Quote Originally Posted by Venziir View Post
    Fair enough, I'll alter my statement to "His dialogue is terrible"
    To be fair, WoW dialogue is hardly mind-blowing these days:

    Archbishop Benedictus: "And now, Shaman, you will give the Dragon Soul to me."
    Thrall: "I will not, Archbishop, it will NEVER be yours!"

    Riddle me blown away.
    "Can your blood atone for genocide, orc? Your Horde killed countless innocents with its rampage across Stormwind and Lordaeron. Do you really think you can just sweep all that away and cast aside your guilt so easily? No, your kind will never change, and I will never stop fighting you." - Grand Admiral Proudmoore

  10. #350
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondercrab View Post
    I don't think citing dozens of examples of comparably sensitive content in the game is really helpful to the discussion at hand, do you?
    The fact of the matter is that we're dealing with an area of the game that happens to be under development and completely subject to change right now, and that someone *did* feel strongly enough about it to raise the issue.
    In this particular, comparatively unique case, it was acted upon, likely because the situation and the timing of it seemed appropriate to the developers.

    Exaggerating and making a checklist of theoretical what-ifs doesn't really come into play unless they're issues that players demonstrably care about.
    I actually think the question though has merit, even if the undercity scene cannot be changed now. How is the undercity scene not as offensive as an npc telling females they are gorgeous? This expansion is going to have some very deep and maybe even disturbing images. Like in wrath of the lich king, when you saw people melting to the forsaken plague in the cinematic. Or in cataclysm, when the school was bombed by the horde. There's going to be war crimes committed by Garrosh. Yet a single "You are some kind of gorgeous huh?" line is offensive?

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    I was about to respond with a possible hypothesis, but then I considered that I might be a victim of the gender-baiting some folks are accusing the originator of this controversy of. I wouldn't want it to come across as a possible attack on her, even if I feel there is a valid point to consider (to consider -- as in, it may be correct or incorrect).

    Overall I feel this is a good discussion to have, even if folks can't agree. Especially if folks can't agree, actually. Doesn't do anyone any good to have their perspectives hidden -- because bringing things to light is the only way to understand the larger, fundamental issues at play. I just think where it gets obfuscated is that people are seeing different things as being the underlying issue.
    my feelings exactly.

  11. #351
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondercrab View Post
    Exactly, and that's the point here: nobody complains about it. Presumably because nobody had a problem with it.
    In this situation, someone *did* have a problem with it, and that was followed up upon.
    You're missing the point. Why does no one have a problem with something that is the same thing, only reversed gender ? If it were universal, the levied complaints should have been directed at both, not just one. The point is that for the people who were offended enough to complain, them being offended has more to do with them than with what happened in-game.

    And if it were Blizzard deciding of their own accord it was a poorly-worded line, why have they kept in the part where Garrosh calls Sylvanas a bitch ? Use of a derogatory term against women, vs compliment a woman's appearance. Are you trying to tell me no one had a problem with the word bitch appearing in the game as an insult towards a female character ?

    Really, think about the differences there. One is directed at an npc, one at a player character. I think the problem here is that folks who felt the line was out of place are confounding the difference between characters and players. Basically I think the original author took it as being a comment from Blizzard, rather than Ji, toward her, rather than her character. Because otherwise, why isn't it offensive that male characters are reduced to being a bag of muscles, as tho they don't have a brain or a face ?

  12. #352
    have been away hanging up washing and thinking about this whole thing, and I have a question

    the overriding sentiment here seems to be that:

    a) it's not sexist
    b) sexism towards men is not given the same level of gravity
    c) we don't want bland, homogenised characterisation in the interests of equality

    so how do you procede? the problem I see here is that women do suffer from a certain level of institutionalised oppression, I think we can all agree on that (the extent of which we won't agree on, but that's for another thread). in other words, there is not equality in the world. if we can agree on that, then exactly how do we proceed? if we will not accept a clampdown on all forms of gender stereotyping (women; beauty, men; strength) and an overall homogenisation, are we asking for a paradigm in which we stereotype wildly and promote imbalance?

    a women objected to this because she found it to be sexist, the argument seems to be that it's not sexist, and even if it was it's okay because there is female chauvanism ingame also. are we asking women to accept all forms of sexism?

  13. #353
    The Lightbringer Uennie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ner'zhul
    Posts
    3,819
    Pretty irritated at that chick who got it removed.

    She's giving all of us regular dames who are cool with NPCs having a personality a bad name.

  14. #354
    Scarab Lord Miralynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Alterac Valley
    Posts
    4,087
    Quote Originally Posted by Uennie View Post
    Pretty irritated at that chick who got it removed.

    She's giving all of us regular dames who are cool with NPCs having a personality a bad name.
    Amen to this.

    I find people telling me what I SHOULD find offensive and treating me like I'm too goddamn stupid to make that decision myself FAR more offensive than anything a fictional character in a video game could say. I liked Ji the way he was, it gave him a 'spark' that he's missing now.
    When asked about the role of women in video games, Samus Aran said, "..." - and then she blew up the planet. AGAIN.

  15. #355
    Quote Originally Posted by squidbear View Post
    have been away hanging up washing and thinking about this whole thing, and I have a question

    the overriding sentiment here seems to be that:

    a) it's not sexist
    b) sexism towards men is not given the same level of gravity
    c) we don't want bland, homogenised characterisation in the interests of equality

    so how do you procede? the problem I see here is that women do suffer from a certain level of institutionalised oppression, I think we can all agree on that (the extent of which we won't agree on, but that's for another thread). in other words, there is not equality in the world. if we can agree on that, then exactly how do we proceed? if we will not accept a clampdown on all forms of gender stereotyping (women; beauty, men; strength) and an overall homogenisation, are we asking for a paradigm in which we stereotype wildly and promote imbalance?

    a women objected to this because she found it to be sexist, the argument seems to be that it's not sexist, and even if it was it's okay because there is female chauvanism ingame also. are we asking women to accept all forms of sexism?
    Some are arguing Ji's line is not sexist, but I think that point is debatable. What I think the original objector is missing is my argument: what is so wrong about depicting characters who have traits you find offensive ? Should Mad Men be taken off the air because of the sexism and lechery ? No, it shouldn't -- because those are characters. Depicting negative traits in a character absolutely does not equate to an endorsement of those traits by the creators. Does Blizzard support the use of weapons of mass destruction ? Genocide ? Demon worship ? Patricide ? Regicide ? Slavery ? These are all things that happen or are referenced in-game.

    So, the original objector finds all those things to be acceptable, but does not find her character being called gorgeous by another character acceptable ?

  16. #356
    Quote Originally Posted by Maedra View Post
    @ Crabmousse By the way, what makes you think I, or the others, are white western males?
    Because you have to be prejudicial in order to call everyone out for being prejudicial.
    "If you want to control people, if you want to feed them a pack of lies and dominate them, keep them ignorant. For me, literacy means freedom." - LaVar Burton.

  17. #357
    Who cares if only a relatively small number of people were offended? Offending anyone is to be avoided.
    You are all just complaining for the sake of complaining, the new version doesn't offend you, if it had been the original text you wouldn't have been offended by it in any way.
    You can be free not to be offended by whatever you like but there is no disadvantage to changing some text if some people find it rude.

  18. #358
    Quote Originally Posted by Imnick View Post
    Who cares if only a relatively small number of people were offended? Offending anyone is to be avoided.
    You are all just complaining for the sake of complaining, the new version doesn't offend you, if it had been the original text you wouldn't have been offended by it in any way.
    You can be free not to be offended by whatever you like but there is no disadvantage to changing some text if some people find it rude.
    There is every disadvantage to changing some text if a few damn people find it rude. They will have to gut the entire damn game to remove any text that anyone complains about.

    Garrosh calling Sylvanas a bitch ? Gone. References to Thrall being a slave ? Gone. Most /flirt emotes ? Gone. Many of the /silly emotes. And that's just what came off the top of my head in five seconds.

  19. #359
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    Some are arguing Ji's line is not sexist, but I think that point is debatable. What I think the original objector is missing is my argument: what is so wrong about depicting characters who have traits you find offensive ? Should Mad Men be taken off the air because of the sexism and lechery ? No, it shouldn't -- because those are characters. Depicting negative traits in a character absolutely does not equate to an endorsement of those traits by the creators. Does Blizzard support the use of weapons of mass destruction ? Genocide ? Demon worship ? Patricide ? Regicide ? Slavery ? These are all things that happen or are referenced in-game.

    So, the original objector finds all those things to be acceptable, but does not find her character being called gorgeous by another character acceptable ?
    Mad Men does a pretty good job of parodying and subverting that particular brand of sexism and lechery though, I think most 'despicable' traits in literature or whatever are contextualised in a critical way. I agree with the poster earlier who said the references to other potentially offensive subject matter in WoW are basically irrelevant, those aren't what offended that particular 'objector'

  20. #360
    I don't know about all the other ladies here, but I for one love it when my man tells me I'm beautiful/gorgeous/pretty. I don't see how "gorgeous" is an offensive term. I wouldn't be offended by it at all. I'm sure I'll get some kind of "you must be a brainwashed female controlled by a male society" but whatever, I know me and what I'm like. Just don't understand how "gorgeous" is bad now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •