Some Flirts and Jokes Removed on the PTR, Fathom Dweller Available in NA, DLC #791

[Dacia Ultan]

How about answering without sarcasm? Why do you think "greenskins" are being removed?

Most likely? Because if GW was going to pounce, Blizzard already being in deep shit on another count would create an opportunity. Just because they did it before and failed doesn't mean they won't try it again; their strategy seems to be less about winning than about trying to undermine.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

There are couple of big obvious problems with that - while we know just how very anal GW is about their trademarks:

1. Green-skins/greenskins/green skins are not copyrighted and realistically cannot be copyrighted (at least I can't find anything contrary about this). GW failed with the Imperial Guard/Eldar for self-explanatory reasons leading to the whole Astra Militarum/Aeldari bullshit.
2. Why just now exactly together with the rest of changes/removals and not a decade before? The timing cannot be less coincidental.

It would be now because games work shop has been on a copy right bender for the last few months with things like banning all fan animations based on the setting taking down custom 3D models or copyright claiming review videos.

- - - Updated - - -

Will they find some other voice actor for Thrall since he is voiced by Metzen? With Blizzard taking out devs game attachments to the game itself no doubt the same goes for devs voicing the characters too?

Metzen is one of the founders and an old guard. Blizzard's new direction to stamp out its own creators seems to make this the next logical step.

As far as I’m aware there only taking out employee references for those directly involved with Sexual harassment not all employee references.

[Dacia Ultan]

It would be now because games work shop has been on a copy right bender for the last few months with things like banning all fan animations based on the setting taking down custom 3D models or copyright claiming review videos.

As I said before: I don't think it's so much about any hope that they can win as about the hope that they can undermine real or perceived competition.

As far as I’m aware there only taking out employee references for those directly involved with Sexual harassment not all employee references.

That's also what I'd heard. But I keep hearing claims that Metzen references are being nuked, despite there not seeming to be any evidence to that end

[uuuhname]

Most likely? Because if GW was going to pounce, Blizzard already being in deep shit on another count would create an opportunity. Just because they did it before and failed doesn't mean they won't try it again; their strategy seems to be less about winning than about trying to undermine.

well, there have been uses of "greenskins" elsewhere in the game and in multimedia. GW at this point goes out of its way to give most of it's properties unique or "unique" names like calling giants "GargantsTM". I don't think they've gone after anyone for using "greenskins" but, I mean, even if it's not a case of covering their asses in a legal sense, who even bothers to notice that sort of change.

[Dacia Ultan]

well, there have been uses of "greenskins" elsewhere in the game and in multimedia. GW at this point goes out of its way to give most of it's properties unique or "unique" names like calling giants "Gargants". I don't think they've gone after anyone for using "greenskins" but, I mean, even if it's not a case of covering their asses in a legal sense, who even bothers to notice that sort of change.

As @Lorgar Aurelian pointed out: they've been even more litigious than usual, on even pettier pretexts than usual, lately. In light of having their hands already full of ethics scandal, Blizz most likely were covering their asses.

But, as to who notices that kind of thing? The answer is "people who are looking for grudgewank material."

[Relapses]

well, there have been uses of "greenskins" elsewhere in the game and in multimedia. GW at this point goes out of its way to give most of it's properties unique or "unique" names like calling giants "GargantsTM". I don't think they've gone after anyone for using "greenskins" but, I mean, even if it's not a case of covering their asses in a legal sense, who even bothers to notice that sort of change.

The anti-SJWs heroes of the internet who are here to warn all of us who dare to not give a shit. It is only they who can protect us from the forthcoming PC safe space that WoW will become. Brace yourself, misgendering a player in-game will soon be a bannable offense! The only way to combat this is to tell Blizzard they're wrong! Wrong, I say! Blizzard, you are WRONG!

[Lorgar Aurelian]

As I said before: I don't think it's so much about any hope that they can win as about the hope that they can undermine real or perceived competition.

That's also what I'd heard. But I keep hearing claims that Metzen references are being nuked, despite there not seeming to be any evidence to that end

They pretty much did the same thing when they tried to copy right space marine, they waved there fist about even though it was a bogus claim and they only stopped when some one bit the bullet and hot lawyers involved.

For the metzen thing if there’s no evidence then some one big probably made up that it was happening and now people are parroting them. That tends to be how these things work.

[Orby]

It would be now because games work shop has been on a copy right bender for the last few months with things like banning all fan animations based on the setting taking down custom 3D models or copyright claiming review videos.

- - - Updated - - -



As far as I’m aware there only taking out employee references for those directly involved with Sexual harassment not all employee references.

Last I heard they wanted all references to any employees that are in the game removed just in case regardless of accusation, as a precaution. Pretty sure they mentioned that on the blue post, as well as not putting any employee represented in game again going forward. Which is like a no brainer idea to be fair one that I thought was dumb in the first place... stop inserting yourself into the damn game.

[Dacia Ultan]

The anti-SJWs heroes of the internet who are here to warn all of us who dare to not give a shit. It is only they who can protect us from the forthcoming PC safe space that WoW will become. Brace yourself, misgendering a player in-game will soon be a bannable offense! The only way to combat this is to tell Blizzard they're wrong! Wrong, I say! Blizzard, you are WRONG!

Pretty sure deliberately misgendering a player in-game is already considered harassment (hell, if I wanted to bother reporting every idiot who's misgendered me in this shitshow of a discussion, the mods would probably have a field day). But it's not like that would sink in with the self-entitled Chicken Little jackholes of the outrage brigade.

[Relapses]

Pretty sure deliberately misgendering a player in-game is already considered harassment (hell, if I wanted to bother reporting every idiot who's misgendered me in this shitshow of a discussion, the mods would probably have a field day). But it's not like that would sink in with the self-entitled Chicken Little jackholes of the outrage brigade.

The intent is what matters. It's impossible to know a players' gender unless they tell you.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Last I heard they wanted all references to any employees that are in the game removed just in case regardless of accusation, as a precaution. Pretty sure they mentioned that on the blue post, as well as not putting any employee represented in game again going forward.

I do believe they just said there wouldn’t be any new ones and that they were removing a few specific references for those involved.

[PenguinChan]

Okay, but let's not do that thing where "the default" is deemed neutral, innocuous, and apolitical. Hell, in this thread alone: the way people seriously upset by the changes have been acting should be rebuke enough to that.

In no way, shape, or form is the norm not apolitical or neutral, fuck that noise lol - I'm not stupid that the usual contains just as much bad or worse as well. It's an overarching issue that reaches beyond even these changes or events honestly, but that's a discussion for another thread about the community as a whole.

That's because it's typically used as a one-sided silencing tactic, as described above.

It is. I'm just kind of tired of any side trying to say what it isn't, at least currently. Until Blizzard keeps putting their mouth where their money is and such.

I found things like "Master Baiter" and "I'm a bull in leather?" and "I like to fart in the tub" amusing. Ditto the vibrator jokes that used to surround the Heartbreaker rocket mount. There's no way that one NPC in Undercity is ever not going to be creepy as an entire concept.

And that's kind of the point, right? Context is very important to what may be deemed offensive or just apart of the game as a whole. It's rather egregious when things are changed post-patch many years later, despite it being a in-character / lore based thing. The jokes and such I can get more-so, but that's still part of what makes characters... Well, what they are. Plus the obvious gags should really put light to it all. For the most part, anyways.

But as for "no homo" jokes? References which depend, one way or another (no matter how funny the film as a whole may have been) on nasty implications (which they no longer want to endorse) in order to be funny? (Yes, I know; people like to spin those as being about "political agendas" and "hurt feelings," on the grounds that "it's just a game." The thing is: games don't exist in a vacuum. The presence of that reference in the first place was at best no less "political" than their removal; and the source of its "humor" was an attitude which, on a greater scale, threatens a hell of a lot more than "feelings.")

Personally I chalk this up with people needing to grow thicker skin half the time and just walk past things that shouldn't bother them, but does. This isn't exclusive to any one group though, and has proliferated ever since social media and safe spaces are all the more common today. Both good and bad, honestly.

As for taking the piss out of a group of individuals? As long as you clearly show the opposite the MAJORITY of the time (Which Blizzard, admittedly, does not), there should not be any grievance or issue with these kind of references. Again: Context matters. So in this case, I understand why it was changed. Do I agree with it? No - but, I'm not the one in charge.

Also: the addition of incubi was probably a good idea; hopefully, they preen and tease just as much as the succubi do.

I'm sad it took them this long to even include sexy ass incubi as an option. The more sex choices we have with things that make sense (And I mean this by Male / Female body types, mainly) - the better. It'd actually be cute if they make the men more seductive and cliche as you'd expect, and a tempter not a temptress.

And there's also the possibility that some lines may have been removed for being deemed vapid and/or dated.

Maybe, but a few changes are just complete removals or gutting the entire phrasing which leaves it empty / generic, y'know?

Trust me: I'll believe that they're genuinely addressing the ethics scandal when I see it.

But the discussion among the fanbase, for the most part, hasn't been about how changing lines is not a substitute for addressing an ethics scandal. It's been, at best, the presumption that it's intended as a substitute for the ethics scandal.

Which I don't understand. It's a cause (That may be building beforehand, kind of clearly in a way) that made an effect. The scandal let this loose and now it's being changed because of it - but also, at the same time, may not even be influenced specifically by it - just now it's open for change. I'd be fucking disappointed if this was all Blizzard really cared to do (They aren't, of course). But who knows how much they're going to change their work culture - RIOT Games had this same dumb shit happen (Among some other companies) and it's still not great many years later.

I've seen it happen to smaller companies / indie studios and have a successful restructure, but that's way more feasible.

And then, there are a hell of a lot of the attitudes I described in a now-locked thread:

You know...paying lip service if that to the irrelevance of the changes to the ethics scandal, demanding that everyone be offended at the changes themselves, branding anyone who's not offended at the changes a "snowflake" as if that makes any damn sense, and just generally flailing and lashing out. Along with the occasional rant about "degeneracy" (and they make it very explicit what they mean by that) or hair dye or pronouns or how much they hate Madeleine Roux.

I'm lukewarm on this myself, as I have thoughts on both sides which I agree, both from experience and just seeing it happen. A lot of people don't want changes (Justifiably so). But others who are also offended / disgusted (However justified) have merits too. Stereotypes and issue-makers are abound on either side. It doesn't help when people paint targets on their back due to their outright vocal screeching. Seen quite a few of those on twitter and here. But the hostility is an issue everyone clearly deals with differently. No one is a saint here, and most everyone has definitely snarked others before.

[Orby]

I do believe they just said there wouldn’t be any new ones and that they were removing a few specific references for those involved.

thats probably it. Its so confusing :P

[Easo]

Because they can.

I did not expect a normal answer and thus was not dissapointed. Why do you even post on this thread at all? This is not arguing in good faith.

Most likely? Because if GW was going to pounce, Blizzard already being in deep shit on another count would create an opportunity. Just because they did it before and failed doesn't mean they won't try it again; their strategy seems to be less about winning than about trying to undermine.

It would be now because games work shop has been on a copy right bender for the last few months with things like banning all fan animations based on the setting taking down custom 3D models or copyright claiming review videos.

That is quite far reach considering the timing. Not impossible, mind you, just very far fetched. The word is pretty much impossible to copyright, lawsuit might not even get anywhere at all before being thrown out by judge. GW is tiny compared to Activision-Blizzard, plus there is overlap in fan bases, who would have no reason to be happy for an idiotic bound to fail lawsuit. Nothing would suck more for GW than some countersuit by the AV-B.
Even more - why would GW chose to muddy waters now when their full focus is on Warhammer+ which gotta be a money pit, especially when their fanbase is already outraged at the whole fan animation thing?

[Relapses]

I did not expect a normal answer and thus was not dissapointed. Why do you even post on this thread at all? This is not arguing in good faith.

How in the actual fuck do you parse developers changing a video game because it's their fucking video game and they can change whatever the fuck they want whenever the fuck they want for whatever fucking reason they want... as bad faith?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

That is quite far reach considering the timing. Not impossible, mind you, just very far fetched. The word is pretty much impossible to copyright, lawsuit might not even get anywhere at all before being thrown out by judge. GW is tiny compared to Activision-Blizzard, plus there is overlap in fan bases, who would have no reason to be happy for an idiotic bound to fail lawsuit. Nothing would suck more for GW than some countersuit by the AV-B.
Even more - why would GW chose to muddy waters now when their full focus is on Warhammer+ which gotta be a money pit, especially when their fanbase is already outraged at the whole fan animation thing?

The timing lines up rather perfectly with the other copy right stuff game workshop is doing.
Here’s a article from just this month https://spikeybits.com/2021/07/looko...uidelines.html

As to failed lawsuits you could say the same thing with all of there other compyright changes pretty much none of them would stand up but people don’t tend to want to spend thousands or in company cases millions on lawyers which is why even clear uses of fair use like emperor text to speech shut down production.

And so you really think they care about overlapping fan bases when they just gave almost 100% of the there fan base the finger with the fan animations changes?

[Dacia Ultan]

That is quite far reach considering the timing. Not impossible, mind you, just very far fetched.

Wait, what? If anything, the timing is a strike against it being a "reach." With their hands full of ethics scandal, they're in a vulnerable position.

And, again? Not only is Games Workshop's aim with their frivolous copyright suits not so much to win as to sabotage: they've been on a streak lately, as @Lorgar Aurelian has pointed out.

[Easo]

How in the actual fuck do you parse developers changing a video game because it's their fucking video game and they can change whatever the fuck they want whenever the fuck they want for whatever fucking reason they want... as bad faith?

I asked YOU a specific question, to which you did not answer but deflected it with some remark about devs. You are posting in bad faith, I am not talking about the devs, FFS.

The timing lines up rather perfectly with the other copy right stuff game workshop is doing.
Here’s a article from just this month https://spikeybits.com/2021/07/looko...uidelines.html

As to failed lawsuits you could say the same thing with all of there other compyright changes pretty much none of them would stand up but people don’t tend to want to spend thousands or in company cases millions on lawyers which is why even clear uses of fair use like emperor text to speech shut down production.

And so you really think they care about overlapping fan bases when they just gave almost 100% of the there fan base the finger with the fan animations changes?

Thiss works well against the average Joe, who can't afford the litigation. We are talking corporation against corporation. AV-B has net income half of what GW is worth, if anything GW would be the average Joe in this battle. This is not comparable at all with TTS potentially getting litigated.

Wait, what? If anything, the timing is a strike against it being a "reach." With their hands full of ethics scandal, they're in a vulnerable position.

And, again? Not only is Games Workshop's aim with their frivolous copyright suits not so much to win as to sabotage: they've been on a streak lately, as @Lorgar Aurelian has pointed out.

What would they exactly do against Blizz and it's parent? What would it practically achieve?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

works well against the average Joe, who can't afford the litigation. We are talking corporation against corporation. AV-B has net income half of what GW is worth, if anything GW would be the average Joe in this battle. This is not comparable at all with TTS potentially getting litigated.



What would they exactly do against Blizz and it's parent? What would it practically achieve?

Mabye if blizzard wasn’t tied up in so many other cases but when already facing millions in fines and other fees do you really think blizzard would want to fight GW in court when they can just change a few lines? GW could avoid spending a penny knowing it would be thrown out while blizzard has to either give in or add on even further losses with all these scandals.

[Dacia Ultan]

Missed these:

The intent is what matters. It's impossible to know a players' gender unless they tell you.

Of course. That's why I specified "deliberately."

In no way, shape, or form is the norm not apolitical or neutral, fuck that noise lol - I'm not stupid that the usual contains just as much bad or worse as well. It's an overarching issue that reaches beyond even these changes or events honestly, but that's a discussion for another thread about the community as a whole.

I think you accidentally got a double negative in there. At any rate: you know that and I know that; but the misconception that the default is neutral, apolitical, and innocuous is nonetheless an all too common one.

It is. I'm just kind of tired of any side trying to say what it isn't, at least currently. Until Blizzard keeps putting their mouth where their money is and such.

Okay, but them removing lines and getting their act in gear are not mutually exclusive. And, unfortunately: there seems to be a trend of framing them thusly. (Although, to be honest: I suspect that a lot of the contributors to that narrative couldn't give less of a damn about the ethics scandal.)

And that's kind of the point, right? Context is very important to what may be deemed offensive or just apart of the game as a whole. It's rather egregious when things are changed post-patch many years later, despite it being a in-character / lore based thing. The jokes and such I can get more-so, but that's still part of what makes characters... Well, what they are. Plus the obvious gags should really put light to it all. For the most part, anyways.

Here's the thing, though: silly vulgar stuff like that is universal. Fart jokes are about something everyone does; fap jokes are about something almost everyone does; and bulls in leather are classic absurdism. None of it requires scapegoating.

Personally I chalk this up with people needing to grow thicker skin half the time and just walk past things that shouldn't bother them, but does. This isn't exclusive to any one group though, and has proliferated ever since social media and safe spaces are all the more common today. Both good and bad, honestly.

...hoo, boy. While there are certainly people out there who do need to "grow a thicker skin," although I'd argue that it's less than half of the time: "no homo" jokes and the "trap" concept are not a matter of gay men or trans women being "thin-skinned." or needing "safe spaces" in some abstract sense. (Hell, being "thin-skinned" while belonging to certain demographics is pretty much literally an early death sentence.) It's an example of that scapegoating thing I talked about earlier; a matter of said demographics being simultaneously viewed as fair game—and I don't just mean fair game for mockery, either—and irrationally viewed as a threat.

I mean, true, a video game isn't going to prompt someone to go on a killing spree. Often as that one may get trotted out at a silencing tactic: no one is actually arguing that. But the gag after which Pip was originally named played off of the "trap" concept, which is another facet of the same mindset that drives "gay panic" or "trans panic" defenses; a deceptive "man" who "pretends" to be a woman in order to "entrap" a straight man into a sexual situation. As that's not so much something that actually happens than—as I said—an attempted rationalization commonly trotted out during a murder or assault trial: I can see why Blizzard wanted to disassociate themselves from it.

As for taking the piss out of a group of individuals? As long as you clearly show the opposite the MAJORITY of the time (Which Blizzard, admittedly, does not), there should not be any grievance or issue with these kind of references. Again: Context matters.

I mean: you, yourself note that Blizzard hasn't really done much in that regard; and see above for why the gag in question goes a little beyond "taking the piss." But, meanwhile: a tweet collage of what added up to "okay, but why is white male entitlement so often represented by guys who really are subpar?" is treated like a horrific display of virulent bigotry.

I'm sad it took them this long to even include sexy ass incubi as an option. The more sex choices we have with things that make sense (And I mean this by Male / Female body types, mainly) - the better. It'd actually be cute if they make the men more seductive and cliche as you'd expect, and a tempter not a temptress.

Oh, they had better make the incubi just as sexy.

Maybe, but a few changes are just complete removals or gutting the entire phrasing which leaves it empty / generic, y'know?

You won't get any argument from me that most of the removals and alterations aren't dumb.

Which I don't understand. It's a cause (That may be building beforehand, kind of clearly in a way) that made an effect. The scandal let this loose and now it's being changed because of it - but also, at the same time, may not even be influenced specifically by it - just now it's open for change. I'd be fucking disappointed if this was all Blizzard really cared to do (They aren't, of course). But who knows how much they're going to change their work culture - RIOT Games had this same dumb shit happen (Among some other companies) and it's still not great many years later.

You know that. I know that. An all-too-prevalent position in this clusterfuck of a discussion seems to hinge on refusal to consider that.

I've seen it happen to smaller companies / indie studios and have a successful restructure, but that's way more feasible.

True enough.

I'm lukewarm on this myself, as I have thoughts on both sides which I agree, both from experience and just seeing it happen. A lot of people don't want changes (Justifiably so). But others who are also offended / disgusted (However justified) have merits too. Stereotypes and issue-makers are abound on either side. It doesn't help when people paint targets on their back due to their outright vocal screeching. Seen quite a few of those on twitter and here. But the hostility is an issue everyone clearly deals with differently. No one is a saint here, and most everyone has definitely snarked others before.

And that's the thing: even if we allow that both "sides" are equally vocal, hostile, and prone to stereotyping? One position is "hey; we're done with y'all treating us as punchlines and punching bags; there's going to be backlash for that from here on out." The other adds up to "how dare you get all uppity; we're going to spin that as weakness on your part until you shut up and go back to letting us have our way." (And that's when you leave out the rants about "degeneracy" or whatever.)

Mabye if blizzard wasn’t tied up in so many other cases but when already facing millions in fines and other fees do you really think blizzard would want to fight GW in court when they can just change a few lines? GW could avoid spending a penny knowing it would be thrown out while blizzard has to either give in or add on even further losses with all these scandals.

Was going to address this, but you nailed it. Thank you.