They changed Ji Firepaw :(

[dope_danny]

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.

[Venziir]

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"

[s_bushido]

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?"

[Austilias]

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.

[Alewen]

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?

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.

[Count Zero]

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 ?

[Deleted]

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?

[Uennie]

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.

[Miralynn]

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.

[Count Zero]

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 ?

[Tastyfish]

@ 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.

[Imnick]

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.

[Count Zero]

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.

[Deleted]

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'

[Rimbo83]

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.

[Deleted]

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.

of course you do, but do you have the same attitude if a greasy old stranger tells you this when you're waiting for a bus or something?

[s_bushido]

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?

It's entertainment. Gregor Clegane (A Song of Ice and Fire) rapes half the women in Westeros. Does that mean the author thinks that's acceptable behavior? Does that mean the readers should find that behavior acceptable?

At one point, Varian pretty much said, "The only good orc is a dead orc." People called him all sorts of names, but I'd hope that most realize that it's just a character, and that his racism wasn't a reflection of the beliefs of the game's developers or players.

Why should a character saying or doing something that a player objects to necessitate a change?

[Deleted]

It's entertainment. Gregor Clegane (A Song of Ice and Fire) rapes half the women in Westeros. Does that mean the author thinks that's acceptable behavior? Does that mean the readers should find that behavior acceptable?

At one point, Varian pretty much said, "The only good orc is a dead orc." People called him all sorts of names, but I'd hope that most realize that it's just a character, and that his racism wasn't a reflection of the beliefs of the game's developers or players.

Why should a character saying or doing something that a player objects to necessitate a change?

I think we're talking about two totally different things though. a fictional account of mass rape is about rape, it contextualises itself in our morality; we know it's wrong. if we apply that same standard to WoW, would it then be acceptable for there to be a quest in which our character was raped repeatedly in an interactive way? I think that Ji's line is acceptable, but I do not think that hypothetical quest would be.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

I suspect this will be a case of "Oh, I should probably have locked this 10 pages ago. Sorry."

[Tastyfish]

ALL this argument and the best line yet is:

YOU are not YOUR Character. Why are you getting creeped out by something not being said to you but your character by another character. LOL