Posted in: Games, Video Games | Tagged: blizzard, entertainment, games, overwatch, video games

On Bums, Censorship And Artistic Integrity: Creative Iteration Is Getting Lost In The Social Battleground Of Games [Updated]

So, there's been a growing meta-narrative through that last few months, that has been rather bizarre to watch evolve. Calls of censorship are nothing new in the pop culture, but there have been three instances that have come up recently that feel somewhat linked. Perhaps most infamously, is Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 , a game about titillating girls who play poolside in bikinis. The controversy came when a message from a developer on the game's Facebook claimed that the game wouldn't come to the West because of how we view the issues of female representation in games. The second storm came when it turned out that Capcom had taken out an animation of R.Mika slapping her bum, which featured in the beta for Street Fighter V, but in later footage, was taken out.

And now we have our third instance in three or four months. The news that has certain portions of the gaming community buzzing is about Overwatch, specifically the character Tracer. There was a pose that featured the character's back to the camera, looking over her shoulder. It's a fairly frequent pose that has been criticized in the past especially when used by women, as it can be perceived to bring focus on…well, her bum (See also Black Widow's pose in this Avenger's key art). This pose caused one member of the Overwatch community to speak out against it, saying they didn't think it suited what they understood about the character. While the post was ridiculed by many in the forum, the loudest voice responded in favor. Overwatch's Director Jeff Kaplan said in the thread:

The last thing we want to do is make someone feel uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented. Apologies and we'll continue to try to do better.

And then, predictably, all hell broke loose.

I've spent time, wading through the discussion from both sides trying to understand the argument. From what I gather of those who are angry, it strikes me that people are mad over what they perceive to be an artist's intention. Essentially, they are mad that an artist's original vision has been altered by social pressure. While trying not to be too controversial, there seems to be a level of projection here on part of the detractors.

What we know is that… well, no one quite knows the reasons that this pose was taken out. From what I've seen argued, there seems to be an assumption that Jeff Kaplan is bowing down to a growing feminist hive mind. A group only interested in one vision of the world, and will shame artists to censor and conform their art into that vision.

The fact of the matter is, we simply don't know that to be true. We literally know nothing about the circumstances of this change. There could be a million and one reasons why this choice was made. It could have been an oversight by the creative team that they never caught. Kaplan could have agreed with the reasoning of the initial post, and decided to change it because he personally found it be well reasoned. Upon reflection, it might not have reflected the character that he was building now. Hell, it could be because it was Monday and he just felt differently than when the pose was originally put in.

Now, I understand the debate. Overwatch is growing in the public eye thanks to several betas. It can be hard to recognize it as in development, past the new heroes and modes put in each time the game stretches its legs. What's important to remember though, is that this is an evolving document and betas are a time that exist for public feedback. That's why I don't see this matter much differently than if someone had said, "Hey, I think Winston's Primal Rage ability is overpowered, and lasts too long" and the director on the game deciding that person was right, before making those changes.

Of course, I do understand why this choice to change the pose is more controversial than that previous example might be (although I'm sure there are many Winston players who would be rather miffed). We live in a time in the pop culture where culture and social politics are a hot topic issue. Feminism is perhaps the hottest of topics too, with some men feeling their values are being attacked by the entertainment they enjoy. I admit, because I am a bleeding heart liberal, I will almost always end up siding with the ideas that invites more diversity into games, but honestly, I also really don't care if some guy just wants to play games and he gets a bit of titillation from the entertainment they enjoy on top. What you enjoy is between you and no one, and it's for no one to judge. However, I can also see how that pose might turn off more casual and new gamers, especially women, who might figure this game isn't for them after seeing it.

Perhaps it is important to note at this point: I don't claim to have an answer for any of this, since I know some women will find the pose empowering, while others will find it off putting. As is the moving nature of individuals vs. movements.

One group who does have an answer though, is Kaplan and Blizzard. In fact, they more or less have the only answer that matters. They can take suggestions from the public on all sorts of things, but ultimately, it's their choice alone to decide what ends up as their complete artistic vision when the game launches. The choice to take out the pose is part of their creative vision.  And here is where I get to the crux of it. Throughout my time as a writer, I've gotten to know writers, directors and developers on games. They are ludicrously driven people and deeply artistic. How do I know? Well, everyone want's their job. They went to school to direct, write and make games. They've toiled for 10,000s of hours at their craft, and they've done everything to stay in the position they are in. One comment on a forum, or the invisible pressure by a movement isn't going to be enough to sway their vision, unless, well, they agree with it. That's not censorship. That's just iteration on one's creative vision. To say that these poor artists are having to change their art due to a social movement, seriously disregards the character and drive of the people making the game.

To illustrate, I'll pull from my own life. While not on the same scale, I once wrote a screenplay that used a rape scene to get a point across. It was about the primal nature of man, for a guy who had been reduced purely to primal urges. However someone said to me, "are you sure this is the best way to do this?" I paused to think about it, before deciding they were right. It was lazy and cheap framing. There were a ton of ways to better get across my point, without resorting to something like rape. I don't take that feedback as censorship of my old vision, but rather a note that I think improved my work. I could have left the scene in, I could have disregarded the question, but the honest feedback helped me better convey a story I wanted to tell.

In such a socially charged area of the pop culture, I can understand why this has been overblown into such an important issue. Some of the audience feel their view is being betrayed for the appeasement of the minority. That's not a fun feeling, especially in an entertainment you grew up with and love. But art is a dictatorship, not a democracy (at least on an audience level). Ultimately, it's up to the creators to decide what their game is, not the people. The dictatorship can listen to the opposing views of the people and take them on board, but they have final say on what goes into their game. The democracy comes in the purchase of the game, and it's everyone's right who fundamentally disagrees with the move to not buy it. (I will say, this seems a silly reason not to pick up a fantastic game though.)

If it turns out that feminists were holding Kaplan against his own will to make the choice, sure, I'll argue in favor that if he wanted the pose in the game, and Blizzard agreed, he should have it. But considering I haven't heard about any break ins to the developer, I'm going to figure this was a personal choice on a game the director is leading.

PS: This is about a video game character's bum. This is all so, so silly. 

Updated:

Here is a quote from Jeff Kaplan to IGN about the choice to take out the pose, which came between writing and posting this feature.

As the game director, I have final creative say over what does or does not go into the game. With this particular decision, it was an easy one to make—not just for me, but for the art team as well.

We actually already have an alternate pose that we love and we feel speaks more to the character of Tracer. We weren't entirely happy with the original pose, it was always one that we wrestled with creatively. That the pose had been called into question from an appropriateness standpoint by players in our community did help influence our decision—getting that kind of feedback is part of the reason we're holding a closed beta test—but it wasn't the only factor. We made the decision to go with a different pose in part because we shared some of the same concerns, but also because we wanted to create something better.

We understand that not everyone will agree with our decision, and that's okay. That's what these kinds of public tests are for. This wasn't pandering or caving, though. This was the right call from our perspective, and we think the game will be just as fun the next time you play it.

Enjoyed this? Please share on social media!

Stay up-to-date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!