@IronStylus: I am very disappointed in you and the art team.

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Steam Store

Senior Member

11-18-2012

I just don't understand why people are upset with a mermaid having boobs. This character is no more offensive then a Disney creation. You people do realize that league of legends has an artistic theme. This is where things are a little cartoony and the aesthetics of the game frequently over exaggerate features to match this. The thing is when u look at a champion if it had very small boobs and no hips you could get confused and mistake it for a boy, Ezreal is a great example of this!

@Pitchfork wielding white knights: If you want a champion that is not attractive then why don't you post some champion archtype ideas for this. Right now you are just wasting time posting here.

@Riot: Nami looks great! However posting in these threads only further heats this silly issue up. It would probably be best just to let these get downvoted and disappear as normally occurs.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KT Samurai

Senior Member

11-18-2012

I just remembered something neat for everyone who says that there isn't a problem because the majority of players don't think there is.

Awhile back someone on the Bioware forums complained about his character being hit on by another male character. He said that Bioware was ignoring its core demographic, the straight male gamer, and that he was kind of offended by this. A Bioware employee replied and I think encapsulated the issue incredibly well, so well that I think it carries over to how the vocal minority (of which I am apart) and lends credence to our concerns. The response reads in part:

Quote:
To the issue: I've said it before and I'll say it again-- perhaps a bit more eloquently, since it's apparently of dire concern to some.

The romances in the game are not for "the straight male gamer". They're for everyone. We have a lot of fans, many of whom are neither straight nor male, and they deserve no less attention. We have good numbers, after all, on the number of people who actually used similar sorts of content in DAO and thus don't need to resort to anecdotal evidence to support our idea that their numbers are not insignificant... and that's ignoring the idea that they don't have just as much right to play the kind of game they wish as anyone else. The "rights" of anyone with regards to a game are murky at best, but anyone who takes that stance must apply it equally to both the minority as well as the majority. The majority has no inherent "right" to get more options than anyone else.

More than that, I would question anyone deciding they speak for "the straight male gamer" just as much as someone claiming they speak for "all RPG fans", "all female fans" or even "all gay fans". You don't. If you wish to express your personal desires, then do so. I have no doubt that any opinion expressed on these forums is shared by many others, but since none of them have elected a spokesperson you're better off not trying to be one. If your attempt is to convince BioWare developers, I can tell you that you do in fact make your opinion less convincing by doing so.

And if there is any doubt why such an opinion might be met with hostility, it has to do with privilege. You can write it off as "political correctness" if you wish, but the truth is that privilege always lies with the majority. They're so used to being catered to that they see the lack of catering as an imbalance. They don't see anything wrong with having things set up to suit them, what's everyone's fuss all about? That's the way it should be, any everyone else should be used to not getting what they want.
The people who are standing on the sidelines shouting in at people like me just don't want things to change. They like that their female champions are *** objects first and characters second and they see any discussion exploring the opposite route being a violation of their privilege.

Link to quote: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/to...x/6661775&lf=8


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Alphonsio

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Not much to add that hasn't been said. I've shown up repeatedly in these sorts of threads as "Attractive Adult Humanoid" is an archetype I personally have no interest in and I'm always thrilled to see the feedback from Riot on the subject.

Honestly, I like the way Nami looks. Maybe I can't view a fish woman as sexualized, but I just don't see any blatant, dull pandering in her design. I suppose I could complain about the cleavage, but she's a fish! Besides, I get the vibe of an elegant, playful princess from her looks. The gills coming down from her head across her chest, to me, look like a mimic of hair and a fancy frill on a dressy blouse, if that makes sense. I really have no way of knowing for sure if that's what Riot was going for, but that's what I see when I look at her and I particularly like it.

I give my kudos to the artist! I believe it was said this is her first champion and I have to complement her on giving us that which, at least to me, feels very different from what I'm used to (And occasionally bored by) in League of Legends. First female champ since Diana I was immediately very impressed by based on her appearance alone. Very well done!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Koelof

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by KT Samurai View Post
The problem is variety, obviously. I guess you didn't read this or any other thread on the matter?

I did, and what about Nami doesn't say "variety?"


Because oversexualization has nothing to do with "variety."


Young girls can be oversexualized, so can older women. Is it always appealing? No.


But the young-old disparity creates varity, regardless of sexuality.


So how does Nami not create "variety?"

Not human: Check
Floats: check
No legs/feet: Check
Animations: Check
Even has her own aura beneath her.



So because it has cleavage it has no variety? Please. You want some more variety in the female form itself?

Why? For the sake of variety?

Variety for the sake of variety is bad.


For the sake of representing a real population? Well, first, the average cup size in the US is a D, and Canada is a C. So the majority of the females representing that is best. To go along with this, cleavage is normal, too.

You want a female zilean? Why? Older women are not portrayed in, really, anything that would be much of a champion. Maybe it's because of osteoperosis, or maybe it's because of a "grandma" figure.

You want a female gragas? Why? First, gragas isn't human. Second, how is this appealing besides the sake of novelty?


Is it about "equality?"

Equality is one of the only valid concerns to this arguement, but it is not a logical choice. The most played female champs by females are MF and Sona, as stated by a red post.

Does equality sell? No, not really. Only a minority care if there's a female gragas, and it's not a good selling point. No one wants to support an obese female(or an obese male), but Gragas fits a stereotype and why he was implemented the way he was. Nothing is appealing about a female gragas, whereas a male one has history and through the use of skins(santa graggy) will approach even more familiar ideas.

So, really, who cares? You're picking at something to pick at something when there is no good rationale behind it.


On a side note,

I love pointing out the 1% rule. 90:9:1. For every 100 users, 90 will lurk, 9 will contribute, and 1 will create. You, being of the very vocal minority, are an even smaller bunch. Because of this, I always laugh when it's a "huge" problem, or "lots" of people have an issue.

No, it's not a lot. It's not a huge problem. Just because you say it is, does not make it so.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KT Samurai

Senior Member

11-18-2012

I like how your response is mostly straw man arguments. You're not interested in what I have to say at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Koelof

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by KT Samurai View Post
I just remembered something neat for everyone who says that there isn't a problem because the majority of players don't think there is.

Awhile back someone on the Bioware forums complained about his character being hit on by another male character. He said that Bioware was ignoring its core demographic, the straight male gamer, and that he was kind of offended by this. A Bioware employee replied and I think encapsulated the issue incredibly well, so well that I think it carries over to how the vocal minority (of which I am apart) and lends credence to our concerns. The response reads in part:



The people who are standing on the sidelines shouting in at people like me just don't want things to change. They like that their female champions are *** objects first and characters second and they see any discussion exploring the opposite route being a violation of their privilege.

Link to quote: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/to...x/6661775&lf=8

Newsflash: Girls like boobs, being sexy, being pretty, etc, too. You're acting like guys are the only one to play these champions, which is not true at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KT Samurai

Senior Member

11-18-2012

That's not what I was saying at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Koelof

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by KT Samurai View Post
I like how your response is mostly straw man arguments. You're not interested in what I have to say at all.

And what exactly have I straw manned?

I addressed most of the concerns that people post about.


The only thing that could be considered a strawman is that young, or old, can also be oversexualized; But it's true.

Look at Honey Boo Boo, and those baby pageants, or people like Joan Rivers.

These are not normal, but it's variety that is not itself attatched to the sexualization.


Then the rest of my post goes on to identify different body types, and why they are either not a logical choice, or why they are not a rationale choice.

Wanting an old woman for the sake of variety is a farce. The old woman has to work with the idea, and THERE AREN'T MANY OLD WOMEN that portray this role, anywhere.

So no one can identify with it, so why would it be a viable choice?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AxeFresh

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by IronStylus View Post
You fail to realize the size of the the deep hole inside of me that WANTS TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY.
Hi.

What I have shown you in the past cannot be unseen

Lady Leona knows of this scandal


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KT Samurai

Senior Member

11-18-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koelof View Post
And what exactly have I straw manned?

I addressed most of the concerns that people post about.


The only thing that could be considered a strawman is that young, or old, can also be oversexualized; But it's true.

Look at Honey Boo Boo, and those baby pageants, or people like Joan Rivers.

These are not normal, but it's variety that is not itself attatched to the sexualization.


Then the rest of my post goes on to identify different body types, and why they are either not a logical choice, or why they are not a rationale choice.

Wanting an old woman for the sake of variety is a farce. The old woman has to work with the idea, and THERE AREN'T MANY OLD WOMEN that portray this role, anywhere.

So no one can identify with it, so why would it be a viable choice?
Your post is mostly straw mans because you were addressing me and I didn't say any of that stuff. You applied them to me assuming I agreed with all of it, and that's a fallacy.