First Overwatch Non-Binary Character Fully Revealed

Shadow2027 said:

Yeah Western Game Development continuing to go to utter shit

Click to expand...

Sircaw said:

Most of the editors I use in games look absolutely nothing like me in real life.

Click to expand...

TubzGaming said:

Click to expand...

Sircaw said:

A couple of beers later:

Click to expand...

Sircaw said:

Well, hopefully, the character is fun to play, that's what really counts.
I really don't get all this Need representation in games bit,
Most of the editors I use in games look absolutely nothing like me in real life.
When i used to play quake 2 competitively i used one of the females skins as it felt more nimble when moving or jumping.

Click to expand...

So a couple years ago we looked at the overall diversity of our roster, and one of the things it showed was that we had like 60% male champs and 40% female champs, or something close to that. We feel long-term it's probably better to have something like 50/50 male and female champs, so we have been adding a bit more female champs then male champs on average, for the last few year. This is something we will likely continue until we are closer to 50/50 on the roster.

Click to expand...

So you just abandon half of your player base? If you want balance you could release 1 male 1 female. You could also add a female option for previous male champs like a skin or something.

Click to expand...

We aren't abandoning half our playerbase by making more female Champions. Our data shows that female players primarily play female champions, in fact its something like 97% of female players only play female champions. Male players are evenly spilt between male and female champions, so Male players play 50/50 between male and female champions, If anything whenever we make a male champion we are abandoning most of our female players, since most of our female players won't play male champions at all.

Click to expand...

Evilnemesis8 said:

On a personal level, I agree with you. I play everything.
But the internal data for more diverse lineup for Overwatch and other shooters with heroes probably shows encouraging numbers in terms of representation and how it relates to dollar spent. In fact things like Apex, Valorant, Overwatch is probably the genre where they'd benefit the most with varied characters that all have different skins for MTX.

Probably the most absolutely bonkers data point I've ever seen in terms of representation and player usage would be this particular reddit discussion that includes Rea3(League of Legends Lead Gameplay Producer).

In there he talks about gender balance in champions:



Overall that seems entirely logical, they are way more male champions than female chamions, so making an effort to get this more 50/50 over time is probably a good idea.

But then some angry gamer™ had this to say:




His reply to that angry comment is where things gets REALLY wild:



Of course this is only a singular game and is not reflective if the entirety of the gaming space. But the fact that LoL female players literally will almost NEVER play male champions and thus never buy male champion skins means that in reality, it's probably better for the ratio of female to male champion in that particular game to be more even more than 50/50.
They'd make more money because each champion would be played by more than male players.

Anecdoctally, female LoL players I interact with reflects this reality, they all play cutesy mages mid lane, or play female AD Carry/Support in the bot lane but I did not know it was that lopsided in terms of play pattern.

This whole thing would probably also explain why in LOL, the champions with the most abyssal playrate are often male and/or a monster champion(which is the furthest away from beautiful female champions).

TL;DR If companies keep making more diverse characters(sexuality,ethnicity, etc..) it's probably because they see monetary returns on it, because that's the only thing these big corps do think about.

Click to expand...

Evilnemesis8 said:

On a personal level, I agree with you. I play everything.
But the internal data for more diverse lineup for Overwatch and other shooters with heroes probably shows encouraging numbers in terms of representation and how it relates to dollar spent. In fact things like Apex, Valorant, Overwatch is probably the genre where they'd benefit the most with varied characters that all have different skins for MTX.

Probably the most absolutely bonkers data point I've ever seen in terms of representation and player usage would be this particular reddit discussion that includes Rea3(League of Legends Lead Gameplay Producer).

In there he talks about gender balance in champions:



Overall that seems entirely logical, they are way more male champions than female chamions, so making an effort to get this more 50/50 over time is probably a good idea.

But then some angry gamer™ had this to say:




His reply to that angry comment is where things gets REALLY wild:



Of course this is only a singular game and is not reflective if the entirety of the gaming space. But the fact that LoL female players literally will almost NEVER play male champions and thus never buy male champion skins means that in reality, it's probably better for the ratio of female to male champion in that particular game to be more even more than 50/50.
They'd make more money because each champion would be played by more than male players.

Anecdoctally, female LoL players I interact with reflects this reality, they all play cutesy mages mid lane, or play female AD Carry/Support in the bot lane but I did not know it was that lopsided in terms of play pattern.

This whole thing would probably also explain why in LOL, the champions with the most abyssal playrate are often male and/or a monster champion(which is the furthest away from beautiful female champions).

TL;DR If companies keep making more diverse characters(sexuality,ethnicity, etc..) it's probably because they see monetary returns on it, because that's the only thing these big corps do think about.

Click to expand...

Sircaw said:

Yep for sure its a thing with a lot of people,

I had a Trans friend who only ever wanted to play Arhi, the fox character in League of Legends; if the character was not available in games, she did not want to play, lol.

I mean, each to their own, I guess; either I few games differently, or I am just too old to put up with all those marketing bullshit to care.

It's like Peter Parker or Miles Morales; i prefer Peter Parker as that is the character I grew up with as a kid watching cartoons, but as for playing the character in games, he could be Wong do fat underneath the custome; it really does not bother me at all.

Click to expand...

quest4441 said:

I look at this and all I can see is more reasons why Dota 2 is the superior MOBA and LoL remains a game for soy latte chumps . Dota's most popular hero is a ugly fat butcher with his stomach torn off and guts spilling out because he is fun to play.

Click to expand...

Evilnemesis8 said:

The main reason why there is such divide in consumption is probably due to the historically poor representation(both in numbers but also in quality of said representation).
Female players gravitating towards female characters is probably probably the same reason why a non insignificant amount of black players gravitate towards black characters and so on.
It has not escaped my attention that current fighting games are all seeing cool black characters(and avoiding some stereotypical pitfalls they used to have). They know the kind of audience the FGC is comprised of in the US market.

A good analogy for this is a desert oasis.
When you're thirsty and starving, if one thing you really would like to see suddenly appears in front of you, you're def going to be all over it.




If DotA 2 is like LoL, top popular character are just mostly OP and/or fun to play.
I will say that both are soy boys audience though, but that's because the strongest audience in Asia/China

Click to expand...