391 réponses à ce sujet

[Saibh]

Marionetten wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

That's the whole point. The male is portrayed as a hulking alpha male whereas the female is portrayed as a sultry vixen. They are both just as stereotyped even if they confer to different stereotypes.

I don't see how it's the same, considering one idealizes the male while the other puts down the female.

Wait. You actually think that most women don't long to be that sultry vixen capable of making any man swoon with a mere glance?

It's every bit as idealized as the hulking alpha male.

I would say most women would really rather be beautiful without having gigantic knockers and wasp waists. I'd say more women would prefer to be beautiful in the face. Most women certainly prefer their female avatars to look more average in body type, because beautiful female bodies a la Isabela's are a man's idealized version, not a woman's.

As I pointed out before, men prefer their avatars and heroes to be ripped. Games and movies targeted to an exclusively male demographic constantly feature rippling, vein-popping, bicep-bulging male leads. Men also like the female models to look incredibly sexy--this is about a guy's version of appealing, not a woman's.

I realize it sounds like I'm blaming men, and I'm not. If some of them like their women like that--sure, that's fine, I guess. But the female models are also my character's avatar, and I'd rather her look more average and less incapable in a fight due to horrific crippling back pain.

Modifié par Saibh, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:18 .

[Seagloom]

I got around to listening to this now. The party member costumes leave me unimpressed. It feels like a throwback to JRPGs. I thought that was fine years ago, but playing all these games with different armor pieces has spoiled me a bit. Yes, I know all those armor models shared the same body and DAO basically had me swapping heads in reality, but I liked the sense of progression equipping new armor and weapons provided. I also liked that there was a visual representation for almost every piece.

It also looks weird when a character in minimal clothing is running around an area their body should be incapable of withstanding. That said, I can live with it. This is hardly a dealbreaker for me. I just enjoy playing dress up and seeing a visual rags to riches progression that tells me my party has arrived.

I will note this, however: Bethany and Isabela better not be indicative of *every* female character. If there are unique clothing models for each NPC, I do not think it is too much to ask that not every female character be a curvaceous fantasy archetype. I am not even asking for realistic proportions; just proportions I can take seriously.

Too bad we cannot pick a custom armor for Hawke and stick with that throughout the game though. Chances are all of Hawke's clothing changes will be shared with NPCs if for no other reason than to justify creating those art assets. It was fine when everyone in the game shared models, but now that the whole party gets to run around in their special outfits, it kinda sucks.

As far as game mechanics go, I like that party members get their own special talent pool to differentiate them. I need to see the upgrade system in action before making a judgment on that.

Modifié par Seagloom, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:17 .

[_John Crichton]

Christ, must EVERYTHING turn into a sexism argument?



Anyway, I dislike the ME2-ification of companion inventory but it appears I'm in the minority there. It's not a game breaker for me. I'm glad that Hawke is still customizable like the warden in DAO.

[In Exile]

When they say that the inventory for the party members is ME2d, do you mean that we have no options to customize them, or that their armour is unique, and we can only swap the companion specific armour in and out? Because that was the system I expected us to get, so I'd like to see if that's the case.

[Addai]

lv12medic wrote...

I don't see anything wrong with companions having their own armor... I mean don't companions have a mind of their own and can figure out how to dress themselves without having papa or mama Hawke telling them what to wear?  Sometimes in DA:O it feels like I'm playing dress up with a doll action figure.

...phew, that was a close one.

The thing is, if you wanted to keep Alistair in splintmail the entire game in DAO, that was your prerogative.  But at least we got a choice.

Less choice= bad.

Dragon Effect= bad.

[AlanC9]

Ympulse wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

I don`t mind Isabella`s bossom. Some women do have large breasts after all. I doubt every female in the game have the same knockers as she does.

$5 says Isabella is the debut of the default female mesh, with follower textures.

Shouldn't bets here be denominated in Bioware points?

Also note that bodies in DAO varied with the equipment, so there's no necessary reason that DA2 female bodies will all be the same. The joke about the Chasind Robes of Breast Enlargement came about because that outfit really did make breasts bigger. Pity the NPC outfits didn't vary more.

[Rawgrim]

I forsee alot of different outfits later. In the form of DLC`s....

[ashwind]

Dave of Canada wrote...

ashwind wrote...

The females anatomy finally evolved from DAO ape-ish anatomy to DA2 human anatomy. Never thought the DA team can accomplish such a monumental feat!

I don't see how having breasts the size of mountains fits.

Saibh wrote...
The proportions of DAO women and having wide shoulders is more common than the new female model. Which...ugh.

It is not about the size of her bosom or wideness of her shoulders. It is about the proportion. Isabela in the screen shot looks pretty "balance".

Just... undress Morrigan or Leiliana in DAO and look at their anatomy. Their anatomy is more akin to apes than humans.

I have totally given up on the DA team when it comes to female anatomy. What they have made and show thus far exceeds all expectation I had for them. (ok, so I wasnt expecting improvement from them   still)

Hence - Bravo 

Modifié par ashwind, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:11 .

[the_one_54321]

Marionetten wrote...
I understand that it's a big deal as I've had to fight the alpha male ideal for years upon years. I just don't appreciate the double standards.

Ditto. I know it's not as extreme as the pressures of the ideal female image. That doesn't make it not sexist or degrading for men though. Double standards are not ok. Women don't get to claim that men never have to deal with image issues.

[Leonia]

Addai67 wrote...

lv12medic wrote...

I don't see anything wrong with companions having their own armor... I mean don't companions have a mind of their own and can figure out how to dress themselves without having papa or mama Hawke telling them what to wear?  Sometimes in DA:O it feels like I'm playing dress up with a doll action figure.

...phew, that was a close one.

The thing is, if you wanted to keep Alistair in splintmail the entire game in DAO, that was your prerogative.  But at least we got a choice.

Less choice= bad.

Dragon Effect= bad.

I don't see a lack of choice in terms of stats with the DA 2 system, just less choice in appearance (and we don't know for sure yet if we're getting multiple outfit appearances or not).

[bzombo]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Hm....

But each character seems to have his/her own capacity? 



Just different points in the game. The inventory is shared, as it was in Origins.

i haven't had a chance to listen to the podcast. my main concern is about changing equipment. does the second screenshot mean we can't give boots, gloves, and helms to our npcs? or is the screenshot of the rogue representative of equipment limitations being introduced in da2?

Modifié par bzombo, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:11 .

[tdawg7669]

In Exile wrote...

When they say that the inventory for the party members is ME2d, do you mean that we have no options to customize them, or that their armour is unique, and we can only swap the companion specific armour in and out? Because that was the system I expected us to get, so I'd like to see if that's the case.

Nobody knows for sure at this point. The podcast wasnt clear in that regard.

[Saibh]

John Crichton wrote...

Christ, must EVERYTHING turn into a sexism argument?

You saying this indicates to me you are a construction worker who spends his entire day munching on manwiches and wolf-whistling dames.

Yes, I'm joking.

[Ryzaki]

And another thing...why would a AW Morrigan walk around in her default outfit?

...So I guess companions no longer get a spec that we can choose?

Which would make sense but also make me a sad panda.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:12 .

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Is that an alignment meter I see by the Swashbuckler icon?

I think it's friendship / rivalry.

Where are you guys looking? I dont see a swashbuckler icon.

[Maria Caliban]

Ympulse wrote...

Her shoulders are as narrow as my thigh.

Hyperbole, I suppose. but it doesen't change the fact that her entire body would have to be far more muscular in order for that posture to be natural. Hell, she'd have a stronger back than most military men just from keeping a proper posture all day.

I disagree. Her current stance is one women use all the time.

[In Exile]

Dave of Canada wrote...
We're going off-topic but the Male archtype doesn't exploit the male, he's shown as strong and confident while the female archtype is shown as this object used for the manly man's manly sexual needs.

When you're a 5'8 guy, a 6'3 beefcake is pretty difficult to tolerate. Just saying.

[Ramante]

Something else..



In the podcast it is said that Isabela can do backstabs (because she is a rogue).. I thought backstabs were removed from the game? o.o

[Saibh]

ashwind wrote...

It is not about the size of her bosom or wideness of her shoulders. It is about the proportion. Isabela in the screen shot looks pretty "balance".

Just... undress Morrigan or Leiliana in DAO and look at their anatomy. Their anatomy is more akin to apes than humans.

I have totally given up on the DA team when it comes to female anatomy. What they have made and show thus far exceeds all expectation I had for them. (ok, so I wasnt expecting improvement from them   still)

Hence - Bravo 

Uh. No, her body is not balanced. She has tiny, tiny shoulders, a small, concave waists, gigantic at least double-D sized breasts, and no muscle or fat to speak of.

That isn't proportionate, at all. The female models of DAO had wide shoulders--you're right. But that's a more common in women than the DA2 models proportions.

[the_one_54321]

In Exile wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
We're going off-topic but the Male archtype doesn't exploit the male, he's shown as strong and confident while the female archtype is shown as this object used for the manly man's manly sexual needs.

When you're a 5'8 guy, a 6'3 beefcake is pretty difficult to tolerate. Just saying.

I know that I've never had to deal with the image issues that women have. But I wonder how many of them literally got dragged out to the playground after school to be beaten up because they looked wimpy. Sexist imagery goes both ways. Double standards are wrong.

[Fishy]

ashwind wrote...

Nice screenshots 

The females anatomy finally evolved from DAO ape-ish anatomy to DA2 human anatomy. Never thought the DA team can accomplish such a monumental feat!

They studied Female Anatomy ?

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...Or i don't share the designer's idea that particular outfit makes character look good. I just don't get why they feel this must be "our way or the highway" to the point where the alternative becomes removed.

I do get they may see appeal in selling horse follower armour DLC, though.

DLC scams aside, I have never understood the NPC is a slave to player's perception mentality. Each NPC is their own person - they are entitled to their own style and opinions. It's give and take with abilities because auto-level or already invested points lead to hardcore gimped characters, but I absolutely disagree that it's appropriate in an RPG for the player to decide what is appropriate for the personality of an NPC.

And before you feel tempted to retort with the choice reply - the loss of customizable and distinct NPC armour is a drawback for me, because that specific feature makes a difference for my enjoyment of the game.

That being said, I don't know why the NPC armour has to be 1 whole unit instead of piecemeal like for Hawke.

[tmp7704]

leonia42 wrote...

I don't see a lack of choice in terms of stats with the DA 2 system, just less choice in appearance (and we don't know for sure yet if we're getting multiple outfit appearances or not).

The appearance can be big deal so the "just appearance" can be still important factor to some.

In fact, appearance seems to be such a big deal that they've chosen to lock your ability to alter it in DA2, beyond what they deem appropriate.

[Sharuko]

I will miss equipping characters with great armor. But I think this is a good move, but then again I preferred how they did it in ME2.

[Aigyl]

In Exile wrote...

When they say that the inventory for the party members is ME2d, do you mean that we have no options to customize them, or that their armour is unique, and we can only swap the companion specific armour in and out? Because that was the system I expected us to get, so I'd like to see if that's the case.

You can't change their armour, but you can enchant them with runes.

The screenshots show that you can give them belts, neck-pieces, and rings just like DA:O.

They also each have their own unique talent trees.

Edit: Oh, and Hawke's inventory is pretty much identical to Origins's system.

Modifié par Aigyl, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:19 .