603 réponses à ce sujet

[Chaos-fusion]

On the Normandy, I don't care, other than Miranda's ass being thrown at me (Do not like!!).

In combat it's annoying and unplausable but not so much that it bothers me enough to keep pointing it out. It gets just silly in some places; ".. or I'll take my helmet off and breath all over your nice, clean ship." is a threat at one point, but it seems kinda silly considering usually I'm there with somebody not using a helmet..

ME1 handled it better, I thought.

Khayness wrote...

Oh my, a male! Let's show him some ******, that will do the trick.

(This isn't an outlash at your post or you, you just happened to mention the mindset that has been around so long that it's considered fine)

It would be alot easier to escape the stereotype if there were less males out there approving anything with a big enough crevice.

[ZachForrest]

What about a bit of artistic licence? Bioware design unique and considered outfits for each character and all people moan about is it doesn't make sense and they should be wearing armour. Get a grip.

[Urazz]

ADLegend21 wrote...

All the "inappropriately" clothes squaddies are biotics. biotics can produce a biotic barrier to protect them from jsut about anything inclding space, since barriers are mass effect fields that distort space. The non-biotic crewmates aside from Kasumi and Tali are all hardsuited up but Kasmi and Tali wear full body suitsand Kasumi's is built for stealth not guerilla warfare. If I already had a biotic barrier protecting me I'd probably wear some PJ's into combat if Shepard would let me.

If this wasn't in combat situations I would agree but in combat that biotic barrier would just get broken from getting hit in combat.

[Phonantiphon]

How do you know that Miranda isn't wearing some kind of funky skinsuit that provides protection? As for Jack... well Jack's Jack. Personally she is (currently) the only character that I just don't particularly like. Not because she's badly done but because I just don't empathise with her in any way, t1ts or not.

Anyway on the occasions where she has been in a hostile environment she has taken a considerable amount of damage from the ambient environment because she's not wearing armour, or a suit. As I said before, the way she dresses and her tattoos are clearly a part of her character and to be honest - (and I can't believe I'm actually saying this about a bunch of pixels) - not remotely titillating. She uses her body as canvas upon which to mark what she has done or what has been done to her, like Japanese gangsters or Russian mafiosi - so it seems natural in that context that she would display those marks, as a uniform of sorts/mask.

Jumping to the conclusion that it's all done for sexually frustrated teens seems to be A: rather trite and B: doing the writers/developers a bit of a disservice, imho.

[ShaggyWolf]

The outfits never bothered me that much. I prefered it to the system of ME1, because in ME2, each character looks unique and has their iconic appearance, inestead of wearing whatever. The only way I'd support squadmates wearing armor, is if they managed to make each suit unique to the person wearing it.



Unique outfits are important. They tell a lot about the character. I was watching a making of video where one of the artists was talking about Jack's tattoos and how each individual one has something to do with the character. That's important to me. Covering that up with some random hardsuit seems like a disservice, both to the character and the player, from my point of view.



As another example, you'll always be able to instantly identify Garrus because of his signature blue armor and his visor. Same with Tali and her suit.



This is a philosophy that's been central to cinematic experiences for a long time. It would've been more practical for Han Solo to wear stormtrooper armor into a fight all the time, but he would've lost his identity that he had when he wore his casual outfits. Same reason why Jack Sparrow wears the same outfit all the time.



As I said, I'd be cool with mission armor for each squadmate, but only if they were unique to each character, and managed to tell about the wearer's identity. Otherwise, I'd very much prefer the current system.

[Phonantiphon]

Valadras21 wrote...

The outfits never bothered me that much. I prefered it to the system of ME1, because in ME2, each character looks unique and has their iconic appearance, inestead of wearing whatever. The only way I'd support squadmates wearing armor, is if they managed to make each suit unique to the person wearing it.

Unique outfits are important. They tell a lot about the character. I was watching a making of video where one of the artists was talking about Jack's tattoos and how each individual one has something to do with the character. That's important to me. Covering that up with some random hardsuit seems like a disservice, both to the character and the player, from my point of view.

As another example, you'll always be able to instantly identify Garrus because of his signature blue armor and his visor. Same with Tali and her suit.

This is a philosophy that's been central to cinematic experiences for a long time. It would've been more practical for Han Solo to wear stormtrooper armor into a fight all the time, but he would've lost his identity that he had when he wore his casual outfits. Same reason why Jack Sparrow wears the same outfit all the time.

As I said, I'd be cool with mission armor for each squadmate, but only if they were unique to each character, and managed to tell about the wearer's identity. Otherwise, I'd very much prefer the current system.

This +1 million.

[ZachForrest]

^^ Agreed! ^^

[Commander Kurt]

Dust_King wrote...
Well to be honest I wasn't commenting directly on the topic, rather the general attitude of complaints of exploiting sexuality in games. A bit of a pet peeve that I wanted to vent.

As for the whole "female gamers get no man-candy" (sorry if I sound like a jerk but hear me out) I'd argue against it. First of all a man's sexual characteristics are different to a woman's, broad shoulders and a athletic physique are probably the most obverse features of the body. Facial hair (and baldness) signal higher levels of testosterone and virility. But there is very little you can do to sexualise a man.

Lets be honest, most of the factors which make a man attractive are to do with the personality and environment. From a biological standpoint men are more likely to look for fitness in a mate and women are more likely to look for potential and success. So things which would make a female character appealing to a man (speaking from a purely instinctive point of view) would not work as well if applied to a male character trying to appeal to a female audience.

Basically I don't think the argument works because men and women look for different things in a mate.

Yeah, about that.. You really haven't visited the "Kaidan Alenko Support Thread", have you? By all means, take time to look at the pictures while you're there.

Seriously, women do like eye candy. It should be a hint if someone is telling you that (causing you to argue against it), espescially if it's a woman doing it. Like now. I'm sorry if I sound dismissive, it's just been one of those days and I might be coming across as more hostile than I really am. Hmm, maybe a smiley..?


And, also, I prefer armor to skimpy outfits in combat. Just showing my support for the thread.

[Ulzeraj]

bassmunkee wrote...

Valadras21 wrote...

The outfits never bothered me that much. I prefered it to the system of ME1, because in ME2, each character looks unique and has their iconic appearance, inestead of wearing whatever. The only way I'd support squadmates wearing armor, is if they managed to make each suit unique to the person wearing it.

Unique outfits are important. They tell a lot about the character. I was watching a making of video where one of the artists was talking about Jack's tattoos and how each individual one has something to do with the character. That's important to me. Covering that up with some random hardsuit seems like a disservice, both to the character and the player, from my point of view.

As another example, you'll always be able to instantly identify Garrus because of his signature blue armor and his visor. Same with Tali and her suit.

This is a philosophy that's been central to cinematic experiences for a long time. It would've been more practical for Han Solo to wear stormtrooper armor into a fight all the time, but he would've lost his identity that he had when he wore his casual outfits. Same reason why Jack Sparrow wears the same outfit all the time.

As I said, I'd be cool with mission armor for each squadmate, but only if they were unique to each character, and managed to tell about the wearer's identity. Otherwise, I'd very much prefer the current system.

This +1 million.

Aggreed. The ME1 armor types makes them look like random-marines-from-space #5.

[Rykoth]

IMO, the fact that they put sound in space is more jarring then worrying about ass shots or near nudity in a vacuum.

[sinosleep]

Valadras21 wrote...

The outfits never bothered me that much. I prefered it to the system of ME1, because in ME2, each character looks unique and has their iconic appearance, inestead of wearing whatever. The only way I'd support squadmates wearing armor, is if they managed to make each suit unique to the person wearing it.

Unique outfits are important. They tell a lot about the character. I was watching a making of video where one of the artists was talking about Jack's tattoos and how each individual one has something to do with the character. That's important to me. Covering that up with some random hardsuit seems like a disservice, both to the character and the player, from my point of view.

As another example, you'll always be able to instantly identify Garrus because of his signature blue armor and his visor. Same with Tali and her suit.

This is a philosophy that's been central to cinematic experiences for a long time. It would've been more practical for Han Solo to wear stormtrooper armor into a fight all the time, but he would've lost his identity that he had when he wore his casual outfits. Same reason why Jack Sparrow wears the same outfit all the time.

As I said, I'd be cool with mission armor for each squadmate, but only if they were unique to each character, and managed to tell about the wearer's identity. Otherwise, I'd very much prefer the current system.

THANK YOU! I've been saying the same thing since launch.

[Ulzeraj]

Rykoth wrote...

IMO, the fact that they put sound in space is more jarring then worrying about ass shots or near nudity in a vacuum.

There _is_ sound in space. The problem is that there isnt a medium dense enough for it to propagate.


I've already said it on the forum a dozen times: Hellooo... you're playing a game about people traveling the galaxy faster than the speed of light using biotic magic powers that do not make any sense! If the game were realistic it would be the most boring **** that ever existed. **** off and have fun.

Years ago I used to play a game for genesis about a dolphin traveling in time to fight aliens. I didnt cared how that didnt made sense at all. I just pressed B for thrust, saved my pod and had my fun.

Modifié par Ulzeraj, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:08 .

[ZachForrest]

As star wars so aptly demonstrates, sound in space is vital.

[Khayness]

Ulzeraj wrote...

Hellooo... you're playing a game about people traveling the galaxy faster than the speed of light using biotic magic powers that do not make any sense! If the game were realistic it would be the most boring **** that ever existed. **** off and have fun.

Who cares if it's not realistic, it's so impractical that it makes no sense (apart from the "aestethic" and artistic excuse), even in fiction.

[InvaderErl]

Valadras21 wrote...

The outfits never bothered me that much. I prefered it to the system of ME1, because in ME2, each character looks unique and has their iconic appearance, inestead of wearing whatever. The only way I'd support squadmates wearing armor, is if they managed to make each suit unique to the person wearing it.

Unique outfits are important. They tell a lot about the character. I was watching a making of video where one of the artists was talking about Jack's tattoos and how each individual one has something to do with the character. That's important to me. Covering that up with some random hardsuit seems like a disservice, both to the character and the player, from my point of view.

As another example, you'll always be able to instantly identify Garrus because of his signature blue armor and his visor. Same with Tali and her suit.

This is a philosophy that's been central to cinematic experiences for a long time. It would've been more practical for Han Solo to wear stormtrooper armor into a fight all the time, but he would've lost his identity that he had when he wore his casual outfits. Same reason why Jack Sparrow wears the same outfit all the time.

As I said, I'd be cool with mission armor for each squadmate, but only if they were unique to each character, and managed to tell about the wearer's identity. Otherwise, I'd very much prefer the current system.

[Lumikki]

Having sexy casual cloths is okey in my opinion. How ever, having them in combat situation isn't really that good. It's more realistic if people use right gear in right situation. So, I support situation based cloths.

[davidshooter]

For a game that is rated "mature" the sexual presentation in ME2 was very immature. I actually like sexually suggestive things in entertainment (when appropriate) but most things in this game left me feeling embarrassed to be playing it. I don't know if it is because most of the dev's are nerds in real life, or if they are just trying to pander to the immature, or something else all together, but the sexuality in ME2 was at the level of two 10 year old boys snickering in the corner because they just heard the word "boobies"

Modifié par davidshooter, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:28 .

[InvaderErl]

Oh yeah because ME1 NEVER


EVER

Ohwait








I would have grabbed the shot of the Consort walking up the stairs when it gives us a nice shot of her ass but alas Google failed me.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:28 .

[davidshooter]

Yup, Benezia was ridiculous too - weird looking rack to boot. The strip joint and the consort didn't bug me, Strip joints and hookers are what they are.  Had Samara been a hooker her outfit would have made sense.

Modifié par davidshooter, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:43 .

[Khayness]

InvaderErl wrote...

Oh yeah because ME1 NEVER


EVER

Ohwait

Strippers in the stripper club! And a High class Callgirl being seductive! Blasphemy! It made sense in context.

The Benezia one didn't however (there was some explanation about being *khm* respectable), but atleast she wasn't in zero/toxic atmosphere, and didn't go on a suicide mission (atleast didn't planned to)

Modifié par Khayness, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:59 .

[Lumikki]

Point was, the hypocritical attitude. The real difference between ME1 and ME2 is in squad members outfit system. Other ways both games was same (sexual cloths).

Modifié par Lumikki, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:42 .

[Babli]

Ah yes, unique personality is going to protect characters in space


At least 3 different, unique armors for every squadmate outside the Normandy would be nice. But another T&A armor and I´m done.

[InvaderErl]

davidshooter wrote...
 the sexuality in ME2 was at the level of two 10 year old boys snickering in the corner because they just heard the word "boobies"

Oh so when ME1 lets you oggle strippers and have meaningless sex with Asari hookers its in context. I'm not complaining about the presence or existence of those characters but the interactivity is clearly meant to titilliate.

Listen, I'm not saying ME2 is guiltless, I don't like the stripper oggling or Samara's cleavage or the DAT ASS shot but ME1 wasn't any more innocent in this regard, they both have moments where the sexuality is juvenile.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:45 .

[ZLurps]

imported_beer wrote...

Khayness wrote...
Considering men as a constantly horny, sex craving being is as offensive as objectifying women. That's why I hate blatant fanservice.

I apologize. It is not a personal belief that ALL men enjoy shots like that. The men was used in the context of straight men being more likely to enjoy lingering shots of an obviously beautiful woman than a straight woman. You know...rather than being confused by it. I liked Miranda, she actually turned out to be very sweet, but...first I was forced to speak dirty to Jacob, then I was forced to check out Miranda's butt...it was getting a bit confusing. It was like Bioware was messing with my mind!

My feeling is that stereotype where men turn to drooling idiots when ever see boobies or nice butt is kinda feeding itself. I think it may appeal especially to younger males who are still building their self image and boobies, oh yes, boobies who would not like boobies or butt is sort of way to make it clear you are a man. What is funny is that it might be as much or even more to show other men that I'm a man too rather than trying to appeal women.

My impression of Miranda is that sex is another weapon for her and I think that fits in
to her character very well. However I can  understand that women in general may not appreciate part where her butt is center of visual presentation because I would not appreciate part where say Zaeeds butt would be center of visual presentation.

I don't have anything against showing things like using sex appeal as a tool, or being just beautiful, there are beautiful and sexy people in real life too. That said, I think it's a thin line between convincing character and ridiculous paper doll that depreciates players.