1151 réponses à ce sujet

[morrie23]

Somebody wrote...
I think hes worried that ME3 will completely do away with the kind of stuff she wore in ME2, and replace it all with armor.

I for one, hope they do.

[Val Seleznyov]

Orkboy wrote...

Val Seleznyov wrote...

Somebody wrote...
Or maybe they are making this armor for a more practical reason.

There's no reason good enough.

OH FFS, you just can't get it into that head of yours can you?

So you don't want Mirandas new outfit.  Wether you purchase it or not is up to you.  If you don't like it... DON'T F***ING BUY IT!   It's not that hard to figure out.

Don't buy it and there you go, Miranda is still exactly the same.

Just because you're too stuck in your own tiny little - "I'm right and you're wrong no matter what!" - world, and you don't like something that a hell of a lot of other people do, is no excuse to start slagging off people that disagree with you.

Especially when this DLC is not compulsory and absolutley IN NO F***ING WAY changes the game that you currently have for your PC/Xbox.

I didn't "slag" anybody off. I simply commented on the lack of progressive attitudes towards women and sexuality prevailant in this discussion.

[Ieldra]

Oh my - the level of facepalm in this thread has skyrocketed since Val Seleznyov entered the fray.

Let me say this:
(1) Miranda's character is the same, regardless of what she's wearing. It can neither be damaged nor improved by the switch of outfits, though others' perception of her may change.
(2) Usually it is regarded as degrading to women if they wear outfits that look like they're flaunting their assets. Miranda's white outfit looks like that.
(3) If Miranda's default outfit looked classy, it would underscore her femme fatale image the game fails to convey. But it looks cheap, not classy.
(4) Both of Miranda's outfits fail to underscore the "badass operative" part of her character. While it is possible for a catsuit to convey that image, the game fails at it, possibly for technical reasons. The armor corrects that. Which means that yes, the armor does accentuate her character instead of detracting from it.
(5) Miranda is introduced as aloof, even abrasive when we meet her first. The armor underscores that image too, and also the "vulnerability under a hard shell" image we get of her in her romance.

So, no, that new armor doesn't only look very good, it also underscores her character in several ways the white outfit doesn't. You can have the sexy outfits on the ship and the armor on missions, which is both the practical thing to do - btw, Miranda is a pragmatic woman - and gets you to see two major aspects of her character in front of your eyes.

If anyone thinks that's not true, please tell me *exactly* why you think so, and without using loaded phrases like "loss of femininity", because that can mean anything and nothing. My concept of feminity includes the ability to wear protective outfits and be badass operatives. Tell me why it shouldn't. I'd trust my women to take their armor off when they want to be more sexy - or let me peel it off them

Modifié par Ieldra2, 02 février 2011 - 06:59 .

[Crackseed]

While I have no issue with Miranda's current armors aside from the heels being a bit...silly, I do applaud and want to encourage Bioware to make ME3 offer more variety for armoring/gearing our squad. I understand each character should have personality and I think that personality can be given by allowing more customization of armor choices. Player 1 uses the catsuit option. Player goes with something more armored like what AAP2 is offering. This is a win-win.

It's just sad that we as fans can't at least debate these things w/o getting into senseless spats >_

Thus - ME3: Come on Bioware, more armor and weapon options for Shep AND squad! \\o/ Also - please, helmet toggle >.>

Modifié par crackseed, 02 février 2011 - 07:04 .

[Gundar3]

So far I agree with Val... Even if Hes trolling. I've always found it amusing how angry people get when it comes to stylized action. Yes its stylized... And your angry by this because its not "real"? Bioware has taken the art direction in their own way. The clothing that the characters wear is part of their personality, which Bioware takes great pride in creating for their characters. No one says you have to like the art direction (personally I hate Jack), but its the path Bioware has chosen. Try not to view the cloths as "catering" to certain populations - instead view it as art and you may find additional depth to many things about the character. Ofcourse this is all just my opinion for what its worth.

[Tasker]

Val Seleznyov wrote...
Yes. This is one of my big concerns.

While i'm not going to actively encourage it, if they decided to give all squadmates a special, fully sealed outfit to wear only in hazardous environments, i wouldn't mind. But for regular combat, the things that Samara, Thane and Miranda are currently wearing are great, and simply giving everybody armour in ME3 would be a massive step backwards.

A step backward?  Excuse me?

ME2 is the step backwards. Giving everyone armour would be a step toward getting the ME franchise back on track.

[_Somebody]

I have to agree that each of the different clothing that our team members wore made them more unique. If everyone in ME3 did wear the same generic phoenix armor or something, that would take away a bit of their individuality. I just want it to be a bit more realistic, especially in hazardous environments. 

[Tasker]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Oh my - the level of facepalm in this thread has skyrocketed since Val Seleznyov entered the fray.

Let me say this:
(1) Miranda's character is the same, regardless of what she's wearing. It can neither be damaged nor improved by the switch of outfits, though others' perception of her may change.
(2) Usually it is regarded as degrading to women if they wear outfits that look like they're flaunting their assets. Miranda's white outfit looks like that.
(3) If Miranda's default outfit looked classy, it would underscore her femme fatale image the game fails to convey. But it looks cheap, not classy.
(4) Both of Miranda's outfits fail to underscore the "badass operative" part of her character. While it is possible for a catsuit to convey that image, the game fails at it, possibly for technical reasons. The armor corrects that. Which means that yes, the armor does accentuate her character instead of detracting from it.
(5) Miranda is introduced as aloof, even abrasive when we meet her first. The armor underscores that image too, and also the "vulnerability under a hard shell" image we get of her in her romance.

So, no, that new armor doesn't only look very good, it also underscores her character in several ways the white outfit doesn't. You can have the sexy outfits on the ship and the armor on missions, which is both the practical thing to do - btw, Miranda is a pragmatic woman - and gets you to see two major aspects of her character in front of your eyes.

If anyone thinks that's not true, please tell me *exactly* why you think so, and without using loaded phrases like "loss of femininity", because that can mean anything and nothing. My concept of feminity includes the ability to wear protective outfits and be badass operatives. Tell me why it shouldn't. I'd trust my women to take their armor off when they want to be more sexy - or let me peel it off them

Very well put. I agree on all counts.

[Johato]

Not sure if anyone posted this yet but I found this on the Mass effect site.
"The Alternate Appearance Pack features new outfits for your favorite squad members, including Tali, Miranda, and Grunt." Scroll down tell you see the Alternate appearance Pack 2 actually shows a picture of what the Appearance looks like.
http://masseffect.bi...e.com/info/dlc/

[Elyvern]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Oh my - the level of facepalm in this thread has skyrocketed since Val Seleznyov entered the fray.

Let me say this:
(1) Miranda's character is the same, regardless of what she's wearing. It can neither be damaged nor improved by the switch of outfits, though others' perception of her may change.
(2) Usually it is regarded as degrading to women if they wear outfits that look like they're flaunting their assets. Miranda's white outfit looks like that.
(3) If Miranda's default outfit looked classy, it would underscore her femme fatale image the game fails to convey. But it looks cheap, not classy.
(4) Both of Miranda's outfits fail to underscore the "badass operative" part of her character. While it is possible for a catsuit to convey that image, the game fails at it, possibly for technical reasons. The armor corrects that. Which means that yes, the armor does accentuate her character instead of detracting from it.
(5) Miranda is introduced as aloof, even abrasive when we meet her first. The armor underscores that image too, and also the "vulnerability under a hard shell" image we get of her in her romance.

So, no, that new armor doesn't only look very good, it also underscores her character in several ways the white outfit doesn't. You can have the sexy outfits on the ship and the armor on missions, which is both the practical thing to do - btw, Miranda is a pragmatic woman - and gets you to see two major aspects of her character in front of your eyes.

If anyone thinks that's not true, please tell me *exactly* why you think so, and without using loaded phrases like "loss of femininity", because that can mean anything and nothing. My concept of feminity includes the ability to wear protective outfits and be badass operatives. Tell me why it shouldn't. I'd trust my women to take their armor off when they want to be more sexy - or let me peel it off them

^ This bloody deserves a quote for truth.

[SpiderCygnus]

Those new armors look very good.

[Val Seleznyov]

In Call of Duty 4, SSGT Griggs never wears a helmet. He's the only guy in the American levels that doesn't. Do you think this says anything about him?

Miranda wearing heels demonstrates just how confident in herself she is, in addition to highlighting just how seriously she takes her appearance. To be of the mind that you're going to wear, or not wear, something that will slightly impair your ability on the battleground is a personality trait in and of itself.

You either missed things, or ignored them, with your overly simplistic analysis.

Oh, and i loved this gem.

Ieldra2 wrote...

I'd trust my women to take their armor off when they want to be more sexy - or let me peel it off them

You'd trust "your women", hey? Very progressive.

Modifié par Val Seleznyov, 02 février 2011 - 07:24 .

[Babli]

This thread is doomed.

[Ieldra]

Trust you, Val, to ignore everything I said except the one thing that could be taken the wrong way taken out of context. Fear to take my challenge and explain yourself, eh?

[JKoopman]

Val is either a troll or he's insane. Either way, arguing with him is a waste of everyone's time.

He thinks a female soldier putting on stripper boots and exposing her chest before running into a combat situation shows "character" (which is nonsense unless her character is that of an incompetent imbecile), that it's impossible to be "tough and feminine" unless you're sticking your ass out in skin-tight spandex and showing your goods and that giving players the option of putting armor on Miranda is somehow degrading and can be compared to forcing women to wear hijabs. How do you have a rational argument with that?

Modifié par JKoopman, 02 février 2011 - 07:45 .

[cachx]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Trust you, Val, to ignore everything I said except the one thing that could be taken the wrong way taken out of context. Fear to take my challenge and explain yourself, eh?

I thought that was standard procedure for forum discussions, gets done to me all the time .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Oh my - the level of facepalm in this thread has skyrocketed since Val Seleznyov entered the fray.

Let me say this:
(1) Miranda's character is the same, regardless of what she's wearing. It can neither be damaged nor improved by the switch of outfits, though others' perception of her may change.
(2) Usually it is regarded as degrading to women if they wear outfits that look like they're flaunting their assets. Miranda's white outfit looks like that.
(3) If Miranda's default outfit looked classy, it would underscore her femme fatale image the game fails to convey. But it looks cheap, not classy.
(4) Both of Miranda's outfits fail to underscore the "badass operative" part of her character. While it is possible for a catsuit to convey that image, the game fails at it, possibly for technical reasons. The armor corrects that. Which means that yes, the armor does accentuate her character instead of detracting from it.
(5) Miranda is introduced as aloof, even abrasive when we meet her first. The armor underscores that image too, and also the "vulnerability under a hard shell" image we get of her in her romance.

So, no, that new armor doesn't only look very good, it also underscores her character in several ways the white outfit doesn't. You can have the sexy outfits on the ship and the armor on missions, which is both the practical thing to do - btw, Miranda is a pragmatic woman - and gets you to see two major aspects of her character in front of your eyes.

If anyone thinks that's not true, please tell me *exactly* why you think so, and without using loaded phrases like "loss of femininity", because that can mean anything and nothing. My concept of feminity includes the ability to wear protective outfits and be badass operatives. Tell me why it shouldn't. I'd trust my women to take their armor off when they want to be more sexy - or let me peel it off them

This.

/thread

[Val Seleznyov]

JKoopman wrote...

Val is either a troll or he's insane. Either way, arguing with him is a waste of everyone's time.

He thinks a female soldier putting on stripper boots and exposing her chest before running into a combat situation shows "character" (which is nonsense unless her character is that of an incompetent imbecile), that it's impossible to be "tough and feminine" unless you're sticking your ass out in skin-tight spandex and showing your goods and that giving players the option of putting armor on Miranda is somehow degrading and can be compared to forcing women to wear hijabs. How do you have a rational argument with that?

You sacrifice any perceived high-ground when you make such ridiculous overstatements.

Nobodies chest is exposed, and the way you describe her footwear as "stripper boots" is odd. Many women wear high heels... do you think of all women that enjoy dressing up as strippers?

If you're going to call me insane, you should try harder to hide your obvious deep seeded psychological issues.

[Ieldra]

JKoopman wrote...
Val is either a troll or he's insane. Either way, arguing with him is a waste of everyone's time.

He thinks a female soldier putting on stripper boots and exposing her chest before running into a combat situation shows "character" (which is nonsense unless her character is that of an incompetent imbecile), that it's impossible to be "tough and feminine" unless you're sticking your ass out in skin-tight spandex and showing your goods and that giving players the option of putting armor on Miranda is somehow degrading and can be compared to forcing women to wear hijabs. How do you have a rational argument with that?

You have a point. I won't let anyone taint my delight in Miranda's new armor. I didn't complain a great lot about the old outfits, I only notice how much they bothered me on missions now that I have an alternative.

[JamieCOTC]

The squademates in ME2 are all designed to be iconic, "easily recognizable." It's a marketing ploy and although there is no rule book which says thought can't be involved in creating a marketing ploy it is what it is. BW sacrificed realism for style on all the characters, not just Miranda. I think the armor is a step in the right direction.

[LPPrince]

I'm still waiting on everyone to agree to disagree so this thread can get back on topic.

All these accusations, name-calling, and general drivel is starting to peeve me, and I haven't even been part of this thread for quite a few pages.

But reading all of it made me facepalm at some folks, applaud others, and make me wonder how some people could possibly feel the way they do.

But instead of telling any of you that I facepalmed at you or applauded you, I'm going to remain silent on that part. Let your mind wander.

As long as this thread gets back on topic and this needless nasty debate gets ENDED.

There's no need to be venomous to others, and there is DEFINITELY no need to put yourself on a high horse.

If you're going to be douchey, learn when to put it aside. Otherwise, THIS happens.

Now then, can we get back to having a positive conversation with contradictory opinions that doesn't delve into the depths of hell?

Thank you, Gracias, Grazie.

Modifié par LPPrince, 02 février 2011 - 08:07 .

[Chris Priestly]

Please get this thread back on topic of the armors in AAP2. If you want to discuss otehr topics, I invite you to take your discussion to another forum for such discussion.

[Babli]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Please get this thread back on topic of the armors in AAP2. If you want to discuss otehr topics, I invite you to take your discussion to another forum for such discussion.

So is Miranda wearing also helmet now?
3rd time I am asking you btw xD

[LPPrince]

I'll take the initiative.

What's with the blue lights on the lower half of Tali's armor?

Will those be more noticeable in game? Will they cover her top half as well?

What exactly are those, anyway? Purpose?

Modifié par LPPrince, 02 février 2011 - 08:10 .

[Ieldra]

OK, enough about Miranda.



Does anyone else think that Grunt's visor looks weird?