807 réponses à ce sujet

[Clonedzero]

for the most part i dont mind the outfits, it was really only a problem in the space and hostile atmosphere areas where they had the tiny plastic face masks. in combat with shields big body armor isn't such a huge deal so i never bothered me much. her catsuit thing gave her the whole femme fatale vibe. she obviously used her looks as a weapon when she could, so she dressed accordingly for that. but complaining about her not wearing armor is a bit silly when tons of characters dont in ME2.

miranda, mordin, thane, samara, kasumi, jacob, tali all don't really wear armor in combat.

personally i liked miranda (personality-wise) far more than jack or ashley. ashley was alright nothing against her, and jack does improve alot if you actually romance her but to get to that point you have to beat through so much hostile attitude that it makes the entire thing completely unrealistic. miranda however has a nice believable character arch where she opens up to you and questions her loyalties. really nice.

[Ananka]

Too long thread for me to read all replies...but yes, it is pretty silly that Miranda is doing her battles in high heels and a catsuit so tight you can see her buttcrack.
And I do wonder what kind of biotic power keeps jack's strap-and-bottlecapsule bra and samara's half-boob cleavage in place while they're running around in battle.

"I was just waiting for you to finish getting dressed. Or does Cerberus really let you ***** around in that outfit?" (may be slightly paraphrased) was a pretty fitting comment, imo.

I'm not raging about it, but it does make me pretty tired that video game women so often are designed to show their boobs just to please the younger male audience.

Modifié par Annaka, 23 avril 2011 - 05:39 .

[gosimmons]

GodWood wrote...
I personally have nothing against sexual content when it's appropriate.

Strip Club/Brothel/Sex scene = Appropriate
Combat/hostile environment etc = Not Appropriate

Honestly I find it ridiculous that armour was thrown away for sexed up catsuits and yet the actual sex scenes were toned down to nothing but awkward dry-humping.

Thank you, very well put.

Clonedzero wrote...
her catsuit thing gave her the whole femme fatale vibe. she obviously used her looks as a weapon when she could, so she dressed accordingly for that. but complaining about her not wearing armor is a bit silly when tons of characters dont in ME2.

I really never got the, she's using her appearance as a weapon, argument. Most the time we're fighting robots and  mindless drones, do you think any of them are going to fall for seduction? 

Modifié par gosimmons, 23 avril 2011 - 05:49 .

[Siansonea]

I tend to agree with the OP for the most part. As a mature woman, I appreciate fully realized female characters with a low Pander Index. But it's obvious BioWare is very much aware of and catering to the "PG-13" players who actually can't buy the game themselves. That's a shame, I could have done with significantly less Tali D'Awwwwness in ME2, but that's neither here nor there.

I didn't mind Miranda's outfit for aboard the Normandy or in normal environments when she's not expecting to be in combat, like walking around on the Citadel. When you talk to Miranda, you get the impression that she designed the suit herself, to show off her assets and put anyone she's negotiating with off balance. Miranda uses every weapon in her arsenal to gain an advantage. But in a hostile environment like vacuum or toxic atmosphere, she should be in a hardsuit, period. Of course, such a hardsuit would still be form-fitting, it makes the most sense that such suits would conform to the body very closely, for range of motion, etc. Breather masks are just silly.

For Samara, the same combat situation applies, but I didn't mind her outfit because she's an older asari. The asari have roamed the galaxy for centuries before humans came along, and it's really only humans that would be affected by "cleavage". Being a one-gendered species, the asari shouldn't place too much emphasis on cleavage or skin showing in general, especially since their form of sex isn't primarily physical, but biotic. It makes sense that younger asari would be more aware of the impact that cleavage has on humans, but for matriarchs like Samara and Benezia, humans are the new kid on the block, and it probably doesn't cross their mind that their outfits are causing distraction among human males. Of course female quarians also have breasts, but quarians aren't a major presence in Citadel space, where the asari are primarily active.

I like Jack's look for aboard ship, but the girl isn't even wearing a SHIRT in hard vacuum? Nobody's biotic barrier is THAT good. I hope if she is "matured" in ME3, she isn't turned into a Stepford Bond Girl. If she grows her hair out a bit, in a spiky short style, and wears a little more clothing aboard ship, I would find that reasonable. But if she's suddenly tat-free and wearing pearls and a prom dress, that's going to be a trifle unrealistic.

I don't mind a character being overtly sexual if it makes sense for the character, like asari strippers and whatnot, and Morinth (who should have been WAY more underdressed). Or the ever-manipulative Miranda. Jack is certainly loose with her sexuality, but she's not All About Sex, nor do I think she uses her sexuality as an asset or a tool in any way, she's just not manipulative. Liara is never going to be a cheesecake asari, that's just not who she is. Neither will Samara or Aria.

I really hope Ash maintains the core of her character in ME3, I'm actually not discouraged by the GameInformer article, because she is still a woman and having a softer hairstyle doesn't mean she's suddenly going to be a bimbo. The outfit she's wearing in the photo is form-fitting, sure, but it still looks like a practical garment for aboard ship, or with a helmet for hostile atmosphere and vacuum.

BioWare has been good about keeping the males to an appropriate level of physical attractiveness without going overboard, though it would be interesting to have a male equivalent of Miranda who uses his sexuality as a tactical advantage in 'social combat'. Or male strippers in clubs on Omega and the Citadel. But if Kaidan or Jacob started bopping around in assless chaps and a mesh wife-beater, I would facepalm.

[LyndseyCousland]

I guess I'm far too much of a horndog and far too fond of boobies to have actually noticed some of this...

I would write a big huge response but I'm feeling a bit tense at the moment.
I more or less agree with the OP.

[HTTP 404]

I agree with the OP, but sex sells and it works for adult males as well as teenage males.  I just think bioware is better than that because they are very capable of making a good story with good gameplay and that in itself should be their selling point, not boobies.


its not so much the sexy clothing squadmates wear as it is where is the practicality of wearing them in combat?  why is Miranda wearing high heels to combat?  why are there so many squadmates wearing clothes to combat? makes me feel like my shepard is a wimp for wearing armor.  Thats why I love to take squadmates who wear armor so that it doesn't look weird.  Squadmates like Zaeed, Garrus, and Grunt are nice to have because we are all wearing armor and are taking hits.  Cosmetic appearances bother me when practicality is thrown out the window so in this case sexy clothing in combat also bothers me as well.


I am however for sexy go go dancers in nightclubs and sexy love scenes...bring em on. 

Modifié par HTTP 404, 23 avril 2011 - 06:45 .

[RE0305]

I agree with the OP.

However i think the problem is not that the game is too sexy, but what is perceived as sexy by the developers.

[Raizo]

gosimmons wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
her catsuit thing gave her the whole femme fatale vibe. she obviously used her looks as a weapon when she could, so she dressed accordingly for that. but complaining about her not wearing armor is a bit silly when tons of characters dont in ME2.

I really never got the, she's using her appearance as a weapon, argument. Most the time we're fighting robots and  mindless drones, do you think any of them are going to fall for seduction? 

A fair enough point. Yes, she doesn't use her sexuality as a weapon during ME2 but that doesn't mean she hasn't used it all before in her life. I imagine that being a very attractive woman has helped her career alot. I also imagine that she has come up alot of people during her life that can't look past the looks and as such they might underestimate her inteligence, her comabt capabilities or the strength of her personality  and her determination. You're alot more likely to be threatened by someone dressed from head to toe in combat armour than a hot chick in a skin tight cat suit, it's just a fact.

That's not to say that I don't understand alot of the criticism Miranda's atire recieved in ME2. I've done 3 complete playthroughs on the 360 and 1 on the PS3 since ME2 first became available last year and it wasn't untill last week
that I realised just how many shots of Miranda's ass there are ( funny how I never noticed before ), after a while I started to feel very uncomfortabe  just having it shoved in my face all the time. Then there is the obvious arguement about those stupid breathing masks that I loath ( that's not proper atire in Sapce ). I hope she is dressed more apropriatly in ME3. She can wear waht she wants on the Normandy although I would like it to sexy and yet still tasteful ( no more ass cheek fan service or ****** ) since I do feel that Miranda's sexuality is a large part of who she is, the chacter is vain enough ( without being narcissistic ) to know she is gorgeous and to want others to notice her beauty as well.

[Eradyn]

I don't care what any of the squad wears (or doesn't wear) on the Normandy. But in battle or in hostile environments, I want to see some ****ing hardsuits and helmets, not breather masks and spandex.

I do agree at not oversexualizing female characters, particularly proportions...as long as they keep femShep "normal," I won't be too put out. I do generally frown at bowling-ball breasts and design choices that serve only to use women as eye candy.

Modifié par Eradyn, 23 avril 2011 - 07:30 .

[gosimmons]

Raizo wrote...

A fair enough point. Yes, she doesn't use her sexuality as a weapon during ME2 but that doesn't mean she hasn't used it all before in her life. I imagine that being a very attractive woman has helped her career alot. I also imagine that she has come up alot of people during her life that can't look past the looks and as such they might underestimate her inteligence, her comabt capabilities or the strength of her personality  and her determination. You're alot more likely to be threatened by someone dressed from head to toe in combat armour than a hot chick in a skin tight cat suit, it's just a fact.

But then why  further that?  She's already in a high ranking position. If she hopes people can look at her skills/intelligence and not just her appearance, you'd think practical attire would be a must. And for a mission like this, I'd have thought an intelligent operative would aim for formal/realism before risking themselves in battle for a fashion statement.

I hope she is dressed more apropriatly in ME3. She can wear waht she wants on the Normandy although I would like it to sexy and yet still tasteful ( no more ass cheek fan service or ****** ) since I do feel that Miranda's sexuality is a large part of who she is, the chacter is vain enough ( without being narcissistic ) to know she is gorgeous and to want others to notice her beauty as well.

Yeah, who's to say the more armored outfits have to look bad? I thought Liara had a good light plating/scientist type look going for her. So It'd be nice to see characters like Miranda and Samara come back with their own type of light armor during combat (maybe with more customization). Heck you could see it as a sign of maturing for someone like Jack.

[InvincibleHero]

Wow. I love how people think they have a right to direct BW as to how to portray their fictional characters in their fictional universe with a fictional codex and science created by you guessed it BW. They decided to not armor certain characters and in fact the armor in game (ME2) provides no protection anyway. It just wouldn't against the weapons used against Shepard anyway. (Geth rocket launcher sandwich anyone?) The KB and medi-gel is how they survive not 1 cm of ceramic material. We forumites are likely no more than .5% of the people that bought ME2 and that means few complaints if they don't even care enough to register to vent their wrath as many here seem wont to do. A majority here still means diddly.

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

5. They provide lots of cover you know for not getting shot. That is the whole idea in the first place but guess what the game is so easy guns blazing Shep (on insanityis exception) is almost invincible once of a certain level.

Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

[Dave666]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Wow. I love how people think they have a right to direct BW as to how to portray their fictional characters in their fictional universe with a fictional codex and science created by you guessed it BW. They decided to not armor certain characters and in fact the armor in game (ME2) provides no protection anyway. It just wouldn't against the weapons used against Shepard anyway. (Geth rocket launcher sandwich anyone?) The KB and medi-gel is how they survive not 1 cm of ceramic material. We forumites are likely no more than .5% of the people that bought ME2 and that means few complaints if they don't even care enough to register to vent their wrath as many here seem wont to do. A majority here still means diddly.

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

5. They provide lots of cover you know for not getting shot. That is the whole idea in the first place but guess what the game is so easy guns blazing Shep (on insanityis exception) is almost invincible once of a certain level.

Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

You mean the lore written by Bioware that says that Shields, Armour and Barriers block Biotic and Tech powers?  Oh...wait...they didn't write that, but they still did it.

[InvincibleHero]

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Wow. I love how people think they have a right to direct BW as to how to portray their fictional characters in their fictional universe with a fictional codex and science created by you guessed it BW. They decided to not armor certain characters and in fact the armor in game (ME2) provides no protection anyway. It just wouldn't against the weapons used against Shepard anyway. (Geth rocket launcher sandwich anyone?) The KB and medi-gel is how they survive not 1 cm of ceramic material. We forumites are likely no more than .5% of the people that bought ME2 and that means few complaints if they don't even care enough to register to vent their wrath as many here seem wont to do. A majority here still means diddly.

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

5. They provide lots of cover you know for not getting shot. That is the whole idea in the first place but guess what the game is so easy guns blazing Shep (on insanityis exception) is almost invincible once of a certain level.

Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

You mean the lore written by Bioware that says that Shields, Armour and Barriers block Biotic and Tech powers?  Oh...wait...they didn't write that, but they still did it.

Multiple people wrote the codex entries. There are more inconsistancies than Zulu has theories.  It is unlikely Drew OK'd it all as lead writer/creator.

In his novels the armor was basically squat good for 1 or 2 hits. How many does armor in ME1 and 2 take? It never needs repaired and never has down time. If you want realism accept it warts and all. So take your 1 to 2 hits and have no armor for the rest of the mission. LOL.

Cutscenes show it as ineffectual the Vido one wasn't the only instance. A few shots from Kolyat taking down heavily armored Krogans is another. The kinetic barrier does the work. The armor just looks cool and shiny.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 24 avril 2011 - 01:23 .

[Dave666]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Wow. I love how people think they have a right to direct BW as to how to portray their fictional characters in their fictional universe with a fictional codex and science created by you guessed it BW. They decided to not armor certain characters and in fact the armor in game (ME2) provides no protection anyway. It just wouldn't against the weapons used against Shepard anyway. (Geth rocket launcher sandwich anyone?) The KB and medi-gel is how they survive not 1 cm of ceramic material. We forumites are likely no more than .5% of the people that bought ME2 and that means few complaints if they don't even care enough to register to vent their wrath as many here seem wont to do. A majority here still means diddly.

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

5. They provide lots of cover you know for not getting shot. That is the whole idea in the first place but guess what the game is so easy guns blazing Shep (on insanityis exception) is almost invincible once of a certain level.

Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

You mean the lore written by Bioware that says that Shields, Armour and Barriers block Biotic and Tech powers?  Oh...wait...they didn't write that, but they still did it.

Multiple people wrote the codex entries. It is unlikely Drew OK'd it all as lead writer/creator. In his novels the armor was basically squat good for 1 or 2 hits. How many does armor in ME1 and 2 take? It never needs repaired and never has down time. If you want realism accept it warts and all. So take your 1 to 2 hits and have no armor for the rest of the mission. LOL.

In an age where Medigel, Omnigel and Omnitools which can synthesize items on the field exist you seriously believe that Armour couldn't be repaired?

[InvincibleHero]

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Wow. I love how people think they have a right to direct BW as to how to portray their fictional characters in their fictional universe with a fictional codex and science created by you guessed it BW. They decided to not armor certain characters and in fact the armor in game (ME2) provides no protection anyway. It just wouldn't against the weapons used against Shepard anyway. (Geth rocket launcher sandwich anyone?) The KB and medi-gel is how they survive not 1 cm of ceramic material. We forumites are likely no more than .5% of the people that bought ME2 and that means few complaints if they don't even care enough to register to vent their wrath as many here seem wont to do. A majority here still means diddly.

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

5. They provide lots of cover you know for not getting shot. That is the whole idea in the first place but guess what the game is so easy guns blazing Shep (on insanityis exception) is almost invincible once of a certain level.

Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

You mean the lore written by Bioware that says that Shields, Armour and Barriers block Biotic and Tech powers?  Oh...wait...they didn't write that, but they still did it.

Multiple people wrote the codex entries. It is unlikely Drew OK'd it all as lead writer/creator. In his novels the armor was basically squat good for 1 or 2 hits. How many does armor in ME1 and 2 take? It never needs repaired and never has down time. If you want realism accept it warts and all. So take your 1 to 2 hits and have no armor for the rest of the mission. LOL.

In an age where Medigel, Omnigel and Omnitools which can synthesize items on the field exist you seriously believe that Armour couldn't be repaired?

Not instantaneously and certainly not any good when the armor is breached. Maybe after the fight, but then where are you going to store all this magical omni-gel? I think they deep sixed it because it was even more far-fetched than eezo. Would it really be able to become any material? LOL. Yet people will believe in omni-gel yet think hey we need armor or it's not believable BW.

Everything in the game needs a high level of suspension of disbelief that not for 1 second do I think I am not playing a game on my monitor.

[shinobi602]

Lol, this is funny.

Out of the hundreds of female NPCs in Bioware games, only a handful are actually well endowed and show it off. OH NO!!! Never understand why some people choose to focus on those few who wear tight clothes or have large breasts, and completely ignore the hundreds of other female NPCs who don't.

Sorry Bioware, but women with big boobs and butts don't exist in my world! (sarcasm)

Modifié par shinobi602, 24 avril 2011 - 01:42 .

[Urdnot Orrad]

shinobi602 wrote...

Lol, this is funny.

Out of the hundreds of female NPCs in Bioware games, only a handful are actually well endowed and show it off. OH NO!!! Never understand why some people choose to focus on those few who wear tight clothes or have large breasts, and completely ignore the hundreds of other female NPCs who don't.

Sorry Bioware, but women with big boobs and butts don't exist in my world.

Then you, sir, live in a sad, sad world. XD

Also, I agree with InvincibleHero here.

[Bluko]

GodWood wrote...

Sphynx118 wrote...
QFT.
Dont get rid of the extremes if they fill an actual purpose.
Go play in a monastery if you cant handle sexualized content.

I personally have nothing against sexual content when it's appropriate.

Strip Club/Brothel/Sex scene = Appropriate
Combat/hostile environment etc = Not Appropriate

Honestly I find it ridiculous that armour was thrown away for sexed up catsuits and yet the actual sex scenes were toned down to nothing but awkward dry-humping.

This is dead on.

[Iakus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

1. Garrus has armor with a bigger hole in it than Samara's yet that is OK.

Actually, no, that was annoying too.

2. Armor should be a tradeoff in speed and that would mean you get hit more. Having no armor has advantages as well.

I'd argue light armor may have advantages over heavy armor, but yes, I'd be willing to live with such tradeoffs.  Customization is a good thing

3. ME 2 is apparently outselling ME1 so they did something right. It meant we got ME3. If they have to pander a bit to the majority of game buyers then so be it.

And it's all because of...stripper outfits?

Dang, how did KOTOR sell any copies at all?

4. If something offends you that much then exercise your right to not buy the game. You are not the creator so stop acting like you are. You'll be happier for it. If I am looking for gloves and the store happens to not have the exact color I want I don't rant they should have it my way. I buy what they have or have nothing to show for it. You can't always get exactly what you want. The demands of this forum makes me happy this is how the universe operates.

Or we could, you know, let it be known to the developers that this was one aspect of the game we didn't care for, and would it be possible to tone it down a bit next time, pretty please?

 
Make your own epic space RPG with fully armored squadmates if it bothers you that much.

See above answer

[Dracotamer]

I agree with OP. Too many companies now a days exaggerate the female body. I'd honestly rather have more realistic figures then porn star bodies.

[Iakus]

Clonedzero wrote...

for the most part i dont mind the outfits, it was really only a problem in the space and hostile atmosphere areas where they had the tiny plastic face masks. in combat with shields big body armor isn't such a huge deal so i never bothered me much. her catsuit thing gave her the whole femme fatale vibe. she obviously used her looks as a weapon when she could, so she dressed accordingly for that. but complaining about her not wearing armor is a bit silly when tons of characters dont in ME2.
.

The problem is that Miranda doens't act at all like a femme fatale save perhaps in the literal translation.  A femme fatale is a seductress, a con artist, a trickster.  She uses her beauty, brains and charm to coerce people into acting against their own best interests. 

DOn't get me wrong, this isn't a knock on the Miranda character.  She is strong, decisive, dedicated to her causes.  But she is not subtle.  Her weapons are biotics and pistols.  She is never shown using distraction or seduction as a weapon.  In portrayal, she's less a femme fatale and more a Bond Girl, really. 

[shinobi602]

Dracotamer wrote...

I agree with OP. Too many companies now a days exaggerate the female body. I'd honestly rather have more realistic figures then porn star bodies.

During my 23 years of living on this Earth, I can personally say that I've seen almost as many voluptuosly curved, big-breasted women as I have "realistic" figures, which I presume you mean more petite in figure.

I don't get this. Why do so many here act like women with larger breasts or bigger behinds are some kind of rarity in the world?

[Saphara]

shinobi602 wrote...

Dracotamer wrote...

I agree with OP. Too many companies now a days exaggerate the female body. I'd honestly rather have more realistic figures then porn star bodies.

During my 23 years of living on this Earth, I can personally say that I've seen almost as many voluptuosly curved, big-breasted women as I have "realistic" figures, which I presume you mean more petite in figure.

I don't get this. Why do so many here act like women with larger breasts or bigger behinds are some kind of rarity in the world?

I dont know about you, but by "realistic" i believe he means realisticly proportioned. You're not going to see a naturally skinny girl with huge boobs and butts unless they're plastic.

I have no problem with curvy girls in games, as i am one of them, but i do have issues with extremely disproportionate depictions of women and excessive use of butt shots (and yes, this includes Jacob).