176 réponses à ce sujet

[D.Kain]

So I was seeing a lot of arguments and basically 2 groups on the forums. Basically the talk is about females, because almost nobody has the problems with male armor/clothes. 

One group says that they want more sexy armor/clothes and want their female character to wear more revealing clothes. A lot of them like how Isabela, Morrigan, Bethany have cleavage and want more of that. Some of them also wanted sexy dress for Motb.

The other group want females to wear less revealing armors and hate the design of Isabela, Bethany etc. And don't ever want to see their heroine in a revealing clothes or dress. 

What I thought about is, what if there were some revealing armors in the game, but they were revealing for both genders equally? That way women wouldn't be the only ones wearing the ''chain bikini'' but it would just be that kind of armor. 

here is a random example from guild wars of the same armor for both genders: 






As you can see the armor is not practical as some would say, but it is revealing for both men and women alike, so people can't really complain that women are portrayed bad. 

Do you think that having these kind of armors in future DA games would solve the problem with people who want revealing armors and people who think it is offensive? 

Here is a poll.

Modifié par D.Kain, 26 novembre 2011 - 01:09 .

[bandfred]

As armor? Hell no.

As clothing? Things like the chasind robe are okay, if they are dressed in such a way due to culture and not to spew sex appeal for an external viewer (IE: men and women in the amazon wearing only loincloths). Chainmail bikinis should roast in hell for eternity, however.

Modifié par bandfred, 26 novembre 2011 - 01:05 .

[D.Kain]

bandfred wrote...

As armor? Hell no.

As clothing? I guess so.

Well yes I guess Dragon age always has everything covered if it's plate. I of course am talking more about clothes and leather armor.

[Eudaemonium]

I like how Isabela dresses, because it makes sense for Isabela to dress that way, just as it would make zero sense for Aveline to be wearing a chainmail bikini. I often err on the side of more-covered/practical. For example, I was overjoyed to see the female leather armor lacking that ridiculous open chest/neck area it had in DAO.

I am not against sexualised outfits, when they make sense for the character wearing them, or (if for the PC) if they are equally revealing for both male and female characters. I object to the over sexualisation of female characters simply *because*.

[Kail Ashton]

lol and the ren-fest rejects should be crawling out of the woodworks momentarily to go on bout how they're suddenly experts on the matter cause they watched "ye olde blacksmith" bob the janitor and bought a replica gauntlet

As for the topic, two things 1- the poll doesn't seem to exist & 2- as per all things in media they should be both apealing & attractive first & foremost, fopr every 1% ranting lunatic theres 99% of everyone else who either understands are is in denial over the fact pretty things are what the human species cares about.

yes your parents lied, yes having a good personality means nuth'n if you're ugly and yes dragon age origins is still one of the most goddamn ugly things ever spewed out this generation(salvaged soley by mods and the real reason bioware will never have a toolset for DA again) so yes making apealing & attractive gear is a better idea than making effective armor IN A VIDEOGAME CAUSE IT'S NOT REAL AND YOU CAN TAKE ARTISTIC LIBERTIES, WHY? CAUSE IT'S A VIDEO GAME!

[D.Kain]

Eudaemonium wrote...

I like how Isabela dresses, because it makes sense for Isabela to dress that way, just as it would make zero sense for Aveline to be wearing a chainmail bikini. I often err on the side of more-covered/practical. For example, I was overjoyed to see the female leather armor lacking that ridiculous open chest/neck area it had in DAO.

I am not against sexualised outfits, when they make sense for the character wearing them, or (if for the PC) if they are equally revealing for both male and female characters. I object to the over sexualisation of female characters simply *because*.

Yeah and that's why I am also asking about clothes/armors for the PC. the ones the player is going to wear. 

[Lynata]

I'd say it depends. I can see the Dalish potentially wearing armour like that (but much more dirty, simple, woodlike ... more realistic - in fact, see the leather armour from DA:O, I think that was perfect), but for other folk it really doesn't make much sense and would detract from the established gritty style of the setting. If I'd want to play some anime game where people run around half-naked I'd do that. Which isn't even meant to sound negative or condescending, as I enjoy doing so from time to time. But everything has its place, and for this it isn't Dragon Age. I wouldn't want laser guns in Thedas either, and I think those are cool, too.

In terms of clothing, I could see the Rivaini people wear some rather loose garments - think all those ~17th century pirate movies for comparison, or just look at Isabela (there will be more like her, men and women alike). Possibly the Tevinter as well (for some reason I always think of the Roman Empire there), and of course the various courtesans.

Modifié par Lynata, 26 novembre 2011 - 01:57 .

[mousestalker]

If it's armour, then it needs to protect. If it's clothing then it may serve other purposes. The 'armour' in the OP looks a bit too Rococo for my tastes although some may find it attractive.

I'd never wear such a thing. If I did, as sure as the sun rises tomorrow I'd need something on the top shelf, reach for it and stab myself with my own clothing. Not only is that potentially fatal, it's also embarrassing to an absurd level.

[Realmzmaster]

No, armor should be fitted to the individual and protect as much of the body as possible. It is nonsense that armor for men cover most if not all of the body and women wear chainmail bikinis. Chainmail bikinis and skirts magically protect exposed flesh of the women?

Isabela is a pirate. Any pirate caught in armor on sea would have a greater chance of being a dead pirate. Loose clothing also fits her fighting style. Isabela dress is flamboyant which fits her personality, but it could be too flamboyant. I will not knock the artist for his/her conception of Isabela but more clothes would not have hurt. As far as big breasted women they exist.

There is also the eye candy factor which is the only reason for chainmail bikinis and showing women with exposed flesh. It happens with the introduction of DA2 Bethany's breasts are actually bigger than in the game proper. It is juvenile humor at best insulting at its worst.

I really tire of the sexualization of women for the sake of it. Showing men the same way does not solve the problem it only adds to it.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 26 novembre 2011 - 01:58 .

[bEVEsthda]

Go away and do that to some other game franchise.

[tmp7704]

Courtesy of Nyoka from another thread (and since a picture is worth thousand words)



pretty much sums the concept up.

Modifié par tmp7704, 26 novembre 2011 - 02:01 .

[D.Kain]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Showing men the same way does not solve the problem it only adds to it.

Why? 

[frustratemyself]

Considering the glorified nipple shields masquerading as armour that we could end up with I would say no.

[bEVEsthda]

Yea, go do it to ME. It's the forum just next door. Bye.

[tmp7704]

D.Kain wrote...

Why? 

Because expanding a demeaning practice doesn't help to eradicate it -- by making it more widespread, it makes things worse.

As an analogy, the solution to slavery wasn't to allow everyone to become a slave regardless of race. It was to ban the practice.

[D.Kain]

tmp7704 wrote...

As an analogy, the solution to slavery wasn't to allow everyone to become a slave regardless of race. It was to ban the practice.

That wouldn't be a solution to slavery but that would make races equal. Revealing armors are slavery in the anology, the rant about gender equlity and women sexualization is the rights. So basically it would solve a different problem. 

[Realmzmaster]

D.Kain wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Showing men the same way does not solve the problem it only adds to it.

Why? 

 It does not change the fact that you still have the sexualization of women. You simply added the sexualization of men. You are trying to appease the women by saying here you have men who are half naked to look at while you men can look at the half naked ladies. The armor still does not protect the exposed flesh. The only purpose it serves is eye candy. There is already one thread complaining about missing bowstrings. We are going to add missing armor to the list.

Would you want to wear any of the armor above if someone was swinging a sword at you or hurling a fireball. What is that I smell burnt flesh? You are looking mighty toasty.

[tmp7704]

D.Kain wrote...

That wouldn't be a solution to slavery but that would make races equal.

Yes, while the ban also makes the races equal *and* solves the actual problem of slavery. Meaning one of these approaches is very clearly much better than the other -- as one of them helps one issue but at the cost of making the other much worse, while the other way removes both issues.

Modifié par tmp7704, 26 novembre 2011 - 02:19 .

[Bullets McDeath]

tmp7704 wrote...

Courtesy of Nyoka from another thread (and since a picture is worth thousand words)



pretty much sums the concept up.

If this is not the greatest thing I have ever seen in my life, it is without question the greatest thing I am looking at right now. And yes, it does far more to sum up the anti porno armor argument than any lengthy essay on the topic.

[D.Kain]

Realmzmaster wrote...

 It does not change the fact that you still have the sexualization of women. You simply added the sexualization of men. You are trying to appease the women by saying here you have men who are half naked to look at while you men can look at the half naked ladies. The armor still does not protect the exposed flesh. The only purpose it serves is eye candy. There is already one thread complaining about missing bowstrings. We are going to add missing armor to the list.

Would you want to wear any of the armor above if someone was swinging a sword at you or hurling a fireball. What is that I smell burnt flesh? You are looking mighty toasty.

Yes that is exactly what I am doing, trying to make both men and women happy with the eye candy. Since it is a fantasy game. But I don't want ALL armors to look like thta, just some, so that people would have choice. I just believe that you can't complain about oversexualized women anymore, only oversexualization in general, which a lot less people have problems with. 

[D.Kain]

tmp7704 wrote...

D.Kain wrote...

That wouldn't be a solution to slavery but that would make races equal.

Yes, while the ban also makes the races equal *and* solves the actual problem of slavery. Meaning one of these approaches is very clearly much better than the other -- as one of them helps one issue but at the cost of making the other much worse, while the other way removes both issues.

If you think that eye candy armors are as bad as slavery then I agree with you. 

I just don't see revealing armors in GENERAL as an issue, it is more about the rights.

[Realmzmaster]

D.Kain wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

As an analogy, the solution to slavery wasn't to allow everyone to become a slave regardless of race. It was to ban the practice.

That wouldn't be a solution to slavery but that would make races equal. Revealing armors are slavery in the anology, the rant about gender equlity and women sexualization is the rights. So basically it would solve a different problem. 

No, to have slavery someone must be the master. So by definition everyone cannot be a slave. The only way to solve slavery is to ban the practice making everyone equal. The same goes for sexualization of gender. Ban the practice. Sexualizing both genders does not solve the problem it simply continues it.

[D.Kain]

Realmzmaster wrote...

D.Kain wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

As an analogy, the solution to slavery wasn't to allow everyone to become a slave regardless of race. It was to ban the practice.

That wouldn't be a solution to slavery but that would make races equal. Revealing armors are slavery in the anology, the rant about gender equlity and women sexualization is the rights. So basically it would solve a different problem. 

No, to have slavery someone must be the master. So by definition everyone cannot be a slave. The only way to solve slavery is to ban the practice making everyone equal. The same goes for sexualization of gender. Ban the practice. Sexualizing both genders does not solve the problem it simply continues it.

Yeah look the above post.

[tmp7704]

D.Kain wrote...
If you think that eye candy armors are as bad as slavery then I agree with you. 

No, i don't think that. Although these practices do share common root when you think about it -- which is, to treat human beings as objects.

[RagingCyclone]

I say leave the armor practical and full coverage. If you like the skimpy stuff perhaps they can put that in an item dlc for those on consoles while pc users just have to wait a few hours for the modding community to make them...but for the actual game leave them out so those who do not want them do not have to have them. That's the simple solution.