176 réponses à ce sujet

[Lynata]

Rojahar wrote...

*SNIP*

Hear, hear. Society has adopted a very weird and hypocritical approach to the issue of "naked skin" - shunning it in public and adoring it in private, plus the whole gender-based differences in perception and approach that have been mentioned here. It's almost like civilization as a whole desperately needs a couple therapy sessions...

Everything 's situational. I could buy the whole idea of sexualized armour. Even belly-free armour. It just has to fit to the respective culture and/or the role played by whoever wears it. Nipple armour? Officers in the Roman Legion had that! The Romans also had volunteer female gladiators who fought barechested (but ironically with arm and leg protectors), and generally weren't as "uptight" as we are today. It simply was a time before what I think was largely religious indoctrination forced the whole "naked skin = temptation = evil" thing on us.

Still, at the end, Dragon Age is not the right setting for such armour, at least from what I've seen so far from the setting. As I said, I'd like to see the belly-free leather armour from DA:O return for the Dalish, but not for normal civilized humans. Perhaps Avvar females could wear something barbaric like, for example, the Picts from the King Arthur movie. Or not wear anything on the chest at all, depending on whether Bioware would dare to show *gasp* naked breasts or not. The Desire Demons already go quite far; what's so evil about female nipples that they are the only thing remaining concealed? As an example of what I think would suit the Avvar: in Germany there's a Pen & Paper RPG called The Dark Eye, which has this (SFW link, the pose doesn't show much of the breasts ).

[TheRealJayDee]

Lynata wrote...
I could buy the whole idea of sexualized armour. Even belly-free armour. It just has to fit to the respective culture and/or the role played by whoever wears it.

Totally agreed.

Lynata wrote...
Still, at the end, Dragon Age is not the right setting for such armour, at least from what I've seen so far from the setting.

 Totally agreed.

[Sylvianus]

Lynata wrote...

Hear, hear. Society has adopted a very weird and hypocritical approach to the issue of "naked skin" - shunning it in public and adoring it in private, plus the whole gender-based differences in perception and approach that have been mentioned here. It's almost like civilization as a whole desperately needs a couple therapy sessions...

This so much. So much hypocrisy is somewhat disgusting.

Also all these problems can be discussed calmly, without exaggeration, or  playing the reactionaries, Puritans or fundamentalists.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 29 novembre 2011 - 03:45 .

[The Baconer]

I don't care about clothing. People can wear what they want.

As for revealing armor, I'm fine with that as well. That is, if the item's protective value is accurately reflected in the armor rating.

[DeathDragon185]

Armour NO. clothing... well there is a fine line as too how much could be revealed

[DeathDragon185]

also NOBODY ever seems to have a problem with male eyecandy. LOL?

[D.Kain]

DeathDragon185 wrote...

also NOBODY ever seems to have a problem with male eyecandy. LOL?

Because it isn't there? 

[tmp7704]

Yeah. The "male eyecandy" would be stuff like



and something tells me you would see some people have a problem with their characters being put in gear like that.

[SkittlesKat96]

I think its utterly disgusting and evil that EAWare has deemed it that we cannot put companions such as Aveline in whatever armor we want

I want to dress up Aveline in chainmail bikini because its the best armor statistically wise, why must she wear that unrealistic silly guardsmen armor!!!!!

[Nerdage]

If the item isn't meant to be protective then I'm fine with how revealing it is being at the discretion of the artist (or whoever designs armour). Seems like the idea now is that only warriors need to wear proper armour, so that's a lot of 'armours' to design for rogues and mages that are essentially just clothes, making some more revealing than others just gives you a wider variety of designs.

I'd add that the designs should remain relatively conservative so long as there's no visual customization for characters though. I'd rather not be forced to wear a man-kini because it has the best stats, but if there were some way to equip a piece of armour without necessarily having to look at it (cosmetic items or something like that), or to move stats from one item to another (SWTOR's mods, WoW's transmog, etc) they could do whatever they want with the designs (so long as there was still a good variety).

Incidentally, take the chest piece off the male model in the OP and it might look less daft; just my opinion but next to the female model it looks like he's wearing a bra.

Modifié par nerdage, 30 novembre 2011 - 11:05 .

[Plaintiff]

I support anything that will lead to a wider variety of armor appearances. I don't give a **** about realism or practicality. I try to find a balance between looking good and having decent defense.

If Bioware did make some revealing armors, it wouldn't matter if they were only revealing for women, because women would have the option of not wearing them if they didn't like them.

I find it silly and annoying when people complain about the way a character dresses. I don't see what's wrong with Isabela or Bethany. They're strong, fairly well-developed characters and their clothing doesn't detract from that.

[N7 Spectre525]

Id like the chainmail bikini for my female chararacter..why not? People are way to uptight about nothing.
In Skyrim my male runs around shirtless with fur armor ala Conan and my female has the female version and they both look bad ass.
I grew up on Frazetta ,Boris Vallelo and Royo so the whole "revealing" armor thing doesn't bother me at all in a fantasy game with Dragons and Elves.

[Chzwz]

D.Kain wrote...

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.

I don't fit in either group.  I hate bikini plate mail. It just breaks emersion for me. But I do like sexy women, with or without much clothing (though I think most CRPG women are way too anorexic to be sexy).

[Lynata]

Chzwz wrote...
I don't fit in either group.  I hate bikini plate mail. It just breaks emersion for me. But I do like sexy women, with or without much clothing (though I think most CRPG women are way too anorexic to be sexy).

The whole thing is way more complex and cannot be limited by splitting the communtiy in two groups just like that, anyways.

Yeah, I'll even go so far and say that I like bikini platemail. But not in Thedas - at least not as war armour. Everything has it's place, but said place is defined by the setting. It's all about the distinctions between low and high fantasy and the cultures depicted in the franchise.

That said, even in Thedas there might be things like parade and gladiator armour that is meant more for show than protection. I could see revealing armour being used there and it wouldn't be a problem. Just make sure that it provides an appropriately low protection and is only found in appropriate places.

[D.Kain]

Chzwz wrote...

I don't fit in either group.  I hate bikini plate mail. It just breaks emersion for me. But I do like sexy women, with or without much clothing (though I think most CRPG women are way too anorexic to be sexy).

Who is anorexic? Well besides Merrill.

[frostajulie]

Plaintiff wrote...

I support anything that will lead to a wider variety of armor appearances. I don't give a **** about realism or practicality. I try to find a balance between looking good and having decent defense.

If Bioware did make some revealing armors, it wouldn't matter if they were only revealing for women, because women would have the option of not wearing them if they didn't like them.

I find it silly and annoying when people complain about the way a character dresses. I don't see what's wrong with Isabela or Bethany. They're strong, fairly well-developed characters and their clothing doesn't detract from that.

Yeah.  What he said.

Plus I like beautiful people/pixels.  I miss my Phoenix armor from DAO

And Winter forge
And Armor recolors

[Sylvianus]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yeah. The "male eyecandy" would be stuff like



and something tells me you would see some people have a problem with their characters being put in gear like that.

Can you show me the female equivalent ? ( Or at least in your eyes ) In what game did you see something like that ? In Mass effect 2, DAO, DA2 ? Not even Isabella is naked like that.



There is no point. What you showed is the same as that.

Obviously at this level, they would be bothered, they would see the problem even with a female, if naked like that. Because that's just nonsense. It isn't matter of gender there.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 03 décembre 2011 - 02:19 .

[PinkShoes]

would you seirously wear that sorta stuff in combat?

[Quething]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

The exception of course being Isabela - because her outfits fits her character. It fits the needs of a pirate. It fits the needs of a woman who is free spirited, knows she is beautiful, and needs freedom of movement for work on the ship and for fights on deck.

Even once she's been landlocked in Kirkwall for seven years? Even when fighting dragons and varterrals, against whom flexibility and agility are of little use and the primary concern is "don't get burned alive"?

I agree that Isabela's outfit makes sense for Isabela when you meet her, and I have no objection to it. (I don't think Beth's makes sense, but that's a design issue, not a gender issue; they couldn't decide if they wanted armor or clothes and ended up with something that fails on both counts. Carver has the same problem). I don't agree that Isabela's outfit makes sense period, for the exact same reason: context and utility matters when considering the plausibility of a character's outfit.

That conveniently also doubles as an argument for giving us character customization back*, but for the purpose of this thread, it's simply me joining the chorus: revealing clothing is fine, when it makes sense for the personality of the character and the setting they're in. Revealing armor is not, because by its very nature armor only exists in contexts where sexualizing a character is not appropriate or plausible.

* I mean, if nothing else, how adorable would it be if you're marching through the Bone Pit to hunt dragons and Isabela is grumbling about you making her wear pants, and purple!Hawke is making some kind of snarky comment about involuntary Orlesian waxes? 

Modifié par Quething, 05 décembre 2011 - 10:25 .

[HowlHowl]

It's simple. I don't think females in games should wear that unless it's reflective of cultural or personal traits. Even still, I think revealing outfits should be restricted to clothing, unless the armor is light and supposed to reflect the freedom of less. And yeah, sure I'd like a revealing male set for a certain cultural or personal feel the same as I would for females with those traits.

But BioWare thus far has done well enough to keep these factors in check for the most part, so I don't know why this is a matter of discussion.

Basically, I'm mostly agreeing with others here, but I posted my won response to defend my stance on my own terms, if need be.

Modifié par HowlHowl, 05 décembre 2011 - 10:42 .

[HowlHowl]

Quething wrote...

Even once she's been landlocked in Kirkwall for seven years? Even when fighting dragons and varterrals, against whom flexibility and agility are of little use and the primary concern is "don't get burned alive"?

I agree that Isabela's outfit makes sense for Isabela when you meet her, and I have no objection to it. (I don't think Beth's makes sense, but that's a design issue, not a gender issue; they couldn't decide if they wanted armor or clothes and ended up with something that fails on both counts. Carver has the same problem). I don't agree that Isabela's outfit makes sense period, for the exact same reason: context and utility matters when considering the plausibility of a character's outfit.

That conveniently also doubles as an argument for giving us character customization back*, but for the purpose of this thread, it's simply me joining the chorus: revealing clothing is fine, when it makes sense for the personality of the character and the setting they're in. Revealing armor is not, because by its very nature armor only exists in contexts where sexualizing a character is not appropriate or plausible.

* I mean, if nothing else, how adorable would it be if you're marching through the Bone Pit to hunt dragons and Isabela is grumbling about you making her wear pants, and purple!Hawke is making some kind of snarky comment about involuntary Orlesian waxes? 

I actually agree with you, for the most part, especially having character banter we've seen in DAII include references to equipment the way we see in Skyrim. My main Hawke was a tactician diplomatic rogue-type that liked structure, politics, and wanted to gain power in Kirkwall through those means, so wrangling Isabela as a romance was brilliant for me. I would have lovedd for her to snip and gripe at him making her wear proper armor.

But I raise you this, if it would break immersion for you that Isabella fights dragons with nearly nothing on, where flexibility doesn't matter in that situation, would it not also break immersion for you for a roughly 5'4"-5'8", 120-140 lb. female knife-fighter to don the kind of armor that actually WOULD be practical against dragons? Does attention to immersion at that level not render most of your party DOA against a dragon if not in massive-level armor a la DA:O? If we were to adhere to immersion at that level then the only viable choice for fighting anything beyond DAII lieutenants and mini-bosses would be large, heavily armored men, as it's much more likely they'll be able to deal with the burdens of it? In fact, male Hawke's build suggest he'd barely be able to support the weight of the Champion Warrior Armor, and female Hawke wouldn't even be able to keep balance with the Champion Mage Armor. I'm only nitpicking, but yeah, immersion always gets jarring at a certain point.

Modifié par HowlHowl, 05 décembre 2011 - 10:53 .

[whykikyouwhy]

@Quething - I don't see Isabela as *wanting* to wear much more than she does, unless the situation really called for it. Her attire fits her character/persona, but also fits how she moves in battle. Anything bulkier/thicker, albeit layered for protection, might diminish her speed and flexibility - both of which would still be vital against dragons and various other Kirkwall nastiness. And your pants scenario is very amusing.

@HowlHowl - I think heavy armor is magically enhanced so that no one is encumbered. But in all seriousness (although, the armor may be enhanced, who knows...) you make valid points with regard to immersion. Personally, I can't get into the "would (s)he really be able to carry this" line of thinking because the world is so fantastic to begin with. If I started to do that, I might have to start mulling on the logic behind the existence of dragons and how they can actually fly - and that would ruin all manner of things for me. *points to avatar*

[HowlHowl]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

@HowlHowl - I think heavy armor is magically enhanced so that no one is encumbered. But in all seriousness (although, the armor may be enhanced, who knows...) you make valid points with regard to immersion. Personally, I can't get into the "would (s)he really be able to carry this" line of thinking because the world is so fantastic to begin with. If I started to do that, I might have to start mulling on the logic behind the existence of dragons and how they can actually fly - and that would ruin all manner of things for me. *points to avatar*

My point exactly. I, more than anyone I've ever met, tend to nitpick at lore inconsistencies or holes in immersion, but I have to resist that habit at some point. All I'm saying is that everyone has to draw a line for themselves as to what a fantasy game can explain away, and I'm sure that line tends to be past whether or not armor/clothing design always denotes absolute practicality. But yes, this is one more argument in favor of being able to equip armor and clothing for your companions.

[Quething]

I can't see Isabela in full plate, no (though depending on era, full plate is far more flexible than most people give it credit for), but simple leather armor would provide a lot more protection against stray bites from dragonlings and standing too close to a fireball without sacrificing much of any dexterity. That's the reason there's light armor in the first place (actually I wouldn't want to be wearing anything metal against a dragon period; I stick my hands and face in active ovens for a living and let me tell you, rings and bracelets are even less ideal than naked skin).

I generally envision her as wearing her usual pirate gear most of the time, and grudgingly letting Hawke stuff her into something sturdier whenever they know there's going to be a major fight (or they go somewhere cold). So, like, varterrals, dragons that they know about in advance (which is... one of them, haha), Xebenkeck, the expedition and both DLCs, probably Meredith depending on how long they had to prep before the templars managed to cross the water. (Notably not Castillon, much to main!Hawke's distress, since the double-cross doesn't work otherwise.) So still, only maybe half a dozen times in seven years. But those half-dozen times still sort of bug me if I imagine her no-pantsing them.