37 réponses à ce sujet

[StElmo]

My previous thread was pretty much a blanket demand that there be no skimpy outfits like Isabella's in combat for DA3 - I personally found it contextually inapropriate for a rogue to be wearing a cloth and expect to survive battle without so much as a decent pair of pants/bracers.

However, although realism is my preference and I  hate characters that appeal to base traits, such as them being "the sexy one" or other tropes like that- someone in my thread spawned a more diplomatic idea:

Let the player choose to cover-up characters that may come accross as skimpy. Don't like that bare chested male party member? Then put some light armor on him in the inventory menu!

Provided the covering armor doesn't have silly boob shaped breast plates (unrealistic and dangerous armor to wear IRL) - I'd be happy for the option to deck out my party in more coverage, even if their default is not so well-covered.

Thoughts?

look at Jack from ME2, I couldn't find her in-game second appearence option (there was one that made her less skimpy), but there was also a DLC pack that did a similar thing.

Modifié par StElmo, 08 octobre 2012 - 09:41 .

[Maria Caliban]

It's not going to happen.

You'll be able to change your companions' armors, but the end look will fall within each character's personal style.

Varric's chest-hair will remain wild and free no matter the player's desires.

[StElmo]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Varric's chest-hair will remain wild and free no matter the player's desires.

While I didn't find varric's chest hair the worst - I think it would be nice for people who don't like it to change his outfit. I like varric the way he looks, but still, the option ya know?

Modifié par StElmo, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:40 .

[thats1evildude]

When said rogue has 498 pints of blood, several sets of redundant organs and skin as tough as boiled leather LIKE EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER IN DRAGON AGE, then she can wear whatever skimpy outfit she goddamn well likes.

Honestly, this debate wearies me. Why do we fuss so much over how much or how little clothing the nigh-indestructible badasses are wearing? It's not like they suffer permanent damage or can die from anything short of a murder-knife or That One Ogre that manages to kill one character per Dragon Age game.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:45 .

[StElmo]

thats1evildude wrote...

When said rogue has 498 pints of blood, several sets of redundant organs and skin as tough as boiled leather LIKE EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER IN DRAGON AGE, then she can wear whatever skimpy outfit she goddamn well likes.

Honestly, this debate wearies me. Why do we fuss so much over how much or how little clothing the nigh-indestructible badasses are wearing? It's not like they suffer permanent damage or can die from anything short of a murder-knife or That One Ogre that manages to kill one character per Dragon Age game.

Well it wouldn't weary you if everyone was happy would it? And everyone would be happy if they had options. So err... either support this, or go away.

[KiwiQuiche]

Ugh, yes, gimme more cover-up. I would approve.

Heck, I can kinda get Isabela's clothes- she's a pirate and a ninja, so it makes sense she's more lightly armoured for speed, but leaving your thighs and chest completely open is rather daft- sever one artery in the thigh and you're dead in minutes. Even something akin to Selene's outfit in underworld would be preferable- it was a pitch-black (species, death dealer) skin-tight for movement, sexy and lethal and all skin covered.

But then maybe I was just disturbed by Isabela's boob size...

[Dhiro]

StElmo wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Varric's chest-hair will remain wild and free no matter the player's desires.

While I didn't find varric's chest hair the worst - I think it would be nice for people who don't like it to change his outfit. I like varric the way he looks, but still, the option ya know?

The way how Varric shows his chest hair and the way how Isabela dress are there for a reason. The DA team has decided to use clothes not only to cover their characters' bodies, but to tell something about said characters.

[BouncyFrag]

So I'm guessing this might be a bit too skimpy?

[Maria Caliban]

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:46 .

[StElmo]

BouncyFrag wrote...

So I'm guessing this might be a bit too skimpy?

Jack had an option to make her less skimpy if I remember correctly.

[StElmo]

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

What are you talking about? Mass Effect 2 allowed you to change Jacks appearence to look less skimpy, how did that comprimise her uniqueness?

Oh thats right it didn't.

Choice is a good thing. Stop trying to take the ball and go home, when you could share and have fun with everyone

[KiwiQuiche]

BouncyFrag wrote...

So I'm guessing this might be a bit too skimpy?

That was Bioware being fairly stupid and going "lol what's ingame lore". Especially when you were on the Collector ship with no air and Jack had her skin all over the place. They seemed to think exposed skin/cleavage/butt wedgies = sexy

[thats1evildude]

If you want to make the argument that it's wrong to fetishize the female body or some other bull****, then make that argument. But don't dress this up as an issue of "realism." Realism checked itself out the moment that my warrior Hawke ran across the battlefield with three qunari javelins embedded in his testicles. It called for a cab the second my rogue Warden did an aerial pirouette thirty metres off the ground while hacking at a dragon's skull with twin daggers.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:52 .

[Dhiro]

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

Options also cost resources. Since equiping a companion with new armor will change their outfit while keeping their overall dressing theme, that means they'll have to make two looks for each set of armor you can equip on them.

[StElmo]

Dhiro wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

Options also cost resources. Since equiping a companion with new armor will change their outfit while keeping their overall dressing theme, that means they'll have to make two looks for each set of armor you can equip on them.

Or MAYBE have some armors that are skimpy and others that are not. Wow, the negativity over comprimise is astounding. Maybe I should just go back to asking for NO skimpy at all... Jesus christ.

[StElmo]

thats1evildude wrote...

If you want to make the argument that it's wrong to fetishize the female body or some other bull****, then make that argument. But don't dress this up as an issue of "realism." Realism checked itself out the moment that my warrior Hawke ran across the battlefield with three qunari javelins embedded in his testicles. It called for a cab the second my rogue Warden did an aerial pirouette thirty metres off the ground while hacking at a dragon's skull with twin daggers.

It breaks the suspension of disbelief.

Sure, it also is an exploitation of base trait, rather then comitting to a deep characterization. Thats true too.! I don't like that either. If you want me to say that, I have said it, so what? Doesn't mean I'm wrong, I don't like base traits being exploited and becoming cliches.

Modifié par StElmo, 08 octobre 2012 - 07:56 .

[KiwiQuiche]

thats1evildude wrote...

If you want to make the argument that it's wrong to fetishize the female body or some other bull****, then make that argument. But don't dress this up as an issue of "realism." Realism checked itself out the moment that my warrior Hawke ran across the battlefield with three qunari javelins embedded in his testicles. It called for a cab the second my rogue Warden did an aerial pirouette thirty metres off the ground while hacking at a dragon's skull with twin daggers.

WOOSH!

[Urzon]

Isabela wouldn't have been able to ninja-gank people if she had to wear a full set of studded leather. Plus, rogues have to be able to easily move around to avoid being hit, not to be able to take them.

[Dhiro]

StElmo wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

Options also cost resources. Since equiping a companion with new armor will change their outfit while keeping their overall dressing theme, that means they'll have to make two looks for each set of armor you can equip on them.

Or MAYBE have some armors that are skimpy and others that are not. Wow, the negativity over comprimise is astounding. Maybe I should just go back to asking for NO skimpy at all... Jesus christ.

People will disagree with you, spare me your capslock.

The point here, for me, is: does it fits the character? Were Isabela to use DA III's sytem, I don't believe she would wear pants. The way she dresses, her lack of pants, is as much as part of her character as her actions. It's her freedom, her ability do dress how she damn well wants and if anyone has a problem with it, they can suck it up. That is why I don't particularly like the idea of dressing Isabela in a full, 'realistic' armor: it's not fitting for her personality.

In my opinion, of course.

[Maria Caliban]

StElmo wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

StElmo wrote...

And everyone would be happy if they had options.

I understand that you want to believe this, but your suggestion does not mean everyone is happy. It means people who value what you value are happy.

Companions can be unique or they can be customizable. You want customization, and that's fine, but others prefer uniqueness.

What are you talking about? Mass Effect 2 allowed you to change Jacks appearence to look less skimpy, how did that comprimise her uniqueness?

Oh thats right it didn't.

Choice is a good thing. Stop trying to take the ball and go home, when you could share and have fun with everyone

You claimed that everyone would be happy. I pointed out that I wouldn't be happy. Your response seems to be 'Maria, don't value something I don't value because it makes it easier when people just agree with me.'

Well, yeah, but that's unlikely to happen.

Anyways...

Do you know why Sten had no horns in Dragon Age: Origins? Why his body is basically 'big human' instead of the more radically physiology of the DA II qunari? Because if they'd made him look like a regular qunari, they would have had to make helmet and armor models just for him.

If he were like the DA II companions, he would have looked like a real qunari. Notice that Shale and Dog, the two companions that do have a unique look, only get changes of color when you equip them in various ways. You can't put normal armor on them at all.

Look at Fenris in DA II. If I wanted to put 'skimpy' armor on him, they'd need to create a new body model. The regular elf one wouldn't have the lyrium tattoos, and I think Fenris is bent over in a strange way too.

BioWare is attempting to compromise with DA III, but I do think it's worth noting that what you're asking for does cost zots.

[Kidd]

I really don't get the complaints about Jack. Yeah, she's got a lot of skin showing, but she doesn't at all come off as sexualised to me. Her tattoos don't really emphasise any of her curves and in general it just adds up in my head to "this is one bad mofo" - the shaved head acts as the cream finish on top of the cake.

[StElmo]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

I really don't get the complaints about Jack. Yeah, she's got a lot of skin showing, but she doesn't at all come off as sexualised to me. Her tattoos don't really emphasise any of her curves and in general it just adds up in my head to "this is one bad mofo" - the shaved head acts as the cream finish on top of the cake.

personally didn't have a problem with jack, but I liked the option.

I like options.

[Windninja47]

If what is said is true (that we will be able to change companion armour but they still keep their over-all style) then I'm sure there will be less-skimpy outfits for people.

[Dhiro]

StElmo wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

I really don't get the complaints about Jack. Yeah, she's got a lot of skin showing, but she doesn't at all come off as sexualised to me. Her tattoos don't really emphasise any of her curves and in general it just adds up in my head to "this is one bad mofo" - the shaved head acts as the cream finish on top of the cake.

personally didn't have a problem with jack, but I liked the option.

I like options.

We all do. But they cost money. If DA III system is going to work, that means they will have several outfits. Jack had two. All the other ones, including the one on your opening post? DLC outfits that you had to pay real money for.

[Maria Caliban]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

I really don't get the complaints about Jack. Yeah, she's got a lot of skin showing, but she doesn't at all come off as sexualised to me. Her tattoos don't really emphasise any of her curves and in general it just adds up in my head to "this is one bad mofo" - the shaved head acts as the cream finish on top of the cake.

I'm ambivalent.

She's a bad ass mofo, but she also breaks down in tears and only really 'heals' in ME 2 through the love of (male) Shepard. You don't see Wrex, Zaeed, Canderous, or Segacious Zu, all dude bad-asses, needing emotional abuse and secret vulnerabilities.


I do like how they moved her forward in ME 3, and I do like the character design.