252 réponses à ce sujet

[EpicBoot2daFace]

David Gaider wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
Why? It's flaws heavily outweight it's pros and I think they take priority over a thread discussing breastplate sizes.

Or you could exit the conversation if it's of no interest you, instead of trying to bully everyone into feeling the same as you do about an unrelated topic.

The discussion is fine. It doesn't seem to have taken it to an offensive place (how startling), is DA-related and there is apparently something to actually discuss. Please continue.

I was just trying to say that I think it's flaws are of more importance is all. As for the thread, I think the issue has already been fixed with DA2. The OP posted pics of Origins.

I'm more surprised it hasn't gone to a "weird" place. There is a lot of that around here.

[grumpymooselion]

MrFlipFlops wrote...

Janan Pacha, that is fair. With all things considered, it's tough to get worked up over such minor details when much more important things are there to grab our attention. And I have no objection to going in a fantastical direction (that would be a silly stance, this is a fantasy game), I just don't find the breast-dents design particularly fantastic.

That works, I think maybe variety being the spice of life that a little something for everyone isn't uncalled for in an ideal situation. We're salt, and all that, and flavor begs augmentation. In that sense armor could follow, if Bioware felt it fitting and they felt they had the time/resources/manpower/etc to cater to several tastes at once, provided it was, again, fitting with whatever they're going for exactly.

[Enkidu]

David Gaider, thank you, sir.

EpicBoot2daFace, I've been silent for now, since I see no obligation to justify not my opinion but my right to express it, but as the OP I feel it is my responsibility to clear up any confusion as to the topic of discussion instead of waiting for like-minded people to do it for me.

I feel that DA2's flaws have been discussed sufficiently since its release. In great depth, in all contexts and with all possible amounts of constructivism and/or vitriol. I do not think our support of some of the choices made in the game and the desire to show that support in the hope of this particular design choice being implemented in the next game somehow hinders any other discussion about any of the games. Or is any less important.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

MrFlipFlops wrote...

David Gaider, thank you, sir.

EpicBoot2daFace, I've been silent for now, since I see no obligation to justify not my opinion but my right to express it, but as the OP I feel it is my responsibility to clear up any confusion as to the topic of discussion instead of waiting for like-minded people to do it for me.

I feel that DA2's flaws have been discussed sufficiently since its release. In great depth, in all contexts and with all possible amounts of constructivism and/or vitriol. I do not think our support of some of the choices made in the game and the desire to show that support in the hope of this particular design choice being implemented in the next game somehow hinders any other discussion about any of the games. Or is any less important.

I thought the thread was unnecessary because the issue had been addressed in DA2 and you posted pics of Origins. Why would you automatically assume they would go backwards?

[Enkidu]

EpicBoot2daFace, same reason people assume multilayer will be a pile of garbage? Because I have no real data to speculate on the subject and human nature compels me to fear the worst, even though I'm one of those genetic mutants who enjoyed DA2 warts and all.
So with that in mind I thought it harmless to post a thread in a place where people discuss and voice their wishes for the upcoming game to voice my wish as well.

Modifié par MrFlipFlops, 14 mars 2013 - 07:12 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

MrFlipFlops wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace, same reason people assume multilayer will be a pile of garbage? Because I have no real data to speculate on the subject and human nature compels me to fear the worst, even though I'm one of those genetic mutants who enjoyed DA2 warts and all.
So with that in mind I thought it harmless to post a thread in a place where people discuss and voice their wishes for the upcoming game to voice my wish as well.

I understand. It's just that your wish has already been granted.

[Enkidu]

EpicBoot2daFace, in DA2, yes. I have not seen any information regarding armour design in the third game. There is no guarantee that they will maintain the status quo vis-à-vis breastplates. There is a good chance that they will. I do not know. There is no harm in me expressing appreciation for their previous design choices in hopes of seeing them appear again.

Modifié par MrFlipFlops, 14 mars 2013 - 07:23 .

[NovaBlastMarketing]

David Gaider wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
Why? It's flaws heavily outweight it's pros and I think they take priority over a thread discussing breastplate sizes.

Or you could exit the conversation if it's of no interest you, instead of trying to bully everyone into feeling the same as you do about an unrelated topic.

The discussion is fine. It doesn't seem to have taken it to an offensive place (how startling), is DA-related and there is apparently something to actually discuss. Please continue.

+1 wow  David  if my memory is actually i belive i  have diagreed with your posts more than i have agreed.... but i

have to give c redit where it is due  ..well done

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 14 mars 2013 - 07:24 .

[Blazomancer]

@krul2k - It's about boobs sandwiched between the protrusions in a plate.

[CaptainBlackGold]

philippe willaume wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

DELETED
martwhim.tumblr.com/post/40061546009/why-do-you-hate-the-shape-of-breasts-in-plate-armor-so

Here, this guy says it much better than I.

well if your breastplate is deformed when it by a sword
strike or a trust, you have been cheated on the quality of your plate.  The point of plate is that it is bloody hard to deform. hence the disappearance of maces, the advent of "hammer" and the speciousness of the sternum crushing argument.
Armour is designed to give the blow as little purchase as possible, and in the case of a "gerrman" armour style that is  with fluting (ie the ridges) to help ginding the point off and resist a cut better for a lighter weight.
Having defined breast only makes sure that your either going to get the full wack of a mounted lance or that it will channel the point of a sword polearme lance towards you face/throat.

If it is about making the life of your opponent that easy, self harm wise there are cheaper way than  plate.
phil

Ah, here we are getting to the "meat" of it. Plate armor was designed, primarily, for mounted knights. The biggest threat to a mounted knight was the lance, driven by the power of the mount's speed. In THAT situation, I can see where the tip of the lance just might well glance off the "breasts" and glide into the sternum.

However, as we all know, horses are extinct in the DA universe, so therefore, no mounted combat (not sure what the cheviliars of Orlais ride these days, but can't be horses).

Therefore, that particular problem is avoided. Furthermore, I insist that in a culture where women are warriors, at least a significant percentage of them will deliberately choose sexually exaggerated armor styles if for no other reason to distinguish themselves from males.

Whether such armor is as "good" as the "normal" kind might well take second place to fashion sense. After all, there are a number of medieval weapons that at the time were thought to be particuarly nasty, but later research demonstrates that they were no more lethal than the normal kind (e.g., the "flamberge?" - you know wavy bladed sword that was assumed to cause a more horrible wound).

I just want some sense of versimiltude in both armors and weapon design. For me at least, I can think of plausible reasons why the kind of armor we are talking about might well have existed in Thedas.

And I admit it, I like big boobs, I cannot lie...:innocent:

[unbentbuzzkill]

@blazomancer wow your blunt.

[BeatoSama]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

philippe willaume wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

DELETED
martwhim.tumblr.com/post/40061546009/why-do-you-hate-the-shape-of-breasts-in-plate-armor-so

Here, this guy says it much better than I.

well if your breastplate is deformed when it by a sword
strike or a trust, you have been cheated on the quality of your plate.  The point of plate is that it is bloody hard to deform. hence the disappearance of maces, the advent of "hammer" and the speciousness of the sternum crushing argument.
Armour is designed to give the blow as little purchase as possible, and in the case of a "gerrman" armour style that is  with fluting (ie the ridges) to help ginding the point off and resist a cut better for a lighter weight.
Having defined breast only makes sure that your either going to get the full wack of a mounted lance or that it will channel the point of a sword polearme lance towards you face/throat.

If it is about making the life of your opponent that easy, self harm wise there are cheaper way than  plate.
phil

Ah, here we are getting to the "meat" of it. Plate armor was designed, primarily, for mounted knights. The biggest threat to a mounted knight was the lance, driven by the power of the mount's speed. In THAT situation, I can see where the tip of the lance just might well glance off the "breasts" and glide into the sternum.

However, as we all know, horses are extinct in the DA universe, so therefore, no mounted combat (not sure what the cheviliars of Orlais ride these days, but can't be horses).

Therefore, that particular problem is avoided. Furthermore, I insist that in a culture where women are warriors, at least a significant percentage of them will deliberately choose sexually exaggerated armor styles if for no other reason to distinguish themselves from males.

Whether such armor is as "good" as the "normal" kind might well take second place to fashion sense. After all, there are a number of medieval weapons that at the time were thought to be particuarly nasty, but later research demonstrates that they were no more lethal than the normal kind (e.g., the "flamberge?" - you know wavy bladed sword that was assumed to cause a more horrible wound).

I just want some sense of versimiltude in both armors and weapon design. For me at least, I can think of plausible reasons why the kind of armor we are talking about might well have existed in Thedas.

And I admit it, I like big boobs, I cannot lie...:innocent:

It doesn't have to be a lance. If you trip in that kind of armor the pressure will 'gather'  right at the sternum.(I'm not using the right terms here as I have a hard time talking about physics in english) While if its only convex armor it'll be more evenly distributed.

Modifié par BeatoSama, 14 mars 2013 - 07:45 .

[Enkidu]

CaptainBlackGold, Furthermore, I insist that in a culture where women are warriors, at least a significant percentage of them will deliberately choose sexually exaggerated armor styles if for no other reason to distinguish themselves from males
I specifically asked several of my lady friends who were available right now if they would do that. They said they wouldn't. And I wouldn't as well. Admittedly, "some of my chums" is hardly a sufficient sample group, but I think it is relevant nonetheless. I'm sure there would exist women who'd do so, but I do not think they would be in the majority. Maybe some of them would order such a design for parade armour, but for front-line combat and for the reasons you specified? No, I do not find that likely.

And I admit it, I like big boobs, I cannot lie
As do I, actually, but as mentioned in the OP - there is a time and a place, like with a good joke. It falls flat and looks silly when done wrong.

Modifié par MrFlipFlops, 14 mars 2013 - 07:50 .

[CaptainBlackGold]

[quote]BeatoSama wrote...

[quote]CaptainBlackGold wrote...

[quote]philippe willaume wrote...

[quote]Blackrising wrote...

DELETED
martwhim.tumblr.com/post/40061546009/why-do-you-hate-the-shape-of-breasts-in-plate-armor-so

Here, this guy says it much better than I.
[/quote]


DELETED:innocent:

[/quote]

It doesn't have to be a lance. If you trip in that kind of armor the pressure will 'gather'  right at the sternum.(I'm not using the right terms here as I have a hard time talking about physics in english) While if its only convex armor it'll be more evenly distributed.

[/quote]

I appreciate what you said here, but am having a hard time picturing it. Granted, the "ponts" would hit the ground first, but then the force would be transferred to the rest of the armor, would it not?

[syllogi]

MrFlipFlops wrote...

CaptainBlackGold, Furthermore, I insist that in a culture where women are warriors, at least a significant percentage of them will deliberately choose sexually exaggerated armor styles if for no other reason to distinguish themselves from males
I specifically asked several of my lady friends who were available right now if they would do that. They said they wouldn't. And I wouldn't as well. Admittedly, "some of my chums" is hardly a sufficient sample group, but I think it is relevant nonetheless. I'm sure there would exist women who'd do so, but I do not think they would be in the majority. Maybe some of them would order such a design for parade armour, but for front-line combat and for the reasons you specified? No, I do not find that likely.

And I admit it, I like big boobs, I cannot lie
As do I, actually, but as mentioned in the OP - there is a time and a place, like with a good joke. It falls flat and looks silly when done wrong.

Agreed, I'm pretty sure that female warriors would want to look as much like their male counterparts as possible.  What advantage would there be in calling attention to oneself, other than say, wearing the colors of your own allegiance, so you don't get mistaken for the other side, if you're fighting other humans.

Also, although it may not be common knowledge amongst non-Grey Wardens, I'd imagine any female Grey Warden who knows about Broodmothers would be *very* uninterested in calling attention to their sex.  

[CaptainBlackGold]

MrFlipFlops wrote...

CaptainBlackGold, DELETE

As do I, actually, but as mentioned in the OP - there is a time and a place, like with a good joke. It falls flat and looks silly when done wrong.

Again, I really do appreciate where you are coming from here. But the phrase "looks silly" is what is throwing me. What determines "silly?" Other posters and I have been arguing this from a pragmatic aspect; and to be honest, I think they may have a point (but then again, never let facts get in the way of a good argument...").

However, you have been arguing, I believe, from more of an aesthetic aspect - that you do not care for the "look."

But what about the "look" is so bad - nay, as you say above, "silly?" This is not a troll question.

And as far as what one's female friends say (how big was the sample size, what are their personalities, interests, prejudices, backgrounds, etc.) the best we can conclude is that it is "inconclusive." When I was on active duty in the military, female service members routinely tailored their official uniforms (a nip here, a tuck there) to make them more "feminine" (i.e., emphasizing breasts and hips)- sometimes against official dress and appearence regulations. And at the time (granted, that was a LONG time ago), nobody in authority said anything (unless it really got outrageous, like making a uniform skirt into a mini). Things maybe much stricter now, but "in my day" it was amazing what a creative woman could do with ugly, baggy and totally unflattering fatigues...

Anyways, the discussion is moot since by now, the armor designs have most likely all ready been done and are in the game. It is likely that you already have your desire. But I would pay for DLC where the armor is more to my liking (if we cannot mod them into the game).

[NovaBlastMarketing]

Jake Boone wrote...

NovaBlastMarketing wrote...

sighs another thread on practicality vrs Aesthetics.. my vote is always for the aesthetically pleasing version.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 Your  right  that can be true  but I was referring to  the  image on the original post.I liked the one on the right   that  was more form fitting than the one on the left .

For a different example I will  refer to Mass effect 1 and  3 Ashley's armor in M1  was bulky and unfashionable  but she still managed to look  good  in it  although IMO  she  looked better in her  uniform than  she did  in her armor.

One of the features that  M3 really hit Grand Slam home run out of the park  was not  only did  they   change Ashley's personal Style  they also gave her  a lot  better armor choices my favorite being the one below.

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 14 mars 2013 - 08:16 .

[BeatoSama]

You'd also be wearing thick clothing under the armor which would flatten the boobs anyway which means that the boob cups on the armor wouldn't have much boob inside them.

And the Ashley redesign is a prime exaple on how to not please your female fanbase.

Modifié par BeatoSama, 14 mars 2013 - 08:09 .

[Enkidu]

CaptainBlackGold, our point of contention does seem to fully centre on subjective aesthetic preferences and arguing that is futile. I suggest we end it now before things get out of hand. We obviously won't convince the other to adopt our views on what constitutes "good-looking female armour". I think there is room in the world for both of our tastes.

Modifié par MrFlipFlops, 14 mars 2013 - 08:10 .

[unbentbuzzkill]

ok i'm going to regret asking this but how does beatosama know so much about this subject?

[grumpymooselion]

I can't agree Nova, I liked the old version of Ashley, and the old style of the first ME's armor options, better as a general rule. That's not a 'practical' versus 'style' thing for me though, I just loved ME1's style in general.

[CaptainBlackGold]

syllogi wrote...

MrFlipFlops wrote...

SNIPPED

Agreed, I'm pretty sure that female warriors would want to look as much like their male counterparts as possible.  What advantage would there be in calling attention to oneself, other than say, wearing the colors of your own allegiance, so you don't get mistaken for the other side, if you're fighting other humans.

Also, although it may not be common knowledge amongst non-Grey Wardens, I'd imagine any female Grey Warden who knows about Broodmothers would be *very* uninterested in calling attention to their sex.  

Why would female warriors want to look as much like their male counter-parts?

In so far as calling "attention" to one's self; two quick comments. Since historically, plate armor cost about the same amount as a small farm, only the rich could afford it. Plate armor was also often highly decorated to make you stand out on the battlefield - presumably so that your deeds could be recognized.

Secondly, ever seen Roman officer armor with its greatly exaggerated "real life" musculature? It made the officers look fearesome and "manly." If there were women warriors wearing plate, why would not at least a percentage of them take a similar approach?

And as far as the Grey Wardens go, only a percentage wear plate; it seems to be fairly uncommon (you don't get any for yourself in DAO until much later in the game). People wore what they could afford/obtain at the time. And I do not recall whether the Grey Warden plate armor had sexual dimorphism or not.

[BeatoSama]

unbentbuzzkill wrote...

ok i'm going to regret asking this but how does beatosama know so much about this subject?

Boobs or Armor?
Armor I'm absolutely no expert of. I'm simply referring to things others have said.
As for boobs, well I have a pair myself.

[unbentbuzzkill]

I meant armor but the latter is nice to know too.