I wouldn't mind something a bit more ninja-esque. I'd love it if I could make my more ruthless female rogue (assassin) look a bit more like this:
I'd love to see your protagonist run around in the frostback mountains and battling fire breathing dragons wearing that underwear.....errrm ''armor''. 
Ooh, and for women warriors, heavy plate armour, I thought Tim Burton's Wonderland did incredibly well.
And what about people who don't like realistic. I want shoot dragon with fireball and look sexy.
And why all armour in game must be like you want tin can why we can't have different style armour.
First, I can't see those images so I have no clue what those armours (I assume they're pictures of armour you like) look like.
Secondly, well... people are always going to have different ideas about what they like, all I can do is argue for what I like. It's just that it happens so often that female characters are stuck with bikini-like "armour" while the male characters get fully covered and it annoys me. Also, when armour is at the level where I can seriously mistake it for a bikini, underwear or lingerie for a steamy night with ones significant other... I don't consider that sexy at all. Just ridiculous. Though I am aware that it's just my opinion.
I'm not opposed to having armour that isn't bulky, I just want vital areas covered, a sleeker style of armour is perfectly fine, or even decorated armour (no huge spikes though). I'm not even saying those armours have to be 100% realistic, they just have to look like they could be somewhat functional. I'm pleased with most of the armour we've seen from DA:I so far, for example, even though some of it isn't that realistic.
You ask why all armour in the game must be like a tin can. Well, it doesn't have to be, I just don't want armour that looks utterly useless or like it's a modified type of lingerie. You say you want armour that your character looks sexy in. I want armour my character looks good in, too. Part of why I want more realistic armour is because I dislike how it focuses on the characters sex appeal, partly because it looks silly and out of place in a story as grim as one where demons are killing everyone and finally because I find those skimpy "armours" horrifyingly ugly.
Wearing full body armor won't save you from arrows either...if reality is anything to go by.
Sean bean is dead irl?
I belive you, I'm just tired of everyone saying that fantasy games shouldn't have skimpy armor because it's not practical or unrealistic. But being a frontline warrior in heavy plate armor is not the only way to play this or any other fantasy game. You can also be a stealthy rouge, or an archer. They don't need overprotective armor, their trait is not getting hit at all or move fast, and then they could easily wear attire like these:
Dude who the hell isn't trying "not to get hit at all"? There are no such things as "Tanks" or "Taunts". You might not need armour if were like assassinating JFK or something. But that NEVER happens in Bioware games. Everyone walks into large prolonged fights and cutscenes. There is no stealth at all, simply a +10 damage from turning invisible.
I'm all for nudity but there's a time and a place. and don't call it armour.
I'd love to see your protagonist run around in the frostback mountains and battling fire breathing dragons wearing that underwear.....errrm ''armor''.
Not to be nit picky with your example, but if you think climbing around the mountains and it's steep trails and inclines in full plate is any better than that skimpy armor you have another thing coming. Not to mention if we're talking realism, being butt ass naked or wearing full plate verses a monster that big and agile are about equally irrelevant to the horror coming down upon you. Unless you think being butt ass naked or wearing armor is going to make a significant difference to your survival when an elephant starts trampling you. Actually, you can probably run faster in the skimpy outfit, that might make a difference.
Realism - only important when it suits your argument, irrelevant otherwise.
Not to be nit picky with your example, but if you think climbing around the mountains and it's steep trails and inclines in full plate is any better than that skimpy armor you have another thing coming. Not to mention if we're talking realism, being butt ass naked or wearing full plate verses a monster that big and agile are about equally irrelevant to the horror coming down upon you. Unless you think being butt ass naked or wearing armor is going to make a significant difference to your survival when an elephant starts trampling you. Actually, you can probably run faster in the skimpy outfit, that might make a difference.
Realism - only important when it suits your argument, irrelevant otherwise.
But you also don't need to wear full plate armour either to be covered over vital areas. What's wrong with a pair of nice leather pants that'll reduce the possibility of getting a slashed aorta, or a simple chain-mail shift that'll keep you from getting a chest-full of arrows.
Do women in games always have to have their body on display? An armour bikini as mentioned, to me is really not desirable combat wear.
But you also don't need to wear full plate armour either to be covered over vital areas. What's wrong with a pair of nice leather pants that'll reduce the possibility of getting a slashed aorta, or a simple chain-mail shift that'll keep you from getting a chest-full of arrows.
Do women in games always have to have their body on display? An armour bikini as mentioned, to me is really not desirable combat wear.
Oh I'm not saying to walk around in chainmail bikini's, but the realism argument is a really bad and often used wrongly argument in my opinion, and typically by people who really just want us to not be objectified and has little to do with actual realism. Not saying there aren't people that like realistic armors.
The issue isn't truly about realism or not, saying it is, is silly, it's a fantasy game with monsters, magic and fire breathing draconic monstrosities. Also using realism we can argue forever considering all the different environment the characters walk through, the amount of time they spend in it, ect, ect. Round and round it goes.
The real issues are, some people like historic armors, some people like more fantasy and exotic armors aimed at being "eye candy," some people like pretty armors that may or may not show some skin, but are aimed at being pretty rather than skimpy or realistic (Where I fall), some like various things in between. Some of us find the skimpy armor offensive, some feel that the conservative "realistic" armor is just not something we want to look at for hours on end and would rather enjoy ourselves than be "realistic" as every sense plays a part in that. I just don't think it's truly about realism at all, at least it isn't most of the time. Realism is an excuse used to cover us up because we find the skimpy armor offensive and don't like that we're so often portrayed as sex objects and would prefer things that don't portray us in that matter. We prefer this because we'd like to end the circle of unrealistic expectations on our appearance often resulting in serious self esteem issues, not to mention oversexualizing us so we are seen as sex objects more than people.
It is this reason why so many of us go and say things like "Well if they have armor like that in the game I won't play it" because we find it offensive and it's a way to boycott and try and force game companies to be more conservative in their armor options. We use realism so we can attempt to bypass what it's really about and pretend it's about something else.
This irritates me to no end because what I like is in the middle of the bickering between the "Eye candy eye candy" and the "It's not *cough*offendsus*cough* realistic crowd. So I end up either half naked, or covered head to toe, or lucky to find one outfit I can stand that's nearer my ideal because of an argument that can have no compromise and is being argued dishonestly.
My point with that last post was to point out some of the hypocrisy and falsehoods of the realism argument. Is not what the argument is about. While yes, some prefer the "realistic" and lifelike armors, if that was all it was honestly about having both and all the variations in between would be fine because you have the choice which armors to wear.
I'd rather end the dishonesty so we may talk about this openly and honestly and possibly find some kind of middle ground so both of the extremes can live with, without "Refusing to buy the game" or trying to shut the other side out completely, because for whatever either side thinks, most people are somewhere in between these two extremes.
Oh I'm not saying to walk around in chainmail bikini's, but the realism argument is a really bad and often used wrongly argument in my opinion, and typically by people who really just want us to not be objectified and has little to do with actual realism. Not saying there aren't people that like realistic armors.
The issue isn't truly about realism or not, saying it is, is silly, it's a fantasy game with monsters, magic and fire breathing draconic monstrosities. Also using realism we can argue forever considering all the different environment the characters walk through, the amount of time they spend in it, ect, ect. Round and round it goes.
The real issues are, some people like historic armors, some people like more fantasy and exotic armors aimed at being "eye candy," some people like pretty armors that may or may not show some skin, but are aimed at being pretty rather than skimpy or realistic (Where I fall), some like various things in between. Some of us find the skimpy armor offensive, some feel that the conservative "realistic" armor is just not something we want to look at for hours on end and would rather enjoy ourselves than be "realistic" as every sense plays a part in that. I just don't think it's truly about realism at all, at least it isn't most of the time. Realism is an excuse used to cover us up because we find the skimpy armor offensive and don't like that we're so often portrayed as sex objects and would prefer things that don't portray us in that matter. We prefer this because we'd like to end the circle of unrealistic expectations on our appearance often resulting in serious self esteem issues, not to mention oversexualizing us so we are seen as sex objects more than people.
It is this reason why so many of us go and say things like "Well if they have armor like that in the game I won't play it" because we find it offensive and it's a way to boycott and try and force game companies to be more conservative in their armor options. We use realism so we can attempt to bypass what it's really about and pretend it's about something else.
This irritates me to no end because what I like is in the middle of the bickering between the "Eye candy eye candy" and the "It's not *cough*offendsus*cough* realistic crowd. So I end up either half naked, or covered head to toe, or lucky to find one outfit I can stand that's nearer my ideal because of an argument that can have no compromise and is being argued dishonestly.
My point with that last post was to point out some of the hypocrisy and falsehoods of the realism argument. Is not what the argument is about. While yes, some prefer the "realistic" and lifelike armors, if that was all it was honestly about having both and all the variations in between would be fine because you have the choice which armors to wear.
I'd rather end the dishonesty so we may talk about this openly and honestly and possibly find some kind of middle ground or both of the extremes can live with, without "Refusing to buy the game" or completely trying to the other side out completely, because for whatever either side thinks, most people are somewhere in between these two extremes.
Wow, very well explained.
I think the realism argument isn't the worst thing in the world. I roll my eyes when people say that "monsters aren't realistic". The realism argument is meant to say that even in a new world with monsters and magic, some form of physics laws and world building consistency has to exist. The realism argument says : if there are arrows and fire flying at you, do you have magical skin to deflect it or do you need protection?
But yes, it's not strictly about realism, it does have to do with my female protagonist not needing to be eye-candy unless I decide that I want her to be. I'll agree that most are in the centre, and I would love it if more games reflected that range. Honesty is definitely the best policy. 
The issue with world consistency, is we're playing a game and telling a story, it's not meant to be that realistic. Not in my opinion, it's more about telling a story with interesting and unique characters, and ways of dress play a large part of that. When we force everyone to dress similarly a lot of that characterization is lost.
Let's look at Varric. The Varric we all know and love wears leathers, with his chest wide open and exposed, showing off that chest hair of his. That and Bianca are iconic parts of who he is.
Now his chest hair is covered, and he has been brought to being just as generic barely straying outside the lines as the rest of us.
In order to be realistic we've sacrificed the clothing that is a big part in playing to archetypes and filling the roles of such, to being unique in outfit.
If I'm a rogue for example, there are so many more archetypes that fit in there than the battlefield scout which we are portraying with our outfits.
Really Warrior should be anywhere between the heavily armored type and animal skins and heavy leathers.
Rogues anywhere between a blouse and skirt with possibly bracers and the like, to fully covered in light armor.
Mages, pretty much any type of clothing really, but focusing more towards robes and dresses, and full suits because a lot of people are offended by wearing flowy garments apparently.
This is just my ranges though. I'm a fan of archetypes and personality, I think they add a lot more to the game than realism does. Some people don't I understand that. I'm just not a fan of completely dismal, dark and gritty for everyone. It's downright depressing.
Edit: Oh yeah almost forgot, Varric is also able to use weapons other than Bianca now, as if he ever would. This likely means Bianca can and will be out leveled, forcing you to equip Varric with another more generic weapon, and thus once again removing a defining characteristic of the dwarf we love due to becoming more generic.
Some sort of overcoat would be cool
And maybe a mask... hehe...
The issue with world consistency, is we're playing a game and telling a story, it's not meant to be that realistic. Not in my opinion, it's more about telling a story with interesting and unique characters, and ways of dress play a large part of that. When we force everyone to dress similarly a lot of that characterization is lost.
When your job is fighting demons, having equipment suitable to that task is part of your characterisation and part of the story telling.
During the World Wars aircraft were mass produced in factories, but their pilots would paint them bright red, or all black, or give them shark's teeth, or add saucy nose art. Armour is often custom made, there is so much potential for variation and unique touches with style, additions, heraldry and mixed parts.
Taking practical equipment a character uses and adding personal touches to it will always say far more about a character than just giving them random nonsensical clothing.
When your job is fighting demons, having equipment suitable to that task is part of your characterisation and part of the story telling.
During the World Wars aircraft were mass produced in factories, but their pilots would paint them bright red, or all black, or give them shark's teeth, or add saucy nose art. Armour is often custom made, there is so much potential for variation and unique touches with style, additions, heraldry and mixed parts.
Taking practical equipment a character uses and adding personal touches to it will always say far more about a character than just giving them random nonsensical clothing.
When fighting demons, some the size of houses, no equipment is really up to the task, and really this is a slippery slope argument anyway, because no one will ever be able to agree on that special magical point when it's just enough that it "still practical" as if being covered in armor is all there is to survival anyway. So when do we start taking armors to the repair shop? What about when a buckle breaks in the field. Are we going to get attacked at night by the same enemies while at camp and not have our super heavy armor on? When are our characters who are walking for miles and hours in this heavy armor going to start suffering from exhaustion? When is the armor going to start protecting us less and less and becoming nothing but an encumbrance until we repair it. If there's swimming in the game, will the armor we wear cause us to sink if too heavy? Pick and choose your version of reality all you want but it's ridiculous because here's the real issue you're not getting.
Not everyone agrees with you, not everyone wants your extreme full armor version of characterization as the only option. Pretty much none of us are demanding your options don't exist, none of us are telling you how you have to feel about it, or that only our way is acceptable. You and others like you however insist it must be your way, it can only be your way, that because our way does not fit your vision it must be excluded period, end of story.
We acknowledge and accept your desires and needs, we say, we don't agree but believe you should have them. Your side says we are wrong, you do not agree with us, and thus we should not have them.
The issue is not that you want armors that are all covering and sometimes over "practical" all things considered. It's that you insist all armors should be that way no matter what anyone else believes.
When fighting demons, some the size of houses, no equipment is really up to the task, and really this is a slippery slope argument anyway, because no one will ever be able to agree on that special magical point when it's just enough that it "still practical" as if being covered in armor is all there is to survival anyway.
When you are fighting things with sharp bits (blades, teeth, claws) which, we know we will, you will be better off with light protection than not. Most of the combat shown has been fighting human sized things with swords or claws.
But I didn't actually play the realism gambit, I said characters should look like they do what they do. Realism can be abstracted away but the characters being represented are fighters, they should look the part. They carry weapons because they are fighters, they don't carry brightly coloured unicorns just because they could.
You and others like you however insist it must be your way, it can only be your way, that because our way does not fit your vision it must be excluded period, end of story.
Pretty much. Everything in the world says something about the world. If the world includes whatever the players want then it says that the world is pretty stupid.
But my only requirement is that characters use equipment that looks feasible. Characters can be made girly, sexy, manly, academic, stuffy, frumpy, boyish, prickly, noble, poor, draconic and so on once that requirement is met. Game companies employ professional artists, let them rise to the challenge.
The problem with the, "the characters are fighters, they should look the part" is that being a fighter and being equipped in armor are not the same thing. The one does not require the other. Now if it were, you're a roman soldier you should look the part, then sure. But fighter? Really? You going to honestly tell me wearing armor is necessary to look like a fighter? Good to know all those less armored warrior cultures throughout all history were not warriors or fighters of any sort, glad to clear that up. Now I'm not saying that wearing armor is not conductive to furthering survival, but is certainly not definitive of any role, especially not rogue and mage.
The issue is once again, the inclusion of rogues into the warrior grouping. They are not just a fighter (Which is apparently the only consideration anyone cares about on this topic) and there's plenty of room in the three classes for all our desires to get representation. I'm not talking about wielding pink unicorns either, don't obfuscate the issue by making silly points way outside anyone's expectations you know no one is arguing for. It's a red herring, it's ridiculous, and the comparison is intellectually insulting to anyone reading it.
I also do not think chainmail bikini's is appropriate either, but in the fight against them, the issue is being taken WAY too far to the other side.
The problem with the, "the characters are fighters, they should look the part" is that being a fighter and being equipped in armor are not the same thing. The one does not require the other. Now if it were, you're a roman soldier you should look the part, then sure. But fighter? Really? You going to honestly tell me wearing armor is necessary to look like a fighter? Good to know all those less armored warrior cultures throughout all history were not warriors or fighters of any sort, glad to clear that up.
I'm sure your condescension would be dreadfully witty and humorous if I'd actually specified how much armour characters need to wear, but I didn't, I said it would make sense for them to have light protection against sharp things.
If they are likely to be stabbed they'll want to try and protect against that - that could range from light leather to full plate, there are lots of options. If they need to move a lot they'll take that into consideration. If they're walking in all-weather they'll want to wear sturdy clothing. If it is hot and tropical it makes a certain kind of sense to go shirtless.
The issue is once again, the inclusion of rogues into the warrior grouping. They are not just a fighter (Which is apparently the only consideration anyone cares about on this topic) and there's plenty of room in the three classes for all our desires to get representation.
Yeah, sure, so long as their gear still looks like it can handle all that walking and fighting they do.
Honestly I'm confused, you say realism should be ignored for the sake of story and character. I say that characters and story are stronger when built on realism. Now you're saying that my view on realism is wrong (when I didn't specify) and that there is plenty of room for variation among rogues and mages that is still based on realism. Okay, great.
All I'm saying is that I want that foundation of realism. I really don't know where this fear of taking everything too far comes from.
Having armor designs that look practical does not mean that all characters will look the same, or that any sort of personal touch or flair will be lost. For example...
From feathered or plumed helms, engraving on armor, brightly colored tabards or tunics, heraldric symbols on tabards or shields...many real world warriors had plenty of features on their armor that served no purpose other than making it more aesthetically pleasing or the wearer more fearsome or impressive to look upon. Its a bit of a myth that realstic means plain and boring.
Having armor designs that look practical does not mean that all characters will look the same, or that any sort of personal touch or flair will be lost. For example...
Spoiler
From feathered or plumed helms, engraving on armor, brightly colored tabards or tunics, heraldric symbols on tabards or shields...many real world warriors had plenty of features on their armor that served no purpose other than making it more aesthetically pleasing or the wearer more fearsome or impressive to look upon. Its a bit of a myth that realstic means plain and boring.
Color a turd and it's still a turd. The shape of the armors alone just don't do it for me, and I hate helms. The thing is, I recognize how important helms are, I also recognize the uses of various armors. But other than the few rare gems, I do not find the realistic armors pleasing to look at. I play games to enjoy myself, I'm going to be looking at my character for hundreds of hours and weeks of game play. I do not want to be stuck in something I find ugly in my escape from reality to the realm of fantasy purely due to the desire for more realism. I'm trying to get a vacation from reality thank you very much. If anything highly decorated armor ends up looking gaudy and ridiculous to modern perceptions. Some recognition of modern tastes and sensibilities are not that bad, or the recognition of cultures that weren't as big on all that armor is not a bad thing either. Not to the exclusion of, and not to be a pervasive influence over realistic armors, but something. We're not talking about a short game here, this will be long stretches of my life, especially with all the play throughs I intend.
In real life my clothes are part of how I express myself and my self identity. If I feel the clothes express myself, and add to my appearance in some way, if I find them pretty and attractive, it makes me feel better and more comfortable. Put me in an outfit I don't like and find unappealing/non flattering and It'll make me feel uncomfortable. The further my characters are from these kinds of ideals, the less comfortable in their skin I am, and the less enjoyment I can get from the game, especially the longer it is, and the longer I am kept in this state.
I get it it, you want realistic armors, and think being colorful and gaudy makes it better, but for some of us that strict demand for realism is a serious detractor for our ability to enjoy the game for the long haul. Is why options are good, it gives varying people the ability enjoy the game. Keep the more realistic armors as the most common, that's fine, whatever I will relent to that, I will even say put the more exotic armors in the crafting system, so they're only in play if you choose to have it. Treat them as "costume" armors rather than world armors if you must, npcs would only have them where appropriate to "realistic" sensibilities. But allow the player to look how they want since it's them staring at them for hours not you, since you decide if your character will wear it or not and make your own judgement.
I mean we're talking about player and possibly party armor here, as in only on anyone if you decide to put it there. Some options is all I ask.
I really, REALLY want Iron Bull's baggy pants for my male qunari rogue. In fact, I'm heavily inclined to send Mike Laidlaw a tweet asking him if we'll ever get some leggings like that.
Not to be nit picky with your example, but if you think climbing around the mountains and it's steep trails and inclines in full plate is any better than that skimpy armor you have another thing coming. Not to mention if we're talking realism, being butt ass naked or wearing full plate verses a monster that big and agile are about equally irrelevant to the horror coming down upon you.
You can do a back flip in plate armor. You can run an obstacle course in heavy armor. There is very little sacrifice in mobility and speed when wearing heavy armor. (which isn't all that heavy) I've seen reenactors fight in heavy armor and they were every bit as quick as those who were not wearing any armor. Heavy armor making you clumsy and slow is an old myth that just wont die.
Also about your point about realism and monsters. Just because it features animals that don't exist in real life it doesn't mean that humans are suddenly resistant to cold. Or that they can fly like superman.
You can do a back flip in plate armor. There is very little sacrifice in mobility and speed when wearing heavy armor. (which isn't all that heavy)
Also about your point about realism and monsters. Just because it features animals that don't exist in real life it doesn't mean that humans are suddenly resistant to cold. Or that they can fly like superman.
Love that you're ignoring encumbrance of plate over long distance travel and hiking over mountains which is where you fight this dragon. Yes you can do a backflip in plate if strong enough and skilled enough. You cannot, however, do a backflip in plate after walking in it up a steep mountain slope for hours on end. As for animals that don't exist, is why I compared it too an elephant, in either case you are screwed, and no you cannot run as fast or as long in plate, or climb trees and rocks as well in plate, or properly tumble as well in plate, also that backflip will take a lot more out of you in plate.
Throwing on a suit of fullplate and showing off a bunch of maneuvers does not demonstrate anything over the long haul. Is easy to talk about the protective properties and ignore all the rest. Is also easy to do something short term and pretend it represents the same thing over an extended period, which is what is occurring during this game.
No the game doesn't give people magical abilities to ignore the weather just by having monsters around, or the ability to fly. It also doesn't give them super human endurance and stamina. And considering how metal is affected by heat and cold, both outfits are stupid in extreme weather conditions.
By realism always wearing these outfits everywhere is just as ridiculous as never wearing them.
I'm mountain climber, I carry more than 1/3 of my own body weight (215lbs) up mountains that are 12k ft tall, and the extra weight is not a big deal once you get used to it. And the weight distribution is far worse then when wearing a plate armor. Thank god the human body can greatly increase its strength and endurance through exercise and training.
You do realize plate armor is doing more to effect you than just being heavy, yes?
You know what, in the end it doesn't even matter, the realism argument isn't my real point anyway.
You know, never mind, just forget it. Fine no one can ever where anything that defines more than "I fight things" because that's all that matters. It also doesn't matter that other people like other things for their character.
It doesn't really matter, rarely got good outfits before either. Usually too skimpy and oversexualised. Now it's just the other extreme. Whatever.
<Tantrum over>
You do realize plate armor is doing more to effect you than just being heavy, yes?
Yes, but its still better than certain death from hypothermia though. Or getting fried in a desert till your skin peels off. People have been running around in very cold weather and in very hot weather in full plate armor, and while it was very awful to wear armor that trapped heat and cold they fought battles in those weather conditions. Though very few people run around on mountain tops or desert while wearing nothing but a skimpy cocktail dress. Or not for very long.
Retour en haut
