513 réponses à ce sujet

[wolfhowwl]

David7204 wrote...

Regardless of many people might like to
claim otherwise, this is not just a battle. It's a story. And clothing
does not serve just to protect people. It serves to characterize them.

Correct. A strong, competent female character will wear clothing or equipment suitable for her job.

A character designed to titillate will wear something more like this:

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 10 octobre 2013 - 03:20 .

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Regardless of many people might like to claim otherwise, this is not just a battle. It's a story. And clothing does not serve just to protect people. It serves to characterize them.

I take it you didn't read the title or the OP then

Since it is indeed about the combat/battle, and the DA games don't use outfits for characterization 

[David7204]

Dragon Age absolutely uses outfits for characterization. Nearly all fiction does. Gaider discussed this on his blog.

Modifié par David7204, 10 octobre 2013 - 03:21 .

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

Regardless of many people might like to claim otherwise, this is not just a battle. It's a story. And clothing does not serve just to protect people. It serves to characterize them.

Sure, but I can still design Jack to have light armor that is all scarred and has graffiti  (like her look) when in Space or Isabella to wear a form of chain mail while still staying true to her character's personality. 

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

Dragon Age absolutely uses outfits for characterization. Nearly all fiction does. Gaider discussed this on his blog.

And you understand that this breaks certain people's immersion? 

[David7204]

I understand it perfectly.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Dragon Age absolutely uses outfits for characterization. Nearly all fiction does. Gaider discussed this on his blog.

Not in the way you view it

[David7204]

Yes, in the way I view it.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Yes, in the way I view it.

So you think that characters should have a unique look regardless of it being sexy 

[David7204]

I don't recall saying anything about 'sexy' in this thread.

[AresKeith]

In this thread? no. In other thread regarding this, very much so

But to repeat myself, you obviously didn't read the title or the OP then since it is indeed about the combat/battle

[David7204]

It's not just about battle, and it makes no difference if the OP says so or not.

In any case, he effectively discredits himself by the incredibly silly suggestion that big weapons and fancy armor is because of a player's power fantasy. Also the completely wrong claim that such weapons and armor are somehow a trend of 'modern games.' Which is utter nonsense.

Modifié par David7204, 10 octobre 2013 - 03:37 .

[What a Succulent Ass]

David7204 wrote...

Regardless of many people might like to claim otherwise, this is not just a battle. It's a story. And clothing does not serve just to protect people. It serves to characterize them.

Yo, this whole thread is wild.

"They should be dressed sexily."

Yo.

[Br3admax]

Yep, Aveline's plain plate armor absolutely characterized her as the bore that she was.

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

I believe every male character should show off their characterization at all times.

Have it hanging out for all to see.

Females doe, cover yourselves.

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

It's not just about battle, and it makes no difference if the OP says so or not.

In any case, he effectively discredits himself by the incredibly silly suggestion that big weapons and fancy armor is because of a player's power fantasy. Also the completely wrong claim that such weapons and armor are somehow a trend of 'modern games.' Which is utter nonsense.

Fantasy is closely related to "over the top" as the OP used the term.  That's the idea behind fantasy.  Might as well not be able to carry all that loot because I don't see my Warden carrying a bag, do you? 

[spirosz]

SergeantSnookie wrote...

I believe every male character should show off their characterization at all times.

Have it hanging out for all to see.

Females doe, cover yourselves.

Your post.  Your post has hit the the ding dong. 

[dreamgazer]

My characterization is bigger than yours.

[AresKeith]

spirosz wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It's not just about battle, and it makes no difference if the OP says so or not.

In any case, he effectively discredits himself by the incredibly silly suggestion that big weapons and fancy armor is because of a player's power fantasy. Also the completely wrong claim that such weapons and armor are somehow a trend of 'modern games.' Which is utter nonsense.

Fantasy is closely related to "over the top" as the OP used the term.  That's the idea behind fantasy.  Might as well not be able to carry all that loot because I don't see my Warden carrying a bag, do you? 

Pocket dimension 

[Ravensword]

David7204 wrote...

Yes, in the way I view it.

However, that's not the way others view.

[David7204]

Is being able to carry loot a 'power fantasy'? Is it in the game because modern COD teenage boys need it to feel tough and cool? Is it because they're just too stupid too appreciate the 'realism' of lugging around 200 pounds of equipment like real, intelligent, hardcore RPG players?

Or is it maybe there just because it makes the experience more fun?

[Br3admax]

dreamgazer wrote...

My characterization is bigger than yours.

Hehe, I'm the dynamic one here. 

[Br3admax]

David7204 wrote...

Is being able to carry loot a 'power fantasy'? Is it in the game because modern COD teenage boys need it to feel tough and cool? Is it because they're just too stupid too appreciate the 'realism' of lugging around 200 pounds of equipment like real, intelligent, hardcore RPG players?

Or is it maybe there just because it makes the experience more fun?

Carrying around a punch of junk is fun, yo. I loves carrying around a punch of dirty rags.