408 réponses à ce sujet

[wolfsite]

AresKeith wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Not sure why Isabella keeps getting brought up. 

Because you gotta choose the booty

Not the context I was refering to but hey that is where the thread is going so what the hell.

[Rotward]

Faerunner wrote...

I'm all for less sexualization. If it's not part of the character (as Isabela's clothes say about her), doesn't serve a practical purpose for weather or combat (for all her talk of practicality, Morrigan's outfit does not look warm, useful, comfortable, or easy to move around in), and/or reveals more skin than its male counterpart (like the belly-exposing female Dalish armor), then I say no.

Morrigan's clothes are as practical as mage hats. Everyone knows mages like to show off how impractical their outfits can afford to be

[leaguer of one]

spirosz wrote...



A man chooses his booty.

I'm channaling  Chairman Kurihara from Kangoku Gakuen. Look it up.

[bEVEsthda]

Thong armor suits have a lot of artistic and cultural merit.
However, it's not part of DA lore or universe, so doesn't exist.
Whatever OP may say.

There are a lot of really harsh things to say in general, about this "sexualization" line of debate, or even viewpoint in general, but I'm sure they've already been said.

So let me remind you of what McAuliffe said at Bastogne.

[efd731]

leaguer of one wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Can't a man just enjoy his booty.

Is a man not entitled to the sigh of fine booty? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It has to be politacly correct.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It needs to be covered.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It just too damn cold.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible.
I chose... Porn.

leaguer, truly you are a god amongst men.

[leaguer of one]

AresKeith wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

No Duelist are hit and run character with better servivalbility then other rogue due to them having a huge dogue rate. You would use her to tank bosses then?

>implying upfront characters = tanks

DPS character are up front characters? Since when?

[TheRealJayDee]

 I can live with varying degrees of, urm, "sexualized" characters in games. I'm happy with a character's look as long as it's

a) consistent with the character's personality, development and circumstances
consistent with the game's setting, design and tone

What I consider hilarious and well done in Dragon's Crown I probably wouldn't ever want to see in a Dragon Age game. In general I'd say Bioware isn't doing a bad job, but sometimes they too fail. 







Poor Ash...! 

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 18 janvier 2014 - 10:59 .

[spirosz]

I'm still confused at using Morrigan as an example. A person who lived out in nature, not caring for what society cares, nor deems normal. Just seems like the wrong type of "oversexualization" to be stereotyping. Personally, I think Bioware has done a very fine job with the DA series, compared to ME2 and ME3. With Miranda (though I understand and agree with what they created) to Ashley pre-ME3 release.



Too much for my eyes.

Modifié par spirosz, 18 janvier 2014 - 10:46 .

[AresKeith]

wolfsite wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

wolfsite wrote...

Not sure why Isabella keeps getting brought up. 

Because you gotta choose the booty

Not the context I was refering to but hey that is where the thread is going so what the hell.

From what I can tell she keeps being brought up because of her outfit, which can be countered because it makes her personality 

Even though they probably could've added a bit more to it

[Aaleel]

JordanDH wrote...

Nefla wrote...

Just look at the title of the freaking thread. The op and others list a select few armors and characters (only Isabella, Morrigan, and Bethany, and with all three it fits their personality and two are mages so armor/coverage doesn't even matter) but whenever someone brings up women who are not sexualized like Wynne, Merril, Aveline, Ser Cauthrien, Marethari, Shale, Rikka (and she's a freaking prostitute) Orana, Anora, Branka, Hespith, Shianni, Lily, Meredith, any female guard or templar, Oriana, Isolde, Marty, any chantry priest, Leliana, the player if they chose to be, etc...the reply is  "oh there are a few minor examples of non sexualized women/armor."

People are acting like it's battle bikini rodeo and that bioware is so sexist for making a woman's revealing robe slightly more revealing than a man's revealing robe. Should there be more skimpy clothing/armor choices for men? Heck yes! But acting like there are no modest armor/clothing choices for women is untrue and doing a huge disservice to one of the only game companies that actually cares about women, LGBT, etc...

The arguments have been made that "it's so unrealistic for any armor to have molded boob plates because she would break her sternum so they should change them" in a game that is extremely unrealistic in almost every area. The word "oppression" has even been used. I'm sorry but saying that because a certain character has cleavage or that there is 1 (optional) armor that shows midriff on a woman it's oppression is ridiculous.

The personalities are part of the problem!  The title of the thread says "reduced" not removed.  The issue is, as I've said numerous times, equality.  Women are more sexualised than men in general in the games.  Less than in other games made by other companies, yes.  But there is still a disparity.

Honestly that just has to do with the demographics of the people playing the game and what they think they want.  Just look at the majority of mods made for most games by the players.  Look at the mods made for males and the mods made for females.  Males are going to get better looking more detailed armor and females are going to get more revealing armor.  Right or not, I don't see how people are acting like they don't know why things are the way they are.

[leaguer of one]

BraveVesperia wrote...

I don't actually think there's a real problem with this in DA.

Sure, the DAO female armours all had breast outlines, but none of the ones in DA2 did. They were all as practical as the male versions. The revealing female mage outfits (such as Velanna's) were also gone in DA2.

Isabela had a scanty outfit, but it did suit her personality (an alternative choice would have been lovely though), meanwhile Merrill and especially Aveline were outfitted very practically. Bethany's starting outfit was a weird combination of boobs-and-chainmail, but she only wears it for one Act. After that, it's purely practical. We also had Varric and his chest hair on display. Flemeth has become sexualised though.

So far for Inquisition, we've seen that Morrigan's replaced her weird bikini-scarf thing for a dress, Cassandra in full plate armour, and Vivienne in nice robes (I know there's a boob window, but I'm reserving judgement until we see more of her personality).

^This.....

[leaguer of one]

TheRealJayDee wrote...


Poor Ash...! 

Sure.. Because her armor is so much defferent then what she was wearing in ME1 IN me3.



Look at hat expose clevage....It's there some where.

[Nefla]

JordanDH wrote...

Nefla wrote...

Just look at the title of the freaking thread. The op and others list a select few armors and characters (only Isabella, Morrigan, and Bethany, and with all three it fits their personality and two are mages so armor/coverage doesn't even matter) but whenever someone brings up women who are not sexualized like Wynne, Merril, Aveline, Ser Cauthrien, Marethari, Shale, Rikka (and she's a freaking prostitute) Orana, Anora, Branka, Hespith, Shianni, Lily, Meredith, any female guard or templar, Oriana, Isolde, Marty, any chantry priest, Leliana, the player if they chose to be, etc...the reply is  "oh there are a few minor examples of non sexualized women/armor."

People are acting like it's battle bikini rodeo and that bioware is so sexist for making a woman's revealing robe slightly more revealing than a man's revealing robe. Should there be more skimpy clothing/armor choices for men? Heck yes! But acting like there are no modest armor/clothing choices for women is untrue and doing a huge disservice to one of the only game companies that actually cares about women, LGBT, etc...

The arguments have been made that "it's so unrealistic for any armor to have molded boob plates because she would break her sternum so they should change them" in a game that is extremely unrealistic in almost every area. The word "oppression" has even been used. I'm sorry but saying that because a certain character has cleavage or that there is 1 (optional) armor that shows midriff on a woman it's oppression is ridiculous.

The personalities are part of the problem!  The title of the thread says "reduced" not removed.  The issue is, as I've said numerous times, equality.  Women are more sexualised than men in general in the games.  Less than in other games made by other companies, yes.  But there is still a disparity.

Wynne is elderly, Merril is still wearing relatively revealing clothes (compare her to the male mage, Anders), Hespith is a relatively minor character whose major trait is her relationship with another character, Oriana gets killed right at the beginning of the game and is your brother's wife, Rica is a prostitute as you pointed out and your sister, Lily's primary involvement is her relationship to someone else, Shianni is raped.  Sexualisation isn't just about a character being promiscuous or dressing "provocatively", it's about a lot of their involvement being about sex.  In a vacuum, these examples wouldn't matter so much, but when you put them together, you see start to see a pattern, and THAT'S where the problem is.

Women dress FAR more revealing in real life, and I see this as sexism against men. A woman can be whatever she wants to be, dress however she wants to dress. Female soldier? No problem! Male home maker? Prepare to be a laughing stock. Woman wearing coverals, jeans, sports jersey? Just fine! Man wearing booty shorts and a tube top? He'll probably get beat up. Games reflect society, though I do want girlier/more revealing male outfts, I also want my character to be able to wear what I would wear irl. (things that every male I know would NEVER wear)

The fact that the 3 whole characters that wear "revealing" clothing have a personality to match is a problem...how? I see nothing revealing about Merril's clothing at all, the only skin you see is her head and elbows, pretty Victorian standard of "revealing."

That list was all off the top of my head of women who are not portrayed as any kind of sex object. From your rebuttal it seems you have decided that "objectified" = a woman who is single, and has had sex at some point...Shianni having been raped doesn't make her sexualized any more than it made Alain sexualized. Rikka is a prostitute yet isn't objectified. There are also plenty of male prostitutes in both games. The problem is, you are seeing what you want to see, forming your own pattern.

[Dr Mew]

 Well I can see the point OP is trying to make; toning down on over sexualization would mean a lot of change across the board mainly for male main characters. Why?

Along the right of my forum webpage is the legendary commander Shepard... but wait! He's in a very typical, over sexualized pose for a guy; He's looking rugged, he's got stumble going on, his armour is actually outling the shape of his torso muscles. He's caucasian He generally looks like the 'Bad boy' stereotype which funnily enough a lot of women go ga-ga over. Now look across the board in games, movies, tv and advertisement. This is the norm.

You can't say women are portrayed as sexualized, oppressed objects for male fans because of the way their clothing is designed or what is on show and then call sexism as you try to compare them to male characters in identical fields. If you notice male characters' clothing is always designed to make them look more muscular or battle worn, giving them the feeling of being a protector. They're not shown to have a little pot belly, a horrible receeding hair line or even to be Black or Asian.

So before you run off ranting about how women are over sexualized, just ask yourself; Is it happening to men as well, just in a different way?

[Rotward]

leaguer of one wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...
Poor Ash...! 

Sure.. Because her armor is so much defferent then what she was wearing in ME1 IN me3.

*snip*

Look at hat expose clevage....It's there some where.

She has boob armor, but lets be honest, she's not getting hit by wedges (blades, spears, etc). She's being shot at. The shape of the armor isn't important; the material and shields are what matters in mass effect. 

[AresKeith]

spirosz wrote...

I'm still confused at using Morrigan as an example. A person who lived out in nature, not caring for what society cares, nor deems normal. Just seems like the wrong type of "oversexualization" to be stereotyping. Personally, I think Bioware has done a very fine job with the DA series, compared to ME2 and ME3. With Miranda (though I understand and agree with what they created) to Ashley pre-ME3 release.



Too much for my eyes.

For me with Miranda, I was more ok with her outfit as casual wear but when it came to missions and combat that's where the problem lies. Plus the on-going ass shots

[LiL Reapur]

Dr Mew wrote...

 Well I can see the point OP is trying to make; toning down on over sexualization would mean a lot of change across the board mainly for male main characters. Why?

Along the right of my forum webpage is the legendary commander Shepard... but wait! He's in a very typical, over sexualized pose for a guy; He's looking rugged, he's got stumble going on, his armour is actually outling the shape of his torso muscles. He's caucasian He generally looks like the 'Bad boy' stereotype which funnily enough a lot of women go ga-ga over. Now look across the board in games, movies, tv and advertisement. This is the norm.

You can't say women are portrayed as sexualized, oppressed objects for male fans because of the way their clothing is designed or what is on show and then call sexism as you try to compare them to male characters in identical fields. If you notice male characters' clothing is always designed to make them look more muscular or battle worn, giving them the feeling of being a protector. They're not shown to have a little pot belly, a horrible receeding hair line or even to be Black or Asian.

So before you run off ranting about how women are over sexualized, just ask yourself; Is it happening to men as well, just in a different way?

You guys need to look at this.......

Modifié par LiL Reapur, 18 janvier 2014 - 10:54 .

[leaguer of one]

Rotward wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...
Poor Ash...! 

Sure.. Because her armor is so much defferent then what she was wearing in ME1 IN me3.

*snip*

Look at hat expose clevage....It's there some where.

She has boob armor, but lets be honest, she's not getting hit by wedges (blades, spears, etc). She's being shot at. The shape of the armor isn't important; the material and shields are what matters in mass effect. 

Everyone in ME has boob armor, even the men. From ME1.

[AresKeith]

leaguer of one wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...


Poor Ash...! 

Sure.. Because her armor is so much defferent then what she was wearing in ME1 IN me3.
*snip*

Look at hat expose clevage....It's there some where.

>implying he was talking about her armor

[Rotward]

@ Ares Miranda was all about being perfect, including her looks. Also, armor has no relevance in mass effect unless you build up inches of material between you and your enemy. It's not a sword and board game. You're being shot at by blasters, usually. Your main defense is a spherical shield.

[Seboist]

Rotward wrote...

@ Ares Miranda was all about being perfect, including her looks. Also, armor has no relevance in mass effect unless you build up inches of material between you and your enemy. It's not a sword and board game. You're being shot at by blasters, usually. Your main defense is a spherical shield.

The Michael Jackson resemblence was perfect.

[leaguer of one]

AresKeith wrote...

spirosz wrote...

I'm still confused at using Morrigan as an example. A person who lived out in nature, not caring for what society cares, nor deems normal. Just seems like the wrong type of "oversexualization" to be stereotyping. Personally, I think Bioware has done a very fine job with the DA series, compared to ME2 and ME3. With Miranda (though I understand and agree with what they created) to Ashley pre-ME3 release.



Too much for my eyes.

For me with Miranda, I was more ok with her outfit as casual wear but when it came to missions and combat that's where the problem lies. Plus the on-going ass shots

Your saying this after being able to wear this...
https://lh5.googleus...WlswZ9hhmBhvvG4
In me1. This super shin type thing the show off nearly every thing fromt eh waste down.

Miranda's Shin tight clothes is a distraction but Shepards skin tight light armor is not some how.

[leaguer of one]

Seboist wrote...

Rotward wrote...

@ Ares Miranda was all about being perfect, including her looks. Also, armor has no relevance in mass effect unless you build up inches of material between you and your enemy. It's not a sword and board game. You're being shot at by blasters, usually. Your main defense is a spherical shield.

The Michael Jackson resemblence was perfect.

You do understand he was trying to look like a woman right?

[leaguer of one]

AresKeith wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...


Poor Ash...! 

Sure.. Because her armor is so much defferent then what she was wearing in ME1 IN me3.
*snip*

Look at hat expose clevage....It's there some where.

>implying he was talking about her armor

>Implying that makeup is sexualistion.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 18 janvier 2014 - 11:02 .