Ce sujet est fermé
Anyone who thinks that there is any chance of modding capabilities is going to be sorely disappointed.
There's not going to be any modding capabilities that BioWare puts into the game.
That hasn't ever stopped us in the past though. I'm not sure why it would stop us now.
Ultimately, this is how I feel about it. I don't really care if people like to dress their characters in a sexy way. It's not my game. Especially in a single-player game. It's not like I'll even have to look at their inquisitors. As long as there are sexy options for guys and gals, I'm fine. I will probably not use them, but it's nice to know they are there if I want them.
In MMO's, it's a bit different because I have to see and interact with their characters. It doesn't really effect me in the long run, but I do tend to eyeroll male characters in bad ass robes and hoods and masks and armor being accompanied Mako running around in a slave girl outfit. But, again, it's a minor annoyance at most.
Well if it makes you feel anybetter I have a fully white armored gree jugg lady running around with a Quinn in the unfettered trenchcoat with some knee boots on XD
swtor armour best
<snip>Force will protect me. We need armour for female like this. where is equality when we really need it.
Some of those are modded armor. And the ones that aren't all have equally or more revealing options for the ladies.
I'm not complaining because I like that they finally made scantily-clad male outfits too, but to suggest that swtor doesn't have more revealing female armor than male armor is kind of silly. The only time where a male armor is more revealing than a female armor is when the male armor is barechested (in which case the female armor usually has a single strap across her breasts - including cleavage and underboob).
...The day I thought I was buying a snazzy looking robe for my female sith only to have it turn in to a bikini with a hood. Silly me for thinking that robe is a robe and not checking that its not a sexist robe first
Yeah thankfully most of the CM armor avoids that there's still some sets that are just *sideeyes*
Some of those are modded armor. And the ones that aren't all have equally or more revealing options for the ladies.
I'm not complaining because I like that they finally made scantily-clad male outfits too, but to suggest that swtor doesn't have more revealing female armor than male armor is kind of silly. The only time where a male armor is more revealing than a female armor is when the male armor is barechested (in which case the female armor usually has a single strap across her breasts - including cleavage and underboob).
Yes I agree we should remove strap across her breasts.
When people overlook exploding blood magic bomb explosions and herculean feats and the presence of freaking elves and alien looking things (Qunari) and then fixate on the mere fact that this relatively hot looking character outfit is somehow the only impractical thing in this wild and mixed up universe, then call me crazy but that starts to look like some kind of irrational fear of sexuality rather than logical analysis.
Qunari don't exist (well as far as we know) at all so therefore practicality judges they shouldn't exist in game. Women shouldn't even be able to use two hand swords, and who knows what else.
HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH... oh god.... oh god... do you even tried that IRL? this is too good to be true. Hilarious, believe me because I did tried, one hand swords are a lot more difficult to use and bows. Long swords or weapons that use two hands are not that difficult.
Also if you need more evidences, here is a video from an expert.
http://youtu.be/j3OIjpLSaYQ?t=4m51s
I'm not a huge fan of chainmail bikinis, but I'd take Aribeth's armor everyday. It's beautiful
So far, I think Dragon Age has given quite a large choice of armors for females, from full plate (warden commander) to less covering light armors (Dalish). I like it that way.
I'm glad ladies like you speak out in support of skimpy armours (again emphasising that it has to be a choice to wear what you want). It used to be ridiculous when people's rationale for hating skimpy armours was that "women wouldn't wear that" presuming to speak for an entire gender.
Nowadays they've moved onto the realism and immersion arguments. Which is complete nonsense for various reasons people have already covered. Not to mention that there is pink lipstick in this game.
Somehow I doubt it is anything to do with realism and immersion, but maybe more to do with people's religion or culture of what is acceptable attire. Somebody mentioned previously something about a 19th century Victorian England attitude, they might not be wrong.
Just make half the armors fan service skin showers and the other half pratcial and functional pieces grounded in the no-fun zone.
What's the problem exactly?
I'm glad ladies like you speak out in support of skimpy armours (again emphasising that it has to be a choice to wear what you want). It used to be ridiculous when people's rationale for hating skimpy armours was that "women wouldn't wear that" presuming to speak for an entire gender.
Nowadays they've moved onto the realism and immersion arguments. Which is complete nonsense for various reasons people have already covered. Not to mention that there is pink lipstick in this game.
Somehow I doubt it is anything to do with realism and immersion, but maybe more to do with people's religion or culture of what is acceptable attire. Somebody mentioned previously something about a 19th century Victorian England attitude, they might not be wrong.
I sit in this lovely place where I like the armour to give the impression of being realistic but "rule of cool" still applies. I'm glad to know that I have the BSN here to tell me how wrong I am by not wanting skimpy armour.
Now if you'll excuse me I have to go do whatever it is that 19th century Victorian English people do. I assume it's some kind of tea drinking in fancy clothing while scoffing at the peasantry.
I sit in this lovely place where I like the armour to give the impression of being realistic but "rule of cool" still applies. I'm glad to know that I have the BSN here to tell me how wrong I am by not wanting skimpy armour.
Now if you'll excuse me I have to go do whatever it is that 19th century Victorian English people do. I assume it's some kind of tea drinking in fancy clothing while scoffing at the peasantry.
No you are not wrong for wanting awesome armour, because you want lore-friendly realism where you get full protection from the polygons and textures. That's a valid want. But there are people, like the OP, who desire unreal armour, because they view armour as a numerical value and would prefer artistic licence. It's also a valid want. How would a company satisfy both audiences?
It's not as simple as dividing people into pro-realistic and pro-sexy. The actual two groups are:
1. People who only want all awesome armour.
2. People who want a choice between sexy and awesome armour.
The third group, people who only want sexy armour, does not exist. Not a single person in this thread has asked for that. Maybe they are all over on lover's lab or whatever.
The thing about group 2 is that it contains people who will only ever use awesome armour (and ignore the skimpy stuff), but they are not selfish enough to deprive the people who do want sexy armour.
That's what mods are for.
And now you made me sad that this game is not moddable 
I definitely like the more attractive armors/outfits, whether it was Morrigan in DAO or Isabella in DA2. The only problem is there's so few of them, it seems like pretty much every outfit except those two were on the 'no-fun' side. I like the idea of making half the armors attractive, fun armors, and the other half can be for folks who prefer 'realism' above all else. That way everybody wins!
There's not going to be any modding capabilities that BioWare puts into the game.
That hasn't ever stopped us in the past though. I'm not sure why it would stop us now.
Exactly. I have no expectations that they will at all care about the modding community, quite the opposite. It's gonna be up to us modders to solve it, somehow.
No you are not wrong for wanting awesome armour, because you want lore-friendly realism where you get full protection from the polygons and textures. That's a valid want. But there are people, like the OP, who desire unreal armour, because they view armour as a numerical value and would prefer artistic licence. It's also a valid want. How would a company satisfy both audiences?
It's not as simple as dividing people into pro-realistic and pro-sexy. The actual two groups are:
1. People who only want all awesome armour.
2. People who want a choice between sexy and awesome armour.
The third group, people who only want sexy armour, does not exist. Not a single person in this thread has asked for that. Maybe they are all over on lover's lab or whatever.
The thing about group 2 is that it contains people who will only ever use awesome armour (and ignore the skimpy stuff), but they are not selfish enough to deprive the people who do want sexy armour.
I am in group 4 I want sexy awesome armour. SUPER!
Guest_IAmVim_*
I am in group 4 I want sexy awesome armour. SUPER!
FRANKY!!!!
Eh, I tend to just use whatever armour has the best stats, regardless of how it looks. Unless it looks REALLY terrible, and there's another one that looks better with almost the same stats.
I'm glad that Bioware is allowing customisation of the appearance of armour separately to managing armour stats. It will encourage me more to mess around with how my characters look, rather than just mixing and matching the best gear I can find.
I know. A gameplay designer I met at the Expo yesterday was not optimistic at all about the prospects for modding.And now you made me sad that this game is not moddable
No you are not wrong for wanting awesome armour, because you want lore-friendly realism where you get full protection from the polygons and textures. That's a valid want. But there are people, like the OP, who desire unreal armour, because they view armour as a numerical value and would prefer artistic licence. It's also a valid want. How would a company satisfy both audiences?
It's not as simple as dividing people into pro-realistic and pro-sexy. The actual two groups are:
1. People who only want all awesome armour.
2. People who want a choice between sexy and awesome armour.
The third group, people who only want sexy armour, does not exist. Not a single person in this thread has asked for that. Maybe they are all over on lover's lab or whatever.
The thing about group 2 is that it contains people who will only ever use awesome armour (and ignore the skimpy stuff), but they are not selfish enough to deprive the people who do want sexy armour.
There is even a forth group people who want the sexy armor only on the female character.
I mean what could be better then everyone having access to all the armors? sexy or not and all genders? I really do not get some people, why would you make the armor distributions unfair, when you can give everyone the same armor and choices.
In the end of the day I am in other group.
5. If you want sexy ridiculous armor the same must be done to the male characters and I am mean everything, dresses, high heels, all of it. If not than do practical for everyone.
It depends on what is meant by 'sexy' armor.
If we are talking chainmail bikinis here, I think the biggest problem is not that it makes it much more difficult to suspend disbelief (though that is an issue) but that it looks retarded.
No I wasn't talking about bikinis and thongs. But for certain types of characters a revealing armor fits their personality a lot more than a full plate.
Putting female armors in DAO massive cleavage just for the sake of it is an entirely different matter.
It is just silly and inmature from developers.
Cleavage in the lightest armor set you can get, a armor set that is suppose to offer light protection in favor of speed and flexibility. However I noticed you didn't post the female model for medium, heavy and massive armor? of which all 3 have no cleavage windows, outside of maybe the boob plate shape on the medium and heavy armors, while massive armors look identical on both male and female save for race size. 1 out of 4 ain't bad considering again what those armors are meant to do. Armors for men and women are designed definitely, big surprise given the shape of the two sexes but really how much more protection would the woman have anyway in lieu having her neck and upper chest covered a little more by another layer of leather? not much if any because a arrow to that section of the armor is still going to kill you just as much as it would kill anyone else. The point of Light armor regardless of the design is to protect against things such small cuts or stabs from small blades, and the people who wear such armor are usually trained to be very agile and quick in terms of reaction, so that bigger weapons do not find them at all. Different designs for different purposes... considering women wore dresses with open cleavage regularly it makes sense in some part that their light armor would have something similar just in case they wore it under a formal heavy dress.
makes perfect sense for Leliana to have the DAO leather armor set on underneath that cleavage window and all. and before anyone says but Dragon Age didn't have dresses with open chest,
so minus the shoulder pads there is some room to argue one needed to be able to hide their combat leathers under their clothes.
I'm pretty certain that is ceramonial armour. When they were off conquering "all known world" (actually, they knew of a lot of land they didn't conquer), for the most part they used mail, and then later switched to the lorica segmenta. The breastplate in that picture is utterly impractical.
There is actually some archaeological evidence indicating that versions of a muscle cuirass were worn in combat. They've been excavated from soldier's graves in Campania, and the Aemelius Paullus monument at Delphi depicts two legionaries wearing muscle cuirasses into battle.
That is why I've never had a problem with so-called 'boob armor,' despite generally preferring armor designs that look realistic. I see it as being the female equivalent of a muscled cuirass. There are also plenty of other artistic flourishes on historical armor designs that served no practical function, from engravings, to plumes or feathers, to things like winged or horned helms. 'Boob armor' quite easily falls into the same category and is no less impractical.
So as far as plate armor for female characters go, a mix of designs that both conceal a woman's shape and others that seem molded to mimic it are fine with me.
No you are not wrong for wanting awesome armour, because you want lore-friendly realism where you get full protection from the polygons and textures. That's a valid want. But there are people, like the OP, who desire unreal armour, because they view armour as a numerical value and would prefer artistic licence. It's also a valid want. How would a company satisfy both audiences?
It's not as simple as dividing people into pro-realistic and pro-sexy. The actual two groups are:
1. People who only want all awesome armour.
2. People who want a choice between sexy and awesome armour.
The third group, people who only want sexy armour, does not exist. Not a single person in this thread has asked for that. Maybe they are all over on lover's lab or whatever.
The thing about group 2 is that it contains people who will only ever use awesome armour (and ignore the skimpy stuff), but they are not selfish enough to deprive the people who do want sexy armour.
I'm not going to go through all 11 pages of this thread, but I know that there's been people attacking others for not liking the sexy armour and wanting to have less cleavage in the case of stuff like most of Origin's leather armour on female characters. It's not strictly saying "There should only be sexy armour", but it's just as stupid in my opinion.
Personally I'd like to see an appearance slot so I can use whatever armour look I want without worrying about stats. Then you can have a mixture of awesome, sexy, and awesomely sexy.
What I don't want is to end up in a situation where one type of armour look has superior stats to the other and people have to choose between style or stats. Especially for those who play on higher difficulties where those stats are going to be much more mandatory.
I really don't like feeling like I need to use armour I hate the look of =P
That is why I've never had a problem with so-called 'boob armor,' despite generally preferring armor designs that look realistic. I see it as being the female equivalent of a muscled cuirass. There are also plenty of other artistic flourishes on historical armor designs that served no practical function, from engravings, to plumes or feathers, to things like winged or horned helms. 'Boob armor' quite easily falls into the same category and is no less impractical.
So as far as plate armor for female characters go, a mix of designs that both conceal a woman's shape and others that seem molded to mimic it are fine with me.
Facy-designed armor, or helmets at least, did sesrve a purpose. It identified officers and other leaders of an army. it told the troops who to rally around and who's orders to follow. Giving such officers such fancy, eye-catching uniforms continued right up until World War One (until snipers figured out this was a really good way to figure out who to shoot at)
At any rate, it's not really the same thing as making armor that goes "Look! Boobs!" As that messes with the actual structure of the armor, making it less capable of defense.
What's attractive varies from person to person
Nope
5 more pages and it's mostly more people trying to get their covenant applications in to become ministers and nuns.
Retour en haut
