2576 réponses à ce sujet

[Revan Reborn]

My reaction exactly. LOTR is probably the most idealist fantasy you can find, albeit Tolkien made some concessions to realism, and in Dungeon and Dragons armor is less used for protection than for the various enchantment that allow for your lvl 30 warriormonkthief to arm-wrestle gods into submission.

You are over-analyzing. I'm using franchises that clearly inspired Dragon Age, especially Dungeons and Dragons, as BioWare developed Baldur's Gate. It's fairly easy to make comparisons with LOTR when referring to Dark Spawn and the Deep Roads, of which can easily be compared to Sauron's orc army at Mordor. Do I also need to bring up the point of the underground Dwarven kingdoms? I'd rather not as that would get off topic. The point is armor matters and plays a role into that particular archetype of character.

[eyezonlyii]

I tend to find much other the "sexy" armor in video games ridiculous. Not only does it look non-functional, but oftentimes looks downright ugly to boot. The problem, as I understand, is that most armor designs (in other games primarily) is done only from the (straight) male viewpoint, so that you get this lopsided representation of what people look like. 

 

So long as there are options either way, I think I'll be good.

 

To be honest though, I was worried about mages getting proper pants. That irritates me the most about fantasy games. 

[Seraphim24]

You should try Japanese games, you get the ultimate male sexy

 

[Puppy Love]

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

[eyezonlyii]

to be fair though, I don't think anyone would spend that much time on a suit that was crafted for the purpose of getting wrecked (the sole reason to wear armor). while some colors and patterns could work, I don't think fancy fills and ornaments would be reasonable. I think the same way about the super "masculine" arm spikes and mega shoulders too.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

Well just so my stance is clear I don't hate Fantasy/sexy armor*quite the opposite infact* and am very much in favor for some to be included as OPTIONS for players who want them however I'm against those being the ONLY options for female PCs.

 

 

I tend to find much other the "sexy" armor in video games ridiculous. Not only does it look non-functional, but oftentimes looks downright ugly to boot. The problem, as I understand, is that most armor designs (in other games primarily) is done only from the (straight) male viewpoint, so that you get this lopsided representation of what people look like. 

 

So long as there are options either way, I think I'll be good.

 

To be honest though, I was worried about mages getting proper pants. That irritates me the most about fantasy games. 

 

 

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

 

 

to be fair though, I don't think anyone would spend that much time on a suit that was crafted for the purpose of getting wrecked (the sole reason to wear armor). while some colors and patterns could work, I don't think fancy fills and ornaments would be reasonable. I think the same way about the super "masculine" arm spikes and mega shoulders too.

 

 

Quoting all of this, but yeah I think this is a fantasy game... more options is never a bad thing, especially when we're not talking about real life.  Who cares if a chainmail bikini wouldn't do anything in real life? That matters as much as that video earlier that showed what combat in full plate is really like.

 

It's like in D&D, most GMs if I want to say my studded leather armor is of the chainmail bikini variety, very few GMs care.  Because, studded leather has stats that it gives my character.  I paid the money for it to have those stats, if i want it hot pink it doesn't change the stats.

 

Or, what I do even more often is the tabletop equivalent of the "appearance tab" which is the glamered enchantment.  So I put that on my armor and i can wear studded leather but glamer it to look like I'm  a belly dancer. 

[Puppy Love]

to be fair though, I don't think anyone would spend that much time on a suit that was crafted for the purpose of getting wrecked (the sole reason to wear armor). while some colors and patterns could work, I don't think fancy fills and ornaments would be reasonable. I think the same way about the super "masculine" arm spikes and mega shoulders too.

You know what forget it, why bother with armor variation at all.  Have one set of light, medium, and heavy armor, since armor being decorated, having personality, ect doesn't matter.  In fact lets do everything we can to make sure every single suit of armor is as non decorative and bland as absolutely possible, because it might get damaged and ruin the design in a game where no armor ever shows damage ever, but let's ignore this fact.

[AresKeith]

You know what forget it, why bother with armor variation at all.  Have one set of light, medium, and heavy armor, since armor being decorated, having personality, ect doesn't matter.  In fact lets do everything we can to make sure every single suit of armor is as non decorative and bland as absolutely possible, because it might get damaged and ruin the design in a game where no armor ever shows damage ever, but let's ignore this fact.

 

I think it's best to just wait till the game comes out

[eyezonlyii]

You know what forget it, why bother with armor variation at all.  Have one set of light, medium, and heavy armor, since armor being decorated, having personality, ect doesn't matter.  In fact lets do everything we can to make sure every single suit of armor is as non decorative and bland as absolutely possible, because it might get damaged and ruin the design in a game where no armor ever shows damage ever, but let's ignore this fact.

 

That wasn't my point at all. I like armor with personality, so long as it's not over the top (depending on the medium). For instance, dragon age armor to me should be a lot more dull than say FF armor, simply because of the aesthetic. However, Dark Souls and Demon's Souls had some functional and personable armor too.

 

But like I said, options. If you want your Femquisitor to run through a contingent for Templars in a Victorian ballroom Hoop dress and massive pauldrons and a scarlet sash around her thigh, more power to you.  

[In Exile]

We should combine them. Sawesome armour! 

 

[Han Shot First]

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

 

I think these all look fairly feminine without completely abandoning practicality: 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

The second one might be a better fit for a mage though.

[AresKeith]

I think these all look fairly feminine without completely abandoning practicality: 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

The second one might be a better fit for a mage though.

 

I'd even consider them sexy too

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I still don't really see the reality argument. It's like, there is a reason people create games, because they just want to see the most fantastical amazing things and have these ultimate hero moments.

 

I'm sure on some level some sense of reality is being factored in, but I just can't really grasp it. I thought this character from a recent game I played was pretty cool. It's obviously at least intended to be attractive, but I guess you can tell she's a mage of some kind at the same time. Maybe that fits into the mage exemption... people don't seem to have as big an issue if it's cloth as compared to when it's plate mail, because of how little sense that makes.

 

Spoiler

Oh hey, Myuria. 

 

That reminds me. I should really play Star Ocean: The Last Hope again one of these days. 

[pengwin21]

Quoting all of this, but yeah I think this is a fantasy game... more options is never a bad thing, especially when we're not talking about real life.  Who cares if a chainmail bikini wouldn't do anything in real life? That matters as much as that video earlier that showed what combat in full plate is really like.

 

It's like in D&D, most GMs if I want to say my studded leather armor is of the chainmail bikini variety, very few GMs care.  Because, studded leather has stats that it gives my character.  I paid the money for it to have those stats, if i want it hot pink it doesn't change the stats.

 

Or, what I do even more often is the tabletop equivalent of the "appearance tab" which is the glamered enchantment.  So I put that on my armor and i can wear studded leather but glamer it to look like I'm  a belly dancer. 

 

The thing is that unlike D&D, artists have to spend time developing and animating said armor pieces. It's easy to say more options is good, give us everything when you're not designing it.

 

I question how much 'sexy' or other seemingly impractical armors fit the overall Dragon Age aesthetic given design limitations. Not saying they should definitely not be included at all, but there are priorities to keep in mind.

[Shadow Fox]

The thing is that unlike D&D, artists have to spend time developing and animating said armor pieces. It's easy to say more options is good, give us everything when you're not designing it.

 

I question how much 'sexy' or other seemingly impractical armors fit the overall Dragon Age aesthetic given design limitations. Not saying they should definitely not be included at all, but there are priorities to keep in mind.

True but I don't see the problem with asking as long as you're polite and courteous when doing so.

[Mr.Hmm]

I think these all look fairly feminine without completely abandoning practicality: 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

The second one might be a better fit for a mage though.

 

For the second one if only it was possible for mages to use swords too when they are casting spells , I would love me a battle mage (no Knight Enchanter ) . Something like Gandalf

[katling73]

Functional is sexy. I love armour like that worn by Brienne of Tarth in GoT, Mulan in OUaT and Aveline in DA2. My favourite mod for Skyrim is the Practical Female Armors one by JZBai.

 

As much as I can - sort of... if I tilt my head to one side and squint a bit - understand the reasoning behind Isabella wearing nothing but a shirt and some boots, I always reacted to it by never adding a single point to increase her health. I don't care how good a rogue she is, if she's wearing nothing but a shirt then her enemy only has to get one good shot in and she's seriously injured or dead so I always reflected that in her stats.

 

I'll do similar things if possible if my character has no choice but to wear something like a boobplate. I'll add some to her health to reflect the fact that at least she's wearing armour but I won't add as much as if she was wearing sensible armour because a boobplate is a recipe for a broken sternum at the very least and a stab through the heart at the worst. For example, I didn't add a single point of health to my Dalish elf until I got her out of that ridiculous armour she started out in.

[karushna5]

It matters the genre. Games like Dragon Age they seem...Out of place? On a non mage. JRPGs don't really go for grit and more for style so they are perfect for them. Some sexy armors are really out of place in Thedas, but i think a few for the mage makes sense(I mean its not like they protect themselves with armor) And plenty of rogue armor can be "sexy" without saccrificing function. Warriors on the other hand it can be hard for the main game to justify. Give and take I guess.

[9TailsFox]

Star Wars is a terrible example. Jedi do not wear armor due to the fact of how restricting it is and wearing armor would hinder their reflexes.

 

Dragon Age clearly takes a lot of inspiration from medieval dark fantasy such as Lord of the Rings and Dungeons and Dragons. In all of these franchises, wearing armor is an absolute must to survive, unless you are a mage or a rogue. For warriors, which this thread is really about, armor is required.

And  I thought we discussing all clothing. You not gonna pick who you fight. Do you think more armour would helped Arishok to win against Hawke. Hawke would still cut armour like paper, because he used blood magic. And you didn't read what I write. I don't care about realist clothing. If I like it I like it, practical or not. And if people want armour like mousestalker show in video. Maker NO! Its boring. best practical armour in DA for me is Sentinel armour. I would like it back in Inquisition. 

 

And armour in  LotR? This is how you fight forces of darkness in LotR. This is not armour this is clothes well except dwarf. But what do you expect from dwarf. And all orcs half naked.

[9TailsFox]

Functional is sexy. I love armour like that worn by Brienne of Tarth in GoT, Mulan in OUaT and Aveline in DA2. My favourite mod for Skyrim is the Practical Female Armors one by JZBai.

 

As much as I can - sort of... if I tilt my head to one side and squint a bit - understand the reasoning behind Isabella wearing nothing but a shirt and some boots, I always reacted to it by never adding a single point to increase her health. I don't care how good a rogue she is, if she's wearing nothing but a shirt then her enemy only has to get one good shot in and she's seriously injured or dead so I always reflected that in her stats.

 

I'll do similar things if possible if my character has no choice but to wear something like a boobplate. I'll add some to her health to reflect the fact that at least she's wearing armour but I won't add as much as if she was wearing sensible armour because a boobplate is a recipe for a broken sternum at the very least and a stab through the heart at the worst. For example, I didn't add a single point of health to my Dalish elf until I got her out of that ridiculous armour she started out in.

rogue max cunning to 40 asap. next all points to dex. 

Merrill 2 points to HP 1 point to magic and she is tank, all sustain spells possible, and she is god.

[karushna5]

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

Yes, I really want that to be the future for most designs, (people like me actually want male armor so you can always toss us a few, in the feminine future to come) I feel like people read feminine is bad/unpractical/silly. Some? Yes absolutely, but masculine armor does the same thing and gets complimented on it. We need, at some point, feminine heroes that are not feminized. I mean their sole definition does not fit into "woman" but we can sort of take back what have been sexualized about us for so long and show it is just as good if not more so, when we have pride in our femininity. Woman owned femininity that does not necessarily have to be sexualized.

Too many female heroes are either 1) what men want to see, boobs, skin, and often a complete erasure of style or style that focuses solely on those aspects That is othering. And a good reason many women go to option 2 or have huge issues with themselves is femininity is so often defined by othering women in the first place. OR 2) Women who are expected to act, move, and feel like men, but whose whole definition is "I am a woman who is trying to be like a man" the insecurity that keeps them from being heroes in their own rights because they don't have features other than trying to overcompensate UNlike their male counterparts who have traits other than trying to act like supermale.

 

We need women who are allowed to be feminine without needing to be sexualized to make it obvious. One reason I really love Vivienne is she is so feminine and is not sexualized for it. Armors that are practical and feminine I think are important, heroes that are capable and feminine are important. Female heroes are important.

[PhroXenGold]

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

 

Practical armour for women is the same as for men, at least in terms of the basic shape of the armour (yes, a suit for a woman would be slightly different due to is being specifically fitted to her dimensions, but the basic shape is the same). And decoration and ornamentation on armour is by no means a feminine trait. Go have a look at the kind of armour rich men used in the late medieval period. Often it was hugely ornamented. However, despite that, it was still functional armour due to the undelying shape. I've certainly nothing against having "pimp my plate" to make your armour all fancy and decorative - provided that it isn't compulsory - my issue comes when the actual functionality of the armour is ignored. Or, even worse, when functionality is applied inconsistently, where some people wear sensible plate and mail armours and others wear mail bikinis and breast-plates (as opposed to actual breastplates), or paulrons twice the size of their head. I can live with everyone dressed as Conan and Red Sonja, if that's how that setting works. I just hate it when you see them alongside Edward, the Black Prince.

 

[karushna5]

Practical armour for women is the same as for men, at least in terms of the basic shape of the armour (yes, a suit for a woman would be slightly different due to is being specifically fitted to her dimensions, but the basic shape is the same). And decoration and ornamentation on armour is by no means a feminine trait. Go have a look at the kind of armour rich men used in the late medieval period. Often it was hugely ornamented. However, despite that, it was still functional armour due to the undelying shape. I've certainly nothing against having "pimp my plate" to make your armour all fancy and decorative - provided that it isn't compulsory - my issue comes when the actual functionality of the armour is ignored. Or, even worse, when functionality is applied inconsistently, where some people wear full plate and others wear mail bikinis and breast-plates (as opposed to actual breastplates).

But look at our companions, and our 3 warriors have 3 different styles which are also different than Cullen's. Saying that no style at all is applicable is like what someone said earlier. Why not one suit of armor and you just apply enchantments to it? It would be the same difference. The fact is across cultures, people have had armor that was both functional and had its own flair. Asking for a slight feminine flair isn't the same thing as not being practical OR being the same as men.

 

I say this, but I absolutely love the new approach. I love practical armor and I am happy, but I feel people who ask for feminine non sexualized things should get them as I feel this is overall the ideal.

[PhroXenGold]

But look at our companions, and our 3 warriors have 3 different styles which are also different than Cullen's. Saying that no style at all is applicable is like what someone said earlier. Why not one suit of armor and you just apply enchantments to it? It would be the same difference. The fact is across cultures, people have had armor that was both functional and had its own flair. Asking for a slight feminine flair isn't the same thing as not being practical OR being the same as men.

 

I say this, but I absolutely love the new approach. I love practical armor and I am happy, but I feel people who ask for feminine non sexualized things should get them as I feel this is overall the ideal.

 

Oh, I'm not against armour showing some level of feminity - have a look at some of the images I've posted earlier in this thread, particularly post 442. And armour designs do vary a fair bit between time periods and locations, so it's not by any means a matter of having one design, but the basic prinicples of providing protection remain regardless of the sex of the wearer. However, if the functionality is completely sacrificed, why wear armour at all? It's clearly not neccesary, so why not just wear a comfortable set of clothes that give you more mobility? It's an huge immersion breaker for me. If armour is supposed to provide protection, then it should be designed in a way that would actually protect. On the other hand, if you're just handwaving it away, and saying "magic" or similar, then there should eb no benefits to wearing full plate and a nice set of clothes should give me the same protection. Which it never seems to do...

[MissOuJ]

As long as I don't see bikini-mail or boob-plate (please let there not be boob-plate), I'm golden.

 

Screw sexy armor, I just want armor with feminine designs, patters, ornamentation, coloring, ect.  I'm just sick of practical meaning the exact same armor as the male, and that meaning following masculine ideals. 

 

Also this, although I don't know about "feminine designs", since that concept is a bit shaky (as in, what exactly is *feminine*), but variation other than "spikes, more spikes, and flat colours"? Yes, please.

 

I just want armour to look decent on my fem!Quisitor regardless of her race, have colours other than mud-brown and gravel-gray, and for the armour to be realistic enough and cover enough skin that I am spared the overwhelming desire to headdesk until I bleed.

 

And if there absolutely needs to be bikini-mail for some dumb reason... let there please be an equivalent bikini-thong for male characters. For justice. (And also for the hilarious, hypocritical, logic-breaking backlash that would undoubtedly follow). But please don't. I doubt it'd be worth it.