2576 réponses à ce sujet

[PhroXenGold]

 

I like what I've seen of the DA:I armor so far. The Inquisitor and Blackwall's heavy armors look a lot better and than the heavy armors of DA:O/ DA2.

 

Yeah, the stuff from the trailers and livestreams looks pretty good. I do like that, in general, there's plenty of heavy armour options that aren't just the massive plate armour which characterised warriors in the previous games, as I much prefer the scale and mail styles of armour, or limited plate such as Cass has been shown in at times. That said, note that Bull has a pretty hefty suit of plate on there in the background, so it seems there's good options for that too, and he won't be running around shirtless the entire time.

 

Throw in some reasonably sensible outfits for mages - even Viv's, for all it's flamboyancy, is likely more practical than the heavy robes typically seen, and overall, what we've seen in the way of combat outfits is pretty darn positive in my books.

[Kharn-ivor]

The Immortals were an elite guard of the Persian empire who also were a heavy infantry not just archers. Eastern armies tend to arm soldiers with swords/pikes AND bows. Even both Persian and Byzantine cataphracts had pikes and bows. It's also somewhat difficult to wear a plate in desert.

I think you might be missing my point there, that or my point wasn't as clear as I thought.

The reason most archers don't have armor is because the armor cost more than the archer , so they are not going with lighting clothing because it's somehow better but because they have no choice.

If the cataphracks can use bows while in full mail or scale then so can everybody else.

Yeah plate might be a bit of trouble in the desert but thats a different issue.

[eyezonlyii]

Throw in some reasonably sensible outfits for mages - even Viv's, for all it's flamboyancy, is likely more practical than the heavy robes typically seen, and overall, what we've seen in the way of combat outfits is pretty darn positive in my books.

THIS! So much THIS!

 

I was happy in DA2 when Hawke started with what seemed to be a light vest and pants. Then he very quickly went back to wearing robes like a circle mage. I wanted to scream :YZOU'RE AN APOSTATE! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU ADVERTISING FOR?!?!? 

 

But then I got the champion armor, with it's portable in-flight tray and all was well.

[Eshaye]

THIS! So much THIS!

 

I was happy in DA2 when Hawke started with what seemed to be a light vest and pants. Then he very quickly went back to wearing robes like a circle mage. I wanted to scream :YZOU'RE AN APOSTATE! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU ADVERTISING FOR?!?!? 

 

But then I got the champion armor, with it's portable in-flight tray and all was well.

 

 

LOL That's why my Hawke stubbornly only wore the pant outfits. I was VERY surprised to find a black pirate looking one at some point and wore it far beyond what I should have been.

[Hadeedak]

Saw a programme that reconstructed Ancient Greek linen armour, and it was surprisingly good at its job. 

 

 

Wool, silk, and a couple other textiles can be pretty effective. The problem is that, in most cases, if you want to make solid armor out of it, it takes extra time and treatment, and can be more expensive. Armor's not cheap.

 

That being said, if you've ever worn an old fashioned wool sweater made completely with sheep wool, it's surprisingly solid. Especially compared to the usual cotton junk most people wear these days, or the fabulously warm, light weight, easily ripped synthetics.

[tmp7704]

Given that there are records of the 'Woads' as they call them in that film fighting skyclad (bollock naked!) then what they've done is acceptably cover the bits of her that would get in the way when she's running/jumping around.

This avoids my question rather than answers it. Why do you think it just happens the one person who is given this sort of attire and not random collection of furs, leathers and/or chainmail is a young woman? And why such care about 'historical accuracy' is selectively applied to getting a female character half-naked, in a movie which plays fast and loose with everything else, including its basic premise?

[Hadeedak]

This avoids my question rather than answers it. Why do you think it just happens the one person who is given this sort of attire and not random collection of furs, leathers and/or chainmail is a young woman? And why such care about 'historical accuracy' is selectively applied to getting a female character half-naked, in a movie which plays fast and loose with everything else, including its basic premise?

 

 

I rather suspect it's that she's the main character (granted, I haven't seen the movie, so I know nothing about it beyond that one still). While the armor's revealing, it's rather... unisex about it. If a man was in that particular armor, I doubt anyone would bat an eye. It is vaguely annoying she's the only one distinguished by that particular outfit. I hope it's to frame her importance, and not to titillate. And I rather hope there's other 'woads' around, possibly out of the shot.

 

Edit: It is rather nice to see a costume that's binding the girls down, rather than shoving them up so they're front and center. There's a reason sane people wear sports bras for physical activity, and not pushup bras. A reason that seems to escape many costume designers.

[Lilaeth]

This avoids my question rather than answers it. Why do you think it just happens the one person who is given this sort of attire and not random collection of furs, leathers and/or chainmail is a young woman? And why such care about 'historical accuracy' is selectively applied to getting a female character half-naked, in a movie which plays fast and loose with everything else, including its basic premise?

What Hadeedak said.  And the other women in the battle scenes were dressed in similar armour, or variations on it, as well as some of the men.

[Eshaye]

The movie in question is an adaptation of King Arthur from a historical point of view instead of a fantasy one. The archer girl shown above is Gwenevere. 

 

edit for pic:

 

[Timate]

Personally I like heavy armor bulky armor, so far they have done a good job with what they have shown so far. Personally when playing any game with this similar setting if you have a warrior/knight if he does not use a helmet then to me he is not a knight. Having less armor makes me think of a foot soldier such as roman soldiers boring at least to me it is. Women or men can wear what you call sexy armor/clothing as long as it fits the game but to me it has to make sense going into battle with hardly any armor on makes no sense unless you are a mage or rouge. It has already been shown several times you will be able to craft armor and make armor to your taste you may like a armor you get early on craft high end material and craft that armor out of that material also get certain material to create the color of the armor/clothing of your desire. Again it makes no sense not to have heavy armor in this type of game and the armor has not even been that heavy looking if you think this is bad you have not played to many games. Maybe give it a chance and once it comes out and you play more then 100hours to be able to make a good response then say what you think should happen.

[Lilaeth]

Personally, I like a nice chainmail shirt.  That Immortals gear was great, thought the chainmail yashmak was a bit much!

[eyezonlyii]

Personally I like heavy armor bulky armor, so far they have done a good job with what they have shown so far. Personally when playing any game with this similar setting if you have a warrior/knight if he does not use a helmet then to me he is not a knight. Having less armor makes me think of a foot soldier such as roman soldiers boring at least to me it is. Women or men can wear what you call sexy armor/clothing as long as it fits the game but to me it has to make sense going into battle with hardly any armor on makes no sense unless you are a mage or rouge. It has already been shown several times you will be able to craft armor and make armor to your taste you may like a armor you get early on craft high end material and craft that armor out of that material also get certain material to create the color of the armor/clothing of your desire. Again it makes no sense not to have heavy armor in this type of game and the armor has not even been that heavy looking if you think this is bad you have not played to many games. Maybe give it a chance and once it comes out and you play more then 100hours to be able to make a good response then say what you think should happen.

It doesn't even make sense for a mage or rogue not to wear armor. A mage should theoretically be able to wear whatever a rogue does. Neither are expecting to take full body blows in a fight.

[AzureAardvark]

edit for pic of picts:

 

Sorry, couldn't resist!

 

Plus, I'm maybe a little burnt out discussing the historical accuracy, tittilation quotient, and/or validity (?) of Keira Knightly's nipples.

 

Hopefully there are enough options in the game for everyone to enjoy their character outfit/armors, regardless of tastes.

[Timate]

Never said they had to also I mentioned only if they are mage or rouge would it be ok not to wear heavy armor. Rouge can be speculated when it comes to armor they would wear from light plate/chain to leather. Mages typically wear robes and leather sometimes it can vary but typically robes.

eyezonlyii

[Hadeedak]

 

Hopefully there are enough options in the game for everyone to enjoy their character outfit/armors, regardless of tastes.

 

 

I hope so! ... Cause I know for a fact I'm going to want my qunari mage to look very different from my dwarf tank. 

 

I wonder if I should see that movie. I do like Arthurian stuff. A lot. Probably more than I should. But I'm also inclined to hide from a lot of it.

[AzureAardvark]

I wonder if I should see that movie. 

 

I enjoyed it; not really my usual cup of tea, mind, but I thought it was well done.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/

[eyezonlyii]

Never said they had to also I mentioned only if they are mage or rouge would it be ok not to wear heavy armor. Rouge can be speculated when it comes to armor they would wear from light plate/chain to leather. Mages typically wear robes and leather sometimes it can vary but typically robes.

eyezonlyii

I wasn't aiming that at you specifically, it was just a general gripe on why all mages everywhere in every fantasy setting wear robes without sufficient reason. I mean you're on a field of battle, no one cares who fabulous you look. lol

[AzureAardvark]

I mean you're on a field of battle, no one cares who fabulous you look. lol

While I agree that robes are kinda ... meh ... I disagree with this statement, particularly in an RPG.

We just have different definitions of 'fabulous'.

[Shadow Fox]

The movie in question is an adaptation of King Arthur from a historical point of view instead of a fantasy one. The archer girl shown above is Gwenevere. 

 

edit for pic:

 

Ugh I hated that movie...

[eyezonlyii]

While I agree that robes are kinda ... meh ... I disagree with this statement, particularly in an RPG.

We just have different definitions of 'fabulous'.

washing bloodstains out of my velvet coat gets rather tedious though 

[Remmirath]

Really, I'm not interested in functional, 'realistic' armour too much. This is a work of fantasy, an escapist work of fiction, and I like the fantasy hero/heroine bodies and sexiness that has always been such a big part of this genre and its escapist appeal. Dull, dour 'realism' is both misguided and unappealing (honestly, nobody ever wore heavy plate except for tournaments and set-piece battles).

Full plate was in use through around the late 1400s up until firearms came fully into play. Yes, it was mostly used by the nobility and by the cavalry, but that was largely due to cost and supply. The infantry did often have lighter suits consisting mostly of breastplates and some additional plates, so even there, it wasn't that they completely shunned plate, it was that they picked and chose the most protective elements and added it onto some other armour.

Also, appeal is not universal. It may not be appealing to you, but it certainly is to some others. I would personally be tempted to say that it's the focus on sexiness in fantasy that's been misguided, but instead I will say that really there is plenty of room for both takes on the genre. Dragon Age has been aiming for the most part for a more realistic (or dark and gritty, if you prefer) take, so skimpy armour is out of place within the context of the setting.
 

There is also another matter when it comes to acceptable skimpy armour, and that's whether there is any logic to it being skimpy. Personally, I'd say any actual armour with exposed skin on the torso is essentially sexualised. There is simply no reason for it. If you're just wearing a bit of cloth or leather that provides no protection, as in the above image, fine, reveal all you want. But if you're wearing armour it should, in a setting based roughly on real mechanics, actually be designed to protect you. And making it "skimpy", even if there isn't a concious intent to sexualise the character wearing it, is inconsistent with such a setting.

I agree. At least work on covering up the vital areas first. Nobody in their right mind is going to wear full greaves and pauldrons and then leave their chest exposed.
 

Okay, I wasn't gonna touch this , but it looks like I'm gonna have to add my two cents. Having little clothing in war when you were an archer or skrimisher was the norm in ancient times. The guys in the back are holding spears and shields. That woman is not. She's holding a bow. Realism I think shouldn't even be applied into fantasy games, since wearing full plate for more than an hour is is exhausting not even considering having to fight in it.

For at least part of history, that was because archers were often drawn from the lower classes and were not only considered expendable and unimportant, but didn't have the funds to properly equip themselves. Mass issued equipment is a fairly recent thing.

But yes, archers and skirmishers would often voluntarily wear less armour. I realise there's been a general focus on plate in this thread (probably because the idea of skimpy full plate is the most egregious example of skimpy armour), but chain and more moderate armours I would say should in fact be the norm. I do love full plate, but it makes much more sense for it to be rare and/or expensive, and I think the brunt of the armour you generally find should fall into more the chain/scale/partial plate area.
 

We're spoiled rotten by fairly high tech mining, smelting, and refining. And keeping all that in mind, if you nip down to your local hobby shop and look for a piece of mass produced chain mail to wear... It's STILL expensive. Let alone a piece made by hand for you.

Tell me about it. I'd love to get myself some armour, but I'm small enough that frickin' nobody makes it in my size be default, so I'd have to get everything custom-made. The default sizes of chain often aren't too costly (often in the $200-$500 range), but start looking for a suit of full plate, and then you're going to go over $1000. Doesn't work to not have it fitted.

So yeah, armour's expensive. Always has been, may always be.
 

It doesn't even make sense for a mage or rogue not to wear armor. A mage should theoretically be able to wear whatever a rogue does. Neither are expecting to take full body blows in a fight.

Indeed. I'm not fond of the armour restrictions that were introduced in DA II (or the weapon restrictions, for that matter, but that's neither here nor there to an armour thread).

[n7stormrunner]

Full plate was in use through around the late 1400s up until firearms came fully into play. Yes, it was mostly used by the nobility and by the cavalry, but that was largely due to cost and supply. The infantry did often have lighter suits consisting mostly of breastplates and some additional plates, so even there, it wasn't that they completely shunned plate, it was that they picked and chose the most protective elements and added it onto some other armour.

Also, appeal is not universal. It may not be appealing to you, but it certainly is to some others. I would personally be tempted to say that it's the focus on sexiness in fantasy that's been misguided, but instead I will say that really there is plenty of room for both takes on the genre. Dragon Age has been aiming for the most part for a more realistic (or dark and gritty, if you prefer) take, so skimpy armour is out of place within the context of the setting.

 

 

then why does it exist in the damn setting

[Hadeedak]

Because qunari and, to a lesser extent, dalish.

 

And Morrigan and Isabella.

 

I'm not completely against skimpy armor... Where it makes a certain breed of sense. Granted, I think Isabella's crazy, but at least she has elbow and knee pads. But if it shows up on my warrior tanks, I'm going to mutter. I may scowl.

[Voragoras]

then why does it exist in the damn setting

 

That's what we're complaining about.

[Seraphim24]

As for why we like those settings, well, for me, it's because they give a real sense of immersion. We have a basic understanding of how this world works, therefore if a fictional world works in much the same manner, with additional, consistent fanatsy elements, we can understand how that world works, thus enabling us to immerse ourselves deeper in the world. If a world works significnatly differently, then we're spending time trying to understand these differences, particularly if they're inconsistent, instead of immersing ourselves. And on top of this, we think "realistic" armours (and other aspects like weapons, architecture etc,) look damn cool. We think they look attractive - not sexy perhaps - but attractive none-the-less. They appeal to our aesthetic tastes. Not every aspect of appearance is about sex - which incidentally doesn't mean it's about suppressing sexuality, it's simply about putting other concerns above sexuality when immersing ourselves in fictional worlds - and looking like you're capable of kicking ass and taking an absolute beating - which realistic amour does - in the middle of battle is, for us, far more important then getting your breasts out.

 

Everything else I've seen is basically just going in circles, even this point really. I didn't see anyone argue the point about relative popularity of Japanese vs. Western games in Japan and outside of Japan after my most recent attempt. It exists in one instance and not the other, that is evidence that while a handful of people such as yourself like those settings for what they are, most people don't, and if you want to make a game that appeals to most people, you would make a game with those J-game kinds of aesthetics. I'd agree that sometimes more realistic outfits are attractive, but unfortunately those are mostly in Japanese games also.

 

It's a group of people like X and Y, and a group of people that like Y. There is still, as far as I can tell, basically one person who only likes X (Remmirath). Additionally, much of the stuff in category X had plenty of sexualized stuff (Annah, Morrigan, Desire Demon, mabe even Sera a bit in DA:I). Rather than argue these points in the abstract, I personally just glance at the evidence and go, yeah, ok. I believe it's personally because of a bunch of nefarious reasons which I've highlighted, but it doesn't even really matter what the exact reason is to me, one is clearly more desirable for people in the aggregate. The continued attempts to lecture and criticize every attempt at supporting a more female/sex friendly atmosphere illustrates that BW is clearly not the hero we're looking for in this respect.

 

Also no offense but that abstract reason as far as I can tell is that sexualized outfits are ok basically anywhere (Silly western games like Saints Row, all Japanese games, all comics, all comic based games) except DA. It's a very small exception at this point, and I suspect thats largely because all this restraint in one area requires satisfaction in others. Heck, even in DA I'm sure (Desire demons use sex to kill, Morrigan's a mage). It's basically only warriors in a Dragon Age game as far as I can tell.

 

It's like has anyone ever modded Morrigan's appearance into a more conservative one? Uh huh, didn't think so.

 

As to why I myself am attracted to category X games, it is frequently the gameplay and other aspects like that which appeal to me more. I don't care how cool the characters are in a card game or VN, they aren't active and so I don't like to play them. Additionally they frequently don't put in the effort of making dialogue or scenarios which illustrate the depths of those characters. I only get to know them through a single image.