1832 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

What if the chainmail bikini gave you a combat advantage against male npcs? Anytime they stare at your character like a sex object, they're technically off guard and you exploit that with an awesome kill move.

 

[phaonica]

Not your bad, no. 

 

Not-Brevnau's bad. He has a habit of routinely infuriating large groups of people. 

 

Ah, this is a thing that I did not know was a thing. Thank you.

[VickVeel]

Maybe certain npcs sure but then you'd have to account for males who are attracted to other types of armors too. Does this mechanic work for males who enjoy other males in slightly suggestive armor? There are a lot of factors to consider when making a game already

 

Having NPC's response to what a player is wearing is something that has been dabbled with in Skyrim mods, hopefully game developers get on the band wagon.

[VickVeel]

Ah, this is a thing that I did not know was a thing. Thank you.

 

I'm going to do you a favor and answer my own question on your behalf, I'm going to understand your point of view WITHOUT your help.

 

Look at these robes from Dragon Age Origins.

 

 

The above robes are kind of like chainmail bikini armor, but for a guy.  I did not want my character wearing the above robe, because I thought it made him look gay.  Given that these robes are Tevinter and Dorian is Tevinter, it all makes sense now, but anyways.....

 

I don't want my character wearing the above robe. Is this similar to how you don't want your character wearing chainmail bikini? Because it makes you feel uncomfortable right?

 

But, don't women want to look sexy in general?

[Uirebhiril]

Having NPC's response to what a player is wearing is something that has been dabbled with in Skyrim mods, hopefully game developers get on the band wagon.

 

I think it's seriously time you got on the wagon yourself.

[VickVeel]

I think it's seriously time you got on the wagon yourself.

 

Dude, your profile picture is awesome, that is how Cassandra Pentaghast should've looked like.

[KaiserShep]

Maybe certain npcs sure but then you'd have to account for males who are attracted to other types of armors too. Does this mechanic work for males who enjoy other males in slightly suggestive armor? There are a lot of factors to consider when making a game already

 

I think a fair example is the Crest of Mercy. While you don't actually see it, it at least shows that you can equip something to get a certain reaction out of specific NPC's, since they allow you to enter peacefully so you can challenge their leader, rather than having to fight your way in and kill everyone. And really, that sort of thing is where reaction to your armor would be the most meaningful. There are some other things, but it would have to be fairly generic, such as, if you attend a ball, and wear a more expensive suit or dress, more NPC's may compliment you on your appearance.

[phaonica]

I don't want my character wearing the above robe. Is this similar to how you don't want your character wearing chainmail bikini? Because it makes you feel uncomfortable right?

 

But, don't women want to look sexy in general?

 

I would say that, yes, the 'chainmail bikini' sexualizes a character in a way that makes me feel uncomfortable.

 

I would also say that, yes, I personally like characters to look sexy, but there is a respectful and a disrespectful way to do that. There is a difference between being a sexy body and being a sexy person. I don't really now how to describe it...

[VickVeel]

I would say that, yes, the 'chainmail bikini' sexualizes a character in a way that makes me feel uncomfortable.

 

I would also say that, yes, I personally like characters to look sexy, but there is a respectful and a disrespectful way to do that. There is a difference between being a sexy body and being a sexy person. I don't really now how to describe it...

 

Lustfilled vs Classy?  

 

BE TOTALLY HONEST. Would you rather chainmail bikini be removed from the game or leave it in for dark, slutty female characters with no class?  AKA controversial female characters?  Please be honest, I'm not going to come down on anyone, just trying to understand a different point of view.

[AresKeith]

Dude, your profile picture is awesome, that is how Cassandra Pentaghast should've looked like.

 

[SardaukarElite]

You avoided the question though, how does it not work in a game with serious combat? You don't realize how much men love breasts do you? There are many accounts of male soldiers through out history that let their guard down around women.

 

Pretty sure there aren't any accounts of women soldiers using their breasts to distract men in combat though.

[Lady Artifice]

You avoided the question though, how does it not work in a game with serious combat? You don't realize how much men love breasts do you? There are many accounts of male soldiers through out history that let their guard down around women.

 

Okay...Could such an event conceivably occur? Sure. Does a depiction of that event represent the male in question as particularly intelligent or competent? No. 

 

So you've come up with a comedy scene for the action adventure RPG. That's fine. 

 

What I don't think we're quite on the same page about, among other things, is whether that comedy scene you've concocted presents a reasonable argument regarding the general practicality of armor bikinis. 

 

::shrug:: Basically, I have no particular problem with bikini armor, because I just don't take the fantasy seriously enough for that. I prioritize aesthetics over practically in fiction and games all of the time. 

 

So, have you're bikini armor for all I care, and more power to you, but could you please try to understand why other people outside of the militant and hateful villainous feminists you rage so passionately against might think "Hey, that's kind of stupid and impractical"?

[phaonica]

Lustfilled vs Classy?  

 

BE TOTALLY HONEST. Would you rather chainmail bikini be removed from the game or leave it in for dark, slutty female characters with no class?  AKA controversial female characters?  Please be honest, I'm not going to come down on anyone, just trying to understand a different point of view.

 

I think that, given that developers have limited resources, that they should devote their resources to respectful options and leave the "no class" options to the modders.

 

And that's the last I'm going to say about it.

[TheOgre]

VickVeel, I'm not necessarily shooting down your idea. I just need to understand will there be more to this than appearance and possibly some effects. Like I liked Kaisersheps idea of maybe and I might be assuming a bit much so correct me here KaiserShep. Some kind of cultural benefit to wearing specific attire. 

 

In your example, I'd say instead of fancy dress for being in Orlais, maybe possible disgust with some slight interest from some npcs? 

 

Maybe an 'approval' system that works on a level of dialogue and sales prices being influenced by what you wear..

 

That would be a neat idea.

[Lady Artifice]

But, don't women want to look sexy in general?

 

Not all of them. 

 

And more importantly, not everyone has the same interpretation of what qualifies as sexy.

[VickVeel]

Pretty sure there aren't any accounts of women soldiers using their breasts to distract men in combat though.

 

I'm not talking about realism in anyway, keep in mind that Dragon Age Origins & Dragon Age 2 were fantastical.

 

I think that, given that developers have limited resources, that they should devote their resources to respectful options and leave the "no class" options to the modders.

 

And that's the last I'm going to say about it.

 

What if some women are highly sexualized, but some men are as well? Then it would be equal, would that be fine? Or do you still prefer a more conservative classy approach?

[Han Shot First]

The chainmail bikini is stupid and should never find it's way into any RPG.

 

Nevermind for a moment that it oversexualizes the character wearing it...if it is exposing more skin than it covers it is no longer armor. The character at that point might as well be nude or wearing only clothing, as realistically they'd be getting no protection from the small bits of chain or plate that completely fail to cover their vitals.

[KaiserShep]

VickVeel, I'm not necessarily shooting down your idea. I just need to understand will there be more to this than appearance and possibly some effects. Like I liked Kaisersheps idea of maybe and I might be assuming a bit much so correct me here KaiserShep. Some kind of cultural benefit to wearing specific attire. 

 

In your example, I'd say instead of fancy dress for being in Orlais, maybe possible disgust with some slight interest from some npcs? 

 

Maybe an 'approval' system that works on a level of dialogue and sales prices being influenced by what you wear..

 

That would be a neat idea.

 

I think that it could get a bit complicated though. The trick is determining which armor gets which effect, and how much of an impact certain getups will have for the story or how it affects the demeanor of certain companions/NPC's. Like, if you equipped more revealing armor, should people catcall? Should you get (digusted noise) noise sounds as you pass by? Murmurs of scandal? These sorts of things can, no will, become kind of annoying, and end up feeling a tad pointless, and frankly, I don't think it would be well received and with good reason. But more than that, it may be hard to discern which armor gets which response, unless it has something listed in the attributes like (people will think this armor is hella slutty!) or (no one will believe you're with Hero Faction #4).

 

I think the most sensible way to have armor affect characters in the game would be to have symbols elicit a response, but this only really works if the actual story of the game makes it relevant. Like, if a group called the Flying Bastards gang is at war with the Flatulent Snoufleurs and you walk into Snoufleur territory wearing the Bastards' emblem, all the armed NPC's will instantly be hostile. But I'm still not sure how well this sort of thing can even work except for some special occasions, like using a special banner to gain favor or something like that.

[phaonica]

What if some women are highly sexualized, but some men are as well? Then it would be equal, would that be fine? Or do you still prefer a more conservative classy approach?

 

Degrading them equally is still degrading them.

[VickVeel]

The chainmail bikini is stupid and should never find it's way into any RPG.

 

Nevermind for a moment that it oversexualizes the character wearing it...if it is exposing more skin than it covers it is no longer armor. The character at that point might as well be nude or wearing only clothing, as realistically they'd be getting no protection from the small bits of chain or plate that completely fail to cover their vitals.

 

IMO if Bioware wants to make an authentic fantasy RPG with realistic armor, then they should start the series that way from the FIRST GAME, not make a drastic change in the third installment.   You have to understand that Dragon Age Origins & Dragon Age 2 were fantastical in nature.  They did not adhere to realism in regards to armor. 

 

Making such a huge change puts the game into the bait & switch category.

 

I'm all for realism, if the game series starts that way.  But you can't start with realism then go into fantasy in the third installment or vice versa.

[Terodil]

I have to hand it to you Vick, the way you can make people go off the rails is quite worthy of admiration. Ares in particular seems to become so incoherent s/he can only spam and post stupid pngs/gifs.

 

Anyway, the 'compromise' that's standing in the room is not a bad one, I think. Instead of trenchcoat #3 for both sexes have just ONE more shapely armor for both sexes. As somebody said here, it's not just naked skin / bikini mail that makes sexy; the person wearing it obviously is the most important (and imo the female main cast was a bit short-changed in DA:I). Adding an armor that just flatters the wearer by being a bit more form-fitting can yield fantastic results -- though obviously that's easier to do with leather armor than with steel; I personally love Meredith's heavy armor and think it's quite sexy. The potato sack fashion of DA:I -- which only Vivienne stands out from -- may be practical, but (again imo) it's not aesthetic. Which was the core issue of the last thread: Realism vs. aesthetics. It would be sad if all fantasy games were perfectly realistic.

[AresKeith]

I have to hand it to you Vick, the way you can make people go off the rails is quite worthy of admiration. Ares in particular seems to become so incoherent s/he can only spam and post stupid pngs/gifs.

Anyway, the 'compromise' that's standing in the room is not a bad one, I think. Instead of trenchcoat #3 for both sexes have just ONE more shapely armor for both sexes. As somebody said here, it's not just naked skin / bikini mail that makes sexy; the person wearing it obviously is the most important (and imo the female main cast was a bit short-changed in DA:I). Adding an armor that just flatters the wearer by being a bit more form-fitting can yield fantastic results -- though obviously that's easier to do with leather armor than with steel; I personally love Meredith's heavy armor and think it's quite sexy. The potato sack fashion of DA:I -- which only Vivienne stands out from -- may be practical, but (again imo) it's not aesthetic. Which was the core issue of the last thread: Realism vs. aesthetics. It would be sad if all fantasy games were perfectly realistic.

Nah I only do it because it only way to truly reply to Not-Brevnau

But I expected him to show up soon since it's the weekend

[SnakeCode]

The chainmail bikini is stupid and should never find it's way into any RPG.

 

Nevermind for a moment that it oversexualizes the character wearing it...if it is exposing more skin than it covers it is no longer armor. The character at that point might as well be nude or wearing only clothing, as realistically they'd be getting no protection from the small bits of chain or plate that completely fail to cover their vitals.

I'll just say that I agree, chainmail bikinis are terrible unless it kinda fits the world and everyone looks ridiculous (Final Fantasy i'm looking at you.) But how is it any different to say, Iron Bull? Realistically he'd die in every battle he fights in. Nobody is ever up in arms about topless male warriors in videogames though, and there's plenty of them.

 

This is why the realism/grounded/whatever argument needs to go. It isn't consistent and it's a ploy to make peoples arguments seem like they have more merit than if they had just said "I don't like it!" This isn't a matter of realism, it's a matter of taste. Why can't we all be honest with ourselves and admit that?

[Aimi]

I think the most sensible way to have armor affect characters in the game would be to have symbols elicit a response, but this only really works if the actual story of the game makes it relevant. Like, if a group called the Flying Bastards gang is at war with the Flatulent Snoufleurs and you walk into Snoufleur territory wearing the Bastards' emblem, all the armed NPC's will instantly be hostile. But I'm still not sure how well this sort of thing can even work except for some special occasions, like using a special banner to gain favor or something like that.

You are now disguised as a member of the NCR!

[Terodil]

I think that it could get a bit complicated though. The trick is determining which armor gets which effect, and how much of an impact certain getups will have for the story or how it affects the demeanor of certain companions/NPC's. Like, if you equipped more revealing armor, should people catcall? Should you get (digusted noise) noise sounds as you pass by? Murmurs of scandal? [...] But more than that, it may be hard to discern which armor gets which response, unless it has something listed in the attributes like (people will think this armor is hella slutty!)

 

Degrading them equally is still degrading them.

What exactly is degrading here though?

Is it the armors, or is it your (perceived or real) reaction towards them?

Armor is just armor. The interpretation and 'moral' evaluation only happens in the heads of the onlookers. You can call an armor set slutty, but the armor set isn't, and quite probably the wearer isn't either.

This really gets my goat all the time and makes me slightly angry. You can't fight for women's rights and call other women sluts for exercising those rights, which clearly includes making the choice what to wear. Forcing all women to wear the Niqab is not emancipation.