1832 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

It would be part of the armor. You wouldn't be walking around with steel dumbells hanging from your boobs. Most that I have seen are connected to a bottom piece that is worn like any other plate. I would imagine like any soldier or knight, your body would adjust to any additional weight over time and since armor was made to distribute weigh pretty evenly, I don't imagine this would be any different.

When I hike, I carry 30-35 lbs of extra weight and I am a pretty small built person. My 120 lb friend carries her twenty pound baby in one of those front carrier things. Does her errands, shopping, laundry, etc with him just hanging there. A soldier would wear this weight nearly every day-- training and fighting. You'd be surprised what a human body can adjust to.

They have support for that. Unlike boobs. ask any woman with large ones any they would tell you how much their back acks from them.

[Fade-Touched-in-the-head]

The technical issues of the game have been talked about to death that no one seems to give a crap about it anymore. So sorry that your mad about people talking about other feedback suggestions.

Your level of mad right now needs to come down to a 5, a level 9 will cause a lock.

Mad? I'm not mad. I was cheerfully mocking the thread. If I was actually angry, I'd probably chastise you for twice spelling "you're" as "your" even though it's a petty complaint and quite irrelevant to the topic, but I'm not going to do that.

Edit: Sorry, only once. Not twice. My bad.

[TheOgre]

Mad? I'm not mad. I was cheerfully mocking the thread. If I was actually angry, I'd probably chastise you for twice spelling "you're" as "your" even though it's a petty complaint and quite irrelevant to the topic, but I'm not going to do that.

My grammar, my feels! You hit me right where I care. Unforgivable.

Enjoy being mad over the interest of others on topics you could "care less" about.

[Fade-Touched-in-the-head]

My grammar, my feels! You hit me right where I care. Unforgivable.

Enjoy being mad over the interest of others on topics you could "care less" about.

As I've already stated, I'm not "mad." I'm not even slightly annoyed. Believe me, I'm grinning ear to ear as I type this with the knowledge that you're the one who's annoyed. I mean, really, you should just ignore me. I am, after all, shamelessly trolling this thread, and it's really getting to you because boobs are important.

[The Baconer]

If I don't care about it no one else should is one of the most baffling instincts in human nature. You don't seem to care one way or the other so why post baconer?

 

It's not so much a general apathy toward the subject itself as it is a dissatisfaction with the way the discussion has developed.

[TheOgre]

It's not so much a general apathy toward the subject itself as it is a dissatisfaction with the way the discussion has developed.

I admit I could see that being a good reason for a lock.

[SnakeCode]

It's not so much a general apathy toward the subject itself as it is a dissatisfaction with the way the discussion has developed.

 

At least it's honest now, before people were pretending it was an issue of realism. This thread could do with less condescension and hostility though.

[Seraphim24]

At least it's honest now, before people were pretending it was an issue of realism. This thread could do with less condescension and hostility though.

 

Oh well no one told me, and just after I made my big realism post..

 

Actually I figured out what my problem is finally, DA (and many games) are just horribly unrealistic with respect to sexual relationships, period, and sex, generally.

 

I cited the threesome for example just being idiotic, people don't just have a threesome and then go about their merry way, there is emotional and sexual connections that screw things up, perhaps you might get love triangle, heck, someone might get an STD. In general, it just seems to pretend there is a consequence free sex environment that exists out there which is incredibly unrealistic, I just mean emotionally and so on it's not possible the way it's depicted, same for most of the other relationships in DA and so on, they just don't really work a lot of the time.

 

Yet no one points the laser at that, instead it's all about the cleavage or a few costumes and people go to the ends of the earth to critique reality on that front.

[SnakeCode]

Oh well no one told me, and just after I made my big realism post..

 

Actually I figured out what my problem is finally, DA (and many games) are just horribly unrealistic with respect to sexual relationships, period, and sex, generally.

 

I cited the threesome for example just being idiotic, people don't just have a threesome and then go about their merry way, there is emotional and sexual connections that screw things up, perhaps you might get love triangle, heck, someone might get an STD. In general, it just seems to pretend there is a consequence free sex environment that exists out there which is incredibly unrealistic, I just mean emotionally and so on it's not possible the way it's depicted, same for most of the other relationships in DA and so on, they just don't really work a lot of the time.

 

Yet no one points the laser at that, instead it's all about the cleavage or a few costumes and people go to the ends of the earth to critique reality on that front.

 

Yes. It's almost as if people cherry pick when realism is justified or not. Isn't it? And that's exactly where the argument fell apart.

[Seraphim24]

Yes. It's almost as if people cherry pick when realism is justified or not. Isn't it? And that's exactly where the argument fell apart.

 

Almost as if indeed.

[midnight tea]

I disagree. I believe most people who create fictional universes create something that they themselves would enjoy and the target audience happens to become the people who share their tastes.

 

But even if we accept your premise, that it is an attempt at titillation (which of course brings us to a different discussion than the one we're having), it's not like titillation is "inferior" as a form of entertainment from fiction, compared to humor, thrill, drama, horror, etc.

 

Okay, hang on a second - artists or creators themselves can be racist, sexist or just not have enough of creative juices floating in their veins to either steer away from 'easy' way out or to get across idea in a good/evocative/non-crude way.

 

I know that, since I'm an artist myself (professionally) - but you don't really have to be one to get something that is so simple.

 

Just creating "something we enjoy" is not enough of a justification or shield from criticism or scrutiny - ESPECIALLY when you let out that creative work "into the wild". And you have to, because art itself doesn't exist without an audience; it's an active dialogue between creators and viewers. 

 

Also, don't forget that in case of games or big movies we're not just talking about works done purely for satisfying creative or artistic needs - those are products. They have target audiences. They need to make money. And sometimes (pah, many times) the spirit of creativity, artist's vision or what we actually want to do is trampled for the sake of making these money or reaching the widest audience, which oftentimes means doing "things that sell".

 

Honestly, should I even tell you how many times I or my friends had clients/potential clients who wanted us to do something "more sexy" because it won't sell otherwise???? In that case it's not us "doing what we want" and finding our audience, but specifically pandering to the audience's base desires and ideas about things - which includes hurtful stereotypes as well.

The worst thing about that is that it creates a vicious circle - people get convinced that nothing else will sell, while audience that feeds on such trite usually just wants what it's used to consume.

 

So yeah - you may believe that people just "create stuff they enjoy" and find their audience, but any person who actually does that for a living (or tries to) knows that it's not that simple.

 

 

 

Also - you can't be serious in comparing titillation to staples of narrative, like humor, or sense of drama, or genres like horror - besides, titillation for the sake of titillation, just like bad jokes for the sake of bad jokes (or more $ earned) is never really a good idea.

[o Ventus]

 

Actually I figured out what my problem is finally, DA (and many games) are just horribly unrealistic with respect to sexual relationships, period, and sex, generally.

I'm assuming you mean period as in time period, and not... The other kind of period....

 

Anyway, DA isn't a period piece. It's never tried to adhere to any specific era of history.

[Seraphim24]

I'm assuming you mean period as in time period, and not... The other kind of period....

 

Anyway, DA isn't a period piece. It's never tried to adhere to any specific era of history.

 

Interesting stories are ones that feel realistic though, regardless of whatever crazy fantasy setting they take place in ultimately.

[midnight tea]

They have support for that. Unlike boobs. ask any woman with large ones any they would tell you how much their back acks from them.

 

Back problem is one thing - you know how hard sometimes is to find comfy underwear? It can be hard to last a day in 'sexier' lingerie, and I can't even imagine how uncomfortable it would be to wear metal or leather variety, likely not designed in any sort of comfort or good support in mind...

[In Exile]

Yes. It's almost as if people cherry pick when realism is justified or not. Isn't it? And that's exactly where the argument fell apart.

Every time any argument about a video game evokes "realism" the shark has been jumped.

[In Exile]

[Double post ]

[TevinterSupremacist]

Okay, hang on a second - artists or creators themselves can be racist, sexist or just not have enough of creative juices floating in their veins to either steer away from 'easy' way out or to get across idea in a good/evocative/non-crude way.

 

Just creating "something we enjoy" is not enough of a justification or shield from criticism or scrutiny - ESPECIALLY when you let out that creative work "into the wild". And you have to, because art itself doesn't exist without an audience; it's an active dialogue between creators and viewers. 

Also - you can't be serious in comparing titillation to staples of narrative, like humor, or sense of drama, or genres like horror - besides, titillation for the sake of titillation, just like bad jokes for the sake of bad jokes (or more $ earned) is never really a good idea.

Artist themselves can be a great number of things, that's not relevant to what we're discussing. It's possible for a racist to create something non-racist.

 

Of course, no one is saying no criticism can be done. But not every disagreement is "criticism". Criticism requires justification of the disagreement. Otherwise it's whining. And with regard to people letting their sexuality influence their work and creating things like boobplate and how that can be "sexist", I haven't seen any justification. Only whining.

 

See, you're claiming titillation for the sake of titillation is bad, while I assume you don't think drama or horror for the sake of drama or horror is bad. Without explaining why. I'm waiting, what makes it inferior? Why compare it to bad jokes and not to, just, you know, jokes. Humor for the sake of humor is fine. So is titillation.

 

As a side note, we disagree on whether art is possible without an audience. I won't expand on that though, it goes way beyond the thread's point, I'd find that impolite to the other posters.

[The Baconer]

See, you're claiming titillation for the sake of titillation is bad, while I assume you don't think drama or horror for the sake of drama or horror is bad. Without explaining why. I'm waiting, what makes it inferior? Why compare it to bad jokes and not to, just, you know, jokes. Humor for the sake of humor is fine. So is titillation.

 

"X for the sake of X" is usually bad, be it gore, profanity, humor (ie: forced), except when it isn't (exploitation).

 

So yeah, having one of those TERA numbers around to slap on Sera or Cass, just because, would be pretty bad.

[midnight tea]

Artist themselves can be a great number of things, that's not relevant to what we're discussing. It's possible for a racist to create something non-racist.

 

Of course, no one is saying no criticism can be done. But not every disagreement is "criticism". Criticism requires justification of the disagreement. Otherwise it's whining. And with regard to people letting their sexuality influence their work and creating things like boobplate and how that can be "sexist", I haven't seen any justification. Only whining.

 

If you only see whining then you're not reading at least half of what's in this thread - there have been numbers of people (including myself) offering explanation why things like boobplate or chainmail bikini are problematic. And just because you don't read those explanations, justifications or critiques doesn't make them invalid or invisible.

 

 

 

 

See, you're claiming titillation for the sake of titillation is bad, while I assume you don't think drama or horror for the sake of drama or horror is bad. Without explaining why. I'm waiting, what makes it inferior? Why compare it to bad jokes and not to, just, you know, jokes. Humor for the sake of humor is fine. So is titillation.

 

It turns out you're not reading comments you respond to carefully as well... or have you forgotten how I said "you can't be serious in comparing titillation to staples of narrative, like humor, or sense of drama, or genres like horror"???

 

Titillation is nowhere near as broad/vague term as "drama" or "horror" or "humor". If someone narrows their work down to 'titillating' the audience, then there really is nothing much left to comment on here. It's as shallow as it gets, which is exactly why it's bad.

 

Not to say that shallow creative works can't exist or that there isn't a place for them - but if that shallowness permeates the market or culture to significant degree, then we have a problem.

 

Also - 'humor for the sake of humor' isn't really as fine you make it as well; humor is a broader term than one dealing with means to simply arouse the audience, but still: a joke told for the sake of it being a joke (it only matters if it's a joke, with really no thought put into what the joke's about or why it should be funny in the first place) is no less shallow.

Usually good creators and writers don't try and focus on "humor just being humor" or "drama just being drama" or "things being there only to appeal to the audience on most basic of levels". It's pointless. Thoughtless.

Humor or drama is like seasoning that flavors the dish - and you can't really live on seasoning alone.

 

(and I'll end here for now since I'm really tired and next few days are really busy).

[TevinterSupremacist]

If you only see whining then you're not reading at least half of what's in this thread - there have been numbers of people (including myself) offering explanation why things like boobplate or chainmail bikini are problematic. And just because you don't read those explanations, justifications or critiques doesn't make them invalid or invisible.

 

Titillation is nowhere near as broad/vague term as "drama" or "horror" or "humor". If someone narrows their work down to 'titillating' the audience, then there really is nothing much left to comment on here. It's as shallow as it gets, which is exactly why it's bad.

 

Not to say that shallow creative works can't exist or that there isn't a place for them - but if that shallowness permeates the market or culture to significant degree, then we have a problem.

 

Also - 'humor for the sake of humor' isn't really as fine you make it as well; humor is a broader term than one dealing with means to simply arouse the audience, but still: a joke told for the sake of it being a joke (it only matters if it's a joke, with really no thought put into what the joke's about or why it should be funny in the first place) is no less shallow.

Usually good creators and writers don't try and focus on "humor just being humor" or "drama just being drama" or "things being there only to appeal to the audience on most basic of levels". It's pointless. Thoughtless.

Humor or drama is like seasoning that flavors the dish - and you can't really live on seasoning alone.

I don't think you could get any more subjective or preference based in your "argument" than what you're doing now.

 

First of all, if you think titillation can't be as broad an area as drama or humor, you just lack imagination.

Secondly, laughing is fine. A stand up comedian who'll just make people enjoy themselves and laugh is doing something great. It's simple and focused on a single area, but that doesn't make it inferior. No, just causing people to laugh in excitement isn't an inferior form of entertainment. Same for horror, drama or titillation.

"Thoughtless. Pointless." Really? Thoughtless is obviously incorrect, you require thought to make a joke. Pointless, again no, you make people feel nice, you don't see a point in that? Obviously you can make a bad joke, but a bad joke is different than a joke for the sake of it being a joke. A bad joke will get no laughs, hence , the "bad" part, a joke for the sake of joke means that you're just trying to make people laugh, nothing more. That doesn't mean this doesn't require effort or thought.

 

It's not your place or anyone else's to judge on their own what is shallow and what not and announce "We have a problem". You are not an authority here, if you want to prove your point go ahead, but declarations aren't enough.

This is exactly why I'm saying I'm only seeing whining and no arguments. Throughout this thread, people who tried to criticise the concept of boobplate in itself went circles around "I don't like it", "it makes me feel uncomfortable", "that makes it bad/problematic/quesitonable". Without proving why. Sorry. Whining.

[Lady Artifice]

This is exactly why I'm saying I'm only seeing whining and no arguments. Throughout this thread, people who tried to criticise the concept of boobplate in itself went circles around "I don't like it", "it makes me feel uncomfortable", "that makes it bad/problematic/quesitonable". Without proving why. Sorry. Whining.

 

I'm in support of more shapely armor options, personally. As much as I disagree the OP of this thread in general, I'm fine with this suggestion. But the detractors, for the most part, have been making reasoned arguments for why "boob plate" would be a very bad idea in real combat, and would thus damage their immersion. As much as the world "realism" is becoming contested as a viable priority on this thread, people should be and are free to care about it as much or as little as they please. 

 

Whining is an interesting choice of word, for that matter, since it's usually attached to people who find fault in the current conditions. The people who are opposed to "boob plate" are satisfied with the current conditions of the DAI aesthetic. It's those of us who would like an alteration who have a complaint. 

[Seraphim24]

Mileena's outfit looks

 

Why does that matter? Mortal Kombat has been called every name under the sun by every manner of special interest group since it first came out. It's been accused of everything from turning the youth of the world to violence, to appropriating foreign cultures, to, yes, having sexist character designs. In fact, MK has been outright banned in certain countries over its violence and a huge percentage of its market are Asian countries whose language and culture are being, quite frankly, butchered by the game. And yet the game is far more graphically violent now than ever and Raiden and Liu Kang still spout Asian gibberish regularly throughout their matches. 

 

The only criticism they've taken to heart is the sexist character design. Despite the fact that, seeing as how the overwhelming majority of MK players are male, this is the criticism that poses the lowest threat to their profit margin. So maybe--just maybe--the reason that MK is redoing its female character designs isn't some nefarious or cynical caving, but something they actually feel they need to work on to improve their product.

 

And, as a matter of fact, they DID. The Mortal Kombat X character designs are some of the best in the series' history. If that was all owed to them being called sexist shitlords, so be it. I got a better game out of it.

 

The fact that people fixate so much on the aesthetic clothing/appearance itself in the first place is at least a big a problem as whatever problems are inherent in the MKX series.

 

I mean all these SJWs (whoever/wherever they are) with their fixation on clothing, it's really you are going to save the world by vanquishing tank tops and panties or something? Thank god, I was barely able to survive the other day what with all these malicious outfits attacking me from every direction.

 

Like these people spent all their time and energy making sure Mileena has Pants, thanks social justice warriors, thank you so dearly, all our lives have been saved by your valiant efforts to get a fictional character some pants.

[Panda]

Seriously if someone thinks people who are against oversexualisation of women in video games are against it, because they have phobia of tank tops and shorts, they have very much missed the point and pretty much intentionally.

[animedreamer]

 

this is how it works for female armor.. while he's not being completely serious it's the closest to an explanation as any can expect.

[Seraphim24]

Seriously if someone thinks people who are against oversexualisation of women in video games are against it, because they have phobia of tank tops and shorts, they have very much missed the point and pretty much intentionally.

 

Clothes don't make a person, one way or another. 

 

What does oversexualization even mean? 

 

I'm not denying there might be some kind of thing I don't like here but clothes are utterly irrelevant to whatever that is ultimately.