1832 réponses à ce sujet

[The Baconer]

That's just a literal copy-pasted Hakkonite body yeh?

It looks really bad.

[AresKeith]

That's just a literal copy-pasted Hakkonite body yeh?

It looks really bad.

 

What's funny is that it actually looks decent on Bull than Cassandra

[midnight tea]

Is that armor that looks like body paint or is it actual body paint ? I ask because I see what looks like a collar around Cassandra's neck. I guess all those people who thought Bull's comment was Bioware taking a stand on impractical armor was a bit premature at best, flat out wrong at worst. 

 

Not really. DLC itself is titled "Spoils Of War" and not "We Suddenly And Inexplicably Give Everyone Body-Paint For Armor" - the armor originally belonged to a Haakonite and Hakkonites (similarly to other Avvars) don't use advanced warfare/armors, but some form of ritualistic mash-up of leather, mud and paint. Add to that the fact that they're extremists and religious zealots and the armor of that kind makes perfect sense.

 

I also assume that Cassandra has this really angry expression on her face, because she loathes being forced to wear it

[The Baconer]

What's funny is that it actually looks decent on Bull than Cassandra

 

I'm sure it would.

 

So then, the option was asked for, and now the option hath been given. I expect there will be no need for further complaints or requests.

[KBomb]

Not really. DLC itself is titled "Spoils Of War" and not "We Suddenly And Inexplicably Give Everyone Body-Paint For Armor" - the armor originally belonged to a Haakonite and Hakkonites (similarly to other Avvars) don't use advanced warfare/armors, but some form of ritualistic mash-up of leather, mud and paint. Add to that the fact that they're extremists and religious zealots and the armor of that kind makes perfect sense.

I also assume that Cassandra has this really angry expression on her face, because she loathes being forced to wear it

Yes, all that is true about the Hakkonites. However, I would think if Bioware was taking a stand against the impracticalities of boob armor, they'd suddenly release it for the Inquisition. Especially since Cassandra and Bull loathe that type of armor. It's very primitive. Doubt Cassandra would forgo her expensive utilitarian armor for that.

It means one of two things. Either Bioware was using Bull's statement as a fun little nod at the forums or they're hypocrites. I believe it's the former. Also, this armor is completely optional. Kind of what people were asking for in the first place. Got to give Bioware at least a bit of kudos for that.

[midnight tea]

Yes, all that is true about the Hakkonites. However, I would think if Bioware was taking a stand against the impracticalities of boob armor, they'd suddenly release it for the Inquisition. Especially since Cassandra and Bull loathe that type of armor. It's very primitive. Doubt Cassandra would forgo her expensive utilitarian armor for that.

It means one of two things. Either Bioware was using Bull's statement as a fun little nod at the forums or they're hypocrites. I believe it's the former. Also, this armor is completely optional. Kind of what people were asking for in the first place. Got to give Bioware at least a bit of kudos for that.

 

... I'm pretty sure people didn't ask for primitive, blue-black colorful mud, basically

 

And I hardly think it invalidates the quip Iron Bull made (or Cassandra to Vivienne), considering that a context for existence of this armor is well-established. It didn't come out of nowhere, nor it's an armor of choice for Cassandra (or Blackwall, or whoever else can wear it), merely a spoil of war - and trollish Inquisitor can force their allies to wear, just like he/she forces Cullen to work with a bear and suffer through barrage of bear-puns.

 

... Now that I think about it, I'd totally spend 5$ for this pack, only to headcanon how my mischievous Inquisitor forces her party to wear it, for the sole reason of re-enacting the Battle Of Squealing Plains!

[AresKeith]

Yes, all that is true about the Hakkonites. However, I would think if Bioware was taking a stand against the impracticalities of boob armor, they'd suddenly release it for the Inquisition. Especially since Cassandra and Bull loathe that type of armor. It's very primitive. Doubt Cassandra would forgo her expensive utilitarian armor for that.

It means one of two things. Either Bioware was using Bull's statement as a fun little nod at the forums or they're hypocrites. I believe it's the former. Also, this armor is completely optional. Kind of what people were asking for in the first place. Got to give Bioware at least a bit of kudos for that.

 
Well Sera's outfit is technically "boob armor", as well as some of the Dalish outfits
 

So it isn't really like Bioware is against it, more that they don't wanna do it with full on actual armor outfits

[midnight tea]

Yeah, as long as armor is functional (leather or fabric armor with visible breast cups isn't inherently lethal) or not hell-bent on underlining or revealing all/most of available female assets I don't think many people here are against it - or at least I don't have a problem with those. 

 

My only issue is with armor that is woefully impractical and exists in the game for no good reason (cultural, personal, religious, etc) other than cheap appeasement.

[TheOgre]

Yes, all that is true about the Hakkonites. However, I would think if Bioware was taking a stand against the impracticalities of boob armor, they'd suddenly release it for the Inquisition. Especially since Cassandra and Bull loathe that type of armor. It's very primitive. Doubt Cassandra would forgo her expensive utilitarian armor for that.

It means one of two things. Either Bioware was using Bull's statement as a fun little nod at the forums or they're hypocrites. I believe it's the former. Also, this armor is completely optional. Kind of what people were asking for in the first place. Got to give Bioware at least a bit of kudos for that.

 

 

 

[KBomb]

midnight tea, on 09 Jun 2015 - 7:24 PM, said:
... I'm pretty sure people didn't ask for primitive, blue-black colorful mud, basically

And I hardly think it invalidates the quip Iron Bull made (or Cassandra to Vivienne), considering that a context for existence of this armor is well-established. It didn't come out of nowhere, nor it's an armor of choice for Cassandra (or Blackwall, or whoever else can wear it), merely a spoil of war - and trollish Inquisitor can force their allies to wear, just like he/she forces Cullen to work with a bear and suffer through barrage of bear-puns.

... Now that I think about it, I'd totally spend 5$ for this pack, only to headcanon how my mischievous Inquisitor forces her party to wear it, for the sole reason of re-enacting the Battle Of Squealing Plains!

 

 

Oh, I agree. That armor is atrocious. However, if they released this armor, maybe in the future they'll release more. This armor makes me think of that Predator movie where Arnold Schwarzenegger is hiding from the Predator in the mud. 

 

 

Also, I agree that boob plate armor has been well established and I was referring to the posters who argued that the quip Bull made was Bioware taking a stand on boob armor being impractical and that's why it isn't an option anymore. If Bioware did that intentionally, I don't think the message would be, "Hey, this type of armor is ridiculous and impractical. So, here is some armor that is ridiculous and impractical!" Even though it is a spoil of war, it certainly isn't there for jocular purpose and it being a spoil of war doesn't mean Cassandra would wear it, forced or not. (I find it funny to think anyone could force Cass to do anything). Spoils of war aren't always used, but displayed as trophies. None of those reasons are good ones for Bioware changing their stance. Unless... Bioware never intended to send a message that "boob armor" (I hate calling it that) was ridiculous and that is why it was omitted and never had a problem with it in the first place. Which is what I believe. 

 

 

 

midnight tea, on 09 Jun 2015 - 7:38 PM, said:

Yeah, as long as armor is functional (leather or fabric armor with visible breast cups isn't inherently lethal) or not hell-bent on underlining or revealing all/most of available female assets I don't think many people here are against it - or at least I don't have a problem with those.

My only issue is with armor that is woefully impractical and exists in the game for no good reason (cultural, personal, religious, etc) other than cheap appeasement.

 

You may not have a problem with it, but if you look back through the thread, you'll see a lot of people do and were very adamant that this armor shouldn't be allowed for any reason--leather or not-- and used lots of reasons to exclude it, the most used being Iron Bull's quip as proof that Bioware agreed with them. 

 

 

 

 

AresKeith, on 09 Jun 2015 - 7:28 PM, said:

Well Sera's outfit is technically "boob armor", as well as some of the Dalish outfits

 

So it isn't really like Bioware is against it, more that they don't wanna do it with full on actual armor outfits

 

Yeah, I don't think Bioware was ever against it. They have never spoken out about it out of game and that one tiny conversation Iron Bull and Cassandra had hardly account to a declaration. I think they just took a different artist direction with the armor for DAI and adding it to a dlc says that they aren't against it. Hopefully we'll get some similar armor in the future---preferably without the mud.

[Ogredad1971]

I say the best comment about "offending" people I've ever heard came from a Suicidal tendencies song You Can't Bring Me down "If I offend you I'm sorry, but maybe you needed to be offended. Here's my apology & 1 more thing F**k You." Everybody's going to offend someone else at 1 time or another if you worry about it constantly you'll never get anything done.

[Grieving Natashina]

I say the best comment about "offending" people I've ever heard came from a Suicidal tendencies song You Can't Bring Me down "If I offend you I'm sorry, but maybe you needed to be offended. Here's my apology & 1 more thing F**k You." Everybody's going to offend someone else at 1 time or another if you worry about it constantly you'll never get anything done.

Excellent song.  

[andy6915]

Well Sera's outfit is technically "boob armor", as well as some of the Dalish outfits




So it isn't really like Bioware is against it, more that they don't wanna do it with full on actual armor outfits

It's metal armors that shatter your sternum if it has boob shapes, leather pretty much has to be shaped like the body though. Leather isn't hard enough to break bones.

[9TailsFox]

Is that armor that looks like body paint or is it actual body paint ? I ask because I see what looks like a collar around Cassandra's neck. I guess all those people who thought Bull's comment was Bioware taking a stand on impractical armor was a bit premature at best, flat out wrong at worst. 

It's just mud. Avvar are barbarians. Cass look like it's clothes because it's Avvar body + Cass head. look at this picture all face covered in mud. And Iron bull commenting on practical armour, just show how hypocrite BioWare is.

 

EDIT I just find out it's real DLC armour can my mage Inquisitor put some to it will be perfect both have matching armour  Oh 4.99 dame I love you Cass but sorry it's to much.

[AresKeith]

It's just mud. Avvar are barbarians. Cass look like it's clothes because it's Avvar body + Cass head. look at this picture all face covered in mud. And Iron bull commenting on practical armour, just show how hypocrite BioWare is.

 

Or it's Bioware making a joke....

[KBomb]

Or it's Bioware making a joke....

Yeah, I think the original comment from Bull was jocular. Bioware has never stated they were against this type of armor, so I am not so sure how it's being hypocritical. Bioware can't be held accountable for what a group of people misinterpret. 

[9TailsFox]

Yeah, I think the original comment from Bull was jocular. Bioware has never stated they were against this type of armor, so I am not so sure how it's being hypocritical. Bioware can't be held accountable for what a group of people misinterpret. 

One time maybe a joke 2 times. Bioware making fun of female character with reviling impractical armour. Iron bull male warrior fight half naked and compliments Cass for having practical armour. And this. "Ceremonial Burial Armor"

[TevinterSupremacist]

 

 

Please point out where in my comment I've asked you to "disprove my claim"????

 

 

Question is what makes YOU so important? You come of as far more arrogant that I could ever be.

 

"What makes good comedy good? It's funny! It makes people laugh! ....But why it makes people laugh? Umm... because it's good comedy and it's funny!"

I agree that those are different things - what is ironic though is that your way of thinking has nothing to do with 'simplicity of design', but simple thoughtlessness. There's no other way of describing what you're doing here other than that - saying that comedy accomplishes its goal when it's funny, instead of wondering whether ends justify the means or wondering why or what makes comedy actually funny.

 

No hon, some things are so bad they don't deserve any sort of commentary.

 

No, it's not - just giving a powerful reaction doesn't make anything great or any less cheap or shallow. I mean, by your logic, isn't me me shooting someone's family member a "great thing" as well? It shall illicit a powerful reaction after all. Same with porn, that I actually mentioned earlier - just because it helps many people reach climax doesn't make it any more cheap or crude.

 

But let's examine less extreme example and focus on something prevalent in a genre that was mentioned at some point in this sub-topic: horror. Namely: jumpscares.

 

-snip jumpscare analysis-

 if used it too frequently, it becomes shallow.

 It doesn't really tickle the part of the brain that is responsible for in-depth or analytical thinking, but one that consists of primal instincts or vestiges of such.

You claim titillation is inerently "narrower" than humor, drama, etc. I say I don't see why. Instead of proving why, you ask me to find a counter example to your claim. This is you asking me to disprove your claim.

 

I never claimed to be important, because I never made statements like "you can't be serious in thinking that you can be treated seriously here" or "no one in their right minds would do x". Speaking for others, is arrogance. I never did that.

 

Putting words in my mouth. Comedy is good when it makes people laugh. It does well at being comedy, that's what it means. I never said anything about why it makes people laugh.

 

Ok, irrelevant comment about me, instead of focusing on what we're discussing , if boobplate (or other forms of titillation) is inherently thoughtless or just simple. Ok. Very productive.

 

Uhm....ok? Let me guess, they're so bad, because you say so, right? I mean, There's something wrong with how I write, because I don't explain why good comedy makes people laugh, even though it was relevant to what I was sying, but you claiming that some things are bad and not expanding on why? Totally fine. Ok.

 

Yes. Giving a strong reaction through art, which is what we're discussing is comparable to giving a strong reaction while shooting somebody. Ok. The two are comparable, even though one violates someone's rights and the other doesn't. Ok. While I'm also accused of strawmaning you, ok, ok.

 

I disagree on your analysis on jumpscares being cheap. What matters is how efficiently they achieve the goal they set, scaring people. Having on your own the assumption that some methods of scaring are fine some others is on you, it's not objective. You can say jumpscares are no longer popular because people are not interested in just being scared, but that doesn't make jumpscares less efficient at scaring.

 

"if used to frequently it becomes shallow" Heh. Now, given that there's no physical change to something , depending on how often it's used -except in cases where, it breaks down, physically, but that's not relevant here-, how can something change and become shallow if used too frequently? Could it be that shallowness simply lies in the eyes of the audience and was never an objective attribute you could use as critique in the first place?....Because you know, if it's not like that, a piece of art won't change internally if used too often, so it won't magically become shallow either, if it wasn't in the first place. If it wasn't shallow and it became shallow through often use, shallowness was never an internal part of it,  it's in the audience's eyes. You can say that if you want to be popular and successful you need to be aware of what the audience wants, but the very same thing that wasn't shallow once, doesn't magically become shallow if the audience gets bored with it.

 

And art appealing to primal instincts is inferior to appealing to analytical thinking because???

 

As a final note, I want to explain why most of my comments are pointing out you don't back your claims and not so much backing up mine -I actually do, but our claims are different in nature and "backing up" mine means something different than yours.

 

You claim titillation is "narrower" than humor or drama , etc as form of artistic expression. I claim it doesn't. For your claim to be true, there must exist a factor that intrinsically makes titillation different from humor, drama, etc. While it is your job to prove the existence of said factor, I can't really be asked to prove its inexistence, can I?

[Aren]

Talking about realism and the impracticality of a boobs plate armor in a fantasy game in which apparently people are capable to survive after that they get hit from a fire storm in the face...  

 

And take seriously what Iron Bull as to say..   

 

...and now  we have boobs armor... love the irony Bioware.

.

[Wulfram]

It's metal armors that shatter your sternum if it has boob shapes, leather pretty much has to be shaped like the body though. Leather isn't hard enough to break bones.

 

Historical leather armour would be rigid, as I understand it, and wouldn't be shaped like the body for much the same reason as metal armour.  I guess it wouldn't break your sternum, but reasonably sensibly designed boob armour word with appropriate padding underneath wouldn't do that either.  But it would direct the blow towards the center of your chest, which isn't good.  In some ways maybe worse, since you've got more chance of punching through even hardened leather than metal.

 

But Sera's clothing probably shouldn't really be understood as armour.

There is also the Dalish Warrior armour, which is metal at the cleavage part at least, though it's hardly extreme

 

[MoonDrummer]

I say the best comment about "offending" people I've ever heard came from a Suicidal tendencies song You Can't Bring Me down "If I offend you I'm sorry, but maybe you needed to be offended. Here's my apology & 1 more thing F**k You." Everybody's going to offend someone else at 1 time or another if you worry about it constantly you'll never get anything done.

[AresKeith]

The other outfits look much better than the mud paint

 

 

 

Tbh, does this really count as boob armor since it's just mud with what seems to be fur or leather around the neck?

 

[Panda]

Well if those count as boob plate armor cause you can see that person has boobs then quite many armors in DAI do. Even Cassandra's most basic armor does:

 

 

And it's actually plate armor, armor from metal. When that Avvar armor nor Sera's armor aren't ^^;

[Wulfram]

Well if those count as boob plate armor cause you can see that person has boobs then quite many armors in DAI do. Even Cassandra's most basic armor does:

 

 

And it's actually plate armor, armor from metal. When that Avvar armor nor Sera's armor aren't ^^;

 

There's no cleavage.  Which means it avoids the chief practical argument against "boob armour".

[Panda]

There's no cleavage.  Which means it avoids the chief practical argument against "boob armour".

 

True, but there is no metal cleavage on avvar leather jacket+paint armor, dalish leather armors (one has orgament on chest, but I think it's decoration on top of leather armor) and Sera's leather armors. But if people are happy suddenly discovering these "boob armors" I guess it's only positive. I wouldn't call them boob plate armors or boob cups though. .