3626 réponses à ce sujet

[MsKlaussen]

 

This is somewhat realistic photo of a woman in the military(if you ignore the fact that one of the hottest Hollywood actresses Demi Moore played a soldier). I'm all for women in ME Andromeda to be portrayed like that but will female gamers like it?

 

No that's perfectly okay. In most games I've played, there's always a bald or buzz cut option. When that's the "only" option or something expected however? Well, that's where the problem comes into play.

 

The irony of referring to a picture of Demi Moore shaving her head after the fact in a movie where she's going through BUD/S "realistic" notwithstanding of course.

[SnakeCode]

In science fiction, our rules don't apply. You can have paper thin material that offers more protection than Kevlar, it's a silly argument.So again this comes back to aesthetics.

[Panda]

Subjective statement. If a sizable audience didn't like it wouldn't be as popular as it clearly is. And before we make assumptions about this audiences composition let's remember almost half of comic book readers are female and most aren't any more likely to complain about it than men.

 

It should be researched what kind of comics women read and men read and see if there is differences in terms of how female characters are drawn. And if these readers are bothered how they are drawn, but still read comics cause they like comics (like I often grin quite badly while reading, but what can you do).

 

And taking accord how many women who read comics are speaking against it, I'd say that people do not like it.

[Evamitchelle]

True. But that's only an issue if realism is a design goal. For comic books it typically isn't. Same for Bioware.

 

Portraying them as unrealistic isn't really the design goal either from what I can see. It's usually meant to be more idealized than outright wrong. But a lot of people apparently can't see that, which is how you get people saying those poses are physically impossible for men to do, but totally realistic for women, because "their bones stretch". 

[Gwydden]

@Han

Catsuits don't need to provide as much protection as heavy armor. The very name implies the existence of medium and light armor. You the heaviest armor would make all lighter options obsolete as people will always wear it, and that about provides only benefits and had no drawbacks. The entirety of human history has something to say about that.

Hmm. I wonder why even hardcore Starcraft fans never seen to complain about all Ghosts wearing catsuits while marines wear heavy armor. Interesting.

[MsKlaussen]

If catsuits provided as much protection as heavy armor, no one would wear heavy armor. The Alliance would have all of its soldiers in catsuits instead. Its a fairly reasonable assumption that armor designs that look like armor, provide more protection than the catsuits...otherwise the lighter protection would have won out and rendered the other completely obsolete.

 

The biggest argument I've seen over the years in support of the whole catsuit-in-combat thing, is that kinetic barriers supposedly provide enough protection that armor may not be entirely needed. I think that argument fails for a couple reasons. The first is that by only rolling with kinetic barriers, you're still sacrificing an extra level of protection no matter how powerful those barriers are. The second is that according to the lore the barriers function by using mass effect fields to deflect away fast moving projectiles. The way kinetic barriers function should mean they should provide no protection against the concussive effects of being in close proximity to a grenade, mortar, tank, or artillery shell exploding. Additionally those sorts of explosives also throw out shrapnel from the explosive itself, and can kick up debris from the ground like rocks or pieces of timber....those fragments, often tumbling much slower than bullets (and definitely travelling slower than rounds fired by mass accelerators) can maim or kill. The way kinetic barriers are described may mean they are not very effective at deflecting the shower moving shrapnel. They certainly won't protect against concussion, unlike body armor.

 

In contrast one of the functions of body armor is to protect against the concussive effects of explosions or the shrapnel they throw or kick up. In fact that is the primary function of modern day body armor like kevlar helmets or flak vests.

 

 

Your opening statement is a non sequitur. Not the sort of start that creates much need to go further. The sum total of the reality it creates is just a hotter spotlight on the fact that this entire beef is about chauvenism. People fight in what they've got. They are not all shock troops, and they do not necessarily all gain advantage from dressing like shock troops. If that's an issue it's neatly solved by leaving the game on the shelf at the store. Pretty much all there is to it - because there's no Federal case to be made about this that doesn't come off petty and superfluous.

[Han Shot First]

In science fiction, our rules don't apply. You can have paper thin material that offers more protection than Kevlar, it's a silly argument.So again this comes back to aesthetics.

 

 

Just because its Science Fiction doesn't necessarily mean that anything goes. Otherwise Shepard would have been defeating the Reapers, in space, from the open cockpit of his/her Sopwith Camel.

 

Opinions of course vary on what does or doesn't break suspension of disbelief. Arguing against any element on the basis that it breaks your suspension of disbelief however is no less valid than arguing against something because you don't like the way it looks. Both are equally subjective.

[Panda]

True. But that's only an issue if realism is a design goal. For comic books it typically isn't. Same for Bioware.

 

Anatomical correctness usually is goal even if realism isn't.

 

Example: Rob Liefields Captain America. It isn't seen as great masterpiece that is just unrealistic. It's laughstock, because of it's anatomical incorrectness.

 

 

Same should be with women who are drawn with broken spines.

[Han Shot First]

@Han

Catsuits don't need to provide as much protection as heavy armor. The very name implies the existence of medium and light armor. You the heaviest armor would make all lighter options obsolete as people will always wear it, and that about provides only benefits and had no drawbacks. The entirety of human history has something to say about that.

Hmm. I wonder why even hardcore Starcraft fans never seen to complain about all Ghosts wearing catsuits while marines wear heavy armor. Interesting.

 

A catsuit isn't armor at all though, its just a thin layer of cloth. 

[Grieving Natashina]

Anatomical correctness usually is goal even if realism isn't.

 

Example: Rob Liefields Captain America. It isn't seen as great masterpiece that is just unrealistic. It's laughstock, because of it's anatomical incorrectness.

 

Same should be with women who are drawn with broken spines.

What the actual....?

 

Okay, that is one of the dumbest designs for a male character I've ever seen.  By Odin, I've seen strippers in Vegas that didn't have such huge breasts that are that far out of proportion with the rest of the body.  

[SnakeCode]

Just because its Science Fiction doesn't necessarily mean that anything goes. Otherwise Shepard would have been defeating the Reapers, in space, from the open cockpit of his/her Sopwith Camel.

 

Opinions of course vary on what does or doesn't break suspension of disbelief. Arguing against any element on the basis that it breaks your suspension of disbelief however is no less valid than arguing against something because you don't like the way it looks. Both are equally subjective.

 

That's a strawman. I never said anything goes. I said our rules don't (have to) apply. Everyone's suspension of disbelief is different. So we are back to personal preferance. You just debunked your own realism argument yourself, well done.

[xkg]

 

Yes it does. It is an even more ridiculous argument when we're talking about Sci Fi, set in a different universe, in the future than it was in a fantasy setting. The realism argument is as fallacious as it gets.

 

Agree 100%. It is one thing to argue for realism in a game somehow based on historical period. For realism in futuristic setting? Yeah no.

It all comes down to preferences in this case, nothing more.

 

I love aesthetic in Star Trek. Seven of Nine's catsuit for example 

Spoiler

 

Farscape

Spoiler

 

In science fiction I prefer something like that instead of bulky, boring metal armours.

[Panda]

To all ongoing topics: If you want your piece of work was it comic, scifi or fantasy game to be taken seriously, you can't completely abandon realism. You also need to create laws for unrealistical things in your piece and follow them. For example: how biotics work, how magic work and how they don't work.

[Han Shot First]

That's a strawman. I never said anything goes. I said our rules don't (have to) apply. Everyone's suspension of disbelief is different. So we are back to personal preferance. You just debunked your own realism argument yourself, well done.

 

That's exactly what I said in the post you just quoted.

 

Everyone has a different level of tolerance for elements that strain suspension of disbelief, just as everyone has a different opinion on what does or doesn't look good. An argument against catsuits in combat on the basis that it strains my suspension of disbelief, is no less valid that someone arguing for or against it based on aesthetics. Its all equally subjective.

 

To be clear...I'm not saying that catsuits failing to realistically protect against shrapnel or the concussive effects of grenades is subjective. It isn't. What is subjective is whether or not that should matter. 

[Panda]

What the actual....?

 

Okay, that is one of the dumbest designs for a male character I've ever seen.  By Odin, I've seen strippers in Vegas that didn't have such huge breasts that are that far out of proportion with the rest of the body.  

 

Not much better for female characters in terms of anatomy ^^;

 

Slightly NSFW, though it shouldn't be since that seems to be regular outfit of the character.

http://assets.sbnati...6/40_medium.gif

[Grieving Natashina]

I've seen plenty of ladies such as the one of linked, but not very many of the male counterpart.  Yeesh.    

 

It isn't so much that he's muscular, he's just incredibly out of proportion.   Idealization for the loss.  I'm not saying the ladies are any better in some comic books (it can also depend upon the artist and era too,) but that's really awful.

 

Poor Cap.  Even in his lame and irrelevant years he didn't deserve that.  

[SnakeCode]

That's exactly what I said in the post you just quoted.

 

Everyone has a different level of tolerance for elements that strain suspension of disbelief, just as everyone has a different opinion on what does or doesn't look good. An argument against catsuits in combat on the basis that it strains my suspension of disbelief, is no less valid that someone arguing for or against it based on aesthetics. Its all equally subjective.

 

To be clear...I'm not saying that catsuits failing to realistically protect against shrapnel or the concussive effects of grenades is subjective. It isn't. What is subjective is whether or not that should matter. 

 

Of course it's valid. But a requirement for the suspension of disbelief in the first place is that something is inherently NOT realistic. Suspension of disbelief is different and tailored to each individual, realism is not. Saying something isn't realistic is fallacious because we don't decide what's realistic for a world that is not our own. So you can't even say "catsuits don't protect against shrapnel" because in another world with different rules, they very well could do.

   

So this entire time you've been saying "It isn't realistic!" when you actually meant "I personally don't find it believable." ?

[Panda]

Of course it's valid. But a requirement for the suspension of disbelief in the first place is that something is inherently NOT realistic. Suspension of disbelief is different and tailored to each individual, realism is not. Saying something isn't realistic is fallacious because we don't decide what's realistic for a world that is not our own. So you can't even say "catsuits don't protect against shrapnel" because in another world with different rules, they very well could do.

   

So this entire time you've been saying "It isn't realistic!" when you actually meant "I personally don't find it believable." ?

 

Why Shepards squad then is only one who uses catsuits when characters you aren't againt don't? Or has Cerberus invented these catsuits that are stronger than normal armor

[Grieving Natashina]

Or has Cerberus invented these catsuits that are stronger than normal armor

Not to get into this debate too heavily (about to play ME2 actually,) but would it honestly surprise you?  I'm not trying to mock the plot, but considering how much money and resources that Cerberus has stated to have, it wouldn't seem that far out of left field.  The ability for them to create better catsuits makes more sense than the Lazarus Project imho, that's for sure.  

 

I've already posted my feelings earlier in the thread, and I respect both your and Snake's PoV, so I'm staying out of it.  

[Han Shot First]

Of course it's valid. But a requirement for the suspension of disbelief in the first place is that something is inherently NOT realistic. Suspension of disbelief is different and tailored to each individual, realism is not. Saying something isn't realistic is fallacious because we don't decide what's realistic for a world that is not our own. So you can't even say "catsuits don't protect against shrapnel" because in another world with different rules, they very well could do.

   

So this entire time you've been saying "It isn't realistic!" when you actually meant "I personally don't find it believable." ?

 

No, someone fighting in a catsuit and high heels is unrealistic. That is a fact, not opinion.

 

Now whether or not someone is able to suspend disbelief for that, like other unrealistic elements of the series such as the Lazarus Project or biotics, boils entirely down to personal preferences.

[SnakeCode]

 

 

 

Agree 100%. It is one thing to argue for realism in a game somehow based on historical period. For realism in futuristic setting? Yeah no.

It all comes down to preferences in this case, nothing more.

 

 

The funny thing is, i'm actually mostly in agreement with everybody here. I can't stand sexualised armor either. I just can't abide the realism argument because it doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.

[Han Shot First]

The funny thing is, i'm actually mostly in agreement with everybody here. I can't stand sexualised armor either. I just can't abide the realism argument because it doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.

 

You're entitled to your completely wrong opinions.

 

[Grieving Natashina]

The funny thing is, i'm actually mostly in agreement with everybody here. I can't stand sexualised armor either. I just can't abide the realism argument because it doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.

My main issue is aesthetics. I hated the Butt-Cam and I thought that the scale pattern on Miranda was ugly.  You know that I'm not shy about speaking up if I feel an opinion I have is one that reflects society.  In this, it isn't that for me.  I just didn't like the way it looked and I prefer her in the black battle armor from one of the appearance packs.  

 

The Butt-Cam is the only part that makes me truly facepalm, other than seeing some members of my squad (Jack, Samara, Thane) running around in hostile environments with skin exposed everywhere.  Taking Jack or Samara to Haestrom did make me twitch a little on a "realism" level, but that was more due to the exposed skin than Miranda's catsuit did.  Few design choices in ME make me facepalm as much the Butt-Cam though, but I have hope that they won't be that thoughtless again.

 

You and Panda have fun with your latest debate.    I've got a krogan to go recruit.

[SnakeCode]

My main issue is aesthetics. I hated the Butt-Cam and I thought that the scale pattern on Miranda was ugly.  You know that I'm not shy about speaking up if I feel an opinion I have is one that reflects society.  In this, it isn't that for me.  I just didn't like the way it looked and I prefer her in the black battle armor from one of the appearance packs.  

 

The Butt-Cam is the only part that makes me truly facepalm, other than seeing some members of my squad (Jack, Samara, Thane) running around in hostile environments with skin exposed everywhere.  Taking Jack or Samara to Haestrom did make me twitch one a "realism" level, but that was more due to the exposed skin than Miranda's catsuit did.  Few things will make me facepalm like the Butt-Cam though, but I have hope that they won't be that thoughtless again.

 

You and Panda have fun with your latest debate.    I've got a krogan to go recruit.

 

Yeah, buttcam was awful. Don't worry, I have no desire to debate with Panda. I've long since given up on ever seeing eye to eye with her on pretty much anything.

 

You're entitled to your completely wrong opinions.

 

 

As are you, as well as your fallacious arguments.  

 

You know I still love ya.

[Han Shot First]

Speaking of butt cam, I thought the most gratuitous part of Mass Effect 1 was the close up shot of the Asari Consort's behind as she walked away...

 

Which was sort of funny, because it was the nude scenes (which were considerably more tasteful and not gratuitous at all) that garnered all the controversy.