928 réponses à ce sujet

[Giantdeathrobot]

For the millionth time, the only stupidity is treating realism as an indicator of quality, in a fantasy -medieval, sci-fi, or other- setting.

"I want my blue telekinetic-powered alien to look realistic when killing cthulian-mega-AIs"

 

BOO HOO

 

It's a matter of personal taste. It's fine to liking whatever you want or asking for whatever you want, but trying to treat your own preferences as some sort of objective milestone against which other ideas are measured is laughable.

 

It's also a fallacy that anything goes because it's sci-fi. Why not have Shepard drop-kick the Reapers into the sun and fly away with angel wings then? Who cares, it's sci-fi, right?

 

Well, na. It's the same reason Geralt doesn't pilot a giant robot in The Witcher, or Luke doesn't fire arrows at people in Star Wars, or Jon Snow doesn't whip out a lightsaber in Game of Thrones. Establishing an art design, a tone, in your setting and sticking with it is a good thing. Mass Effect 1 established that you need armor in combat, and fully sealed hardsuits in vacuum and hostile environments. Then ME2 dropped all that, with the results we know. It's not just about realism. It's about obeying your setting's own rules and tone, making it more believable.

 

I want that trend reversed. Anyone can wear whatever they want off-duty, and civilians can parade around naked for all I care. I'm not a puritan or one of those ''evil SJW'' that have become scapegoats around here. But I want armor in combat, and sealed hardsuits in hostile environments. Doesn't have to be some ugly and super-heavy grey bloc; Miranda's DLC armor posted a few pages back is perfect for her. It's all-black to signify her allegiance to Cerberus, suits her form, and looks like something someone might want to wear in a combat situation.

[KBomb]

Wrong. Some things are just facts. Wearing a catsuit or thin leather straps with exposed flesh into space is objectively stupid. Wearing a catsuit or thin leather straps into armed combat instead of armor is objectively stupid. "Oh, but they can put up biotic barriers." Gameplay contrivances don't make design flaws go away. Biotics drain the user and require constant concentration. As soon as that barrier goes down those ***-straps and catsuits aren't doing anything but getting ventilated.

Where did I say their combat armor should be worn in space? Can you show me where I said such? Didn't I previously state that they should have appropriate hardsuits in such situations?

Kinetic Shields and biotic barriers are contrived? As far as Jack goes, don't recall ever saying anything about her armor and as for Miranda's, I already explained once and you didn't get it, no need to argue the same points. You should calm down. This poor dead horse has been beaten for three games already. Adding options isn't going to cull your game.

[TevinterSupremacist]

It's also a fallacy that anything goes because it's sci-fi. Why not have Shepard drop-kick the Reapers into the sun and fly away with angel wings then? Who cares, it's sci-fi, right?

 

I feel sorry for you if you don't understand the value of a space-opera like crazy ride with angel-winged cyber commander manhandling space cthulu into collapsing stars.

 

Of course it goes.

[Killroy]

Where did I say their combat armor should be worn in space? Can you show me where I said such? Didn't I previously state that they should have appropriate hardsuits in such situations?

What armor?
 

Kinetic Shields and biotic barriers are contrived? As far as Jack goes, don't recall ever saying anything about her armor and as for Miranda's, I already explained once and you didn't get it, no need to argue the same points.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.
 

You should calm down. This poor dead horse has been beaten for three games already. Adding options isn't going to cull your game.

 

Ah yes, the old "if I can't win the argument you're mad and irrational" ploy.

[KBomb]

What armor?


I have no idea what you're trying to say.


Ah yes, the old "if I can't win the argument you're mad and irrational" ploy.

Win the argument? lol Winning an "argument" on the bsn is like a man with no head winning a hat. Oh, but please. You shall win this argument if it pleases you. Enjoy your prize. lulz win an argument. Oh bsn, never change.

[Killroy]

Win the argument? lol Winning an "argument" on the bsn is like a man with no head winning a hat. Oh, but please. You shall win this argument if it pleases you. Enjoy your prize. lulz win an argument. Oh bsn, never change.

 

>if i pretend i don't care that means i'm right

 

Nice try.

[KBomb]

>if i pretend i don't care that means i'm right

Nice try.

How can I possibly pretend that, when I care so much? This armor thing is a gamebreaker and I just lost an argument. Oh, I care random bsn user. The problem is I care too much.

[mopotter]

I like both.  And it depends on my mood.  I would like options, even if some of them were from dlc content that I could buy if it interested me.

 

But for traveling to a planet where there could be air that is caustic or ice storms or lava, I want everyone to have good armor that will protect them from the tip of their head to the bottom of their feet and all parts in between.   I worried about Jack, I liked the outfit I got with the dlc for her, but if you have to wear a mask to breath, you should have a good set of armor that takes care of the rest of you.   

 

Traveling in a city or on an earth like planet I might wear something lighter and I don't mind my team wearing something different.  Depends on the situation and what the story calls for.  

 

I'm far more inclined to skimpy armor in a Red Sonja type story rather than a SSgt Kerr type.   I don't care if people use skimpy armor as long as there are other options available.  

[SKAR]

Leaving the Normandy to enter the Collector base?

We apparently had oxygen to breathe.

[SKAR]

Heretic Geth space station too.

That's not the vacuum. They had air masks on.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

We apparently had oxygen to breathe.

No, we didn't. It opened out into space and we wore helmets and/or masks the entire time we were in there. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

That's not the vacuum. They had air masks on.

They had air masks on because there was no air to breath in the station so they had to bring their own. The Heretic station is a vacuum or a near vacuum, either of which are bad for us. 

[SKAR]

They had air masks on because there was no air to breath in the station so they had to bring their own. The Heretic station is a vacuum or a near vacuum, either of which are bad for us.

Apparently not the mouth to kill us by mass effect standards. Jeez.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Apparently not the mouth to kill us by mass effect standards. Jeez.

Yes, it was. Bioware just didn't care and put Rule of Cool over logic and their own lore.

 

It is especially annoying since on Haestrom they even acknowledge how shields and barriers are worthless against environmental hazards since the star strips them away in seconds. 

[SKAR]

Yes, it was. Bioware just didn't care and put Rule of Cool over logic and their own lore.

It is especially annoying since on Haestrom they even acknowledge how shields and barriers are worthless against environmental hazards since the star strips them away in seconds.

That one crossed my mind as well. I dont know. Good sun tan lotion and kinetic barriers? I'm sure they wont make that mistake again. But it's Their game and they can do whatever they want. A wise man once told me that.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

That one crossed my mind as well. I dont know. Good sun tan lotion and kinetic barriers? I'm sure they wont make that mistake again. But it's Their game and they can do whatever they want. A wise man once told me that.

Considering the lore says only hours of exposure would kill a person, I doubt sun tan lotion would do much. Unless it is SPF Googol(A googol is 10 to the hundredth power, or 1 with a hundred 0s behind it) or something.

 

I hope it won't. 

I can do whatever they want, but they shouldn't. Consistency is one of the most important things in setting up a good fictional universe. They made the lore the way they did, so they should follow it. 

[o Ventus]

I'm going to guess that you haven't actually tried to find out why sexualization is a problem. If you had, you would find plenty of research that show that sexualization can lead to mental health issues, contribute to less egalitarian beliefs among genders, cause negative self image, contribute to rape culture, etc.

I'm a bit tired so here's a few links to articles just an easy search away explaining the problem with the preponderance of sexualized characters in media:

http://www.scientifi...le-superheroes/

http://www.apa.org/n...ualization.aspx

 

Translation: "I have a point to make but can't or won't elaborate on it myself, so I'll just redirect you to some articles to do the legwork for me."

 

You keep on using these weasel words here too. "Plenty of research". What constitutes plenty? Who is doing the research? Are they feminist organizations or impartial scientific groups? The Scientific American article cites a study, but the study is behind a paywall, so that's not even a credible source. Looking up the people conducting the study gives me some interesting results. The women in charge of the study aren't even scientists or statisticians, they're Communications professors at some universities in California and are both noted feminists. Already, your sources are poor because they're tinted with bias and don't come from a credible source on top of not being able to be accessed. The article's summary of the study reeks of bad science too.

 

"To explore the effects of watching sexualized female victims and heroines, Pennell and Behm-Morawitz asked female college students to watch a 13-minute video montage of scenes that either featured female victims from the Spider-man series or female heroines from the X-Men series.  After watching one of these video montages, participants completed a survey that assessed gender role beliefs, body image, and self-objectification.  A number of other measures (e.g., movie-going habits, enjoyment of different film genres) were included to camouflage the purpose of the study, and in a control condition, participants simply completed the survey but did not watch either film montage. Gender role beliefs were assessed via the Attitudes toward Women Scale, which evaluated participants' views about men's and women's responsibilities at home and in the workplace, appropriate attire and appearance in public, rationality and problem solving skills, and physical strength.  Body image was measured using the Body Esteem Scale, which requires individuals to rate personal satisfaction with general appearance and specific body parts (e.g., face, chest, thighs).  Finally, the Self-Objectification Questionnaire required participants to indicate the importance of their body image and body competence to their personal identity. "

 

Right off the bat I notice errors in their method. The control group is not partaking in the same activities as either of the variable groups, so any baseline that the control would have given simply doesn't apply. Then they deliberately sabotage their survey results by introducing questions that have absolutely nothing to do with the experiment. I could forgive the control not setting a good baseline if the article at least mentions the comparison of the data sets between the control and the variables, but it doesn't, so at best I'm skeptical.

 

And then there's lines like this: "Because these sexualized superheroines have unattainable body dimensions and engage in unrealistic physical feats (e.g., saving the world in spiked heels), it’s not surprising that female viewers are left feeling dissatisfied with their own physical appearance and prowess." Unrealistic physical feats it says. Considering the study is about superheroes, one can also argue that flying and being able to shatter boulders with one's bare fists are also unrealistic physical feats. The article, and I'm guessing the study too considering who is conducting it, automatically insinuate that any feelings of inadequacy in regards top SUPERHEROES are due to sexualization and objectification, and not the amazing powers that the heroes have at their disposal, effectively making them into demigods. The study, from what little the article actually cites, has an aura of confirmation bias.

 

Honestly, I haven't looked at your second source and I have no intention to right now. If your first was this cartoonishly bad, then I don't see a point in wasting more time.

 

Also: lol @ the idea of a rape culture. Maybe if you live in the Middle East where rape is actually legal and even encouraged under Sharia law, then sure, except here in the West rape is not only illegal, but one of the worst offenses a person can commit. Rapists are arguably seen as worse than murderers.

[The Dank Warden]

******

 

Now that i've your attention, i always wondered about Zaeed's armor and space, how didn't he die in the space cutscenes? i mean he had an arm exposed there...

[o Ventus]

It matters because pandering to a presumed male audience directly leads to the overwhelming amount of sexualized female characters in media.

 

But oversexualized male characters in media are totally okay, right? It only matters when it hurts women?

 

(It doesn't even hurt women)

[o Ventus]

******

 

Now that i've your attention, i always wondered about Zaeed's armor and space, how didn't he die in the space cutscenes? i mean he had an arm exposed there...

 

It's not like he would freeze or explode from decompression. Being out in space exposes you to cosmic radiation, so he might get a nasty sunburn, and the water in your system would vaporize from the lack of atmospheric pressure. The vaporization of the water would cause swelling, but not to the point of exploding in a shower of gore, and if you get back to a normal environment quickly enough, the swelling will go back down and you'll be fine. If you linger in space while exposed though, the swelling can eventually lead to ebullism, which is when liquids in the body begin to form bubbles from the lack of pressure. If Zaeed were to die from anything due to exposure to space, it would be from suffocating, simply because that would be the fastest thing to do him in. He wouldn't freeze to death, since the lack of convection in a vacuum means the heat would linger in his body longer than the low temperatures would chill him (not to mention by the time that happened, he would have already died from suffocation). Of course, when you're exposed, the first thing you want to do is exhale all of the air from your lungs as fast as you can, because any leftover oxygen in your lungs would expand and your lungs might blow.

 

None of this would happen instantly either. Astronauts/cosmonauts who have been exposed to space have typically lasted around 14 or 15 seconds before the effects of body fluids acting up are felt and they lose consciousness, and the most common estimate I've seen is you might get around 90 seconds of exposure before death is a certain thing. Of course, this is all with our current technology. Considering that ME is sci-fi, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of handwave for why characters can survive in apparent vacuum. Biotic barriers or something. I remember Joker in the intro for ME2 had some kind of special helmet on that projected some kind of barrier over his face that let him breathe, and the rest of his body was exposed. The Normandy also had a huge gaping hole in it at that point, and there was some kind of mass effect field or something separating the cockpit of the ship from the rest of it, suggesting they might have the tech to allow them to pressurize individual segments of the ship. If they have that, it wouldn't be out of the realm of belief that they could scale it down and apply it to body armor for space operations. Space combat in ME involves one-manned fighters shooting at each other in dogfights anyway, it actually stands to reason that they WOULD have something to try and save their pilots in the event of emergency depressurization.

[In Exile]

It's also a fallacy that anything goes because it's sci-fi. Why not have Shepard drop-kick the Reapers into the sun and fly away with angel wings then? Who cares, it's sci-fi, right?

 

Well, na. It's the same reason Geralt doesn't pilot a giant robot in The Witcher, or Luke doesn't fire arrows at people in Star Wars, or Jon Snow doesn't whip out a lightsaber in Game of Thrones. Establishing an art design, a tone, in your setting and sticking with it is a good thing. Mass Effect 1 established that you need armor in combat, and fully sealed hardsuits in vacuum and hostile environments. Then ME2 dropped all that, with the results we know. It's not just about realism. It's about obeying your setting's own rules and tone, making it more believable.

 

I want that trend reversed. Anyone can wear whatever they want off-duty, and civilians can parade around naked for all I care. I'm not a puritan or one of those ''evil SJW'' that have become scapegoats around here. But I want armor in combat, and sealed hardsuits in hostile environments. Doesn't have to be some ugly and super-heavy grey bloc; Miranda's DLC armor posted a few pages back is perfect for her. It's all-black to signify her allegiance to Cerberus, suits her form, and looks like something someone might want to wear in a combat situation.

 

I actually wouldn't use the Witcher in this post, funny enough. The games actually don't really get into this, but the books are downright weird when it comes to science-fiction and multiple dimensions. It's actually way more of a science-fantasy pastiche in some ways, that Geralt getting a mecha wouldn't be quite as comically over the top as you think. Still comically over the top, just not as much as you think. 

 

Anyway, the Miranda issue seems to confuse armour with clothes, and wearing clothes as armour (which is what Miranda, Jack and Samara all do - even Jacob and Tali basically do it).  

[Giantdeathrobot]

It's not like he would freeze or explode from decompression. Being out in space exposes you to cosmic radiation, so he might get a nasty sunburn, and the water in your system would vaporize from the lack of atmospheric pressure. The vaporization of the water would cause swelling, but not to the point of exploding in a shower of gore, and if you get back to a normal environment quickly enough, the swelling will go back down and you'll be fine. If you linger in space while exposed though, the swelling can eventually lead to ebullism, which is when liquids in the body begin to form bubbles from the lack of pressure. If Zaeed were to die from anything due to exposure to space, it would be from suffocating, simply because that would be the fastest thing to do him in. He wouldn't freeze to death, since the lack of convection in a vacuum means the heat would linger in his body longer than the low temperatures would chill him (not to mention by the time that happened, he would have already died from suffocation). Of course, when you're exposed, the first thing you want to do is exhale all of the air from your lungs as fast as you can, because any leftover oxygen in your lungs would expand and your lungs might blow.

 

None of this would happen instantly either. Astronauts/cosmonauts who have been exposed to space have typically lasted around 14 or 15 seconds before the effects of body fluids acting up are felt and they lose consciousness, and the most common estimate I've seen is you might get around 90 seconds of exposure before death is a certain thing. Of course, this is all with our current technology. Considering that ME is sci-fi, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of handwave for why characters can survive in apparent vacuum. Biotic barriers or something. I remember Joker in the intro for ME2 had some kind of special helmet on that projected some kind of barrier over his face that let him breathe, and the rest of his body was exposed. The Normandy also had a huge gaping hole in it at that point, and there was some kind of mass effect field or something separating the cockpit of the ship from the rest of it, suggesting they might have the tech to allow them to pressurize individual segments of the ship. If they have that, it wouldn't be out of the realm of belief that they could scale it down and apply it to body armor for space operations. Space combat in ME involves one-manned fighters shooting at each other in dogfights anyway, it actually stands to reason that they WOULD have something to try and save their pilots in the event of emergency depressurization.

 

I also think it's dumb, as I said earlier. Zaeed's armor works in a combat situation, but not in vaccuum, and I'd have been alright with covering it up. Not for modesty's sake or anything along those lines, but because only an idiot wilfully exposes himself to the consequences of exposed skin in space when there are perfectly serviceable alternatives.

[In Exile]

I also think it's dumb, as I said earlier. Zaeed's armor works in a combat situation, but not in vaccuum, and I'd have been alright with covering it up. Not for modesty's sake or anything along those lines, but because only an idiot wilfully exposes himself to the consequences of exposed skin in space when there are perfectly serviceable alternatives.

To be fair, Zaeed is kind of an idiot. Not your point, but still. 

[grumpymooselion]

Why does it always have to be a versus thread? Why is it always either or, as if choice is such a crippling concept?

 

Revealing, Practical and variations in between in NPCs is only realistic, because people come in all sorts, with all manner of preferences, and NPCs are supposed to be people. Don't start with the, "practicality" arguments for the revealing stuff, because some people just aren't as practical as others.

 

This extends to the player. Choice.

 

And before the, "they can't possibly have the time or resources or blah blah blah" brigade comes marching in, let's be clear about something. Yes. They do. How do I know? Because they had it in ME2 and ME3. Various sorts of armor, some more practical, some less, and variations in between. It's not a competition or a choice, it's something Bioware and countless other game making companies have managed over the years. Variety of visual aesthetic while maintaining a unified theme.

 

This goes for the, "but-but my revealing armor!" people too, I'm not just sick of the, "but-but my practical armor!" people, I'm sick of both camps acting like their way is the only way. Games for decades could manage to have a practical and armored NPC right along side one that was not, this doesn't just go for armor, this goes for clothing too. Different cultures and personalities can have drastically different ideas of visual aesthetic in clothing.

 

ME makes all sorts of choices in its visual design, when to be more realistic, when to throw realism out the door and just have fun, and this extends to its armor and clothing on NPCs and what the main character can wear/equip. Both viewpoints have merit, but most importantly, so do the gray areas in between, that don't tend toward either extreme.

 

Now, personally, I tend to play more conservative characters, visually, I like full covering, but elegant, clothing, and practical, if somewhat ornate (or minimalist, depending on my mood), armors. I'm not defending practical armor though, anymore than I'm defending revealing armor and clothing. There's a place for everything.

 

And yes, developers have managed to do both at once, with variation in between - Bioware included, within this series even. It's not an impossible feat, as they've done it before. The world didn't end either, and the games didn't fail horribly because someone paid too much attention to clothing and armor variety.

 

The only thing that dictates whether such things will appear in the game, or not, to whatever extreme, or lack thereof, are Bioware's own decision to implement such, or not. It is a matter of want, not a matter of possibility. If they want these things in the game, they will be there. If they don't, they won't. As proven by the many projects of many studious, including Bioware, variety doesn't take up too much resources, it's just a matter of whether those studious wanted variety or not. If they want to, if that's their vision, it's fine. If they don't want to, it's still fine. The only thing that's not fine is this continual nonsense across this forum, and others, that results in ridiculous us vs them rabble in, often, single player games, where someone else's choices and preferences cannot and will not hurt you or ruin your experience no matter how much I occasionally see people insisting to the contrary.

[SKAR]

To be fair, Zaeed is kind of an idiot. Not your point, but still.

Oh God.