Looking through all the origin characters and their class options has me wondering if the modelers used to work in the comic book industry. Some of the poses, especially the females, look painful and possibly scoliotic.

The way the hips jut out and twist the back reminds me of the controversy over Spider-Woman #1 a few years back.

(http://gizmodo.com/heres-how-anatomically-impossible-that-spider-woman-1-1628838463)

Agreed, thank you for saying something. I also "love" how heavy plate mail breaches on the male human turn into little leaves and twigs on my female elf. Not.

I get trying to have a separate "aesthetic" for each of the characters, but this is just a little stupid. Fine, make the light armor look like that, but please don't do it to the plate.

For what it's worth, the male elf isn't any better. They look ridiculously anorexic and everything I put on them turns into little forest bits.

No.
This sort of nonsense belongs to Tumblr not here.
Larian has chosen their aesthetics and yes they look outlandish but they always have, have you played Dragon Commander?

Artistic vission need not be hurt because someones hurt feelings.

Also, seriously? Complaining about the fact that each race has their own aesthetic?
Maybe heavy elven armor is not plate armor because elves dont use plate? Their entire theme is that their armor looks organic, why would their heavy armor be plate?
I dont see you complaining about lizard Cowls not beeing cowns but huge turbans.

We are talking about a game with Teleporting crocodiles and you complain that the poses of fantasy characters is exagrated, when the two races where this is the case (lizard and elf) have extremley exagrated body structure with overly long limbs wiht the lizards not even having human like legs.

I don't think they indicated that their feelings were hurt.

I do agree that elven armour really doesn't tend to be much more than chainmail bikinis from what I've seen. (Though I expect this issue isn't just limited to female elves?) I definitely prefer that armour is the same for all races (just morphed for body shape) with some armours being be designed with a particular race in mind but not only for them.

I also found the elven underwear to be hilarious. It's like they glued a bunch of leaves to their private parts. How do they make these clothes, exactly?

I'd also prefer that the characters to have natural poses.

"Chainmail bikini" Yay buzzwords. Its neither chainmail not a bikini such its not a chainmail bikini and even if it was a chainmail bikini if thats the aesthetic vision of Larian then its good.

Why would you prefer armor to be universal?
Thats just less diversity in the character designs. Its just less interresting. Also since all the races have such divergent body shapes how would that even work? How do you put human boots on a lizard?
How do you fit a dwarf with a human platemail?

And what are natural poses? how are the poses not natural? I assume you are talking about the female lizards and elves since those are the only exagrated poses i can think of and they only appear in the character creation menu: Fantasy races, the poses look that way because they look good on certain designs.

I like the fact that armor is no universal and has a unique flavor for each race...

I really like how the armour changes too. Gives every race a unique as opposed to just the heavily armed Matryoshka family you get in most RPGs.

[img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/140/images/3725-1-1381259829.jpg[/img]

Make any sense? Nope. But then neither does much else in the game. Or in any other rpg for that matter.

"I find really annoying. I would have preferred a Mana system."

Its a Joke guys, just making a first DO2 mem =) out of this statement.

http://larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=586382#Post586382

Regardless of armour, I do agree about the poses.
Choose female warrior and flip through the poses, and it's pretty clear they're almost entirely that classic arch-back-pop-butt.
I do think it's not as bad as a lot of other games, but I think Larian can do a bit more to improve this.

Personally I think the elves are fine, both males and females seem to not be aware of clothes, nothing sexist about it. Lizards are just all weird, some "sexy" and some not.

Honestly the only ones I saw an issue with were the human female poses. ##

I mostly agree, but I have to say, the only one that really irks me is the default pose for the human female inquisitor.

Look up more than just that image relating to spiderman and you'll see that male spiderman adopts that pose to. It's not to pop her butt, it's the "look at me I'm like a spider" pose that they chose to use. Does it make the butt pop? Sure. Was it their intention? Not really.

Regardless, I do agree the poses are a bit out there. Some of them don't rightly make sense from a combat perspective. However I don't see it as a way to make them more sexy, it's mostly just a fantasy trope at this point. In game I've never seen Lohse or Sebille actually don any of those, they move about regularly and cast regularly.

It's not about the literal chainmail bikini and this is not simply a buzzword. Just because the trope name uses the word bikini, it also doesn't mean it's all about sexism -- the chainmail bikini is a defined trope.

Look at the illustration on the trope page. It's a pretty good representation of the areas that are visually protected when an elf puts on armour in D:OS2.

D:OS2 elf in scale mail.

The problem is that it's impractical and immersion breaking. If you're going to go to the effort of wearing armour, you'll probably want to try protecting your midriff. I don't know why it's so important for the elves to always try so hard at being sexy.

Funny, I don't remember all that garbage when Spiderman was doing all of his neckbreaking poses.
What's wrong, equality not in your dictionary? Then how about "hypocrisy"?

Yet 3 ton teleporting crocodiles and talking fire slugs are totally realistic.

For those of us who don't pay attention to the Spiderman comics, can we keep this about D:OS2?

For the record, I'm pretty sure the male elves in D:OS2 are about as ridiculous as the females, but I haven't looked into this.

Last time I checked this was a fantasy RPG. What a stupid complaint to make about the pose of a female when there are things like magic and mechanical golems.

Tough, since op started with talking about nontroversy that was Spider-woman's pose.
Isn't bioware making any "progressive" rpg where everything is politically correct?

More realistic than wearing a bit of armour over your boobs and hoping that no one will try to stab you in the stomach?

Yes.

This is completely irrelevant. So because it's fantasy it's fine? is that what you're going with? Funny how people who make that argument usually don't care one bit if the same issues arise in the real-world.

Yes.
Also if the same thing happened in real life you'd better not say anything or you'd be slut shaming.

I was called out for this! But yeah Female Inquisitor pose is just downright absurd. The others were not near as bad. the Wayfarer for instance looked great.

Also I played Divinity 2 the armour in that for female was amazing as was the armour for females in Divine Divinity and Beyond Divinity. So this is not their usual stuff this is new.

Ugh.

It really seems you want to make this about sexism, and you want to make it as clear as possible that you're on the wrong side of that war.

The characters have every right to be sexy. People have every right to be sexy. If there's a female character in the game with her boobs out, then great for her. Morrigan in Dragon Age dresses sexier than anything in D:OS2, but she isn't pretending to wear armour. I don't remember much of any controversy about her outfit?

Armour shouldn't be sexy -- it should be functional.

That's exactly what I'm going with. Fantasy means - not real - meaning, the developers can do whatever they want, no matter how absurd. Having said that, that doesn't mean they can introduce literally anything because this is a Divinity game so there is already a universe with lore and law.

But then complaining about the pose a character can do is.... hypocritical at best. So many superheroes (especially in popular comics) are posed the same way and nobody demands a change for that.

Plump, in actual fact people, do complain about those poses and call them Cheesecake poses. So your argument is moot. Again female inquisitor is the worse one, the others are not near as bad.

Armor's been sexy in fantasy settings (and others) for ages, who are you to change that?

Trust me. There was.

The chainmail bikini is not inherently sexist. One of the examples of this is Conan the Barbarian, who runs around in leather underpants. His character is a bit campy though, and doesn't represent the fantasy genre overall.

Overall, the fantasy genre has serious issues of sexism. You would often see a man in realistic armour alongside a woman in a chainmail bikini. The first D:OS made this exact mistake.



So yes. Historically the chainmail bikini was introduced to the fantasy genre in a highly sexist way.

----

Feel free to give elves a racial talent "unable to wear heavy armour". Maybe they have to instead use some kind of special elven magic in order to protect themselves while wandering around half-naked. Feel free to find a way to justify their penchant for skimpy outfits.

But when The Red Prince wears scale mail, he looks like he's taking armour seriously. He looks not far different from the illustration in the header image of this website. Take the same armour, put it on Sebille, and she essentially gets a couple of pauldrons and super-skimpy boob covering. It's absurd.

"Overall, the fantasy genre has serious issues of sexism"
"Historically the chainmail bikini was introduced to the fantasy genre in a highly sexist way."
"It really seems you want to make this about sexism"

How ironic.

I performed a google search for "Dragon Age Origins Morrigan Sexist" and browsed through a few pages and found no results where people were terribly worried about her outfit. (The prevailing topic is Morrigan's pregnancy arc, followed by discussions of the misogyny inherent in the medieval setting.)

Compare this to, say, "spiderwoman sexist" or "divinity original sin sexist". If you have any better links, I'd be interested.

How so? Historically, the chainmail bikini has been used in an extremely sexist manner, and this includes D:OS. Your desire to keep the chainmail bikini just because it's traditionally part of the fantasy genre is indirectly sexist.

However, no one's directly accused Larian of using the chainmail bikini in a sexist way in D:OS2.

I've simply accused them of using a crap trope.

Remember, everything is racist, everything is sexist, everything is homophobic and if you don't agree- "you're on the wrong side of that war."

"Hey I'm not saying they're sexist for using chainmail bikinis. Where did I ever say they were sexist for using chainmail bikinis? I'm just saying that they're sexist for using chainmail bikinis."

Ah yes, the "I am offended by this so change it" SJW group. If your offended by it then you probably should not be playing this...or anything honestly, since everything will be offensive. I remember the original DOS cover controversy and the perpetually offended harassed larian to change it. I also remember reading how upset the artist who created it was since they put their heart into it. Play something by EA if you want something that tries to please the identity politics group. Larian has a clear asthetic they want and I personally think its a nice change from so many games trying to make everyone and everything asexual.

Sad thing is people are not willing to have a mature conversation about this. Instead, they keep screaming SJW or Feminist nonsense. I love Larian games, I love their worlds and humour, I praised their armour in Divinity 2. It's why it's disappointing they are going away from that...

I don't know why this is so confusing for you guys.

The chainmail bikini is a trope that is often used in a sexist manner. Browse the trope page, and you'll find that the vast majority of the examples are women. But the trope can apply to men too. The trope is not inherently sexist, but it is often used in a sexist way, as it was in the original artwork for D:OS.

If Larian were using the trope in D:OS2 in a sexist way, then I would definitely be protesting it much more aggressively.

But they're not (as far as I can tell).

What I do notice, however, is that when you put armour on a human, lizard or dwarf, it looks like armour. When you put the same armour on an elf, it transforms into an immersion-breaking chainmail bikini.

It feels ugly and I don't like it.

Nice try to brush aside calling a spade a spade. But the moment this was said



It is clear that this is nothing more than attempt to shove identity politics into gaming. This comes directly from the identity politics playbook.

Haha, I love the elf aesthetic. I mean, if they wanted to add MORE wood stuff to it, I certainly wouldn't complain. But I think the look is great.

I am not shoving issue aside I am completely against SJW nonsense which you don't seem to realize. But I am calling a spade a spade and the Fem Inquisitor Pose would hurt to hold for a long time. It's immersion breaking whether you think otherwise. It's the only Pose I actually paused at. I have said Divinity 2 had great armour for females and overall armour for me is Grand. Elves armour is unique I can accept this. The Inquisitor pose is just pointless and makes no sense for what the character is... Now maybe if they were a Bard with skill of seduction that would make a great deal more sense.

It's not that I dislike the designs of the armour as such (although the elf underwear is pretty silly).

It's just the jarring contrast. You give heavy armour to an elf and it transforms into a bikini.

I don't understand why people are discussing how realistic and unrealistic stuff is in a fantasy world. Can't we just all enjoy the game and stop this endless debate that has no end?

With the mechanical bugs and other problems... this is the game breaker for some people? Strange.

Poses seem fine to me, am I missing something?

Also the racial armor... Also seems fine to me. Lol, I'm actually surprised people are complaining about this kind of stuff.

I thought the Early Access period was for players to voice all their concerns. I didn't realize only some were allowed. Strange.

Are there lizard boobies though?

I am pleased to report that there are not.

This is an outrage.

http://larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=461154

It bothers me more that the same armour would fit a slight elf, a burly human, a short dwarf and an entirely differently-shaped lizard. It's not like IRL I can buy size 10 clothes and fit into them, after all.

So if they'd have to be altered for fitting both size and anatomy they may as well be altered for the character type's aesthetic preference too. There's a magic, invisible armourer and tailor shop that follows your team around to provide this special service free of charge. :p

1. Whats wrong with these poses. Ive yet to found an explanation for it.
What is wrong with sex appeal in an RPG? especialy when it its only the pose in character creation read: where your character is posing. there is no context to it.

Its an elf, elves quite clearly arent as technologically advanced as humans are in that setting, if that breaks your immersion then you need to get more entrenched into the world Larian has created, not think of everything as Tolkien.

and as for the "chainmail bikini trope" how about you look up the trope called "Tropes are not bad"
There is nothing wrong with using tropes.


Yes they are also terrible as a result.
I played Dragon Age Inquisition thinking id get a cool fantasy RPG, instead i got someone explain to me what "Transsexual" means in Klingon.


No?
In truth realistic armor does not equal practical armor at all.
Armor has been exordinarily gaudi in quite a few instances in real life and we are talking about a fantasy universe here.

Realism is not your concern at all and it is evident from your posts. You simply want to remove something because it is sexy just like all of you people coming from Tumblr trying to instill your prudish ideas on other people.

In fact i dont even know why i sitll argue with you after you have defended the censorship of Larians Artists on Steam.
Is this the 90s again? No sexy stuff allowed in vidya games?

EDIT: and of course the deflection. You screech about random tropes you screech about unrealistic armor for women (ignoring the fact that the males of the same race have the EXACT same armor designs showing the exact same ammount of skin) and then you say others call you an SJW are irrational.
No, it is you people who shove identity politics into video games that are the true danger to creativity.

And you do it blantalty and open for everyone to see.
If you get triggered by beeing called an SJW how about you stop shoving your believes on everyhting you touch.

People can voice whatever they like and i can find whatever i like strange as well.

I didn't say there's anything wrong with using tropes. I did say that this a bad trope. (I should clarify that and say it's generally a bad trope.)


I played the Witcher 3. I never complained about seeing boobs. I never complained about the sex scenes. This has nothing to do with being prudish.


I ignored the fact that the male elves also wear sexy clothes? Maybe you should start by actually reading my posts, because I certainly acknowledged this on several occasions, and I have not (yet) accused Larian of being sexist in D:OS2.

But I do feel it's tasteless and immersion-breaking. Either let elves wear scale mail or don't. You don't need any advanced technology to wear clothes. Anyway, it seems we now have two threads covering this issue. I'd rather not have this conversation in two places.

Returning to the main subject of this thread, I figured I'd take a moment to look at what the fuss was about in regards to the human inquisitor woman. Her body is almost twisted 180 degrees. As a person with average flexibility, I am physically unable to twist my body far enough to mimic that pose. I agree with the OP. It's pretty silly and unrealistic, especially considering she's wearing armour, not spandex.

1. Whats wrong with these poses. Ive yet to found an explanation for it.
What is wrong with sex appeal in an RPG? especialy when it its only the pose in character creation read: where your character is posing. there is no context to it.

Which is exactly what's wrong, IMO. I prefer seeing characters in heroic poses, or poses relevant to their profession, not sticking their butt out for no reason.

I honestly try to stop discussing this because clearly it's getting nowhere.
I'll leave some counter arguments though, as it's pretty fun treading water!

- "It's always been like this, who are you to change it" is the stupidest argument ever. Humans have always not-used computers, who are we to change that? Until a recent point, white people have always had slaves, who are we to change that? Women weren't allowed to vote, who are we to change that? Should I continue?... Equality struggle is constant, it's been happening since forever and it will probably keep going on for a very long time.

- "It's fantasy, they can do whatever they like" while true, it doesn't change this argument at all. Yeah they can do whatever they want (just as in MGS Snake is naked because "she uses the sun to whatever"), but it doesn't mean it's not an issue. It's a fantasy world which REAL ACTUALLY NON-FANTASY HUMAN BEINGS play in. The fact that it's fantasy doesn't mean it doesn't have real-life implications.

- My wife, who's a big DOS1 fan, cringed at those poses. He reaction was something like "really they put so much effort into this and that and all the female humans just stick their butt out?". and yeah, it's glaringly obvious.

- "It's their artistic vision" is complete BS. I'm 100% positive there's no "artistic vision guideline" at Larian stating that human females should alwyas stick their butt out in this world. It's probably a guy doing the poses, looking at references from Comics or Superheros or other games or what have you, and posing that. So calling them out is GOOD, just as they were called out on DOS1 female armour which they changed.

- There's nothing prude about this. It's great to have sexy women and men. Nudity is awesome. Suggesting that is simply an argument you're trying to find because you either don't understand the arguments, try to invalidate the person making them, or just being a troll.

Phew.

Which happens where? Ive looked through all the Elven poses right now and that doesnt happen.
The knight has a double handed grip on the sword the warrior stands there in a fairly straight forward "look ive got a sword" pose. The cleric looks more guarded and the wizards do fancy stuff with their wands. The Battlemage stands there in what i can only explain as a "Ninja pose"
Where is that supposed sticking their butt out? you are just making stuff up as you go.
Or are you also gonna complain about the human inquisitor pose which emphasizes motion?

You are making up issues where there are none. None of the characters goes against their intended role.
and let me ask the question again: Even if there was a character sticking its ass out at the camera, WHICH THERE IS NOT save for the dwarven MALE inquisitor, whats the issue with that? The male Lizard Inquisitor also sticks his "butt" out and i dont see you complaining.
Or where is your mention of the Dwarf Battlemage who shows off his gratuitous body hair in a quite compromising pose? Is this also an issue for you?

The beauty of the Human (or inhuman) body is a staple of the fantasy genre. Explain to me why emphasizing beauty through posing, which as i might add ONLY exists in the character creation and comes up nowhere again, is a bad thing.



Your tumblr is showing again. But i dont expect someone to know of history who thinks that teleporting crocodiles are more realistic than gaudi armor and battlefield nudity (look up Gaesetae)



It absolutley 100% does not.
This is a video game. Leave your culture war at the door.



Let me get this straight: an Artist at larian has created something.
You now come along and claim that it was not his artistic vision.

Ok. No.

[quote=Beyond"Suggesting that is simply an argument you're trying to find because you either don't understand the arguments, try to invalidate the person making them, or just being a troll."[/quote]

no you just dont have any arguments.
All you have is your opinion that is not founded on anything other than an agenda that does not have a place within a video game.

They even clearly linked the Fem Inquisitor pose and explained they would struggle to hold this pose. It's about the spine, the spine does not work like that...

I made this account just to tell you that i can hold that pose, you're all exaggerating a ton regarding how hard it is to hold it.

Oh? "You prefer heroic poses" do you? So they should just change their designs, and negate their own choices because, well, that's what you prefer. Your preference is of the utmost importance, right? Well guess what? I prefer the poses as they are, and I think if the designers want the poses to be that way, then that's fine, it's their game, their art, their decision. If you don't like it, simply don't play the game. It's not complicated.

Who cares what your wife has to say about the poses? Both me and my sister are "huge fans of D:OS1", and she thinks the poses are fine. In fact both she and I are dumbfounded that this is ACTUALLY something people complain about.

Artistic vision is what the artist/designer envisions in their mind. The result they strive toward. There's no "guidelines" or rules, that's what makes art so great, an artist can design whatever they want however they want to fit that vision. You can disagree with it, sure, but you can't expect them to change or censor it just because you or others get a little triggered.

If you have such a huge issue with such a trivial aspect of the game, maybe you should take a long hard look at yourself as a person, and think about the reasons you play games. On my end however, the issue is much more important. As an advocate for freedom of expression (and intelligence), watching you self righteous goons pressure and harass developers into self censorship makes me sick. How dare you? As an aspiring game designer myself, and avid gamer, my passion for games goes deeper than you can comprehend, and seeing this political agenda pushing rhetoric seep into this industry like a cancer pains me and stresses me the hell out. Designers can't create what they want anymore because all the crybullies will accuse and harass.

It's just some sexy poses in a video game. Don't like it? Fine. Ignore it, play male characters, or better yet, don't play the game at all. Because you clearly don't care sbout games, or what they mean.

I do so love the strawman and cries of censorship. This is a minor issue it would not stop me playing the game. Nonetheless, it's an issue and the description for the Inquisitor does not fit the pose.

"A daring wand-wielder risking life and limb to decimate evil head on"

As I said if it was a bard who had seduction skill then it would be perfectly fine.

For instance, if Bard was a class it could be written like this:

"Whether skilled in the art of music or sublime seduction it is easy to forget the Bard is as deadly as it is inviting."

Well, we all know what happened last time, they had to censor the cover art. Which, like now, was not an issue.

And that description could be applied to the character and they could still be sexy. You think just because they're a "daring wand wielder" means they can't be a sexy badass?

Well, let's make a comparison of a bad ass. Most of the time Buffy was not sexualized nor was River Tam both could be bad ass without coming across as insulting to their character. My suggestion at least lines up with a character would use such a pose. Not to mention my suggestion is solely based on one idea. There are many other classes that could use it.

Also, because of that pose, I chose Wayfarer instead, even though Inquisitor intrigued me. Face it, most who complained supported game in Kickstarter so our opinions are just as relevant as yours. You don't seem to realize this nor realize that since the game in Alpha it is time for these niggling issues to be resolved. I never said it was a huge issue, but it was distracting for otherwise good game.

Maybe a magical spine does ?

Touche .

I agree that the poses are looking "ridiculous" for some.

In fact, I would use the term "goofy".

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing though...

I was surprised by it, but it didn't bother me. I thought it was a Larian game, and it's mostly a question of setting oneself in the right mentality to enjoy Larian's style. I was thinking the poses were a signature for the studio, but that ingame would have a different tone (it's just a reminder) anyway, so it's really not a big deal and it's funny.

There is no win scenario for always trying to please everyone. That's why developers should create games they want to see/play and hope that player's like it , not the other way around. Hurt feelings are easy to get over,


If people could spend a fraction of the energy they use to complain about perceived sexism and stereotypes in other people's creations maybe they would be able to create a game they could enjoy.


As for the pose, its unrealistic but so is the male one where it looks like he broke his back. Its how they designed it. I and i'm sure the majority of players will get over it.

Again, if you're gonna complain about an unrealistic pose then you have to complain about how magic and dragons aren't real in fantasy either. SJWs should stop making stupid complaints like these and accept the fact developers should create whomever they want and however they want, unrealistic or not. If you don't like it, don't play as that.

Games would be boring and uncreative if every game had the same poses and were all realistic.

Plump just because someone complains about this does not make them an SJW. Also, there is a thing called immersion and suspension of disbelief. I can accept dragons and elves in these games fine, but seeing someone who is meant to be human have their spine mangled in such a pose is difficult to accept. So quit calling people SJWs for something that is not even an SJW issue. As it stands I despise them, but this was never an SJW issue.

If anyone can show me a photo of an actual human holding that pose with their butt at that angle, then I'll believe you. Otherwise I'm assuming you've half-assed it.

Look at the shoulder. It's behind her butt.

Of course, I'd also challenge you to hold that pose while wearing armour, but I understand that can be a little difficult to obtain.

Right, and a 7 foot tall elf eating a severed head to read its memories is much more immersive, okay.

Fact is, these aesthetic complaints with a bias towards females are in fact an SJW issue. That's right, the poses are aesthetic and don't effect the game. Why aren't the people defending the OP here complaining about the "mangled" poses by many of the DC/Marvel heroes, both male and female?

This thread isn't about that, but here you go.

So that article was made by the OP or somebody in this thread, because that's what I asked for.

Dude. Just Google Rob Liefeld. It's not hard. It should make for a fun afternoon.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=female+gymnasts+back+bending

It is most definitely not unrealistic. I won't go as far as to post a picture of myself on here, but the google search there should be all that you need.

Both the male and female elves look absolutely ridiculous and it's FINE. That's the design that Larian chose, they look very sinewy yet frail. It's one of the more unique elven designs I've seen in a long time compared to humans with pointy ears which every other fiction settles for.

Agreed. I love the elf design for both male and female and I am not seeing any issues with them. Sexy =/= bad design.

No one said sexy equals bad design, but there is no reason the Fem Inquisitor should hold that pose. Again Plump you are putting words into people's mouths.

They can hold that pose because this is an unrealistic, fantasy game and the artist can do whatever they want to the game.

There's no reason an elf wizard/witch should stand the way he does, showing off his underwear to the entire world.

The poses are just there for flavor. It would look really boring if all classes stood the same way.

Let's assume the inquisitor also happens to be a world-class gymnast and that her armour doesn't get in the way at all. First of all, the inquisitor is not bending backwards. She is twisting.


This is a real gymnast twisting. This is an athlete who essentially specialises in flexibility. She is not twisting to the extent of the inquisitor. She is not curving her back to the extent of the inquisitor.

To make this clearer, look at the line between her butt and her shoulder. Notice that on the gymnast this line is a very soft curve.

Look at the inquisitor, and notice that the same curve is essentially a 90 degree angle. That's a broken spine.

That argument holds no water. The game treats human as mundane with maybe some magical talent. The elf holding such a pose not a problem, humans though seem largely based on our skeleton.

Tumblr can no longer contain them...

Your entire argument that people can't hold the pose is moot.

Here's why.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. Cause i stand by my point, and you seem to stand by yours.
That is definitely not a broken spine.

You do know just how rare Contortion is. It's not a common condition so really a rare condition that allows for body to be presented in such a way is not an argument.

And here I though the " The first thing you see in the game " topic was said... then I read this.

I paid no attention to any poses in character creation. Why should I? Like... really?

You guys do know that the humans in divinity can use magic right?
Maybe the use of magic / source changes the body a bit and allows you to be more flexible?
I dont know why you guys argue about the human body in fantasy game.
Humans in divinity can do other thing than we can so why not bend a bit more?

I'll concede that a contortionist could probably pull it off.

Bear in mind though that in order to achieve this pose the contortionist would have to literally dislocate bones. (Some can dislocate their hip on purpose.) I'm not sure that's the intention here.

Maybe they use magic to help bend their pose, or didn't you think that far ahead?

Dear god, I thought people had stopped making this sort of regressive complaints years ago.

Nope. Getting really tired of this. It happened the last time around and if you don't like it, walk away. Let artists, animators, and developers do as they want. You want to whine over mechanics, feel free. But it's getting bloody tiresome over the whole "omg pose" "omg buttocks" "omg she's showing bellybutton!" "OMG the epic fantasy game isn't like IRL, I NEEEEEED TO WHINE!" Maybe the developers can pull a Blizzard and add an even better pose, something that will really trigger people who are whining over this.

FYI OP: Your gawker clickbait was debunked ages ago. Let them burn in the wreckage of history as they deserve. Maybe they can redeem themselves under univisions hand, but I doubt it.

I don't even get why an elf is forced to adhere to human standards.

I'd like to inform people in this thread that this thread was posted on KiA, so watch out if you want to avoid GG doxing and usual harassment.

Well this is downright wonderful -.-...

What is KiA?

Kotaku In-Action it's the worse and most abusive game reddit online. It was begun by Kotaku originally but it's now inhabited by worse type of Gaming people.

KiA and Gamergate are a bogeyman for angry feminists.

Oh, Jesus Christ, none of this was about Feminism it was about a pose being unfitting and most likely painful for a character. I supported Gamers Gate especially with abuse Anti-Game Gaters flung at TB.

Also, Sordak posting this on the on Reddit just to get more people on your side and to distort the point in the whole article is frankly just sickening. I showed this thread to one person, but I would never post it elsewhere to validate my opinion.

Honestly, it's pointless to say "it was not about feminism" or "I disliked the abuse flung at TB" if you've basically entered in the same hole that the people you were against did.

How is not liking seeing someone spine mangled in most cases if you try an imagine it somehow Feminism or SJW? You don't seem to get this, but if this was a male I would still find it absurd.

[quote=Tiaan]How is not liking seeing someone spine mangled in most cases if you try an imagine it somehow Feminism or SJW? You don't seem to get this, but if this was a male I would still find it absurd. [/quote]

Because if you disagree with them=evil SJW and Feminism. Also free speech only applies if you agree with them.

Because if you disagree with them=evil SJW and Feminism. Also free speech only applies if you agree with them. [/quote

Thank you Reg for telling us... especially since it was Sordak who did it. Showing he just wanted to cause trouble.

You are right, though, everything labelled SJW or Feminism. It's not about that, it's about rather wishing not to imagine what that spine is doing...

I just thought of an ideal solution for this the classes could have multiple poses the person can select. It would please everyone.

Seriously, guys, stick to the topic (whatever it is now) and stop having a dig at particular people.

How silly considering it's the anti-gg side that loved doxing so much.
But hey, what do I know, I'm on the "wrong side of history" here.

Both sides did it. Pretending otherwise is a distortion of history.

But that is neither here nor there.

You guys seriously love to bitch about meaningless stuff. Larian art style is about funny and cartoony characters and you seriously start bitching for a damn pose ? Is it Overwatch bullshit all over again ?

Also about the elven armors, they made them feel special and I think it's great because elves look very different from humans (unlike many fantasy games). Maybe their armors doesn't seem very protective but we're not in a damn simulation, it's a fantasy setting and sometimes sacrificing a little immersion for the visuals is a good thing.

If you can accept magic and supernatural creatures you can also accept the fact than elven armors are made of enchanted wood, leaves and tatoos and that even if they're not made of plate and don't cover everything they can still be a reliable protection. This whole argument about immersion is complete bullshit, maybe that's why you're called SJW.

Hardly, immersion is not a bullshit argument. I even explained suspension of disbelief which these other things you mention in can justify.

I was going to post this myself. I remember how much BS SJW and sites like kotaku went after larian because it "offended" them, it pissed off the artists and fans of the game. Larian has a clear aesthetic design that they are going for and I think its great. Enough trying to pander to the perpetually offended.

I do find it laughable that people say the pose suspends their belief when we have people shooting lightning out of their hands, getting shot in the face with arrows and still moving, dragons, walking skeletons, etc, but THIS, this is the thing that breaks immersions. Ok, yea. Not buying it. This is just another push by the same group that attacked larian last time.

I'm always amused with going "it's neither here nor there" AFTER spewing some garbage.

Both sides did do it. I am not blaming one side, either side had ass holes in it. The abuse TB got was from Anti-GG but on otherhand doxxing went on with GG.

I'd be interested in your sources on that one.

I hate this has turned into such a big deal...

It hasn't... seriously.

Yeah my bad seems i got this post confused with another similar one.

HI

All elves wear practically nothing. Play a male elf, scale looks just as skimpy on them. There's very little female only sexualized clothing in this game. Also everyone has goofy poses.

I find the nitpicking over various poses or armor outfits in games extremely gender negative. It's fine to not necessarily enjoy something but why make art in entertainment a political issue when the art itself is not inherently political? Is the idea here that we should police culture or specific sub-cultures?

Attractive stereotypes are not a bad thing, its just a thing. It's something to be enjoyed for those that enjoy it. Once can celebrate attractive stereotypes without expecting everyone, including oneself, to meet those stereotypes. Fantasy loves attractive people. The 'female armor bikini vs full plate man' stereotype in fantasy comes from a very simple notion: Men are considered attractive in uniform, women are considered attractive in bikini. It's very simple, not very profound, but also not wrong to enjoy or like in any way. I think it often looks stupid, particulary when its overdone, but that does not mean it is a bad thing.

Anyway, I hope Larian sticks to their guns on this one because it is impossible to please everyone. That includes me. I don't particularly like how the armors magically change based upon the race wearing it, I don't like it because I enjoy more the consistency of an item regardless of who is using it. That said I understand what Larian is going for here and if that's their thing they should stick to it

What anti-gg side? There is no "anti-gg" side, people who dislike GG are not part of an organization, necessarily.

Why bother? Everytime someone from the GG does anything bad, it's either "Justified because X" or "H-he doesn't speak for all of us!"

Anonymity is a powerful tool, /pol/.

Hello, actual artist here. So there seems to be perhaps a bit of confusion over physiology, especially as regards the inquisitor. If we take the pose and sketch over it, finding the main body landmarks (breast, centreline, ribcage, etc) it shows us that it's a simple dropped shoulder pose, something that even I, in my less than athletic state, can replicate with ease.



As you can see, the right breast is mostly visible, only the very edge of the left, which means we can get a decent idea of the centreline of the character. Map out the ribcage and the shoulders from there, and it's perfectly natural. Stylized and dramatized, sure, but what isn't, in art?

Really, the only thing that kind of stumps me is the left arm. I get the kind of angle it's trying to make, but the elbow seems floaty to me, up there by her head. I'm sure it would make more sense if I rotated the model and was able to see it from a different perspective.

Now, while my main point here was on the pose and the realism thereof, I'd also like to at least touch on the divergent visual styles of the armor. I've always liked that the species were very divergent in visual style, and with the general aesthetic Larian games, especially Original Sin had, it's great that elves look like they're festooned in branches and ivy. After all, as we well know from Original Sin, there's magical potions out there that can somehow turn a person more durable and tough (+armor), so perhaps the elves just craft their armor out of whisperwood, rather than the more mundane steel that humans make it from.

It's certainly not unreasonable, and if anything, I feel it's more immersive. Elves are using magical, natural defenses, humans using what they can heat up and hammer together.

In what little I've played so far, I think quite a few of the animations are a little silly, in my opinion. Not exactly gender negative, but I do find them, so far, somewhat unfinished. Of course, it could be because of my horrid frame-rate.

I have a few other nitpicks so far, but I have a good feeling they'll be fixed in later patches...

I appreciate your contribution, but there are some problems here.

I'm definitely can't claim to be an artist, but I have access to both 2D & 3D professional artists and I've previously consulted with one of them as part of my process of understanding what's wrong with this image. But being an expert doesn't prove anyone's more right. Remember, Rob Liefeld is also a professional artist (somehow).

It's easy to pull off a similar pose, but there is a reason I've insisted on the "pics or didn't happen". I've posted a photo of a gymnast in a similar pose, but there are key differences between these poses which become more evident when you actually look at the line you've traced of the spine, and when you notice that the inquisitors arm is actually concealing the fact that her second butt cheek would be visible to the camera (try drawing in the hips and the centrelines for the legs). The twisting in the waist needs to be extreme to achieve that. There is a line that has well and truly been crossed here.

I only mentioned being an artist as it was relevant to the fact that I often draw and do 3D modelling, including animation, and as such have dealt with drawing and posing models in the past, and I'm giving my perspective. I do not use it as an 'I'm correct' button, regardless of what you imagine my intention is.

I would, however, be quite interested to hear what your friend's professional opinion is on this, since you consulted with them.

Here's another examination




Red is the assumption that the other cheek is visible without the arm in the way. I'd like to draw your attention to her belt. Highlighted in blue, it is clearly side-on to the camera. We can see the angle of it as it loops over the hip, but we cannot see any flat portion of it. Similarly, look at the texture detail on the butt of the pants themselves. Again, it follows the curvature of the rear, but then stops before it can flatten out. This is clearly a pose where the hips are align so as to be perpendicular to the camera. The arm is hiding nothing more than the upper part of the thigh. As you can see highlighted in red, if the other cheek were, somehow, managing to face the camera, you'd have bigger issues than an unrealistic body pose - the model itself would be presenting visible mesh deformation as it rotated in such a way as to screw up the skin weighting. Believe me - it's all well and good to say that a pose is unrealistic for a person, but 3D models aren't magic, skin weighting is a very precise deal and bending or moving bones too far can and will look horrible and readily noticeable.

Further, as you desires pictures, well, consider request granted. From the art blog of pirate-cashoo on tumblr, [whose blog the forums don't seem to want me to link] that reference in the above image is an actual woman doing the exact same pose, albeit viewed from a slightly different camera angle. There are further demonstrations within the original post that show a variety of similar, and even more dramatic angles, and how each is, while perhaps not practical, quite possible, such as:



apologies to pirate-cashoo for rehosting, but Larian forums appear to autofilter tumblr links as spam.

Every site should do this.

Once again I accept that it is humanly possible. And it appears that your example is not a contortionist, but someone who's pushing the limit of human flexibility.

It's close enough that I fully concede that point. Thank you for clarifying.

Though I am still against it contextually.

1. Even in the photo, the pose looks unnatural and uncomfortable. There's no practicality to it.
2. The character is a mage, not a "finesse" class where you could believe they have above average flexibility.
3. I'd like to know how people would feel if they gave the male inquisitor the same pose.

I would feel like it was there as a joke at the characters expense done to show how disempowered they by virtue of how absurd the pose is.

I respectfully disagree that the linked pose is out of character. People are rarely one-dimensional, which can lead to surprising decisions, even from people we thought to know better. I don't think that behaving a little silly at times and being sincere are mutually exclusive. In D:OS II, I've seen more realistic characters than in earlier games. They tend to have opinion on multiple things, and they often seem to make decisions based on multiple factors.

I think that everyone has done things they aren't proud of, or because they were just caught up in the moment. The reason for this irritation is that these decisions run contrary to our self-image. At the same time, this is also the reason why we are not one-dimensional. It is my sincere opinion that we should be more tolerable not only for others, but for ourselves as well.

Well It's a pose; the kind of thing you do in front of the camera or at a bodybuilding contest. It's not supposed to be practical, especially not when the person posing is a video game character.

It's outrageous and elegant which fits the art style. Combined with the levitating wands it gives the female Inquisitor a air of mysticism and style. The pose and the art-style of the entire game in general goes hand in hand as being "form over function", authenticity is not a consideration.

That's a trick proposition: the male inquisitor would most likely end up looking rather goofy in that pose which would go against the entire "elegance" part of the general art-style. However, I will bet you that if an artist could make the male inquisitor work that pose while looking just as elegant and stylish as the female inquisitor does then people would not care at all.

JoJo poses for everyone. Problem solved.

Out of character for what? It's a custom character. By definition, she has no personality until we provide input.

There's nothing about the act of choosing the inquisitor class that implies "sexy pose".

How is that a trick?

It would look goofy because you feel uncomfortable seeing a man in a sexy pose. Also, IcySteps tried to argue that "goofy" (in his words, "silly") was exactly the effect they were aiming for. I suggest you two work out what you want it to be.

If a university were trying to attract people to a dancing course, it makes sense that they'd put up posters of dancers looking a bit sexy.

Imagine a university tried to attract female students into medicine by putting up posters of female doctors in sexy poses. It's absurd.

The outfits? No problems that I can see - the elf aesthetic is literally 'covered in fig leaves' (except, inexplicably, for one cloth suit on a caster type).

The poses? Well, yeah, the inquisitor and battlemage poses of the female human leave me wondering whether they root out evil magic with the power of disco. But that falls under the header of 'absurd' rather than 'sexy'.

I don't know what sort of sex-negativity you are projecting here. Sexy men are sexy, not uncomfortable. Same goes for women. A man in that Inquisitor pose however would not be very sexy at all (unless he somehow managed to pull it off).

You do know that there is a difference between femininity and masculinity, right? Or are you the sort of person that thinks it's a problem that there are difference between "men routines" and "women routines" in dance? Or for that matter that there are differences between men and women in posing art.

It should also be further noted that the pose in question is not about looking sexy but about style and elegance, though the end result is the same: the man would probably not be able to pull it off using that pose and he would look goofy as a result (I'm still convinced it could be done if a good artist really tried, but it also depends on the character-model/art-style and not just gender; you would need a man that could look elegant/stylish in a feminine pose without ending up looking like a goof)

Why do you think that your poster parallel is accurate in this situation?
Please quote me where I've said that they wanted to make it look silly.

Also, what is your source that your example of a parallel is absurd?

On further inspection, the prize for 'huh?' poses goes to the male dwarf, specifically the fighter and cleric (who apparently think that shields are wielded with a foot), and the knight (with a 'heroically examining my fingernails' pose), with honorable mention to the female dwarf knight (who can apparently lean against a freestanding sword).

This kind of pose certainly would not be odd or goofy in the context of a male ballet dancer or a male gymnast. But of course, these men often catch flak for being "too feminine".

But the analogue ends there. It's not strange for a dancer to be a bit sexualised -- that's part of the art of dance. It is, however, awkward to sexualise a doctor just for being a doctor.


Your whole post was justifying the "silly" pose by arguing that it's just part of how Larian wanted to make the characters more than one-dimensional.


A university wouldn't advertise the career of a doctor with a sexy (or elegant) pose for a range of obvious reasons. Primary among those is that women don't choose to be doctors so that they can be sexy or elegant. Likewise, these poses are Larian's way of marketing these classes to new players. Let's imagine, for a moment, that Larian wants women to play D:OS2, and a woman (or man) chooses this class because she wants to play the role of an inquisitor, not a ballerina.


No one's arguing that this is the only silly pose. The subject of this thread makes the point that there are a lot of silly poses that can be improved on, but there are special problems with some of the female poses.

Ayvah, I did not say anything about Larian's intentions, only about my perspective on the topic. This is why there are no quotes.

I hate to say it, but you make some unfounded assumptions. If these assumptions are justified, you have not cited them. Can you provide statistical evidence that if such a poster was used as an advertisement by a medical school, it would discourage women students from enrolling, or that they generally don't want to be both doctors and elegant? This is not an argument whether there would be women who would not enroll due to the poster.

My understanding is that this pose paints an unattractive image of the female inquisitor for you, and very possibly, for many others. Personally, I would be on board if Larian decided to change it. I'm not fond of the thought of reducing someone... in any manner, really. I am, however, not sure why someone would never, under any circumstance, perform a pose like that.

May I ask what your personal motivation is against this pose?


Also, I wanted to react to your earlier post. I don't see how it is possible to create a truly custom character, given that the player can only choose from some premade options. Larian has a big say in the possible character permutations. That pose, in my opinion, is not out of character for someone so heavily influenced by Larian, and for most people.

You are setting up a huge double standard here by refusing to see the other side of the same coin.

Just like male dancers/gymnasts/teen-pop-stars/etc get flak for being too feminine so does male bodybuilders/wrestlers/action-heroes/etc get flak for being too masculine. And the problem is the same for women, maybe worse even as some people tend to be hilariously obsessed over how women should look or behave or be portrayed.

See the only issue here is that a certain percentage of people behave like idiots, imposing themselves and their subjective preferences on others instead of accepting things for what they are or try to be (hint hint). And they try to shame it down with some righteous speech of cultural superiority instead of admitting that the thing in question is just not what they are into. We have seen this over and over again with everything from rap music and metal to male ballet dancers to female football players to stylish character models in video games.

And as I said earlier this pose could certainly work for a male. If it was done right and he actually ended up looking as stylish and elegant as the female instead of just a goof. The pose draws on the strengths of femininity so a female body will have an inherent advantage with it, but that does not mean its impossible for a male to do the pose just as good. But the fact that it could work does not mean it has to be like that. The female pulls of her pose with style and so does the male with the pose he is given and that should be the end of the argument right there.


So what? This is a pose, it's purpose is to be stylish and elegant. Everything has a degree of being sexy or not sexy. If you find stylish and elegant to be sexy then good for you, but that does not mean it was main the purpose of the pose. Not that it would make any difference if the purpose of the pose was to be sexy.

If you meant to say female bodybuilders and other athletes. Absolutely. These are athletes. They are there to excel at their profession, not to meet our stereotypical concepts of masculinity or femininity.

Larian didn't seem to get the memo on this and decided to pose the inquisitor like a ballerina in order to emphasise her femininity.


First of all, my question was how you'd feel if a man had exactly the same pose. If you have to fix it then you have to admit there's something wrong with it. And there is something wrong with it. There's a reason why it's funny to do a model swap like this and this. (I think Quiet looks completely natural acting like Ocelot as long as you can ignore Quiet's irrationally skimpy clothing, but the inverse does not apply.)

But anyway, are there any examples of elegant poses that have actually been used for males in D:OS2 (elves need not apply)? Where are the ballerinos? It's certainly not the male inquisitor.

Don't know what is wrong with people, I like girls in chainmail bikinis since DnD and I enjoyed playing a muscular power fantasy berserker in nearly all crpgs. It's not like only females have unrealistic attributes to them in most games. It's just normal anthrophomized beauty standards turned into a pleasing aesthetic that male and female can enjoy.

Especially in our modern times that kind of stuff shouldn't be a problem anyway. Still heres an advice;
"Deal with it."

Your linked image has the inquisitor standing hipshot, contrapposto with his weight resting mostly on one leg. It's a pretty classical stance. See: David, Hermes and Dionysus.

That is a very stylistic pose.

Classically, posing reflects the strengths of the form. For male, this tends to be the solidity of the body - facing forward, emphasizing the hip/shoulder ratio, the musculature, broadness of the chest. Head can be facing forward or away, sometimes facing to the side allows for examination of the neck and shoulder musculature and emphasis there. For female, this is generally the curvature of the form. The thinness of the waist, broadening of the hip and bust, and greater flexibility of the body.

A simple google image search for 'male statue' and 'female statue' gives a decent contrast between the two. In general most male statues tend to follow a similar pattern of front-oriented facing, legs parallel, arms at the sides or perhaps one raised to chin height or pointing forward. In general most female statues tend to follow a pattern of legs close, one before the other, arm or arms raised high, torso turned or bent in such a way as to emphasize curves.

We are a sexually dimorphic species. To rigorously hold both sexes to the same standard of posture and capabilities is to ignore biology at best, or ignore thousands of years of cultural and artistic expression at worst. Art is a celebration of what makes the subject unique, of their strengths and their abilities. Physical, most predominantly, as we are visual creatures.

Let me just review some of the comments in this thread:

This is simply unacceptable on a basic level. Here's a basic introduction. If that's not already intuitive, then I can only assume you've never worked in a company where more than half of the leadership roles are filled by women.


Modern times? You don't think sexism is a contemporary issue? See the above article. Or try any Google search to refresh yourself with the latest research on these issues.


How many statues are there of female philosophers, or female heroes from Ancient Greece for us to emulate here?

Haha my last post apparently went straight over your head but nevermind, I can take your bait.

Your assumption that if the male took exactly the same pose as the female and it didn't look good on him then that means there is something wrong with the pose, is of course a huge fallacy. Anyone with even a decent knowledge of posing will know that the pose and the body must work together, if you change the body then you must change the pose. I can't just smile like Morgan Freeman and expect to look as good as him, I must find my own smile.

Anyway that's beside your challenge isn't it? It's not what you're fishing for. Okay then. You asked me how I would feel if the male had exactly her pose. Shockingly enough the pose, the gender and the model is irrelevant here, it's the result that matters. So my feelings about it depends entirely on how he would end up looking with that pose. If he is just as elegant, cool and stylish with that pose as the female is then great, I love it! If on the other hand he ends up looking like a try-hard with no style then it's a bad pose for him. Or it's a bad model for the pose, whatever way you'd like to see it.

But all this is is kinda beside the point, which is that you have a problem with the female pose drawing strength from femininity to look stylish while the man draws from masculinity. And you try to paint this as a cultural problem that needs to be dealt with rather than just acknowledging it as something that is just not for you. It's like the 90s conservative right all over again.

I enjoy hyperbole so I will leave you with a iconic, almost religious, image from the rather good movie Children of Men, and ask you how a male could pull that pose off without looking goofy*: Youtube link HERE(fair warning, semi-nsfw)

*yes I know I'm being unfair but that's kinda the point

Irreconcilable Differences: The Forum Thread

I think if you really believe there's underlying sexism in a pose in a fantasy videogame where everything is highly stylized and designed to be aesthetic you should probably search for a better hobby.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the poses. It's just to give the feeling of femininity and masculinity. I don't think it's too different from when you see an advertisement of a woman in a feminine pose and another advertisement of a man in a masculine pose.

I'll say what I always say when these things come up - make it the same. If the armor is revealing, make it revealing for both genders, if the pose is over the top, make the exact same over the top pose for both gender etc. just make it the same.

I would just like to say that there are many other topics on this forum that could use some of the passion being displayed in this one!

Ayvah, I am uncertain what you are arguing for at this point.

Have you seen me making any points pertaining to the existence of sexism, or its possible effects? I am interested in your findings regarding me saying anything on the above topic.

In the meantime, I believe that I handily summarized my point at the very beginning of my first post in this thread, which I later extended. I quote:

You simply cannot argue with me regarding sexism, because I haven't made any points about it yet.

Since you seem eager to classify me, I will tell you this. I am less interested in someone's body shape, and far more in their being*.

Are you talking about MGSV or D:OS2? The sexism in MGSV should be pretty obvious. I still played it, and it was still a great game, but it was certainly far from perfect. Just because I'm willing to admit that, it doesn't mean I have to quit games forever.

Besides, sexism is everywhere. In some situations, sexism is justified (such as dance) because there is explicitly a sexual component to it. But there is no reason why these attitudes should be transported to an asexual setting, such as a workplace.

Artistically, you can also justify that the setting is distinct to the tone of the work. For example, the TV show Mad Men portrays 60s sexism, but the TV show does not present this sexism in a positive light.

However, the setting does not justify the pose under discussion for reasons 1 & 2 I explained earlier. (This is also why I also don't agree with transplanting the pose to the male, but the inverse would be fine.) Where this gets uncomfortable is when you notice that these non-contextual poses appear to have been introduced in a heavily gendered way to the female characters.

And yes, there are other poses that seem silly (such as leaning against a sword), but at least those poses are contextually relevant to the setting.

Returning to your point, it's ironic that there are so many comments in topics like this about the complainers being "non- gamers" and then there are comments like yours that explicitly seek to exclude them from gaming. I feel I'm committed enough to gaming to consider myself a hardcore gamer. Perhaps more would be joining us if we let them. Maybe that's what you're afraid of?

I've already bought D:OS2, and I'm sure I'll enjoy playing it, but not as much as I would if it could more adeptly negotiate these kinds of issues.

They are already the same.
But... they just toss out that fact, and males entirely since... well, it would distract from their argument that woman are suppressed or something.

Wew lad, that's some dedication.

I'm normally really good in noticing a joke but you really got me for a moment.

All this talk about sexism reminds me of a quote from one my favourite movies.

Seriously, it's only a videogame, and we should respect the artist's vision.

Perhaps this is something better understood in Australia.

It's more important that the artist should respect their audience, isn't it?

Which bit of the audience, though? You can't please everyone, as this very topic proves, so I figure the artist may as well just stick with their vision. Because as soon as they change it to suit one person's taste and not offend someone else, it may no longer suit anyone's taste and be so bland as to not be worth bothering with.

I agree that they may want to reconsider something that might be generally considered to be very offensive, but there's nothing about Divinity that fits that description.

Not at all. Where did you get that idea? It makes no sense at all.

The artist does his thing and you follow him because of it. If he does something that you don't like, well you can just not like the thing and keep on following him or not, expecting the artist to censor himself because of your opinion is very entitled.

First you should make sure you actually represent the audience.

Absolutely savage.

To add to the above:
It is in fact the opposite.
If you dont like what an artist does then you are free to leave. Its as simple as that.

Further @ayvah, the source u linked earlier:
No surprise, given the website name, they dont come up with any factual peer reviewed stats.
Just like all other outlets that run down this narrative like a clock, they never come with facts and always rely on obscure "studies" and the perception of people.
And thats exactly what this source did as well.
Just because you believe something is true, doesnt make it true.
FYI these women they are talking about, considder a man simply looking at a women in a way THEY perceive to be wrong as sexism. So its no surprise they come up with this complete nonsense. Not to mention the entire article comes from the regressive left camp.
I could go far deeper into this but i dont think anyone here is interested in this anyway.

Here is an example of such study in a different context, done in my own country:
-Asked a bunch of people how safe they felt in their city
-High percentage claimed to feel unsafe
->People feel unsafe!
Is there any legitimate reason for these people to feel unsafe?
-Studies are done to find out how much crime occurs in the city
-Turns out it has one of the lowest crimerates in the entire country
->Facts =/= perception

Why were these people feeling scared?
Well one of the reasons put forward was that the people questioned where mostly old people, due to the fact that that particular city has a high concentration of old people living there.

I'm reminded of The Daily Mash and its frequent citation of the Institute of Studies. That said, the Mash is probably more accurate and honest than most other newspapers!

Why aren't any of the women at Larian Studios making a fuss about sexism? It's always someone else doing the complaining, and almost never the women that might be involved somehow with the "over-sexualizing."

I think this thread is another case of people with a premeditated goal of finding something to be offended about... Ultimately they aren't interested in fairness, but in exerting control over others' creative expression, so there's nothing they'd find acceptable.

Creators, please: don't be intimidated. Your works are neither realistic nor serious, and they don't have to be. Make the game according to your vision - there's no reason to compromise on that. Many serial offense-takers have no intention of being your customer regardless of what you do.

First of all, I should point out that sexism is not something that men do to women. Men do it to men, women do it to women. Everyone does it to everyone.

I appreciate you're disappointed that this research doesn't meet the highest scientific standards, but it's far more scientific than the moaning in this forum when anyone suggests... Well, anything at all. Swen confirmed in another post that they look at player data via the Early Access is order to get quantitative data on player behaviour. While I'm sure this is very useful, it certainly would be of a much lower scientific standard than the research I referred to.

I never claimed to represent the entire audience, but I an certainly one member of the audience. By telling me to "respect" the artist, you're not asking for respect, you're asking for silence. Any business that chooses to ignore feedback from customers does not respect it's customers. That doesn't mean they should bend over backwards to accommodate every demand, but they should be respectful of the feedback and give them a fair amount of consideration.

Also, I've criticised this posing as being disrespectful to people who believe that women should be more than just eye candy.

Maybe you should stop posting silly ideas, then you probably won't see any "moaning".

The moment you prove your demonstrably false opinion is fact, then I suppose people will take you more seriously. You're complaining that the pose of a video game model is disrespectful because of your own bias that anything remotely sexual is negative, a sexist bias at that because there are men with similar poses but only the women are eye candy. Not just that but you're the only one that can't see the women past the poses, do you realize that? Everyone else that disagreed with you can see that as sexualized as they may be(which they hardly are) they are incredibly powerful sourcerers , the next Godwoken and YOU only see sexualized women.

So, just jumping in here, but let me see if I got the gist going on here:
- You criticize poses and armor models...mostly on the female models and with a marginal mention of male elves
- You're specifically pointing to the unrealistic elements that "over sexualize" things while disregarding realism or just generally make no sense (ie Bikini Armor or Twig/leaf armor of elves)
- People call you out and bring in SJW claims and generally try to invalidate/argue with your feed back on claims of the high fantasy elements and ultimately that the artists get final say or should get the only say in representing their ideal
- Sexism discussions on the topic are brought in and how it's historically evident in such genres and so on
- You used the old cover art for D:OS as an example of what you meant and how they "fixed" it after feedback
- You are now calling out to the fact that your feedback as part of their audience is authentic as a customer and that all feedback should be considered

Is that the basically everything? Just want to make sure I understand before putting my two cents in.

EDIT: Let me preface that I don't agree with your original stances really but I respect your ability to give feedback and be listened to enough that I want to make sure that my own words on the topic are on point to the discussion(s) at hand

I think my opinions on this, as a (full disclosure) gay male feminist of the moderate branch ... is that we should have multiple options in how we want to represent our characters along a continuum of "sexualized" to "practical."


Lets be frank. The current models for the female elf has very little options to not dress up as a sexualized character.

If I want to make a female elf currently, I do NOT have an option of playing a well armored, tribal warrior elf, for example. Why would I want my character's bare ass showing just asking for an arror or blade? Have you SEEN how much fire is in this game? Not to mention the sunburns.

Similarly, if I want my male human to be able to show some skin, I'm also at a loss besides stripping down and forgoing major stat loss.

What we need are some armor models that reflect multiple tastes. Nothing should be the "default" that you are stuck with simply because "thats just how they are," especially if the default is inherently "the sexy turned to 11."


Does this take more work on the model mesh creators?

Sure.

Is it something we should expect out of a modern, progressive game stuido?

Absolutely!


I want to have my battle-armored women. My scantally glad androgenous male assassins. My burly warriors in lion cloths, ladies or men. I want my sexually dimorphic lizards without boobs. I want my bearded dwarf women and men.

The more options people have to generate unique, interesting, and still lore-appropriate characters, all the better.

There is no reason why we cannot have variety of body types and gender representations present in the game so that EVERYONE can play what they deem appropriate.


...

All that said, can we ALL please agree that this not only looks ridiculous, but painful, and that poor character's face is practically screeming "kill me, please. It will be a mercy." LOL

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6LnJ4-WjK-CMGs0dlB5WXM3Y2M/view?usp=sharing

I haven't criticised the male elf poses at all at this point.

I haven't done a full analysis of all the poses in the game. However, I have done a direct comparison of the male and female inquisitor poses, and I have invited suggestions of any male poses that fit the label of "elegant" (in the sense of a ballet dancer) or "sexy".

I have excluded elves from this exercise. Aside from the fact that they can generally be seen as sexualized simply by their across the board near-nakedness, elves can easily be generalised as elegant. So it's easy to justify in context.

The point here is that I don't see any justification for why the human female inquisitor is something that should be typecast as "elegant".

Also, while I have criticised the armour of elves generally (for reasons completely unrelated to sexism), this discussion has been moved to the several threads discussing elves and armour specifically.

Other than that, you've got a good handle of it.

Also, although I know this is going to sound incredibly nit-picky to some ...


I went through every single female Human pose.

There is a very subtle thing that is often done in advertising that most people don't pick up on, but its what I call the"hip drift."

If you look at the male poses, most of the poses are an "action" stance, or he appears prepared to "DO" something.

Now, look at the female stances, and I challenge you to find any pose in which the female's hips are actually firmly planted in an anatomically appropriate "even with the ground, not tilted to one side" pose.

There are literally none. Even the Warrior pose, which appears to be the most battle-ready pose, STILL has her little "sassy hip to her right."

Compare that with every male's pose, and there are very few "unbalanced, not ready to fight" poses, and very few with any "hip to the side" stances (Inquisitor slightly, and Knight slightly, but this is due to his overly masculine "this is mah swwwword" type pose).



Its small, subtle things like this that communicate a message of "I'm feminine, this is what feminine battle ready women look like. I'm going to look distractedly off in the distance and use my weapon as a prop to accentuate my body."


Now, this does happen in some of the male poses as well, in which their weapons and armor "frame" their masculine features, E.G. the Knight or the Battlemage trying to strike overtly masculine cliche poses as well, so its not strictly a female model issue.


Contrast some of these poses to the Female Dwarf. Most of her stances are firm, she assertively looks forward, most of the time her weapon is at the ready.

These are poses of a gritty, battle hardened woman ready to take it to the foes and crack some skulls.

There is a good balance of "assertive and martial" poses and some more flippant carefree poses, such as the Knight, as well as some more whimsical and asymmetrical poses such as the inquisitor.

Whats more, there is good parody between the genders on the dwarf. Look at both Knight poses. They both basically convey the same emotion of "pfft, I got this, piece of cake. I can afford to be lax, but I'm ready to go at a moment's notice." Neither gender is posing with their weapon in a way that suggests "im here to look good."

The Dwarf female inquisitor is really about the only female dwarf pose in which she doesn't look like she's ready to engage a foe, being all distracted with her telekinetic twirling.


If you want a funny comparison, the dwarf Female has far more in common with the posing used for Erza Scarlet, a popular anime character in a show called Fairy Tail.

While ironically this character is often HYPER sexualized by the creator and used in many fan-service style poses and shots, her actual battle poses are generally VERY well drawn, balanced, powerful, and interesting. The showcase her weapons, her stance, her moves, and her reactions to forces that impact her well.

Just check a quick goggle list, and try to avoid the fan-made pics

https://www.google.com/search?q=erz...UIBigB#tbm=isch&q=erza+scarlet+anime

Here is another example of a good pose, realistic armor, and in my opinion a quite stylish and simple piece of art:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/06/56/6e/06566e91beb9f84d68fa95ed2cfe2358.jpg

Alrighty then, now that I know I have a handle on things, let me throw my two cents in:

Let me begin by stating that:
Yes, I have many issues with "SJW" movements and a majority of self identified feminists. This has to do with the loudest in the group most of the time being the dumbest. I know that not all liberals, feminists, ect... are bad people or anything; the "bad ones" as it were have given a bad name to the group in my mind though. In that vain, I don't see in SJW in these threads...by definition they would be crusader like personalities simply spewing both hate and aggression <- concerned parties of a certain mindset is how I'd label Ayvah, even if his origin point does have commonalities with SJW groups and the rhetoric they spew. He's allowed to have an opinion and give his feedback; same as anyone else. An SJW would be those people who sent hate mail and threats and so on back during the original cover art reveal for D:OS.

Moving on:
Yes, high fantasy gaming is commonly over sexualizing and over dramatizing females (Bikini Amror for instance and the poses). Is this wrong, though? I'd say no. The point of high fantasy characters have always been to represent ideals and and overly fantasied lives the players could live. This generally means a guy is the ideal for masculinity and a woman is similarly the one for femininity. This carries over in their representation of what people think is attractive (ie muscles, toned bellies, crurvy bodies, ect..). Added to this is the idea that femininity is linked with sensuality...thus bikini armor and certain poses. Masculinity is generally linked with being tough and strong....thus full plate male and more bulky bodies. This is easily mirrored in D:OS character models; which is as it should be given that the game is meant to go back to gaming roots. It's a game made to cater to older standards of idealism and over exaggeration....not modern culture. A game such as this (where one tip toes in barrels when you sneak and hammer potatoes to cook) is not meant to be taken seriously...over analyzing such concepts of a pose being painful in reallife or not will only lead to questions concerning elf armor and the crafting system and the fact that all the melee moves are over dramatized and so on.

This leads into the question of whether or not Divinity has been unfair in how it exaggerated females models more than guys. This again goes back, partially, to what people think of as attractive, traditionally, for the two genders. Guys like seeing a woman in bikini armor striking a sexy pose......Women like seeing the stoic strong guy twirling his massive sword impressively. Also, there's the fact attractive poses of men and women are fundamentally different: generally women contort themselves more to create curves. Context here is important.

Sexualization =/= bad in all context. High fantasy gaming meant to be over the top and fun is one such, I feel.

Now, despite all this:
Yes, the amour morphing bothers me....twigs really? Maybe I want my elf in full plate. And yes, I've always had plenty of issues with bikini armor cause I prefer greater realism in my games, normally....it just makes no sense how it works; is the enemy magically enamored to only target the armoured bits?

Given all this:
I don't really feel like Larian is wrong to present there characters in any way they like. They have a certain idea they want to shoot for and should be allowed to reach for it; it certainly fits the game theme and inspires some humor in how over the top it is (my mage in D:OS is the buffies bookworm in the world).

Modern RPG games generally provide a plethora of options in avatar appearance and some even include stances and poses. This is good; it's inclusive of all parties and every one can be happy. The problem is that this takes both resources and generally means less focus is given elsewhere. Everybody would be happy with more character options in this game...everybody would be happier with this in any game, I dare say.

The question is, though, if *this* game *needs* it. At the moment, I don't think so. The developers are going for certain thematic concepts and appearances that tie into the game play experience; both in lore(ie elves in twigs) and feelings that are inspired (be they humor or whatnot -> ie buff men). Whether there current character models achieve the goal(s) they set out to do should be the criteria by which the models are judged, I'd say.

- Do the current armor/poses make you feel especially like you represent a man or a woman? A certain race? A certain class?
- Do they inspire idealized masculinity and/or femininity? Is it funny and/or engaging?
- Does each avatar feel unique? Are they fun to watch and use?

Realism, sexism, reality, functionality, and so on don't really have a place there at the moment. If they move to give more options that'd be great but I wouldn't wanting them to focus too much on this as a main topic at the moment.

The part I disagree with in the above is simply if you don't have a creative space to really express how you want your character to be like.

I understand that resources are limited, but there was a clear design choice to go for twig armor instead of badass full bark-plate ala some Sylvari Armor in Guild Wars 2.

That is a decision Larion and their artists made, so if they have to work a bit harder to create additional art assets to provide some actual "protective" looking elf armor for both sexes, that is their own doing and they should take the time to create a variety to satisfy people like you and I who WOULD like to make a protected looking elf if we wish to.




I do strongly disagree that "harking back to old RPGs" is at all an excuse to not provide a variety of representations to choose from.

We have pixel art games that are throw back as well, namely Stardew Valley, that are made on a fraction of a budget and they still manage to allow exceptional amount of freedom in your character's expression of their gender. You can literally play a trans character if you so wish by selecting the opposite gender's clothing, you can marry who you wish, and the game provides options to fully cater to essentially anyone.


Its 2016, and there really is not a valid "rational" for why twig armor can pass for "the only option for heavy armor" on a character, of either gender. If its a neat option, sure, but if its the default and exclusive option? Hell no.


Games are a medium. They are a creation born of a creative process. Sometimes it is good practice to evaluate your process through multiple lenses to see how others may view your finished product. Currently, I can understand how MANY potential customers would view the current elf models and armor options as "pandering" where as we have other, wonderful models like the female dwarf and Lizard who have a great variety of options, poses, and are much more unique.


We really should expect better on the Elves. Their current models really don't convey how cool their culture is or really how distinct and unique their armor COULD look.

This is exactly what I'm all for. If you are going to have outlandish poses, imagine the opposite sex in the same pose.

If it looks "silly or funny" when a man does it, why do we expect a woman to do it?

Sure, if its equal on both fronts, then that can just be considered a quirky pose or a funny referential thing potentially. I'm allll for that. But if you see a consistent pattern in which either gender is being framed in a specific way, that's a problem in my book.

https://www.pinterest.com/arthes1881/men-posing-like-women/


Just a clear example of gender-bending some traditional advertising poses clearly shows that it looks down right ridiculous when you place it in a "male context."

The same is less true for the inverse. I have spent the past 10 minutes trying multiple filters with google searching to find "women striking male pose" and its damn impossible to find anything.


Its not Larion's fault exclusively that they portray a large portion of their female models and poses in a very common gendered way, as its all over traditional media, but would be rather nice to have at least some parity between the genders if it is going to be so prevalent.

What if I want my human/elf female to be a "wise older lady" who does cater to this bullshit and just wants to curse a mother fucker with necrofire?

@Swiftwynd
See, what you're saying is fine and all, but it's founded on the premise that modern gaming must give full control over character representation. That the times have changed and the industry with it; such that gamers deserve, and should definitely be given, a large spectrum of choice in avatars.

That's a fundamental point that, I think, we disagree on. I love choice and I certainly don't prefer games that don't give me great control over my avatar, normally, but it's not always mandatory either; Witcher 3 or Diablo is a keen example of this.

"Harking back to old RPGS" and high fantasy isn't an excuse to limit choice but an explanation to explain why they chose the spectrum of choices they did give. Excuse implies that they have to justify or apologies for something and an explanation simply implies and elaboration on reasoning given. The former isn't always later unless you choose to interpret it as such. As you said they made their choices, and just as we can criticize or praise them for it, that doesn't make them inherently wrong for having others disagree with it.

*shrug* I actually do feel that the current models make the elves distinct. Whether or not they look cool or could be better though is an opinion. You know mine and I know yours, but a this point I think it comes down to what the majority of their audience thinks....which is what the EA is for :P Feedback

Edit: As for gender framing being a problem, I point to my original points on high fantasy...it's not a problem in my opinion. On this, I feel, it's basically coming down to your sensibilities and political and philosophical stances. You're on the right track arguing for more options being wanted..now it's just a case of convincing people it should be a priority....I don't think arguing wrongness though is how you should do it; that's an opinion. The old elf lady spewing curses is a good example of more options being desirable. But if age was part of your avatar options, wouldn't you want story elements to show that? Each new option in this game adds exponentially more resources. It's an important point to consider.

Greater armor options would be much easier to include though I think and would satisfy many

Do you remember a big controversy (very similar to the one in this thread) over a certain spiderwoman cover?

http://i.imgur.com/aLBEC1H.png

Everyone had a fit about that pose, but it had nothing to do with gender... People just want an excuse to be outraged. Can you find a comic book cover featuring a female character in this pose?

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61UZP8y69eL._SY445_.jpg


You can't expect that level of RP to be represented visually by the game. At a certain point you're going to have to invoke your imagination and suspension of disbelief. This has nothing to do with gender.

You are still going at it?
Making up more nonsense? "Hip drift" my ass.

Gotta give one thing to you, your kind never gives up no matter how stupid you sound.

I suppose what bothers me a bit about stuff like this is the assertion that others know better than I do what I should find offensive. And if I say I don't find it offensive, there's sometimes a bit of a vibe of "shush woman, the men are talking".

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

I finally worked up the effort to make a forum account to say this is the funniest thread I have read in years, don't stop now.

Who knew such little things could result in such a fiery argument?

I kinda want a Larian dev to stroll in and say the poses are placeholder so you have all been wasting your time :D

Either way correct me if I am wrong, the poses only show up during character creation and never after that right? I thought they were humorous rather than anything else and I feel its a bit excessive to get heat up over something that has such a small appearance in the game. I also wonder if its only males taking apparent offence to this? what do females think?

Well that's the classic "If you're not with us then you are against us" thing for you. It's all about acting or thinking "proper" else we shun you. Not sure if gender has any real play in it though beyond surface issues or cheap attempts at insults, it's just cultural authoritarians of different kinds who like to attack what they feel are problematic subcultures with claims of moral superiority on their part. It's basically the modern version of aristocrats looking down on what they feel are filthy people with filthy practices.

I'm being hyperbolic here of course but you get my drift

This should be the ending statement for the thread.

I still think it's just a big troll, the "sexism is everywhere" part should have made clear this is an obvious joke.

But sexism is still a part of most, if not all, societies though. Both against women and men. As much as we would all like to believe in social progress I don't think we've reached the point where sexism is completely erased everywhere.

To get on topic, the poses are indeed pretty ridiculous and I wouldn't mind them changing them. They're only shown in the character creation screen too, so any changes made would only minimally and aesthetically affect the game. I don't see why people are making such an uproar over such a low-consequence suggestion.

You are right.

How about you go to Saudi Arabia then and go fight sexism where it actually exists, rather than in video games where you have to come up with increasinlgy ridiculous accusations to make people believe its there.

No?

@Sordak

You're either completely ignorant or unwilling to be informed if you truly believe that sexism is completely absent from American media, including video games.

Additionally, your Saudi Arabia argument is such a cheap one to make. We could all be doing better things with our time than bringing up our personal issues with the game, but since gaming is something we enjoy so much we choose to do so anyway. OP's and my opinion are valid regardless of how much you want to belittle it.

Just pointing it out there, but have the people bringing up sexism and so on bothered to ask the female members of this community their opinions or thoughts before supposedly defending them from sexism?

From there statements it seems like they don't approve....

I did not read everything above but this is my opinion:
I just looked at character creation and switched through all races and classes.

- I do not think that elves and lizards look very sexy because they are too alien for me. I like the look of elves and lizards because they are different from what you usually see in video games. It is very good that elves do not look like humans with pointy ears.

- I find the female dwarfs most sexual, while humans look quite neutral to me.

- I think that all chars have enough cloth, unless you press the "hide armor" button. (I have no reason to do so. This is an RPG where my char will always wear armor, not a miss universe contest.)

- You only see it at character creation. Once you created your char you will never see him/her like this.

- The term "race" refers to different groups of the same species. Unless we see later that the pale elvs suppress the dark elvs, the term "racissm" makes no sense in the game world.

- I do not understand why so many people talk about this. This is my first and last post in this tread. If I keep on reading here I get a headache.

Yes, this is a good point to bring up. Just because some of us find the poses distasteful/offensive doesn't mean we should dismiss the opinions of or silence the women who don't care about the issue or believe the poses aren't distasteful/offensive at all.

We should all be entitled to our own opinions.

Can we stop here? All those posts for something you will see for like 5 min in game.
Yes you have all the rights to point out that you dont like certain poses. BUT in the end the designer has the desicion to change the pose or not.

Well.. your not necessarily wrong but you need to define what you mean by sexism. There's a lot of accusations and claims of injustice going on without people actually explaining what they think is wrong. What kind of sexism is the issue in videogames?

If a bully calls a woman "a kitchen tool" is he a sexist? If the same bully calls a shy introvert "a pathetic looser" what is he then, a nerdist?

Or do you mean sexism as in 'holding the belief that a particular sex is inferior'?

Or do you mean sexism as in 'holding the belief that the genders have different average behaviors'?

Or do you mean sexism as in 'treating the genders differently'?

Or do you mean sexism as in 'focusing on the sexual value of the genders'?

Or is it something else?

I'm not pulling your leg here. I really need an explanation of what you think is wrong and why it is wrong before I can state a opinion on your claims.

This looks like a troll thread. I suggest everyone move on.

As I've explained earlier, sexism is something done by everyone to everyone. The classic view that it's something done by men to women is completely incorrect.

There is a well known scientific study where a researcher tried sending an identical resume to a number of American professors, to have the resumes evaluated. There were two slight variations though. On one, the applicant was named "John", the other "Jennifer".

The female resume was rated more poorly than the male resume. And this trend was no different even among female professors. There is no adjective that describes this better than "sexism". That's progressive America.

Women certainly should have a voice on the topic, and I don't recall anyone telling Vometia to stay out of the discussion, but we all need to recognise that those of us who have been a part of this community for so long have gotten used to the culture of this community. In Australian politics, our conservative party is 17% women, and they are quick to join the men of their party to argue that sexism is a dead issue. Meanwhile, our progressive party, which is still only 40% women, talk about sexism as a modern issue, and the men are almost as passionate as the women. Women are not always feminists. How many people here have learned about the women who opposed women's suffrage?

The OP actually presented the opinion of his female friends. While it's fair to question whether he was lying, we shouldn't dismiss their opinion on the basis of the friends not being part of the core group posting in this forum. We're all entitled to our views, and we should certainly listen closely when a woman speaks about her experiences with sexism, whether or not she feels like it has been a real issue. However, no man or woman can claim to speak for all women.

We don't need to feel guilty about making mistakes sometimes. I've certainly made sexist comments in the past. The most important thing is to recognise sexism for what it is and endeavour to do better.

In review:

1. We provided several objective criteria proving that there is a contrast in style between poses in D:OS2 between male and female humans. There appears to be broad agreement about this.

2. The first point of disagreement is how we view this difference. I see the difference as designed to emphasise the femininity of the female characters.

3. The second point of disagreement is that I do not feel comfortable with the idea that people -- male or female -- should have to be constantly be exposed to media suggesting that it's okay for a woman to be professional BUT only if she lives up to our ideals of femininity.

I'm going to throw my hat in the ring and disagree with you about this.

The models, both male and female, are highly stylized. The female models don't put a great emphasis on nudity and the class poses that are less armored also have less armored male counterparts.

I did write an article further articulating my stance on this, so instead of typing it all out over again you can check it out here

http://multitoad.com/the-world-needs-more-video-game-nudity/

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting, but that seems to be immediately invalidting my opinion about the subject, which is effectively denying me a voice.

For the record, I am certainly aware of sexism and when people are guilty of it, but the stuff that bothers me is for example someone who assumes I know absolutely nothing about technology because I'm female. It's sometimes tempting to add "... even though I've worked in IT since the 1980s", although really that shouldn't be necessary as at best it just leads to a grudging "well I suppose I can make an exception for you, then."

For the record II, my gf's g-grandmother was a suffragette, so I'm kinda aware of them.

No. It's important that the artist make something that they enjoy and how they want. It's also important that the artist be forced to redesign their artwork because it hurts someones sensitive feelings. And others should take their work(s) as it is, instead of trying to jam their viewpoint on it or whine about how it's so problematic, sexist, or whatever.

Vometia, I don't know what gives you that impression exactly. Your opinion and your experience is valid, and I am listening.

But at the same time, it's one person's experience.

Just like yours and yet you managed to fill 10 sites of trollposts with it.

No, that´s not how having a voice in the discussion works.
You state your opinions, preferably followed up with some arguments so people can see what you base your opinions on.
Then others chip in, they might agree or they might not, but if they do not agree, or even (oh the horror) happen to think something you said was stupid, that is not denying you your opinion or your ability to voice it. That is nothing more than disagreeing with your opinion.
Regardless what you happen to think about anything under the sun, someone is going to disagree.

I reccomend you learn to deal with it, because not being able to handle this part of a discussion will indeeed make people not think very much of your opinions.

Jesus almighty, this thread is still happening? At the end of the day, as I've said before, the designer can do whatever they want and if you don't like it switch to another class/gender/character or don't play the game. I, for one, like how it is at the moment and don't want it changed. I'm not seeing any issues here so let's close this thread already.

Man; this whole thread was some fantastic reading on a slow afternoon.

I like the stylized poses for both the males & females. It looks good, especially with the more 'alien' races. Why has sexy become bad? I mean, we, as human beings are sexual beings (and I'll never be as ripped as any of the guys on there, should I feel bad? Or is it supposed to be a 'power fantasy').

Though I did want to say (as I couldn't see anything regarding it) that the infamous Spiderwoman pose was drawn by Milo Manara, who, is an in/famous erotic comic artist. Why Marvel would ever choose him to do covers for their very much PG13 comics when he's renown for the complete opposite .. who knows?

At the end of the day though; it's all a little moot. It's Larians artistic vision and choice and I feel support should be given (as it's getting hard enough now to make something without it causing offense).

There is a difference between "realistic" and "plausible". In a fantasy setting troll, magic and elementals are plausible. Full plate armor on guys that becomes teeny weeny string bikini on girls is not, as much as I like it.


It has not, as long as you also get a male with bikini armor.

i get the argument about plausible but its not an argument you should be making in this point because this is mereley the plate armor equivalent for elves, not plate armor when equipped by elves, thats realy only game mechanics mixed in with rule of cool.

and realy what else would it be? actual plate armor just wouldnt fit with the aesthetic style of the elves here.
Style over substance? yeah but thats not a bad thing.

But realy i dont trust you to make your argument in good faith anyway.
everyhting you say is just an excuse to push your idiotic agenda.

This kind of thing is relative, honestly. A lot of the times artists do know best about their work, but some times the audience also has some good points/ideas.

I mean that's the entire purpose of releasing a game in Early Access no? So that the devs are better able to create a game most fans would enjoy by listening to their opinions. Audience feedback about aesthetics is part of this same process. They allowed us to give our opinions, so they should be willing to at least listen and consider what we have to say on the subject. Perhaps even make changes based on what we've said.

Larian's end goal is to create a product they can be proud of and that all of their fans can enjoy. This has the best chance of happening if they listen to what we have to say and make some changes; aesthetic or otherwise.

Hopefully Devs won't listen to some whining people willing to censur artistic media in 2016.

I never pretended that I'm more important than anyone else in this forum. I've expressed my opinion and I've provided evidence to the best of my ability.

The fact that you continue to feel the need to label this as trolling indicates your lack of interest in engaging in any meaningful discussion. thebonesinger provided evidence and I listened and I was sufficiently convinced to concede the point.

You know what? Just to make the feminists happy (and also cause it might be cool) Can we get some barbarian armor and maybe some transexual gag amour? The later would certainly be funny and the former would be cool if I want to be a murdering naked hobo

Instead of arguing for change on artistic stylization - why dont the naysayers present ideas that could be included easily enough to mollify them? Naked barbarian armour, some gag armour, a couple new poses for both male and female. Nothing require change or even too much work except to create a couple to few new models and animations. Then everyone can be happy, the devs can create joke armour for laughs and surprise us with it, and this long thread can finally end

This thread is kind of ridiculousness. Also, yes, any female audience member who has issues and plays the game actually deserves a voice....not those who just make comments on the side in passing. Especially considering we've had issues with people arguing over the phrase "man-at-arms" before from self-described feminists.

I won't get into every single character mentioned, but Quiet from MGSV is completely unjustifiable outside of soft porn. Have you even tried watching the Quiet/Ocelot model swap videos?

However, one area where Quiet is better than the random characters from D:OS2 is that Quiet (and the other examples in the article) is a character who chooses the way she dresses. That's called context. It's a very flimsy context, but it's still a context.

I'll remind everyone that one of my biggest criticisms is regarding the lack of context and/or the weakness of the context. Witcher 3 is an excellent game which includes topless men and women, and I'm a big fan of Game of Thrones -- not despite the full-frontal nudity but perhaps even partly because it's bold enough to be unashamed about sex and nudity. What these two works of art have is a very strong sense of context. You don't see Game of Throne's Brienne of Tarth charging into battle in a string bikini.

@Ayvah
And people have given context for the game. Thematic context.......if you're looking for strong lore context for something placed for stylistic reasons, you're not always going to see it. A pose is stylistic -> no context necessary outside of the obvious (ie two handed warrior isnt doing backflips). A style of armor is both -> elves wear twigs cause they're forest people, but the way that looks is artist influenced. Style and context can clash -(ie Bikini armor) but sometimes a developer must decide which is more important.

If the style of the game is sexist, then that's the real problem.

And yet, many disagree with you that it's in here. Heck, even female audience members disagree with you. Are you saying you know what's best for them?

Sexualized somewhat and giving clear gender differences -> Sure.

Sexist -> Discrimination or prejudice based on gender in an unjust way? No.

The game is idealizing both genders. So it's not discriminatory.

Also, sexism => must change game for society and morality and ect...is also wrong. It's a product. It's sold for profit. A certain audience buys said product. The business transaction and the voices of the consumer and producer effecting said transaction are the only ones that matter. Your moral standpoint has little value here. Only whether or not any changes or additions made will improve the game in such a way to appeal to a larger audience or improve customer satisfaction for the majority.

As it stands, I don't really see any points you brought up doing either of those two things

This would make this the only feedback in these forums where we have the onus to articulate and prove the financial impact on sales of the game.

Also, it's clear that Larian is more than just a soulless business seeking to make a buck. Swen has also expressed his desire to reach a gender diverse audience. I'm not saying that this thread gives them the answers they need to achieve their goals, but it's food for thought.

Anyway, I appreciate the argument that sexy =/= sexist. As I said, I'm comfortable with sexiness but I don't see the male poses as equivalent as I'm not aware of any male human poses styled like ballet dancers.

The justification that was presented earlier is that the poses are styled based on historical references that, notably, never had women in poses designed to highlight their intellect or their strength. (The Ancient Greece argument made earlier.) Thus, at best this justification makes the style indirectly sexist by channelling historical sexism.

and now the style of the game is sexist.

Do you even listen to yourself talk anymore?

I mean goddamnit historical sexism.
All the while earlier you were talking about realism.

you are grasping for straws and you have been for weeks just that you cannot let go.

You are wrong about everything here.
Every thing you say is wrong, every thing you said has been disproven. And you are making up stuff as you go just to hold on to your idiotic topic of sexism that is not present here.

What have you done to fight real sexism? For example in the middle east, or failing that middle eastern people wherever you live. how much time have you wasted here fighting made up sexism?

I clearly don't understand those kind of debates about sexism and stuff in games. For me, the company making the game is responsible for the art design they have chosen and players who don't like it just don't play the game, end of the story.

This fashion of always critisizing art and games for the messages they deliver is clearly a hindrance to creativity. As players, we can decide whether some mechanics are fun or not but the art design and the narrative should only be judged in one way: whether we like it or not. There is no room for debate on that matter because we clearly overstretch the boundaries of what it is: a game.

And in that sense, for me, a game has its right to be sexist, racist, sadistic, as long as it's part of the narrative and the cohesion of its own universe.

After 11 pages of the thread I still struggle to understand the definition of the word "sexism" which we all are talking here about.

For me sexism would be for example if the female heroes would be barred from being warriors or rangers and would only be allowed to be enchantresses. Or if they would not be allowed to invest more than 10 points in intelligence. Or if all other NPCs would be unwilling to talk to female heroes and would rather talk to the male heroes of the group.

So, genereally speaking, sexism for me is when some onedenies the women (or men) certain rights based on their gender or belittles their intelectuall/physical abilities.

And I do not see how the poses in the character selection screen belittle the female heroes. Yes, all the poses (male and female) are highly stylised and sexy - but how exactly does it belittle a woman's abilities if she is depicted as a sexy being? And wouldn't it in turn be sexist if one would insist that women have to be depicted as prudish and virtuous (because a woman cannot be trusted with her own good looks and needs to be protected from the prying eyes of would-be seducers)?

What gave you the idea that this is what constitutes male sexiness? Have you ever stopped to wonder why a lot of women think fire fighters are sexy? Is it because fire fighters tend to pose like ballet dancers, or is it because a well trained male body working, or in a pose suggesting action is something that is really commonly thought of as how men go about being sexy.

If we go watch 1000 sucessfull atempts of a man picking up a girl at a bar, how many of them do you think did it with ballet poses?

There is a very simple question that anyone concerned about what levels of sex appeal suggestive stuff should be allowed in a creative medium can ask:

Should porn be illegal?

If the answer to this is no, then ask yourself a couple of cuestions regarding other and milder types of sexual content. Unless you end up being a contradictive hypocrite wanting to allow porn but ban really mild stuff, then you have demonstrated to yourself that you actually think it is ok for a game, or movie or book in theory to include something sexually suggestive, but for some reason you are just trying your hardest to invent a reason for why its wrong for this game in particular.

Unless you want to outright ban sexual stuff, then its ok for creative media with sexual undertones to be part of the market, and the frequency of them will be regulated by market forces. People buy what you like.
If you don't like something, don't buy it. But stop riding some imaginary stick moral horse around and make a fool of yourself.

Sexism can also involve stereotyping, which is what I believe is happening here. The portrayal of women as sexy via poses and revealing clothing has been pretty dominant in the video game industry whereas the depiction of male heroes, though at time highly stylized like in this game, tends to be more diverse or at least less reliant on sex appeal.

The poses are sexist in the sense that they perpetuate this stereotype for female characters. They contribute to the idea that female characters must look sexy in order to be interesting or appealing.

It would indeed be sexist for us to say that all female characters should be prudish and virtuous, but that's not what we're trying to say here.

As long as this is not true for all video games you really don't have an argument. If all females presented in video games were of the sexy variety, then you could argue that the medium enforces a stereotype.
However that is not the situation. What we have is an industry where it is common. At best you can argue that sexy women is common because the market make them popular.

As I pointed out earlier in the thread you need to think about if you want to argue against sexy women being allowed in media, or if you are simply complaining that something you don't like is popular.
Unless you are arguing that it should not be allowed to portray women in certain ways (which I don't think you are), you are just arguing for something popular to be less popular. Now given that the video game industry operates in a global free market economy, what would be your suggestion to make things people like to buy less popular?

The simple way to make things you don't like less popular ir to simply not buy them. The interesting question is what you think entitles you to have other people have less of something they like but you don't?
Women done >have to< be sexy in video games, its just common. So what?

We as a society create what constitutes sexy for everyone. It's why things like fashion are continually changing; our ideas of what makes someone sexy changes over time. This means that Larian can choose to do poses that fall into what we're used to or do poses that do something different. We wouldn't mind them doing something new that breaks away from sexist stereotypes.

I don't think we're talking about banning sexual undertones or sexual material, we just want a break from a very well-established norm. If someone had you continually eat different variations of cereal for a long time you'd still eventually get tired of it no?

Though it is true that the market supplies demand it also creates it. It's why when something new and interesting comes up we all jump on it. Consumers enjoy trying new things.

I have some layered objections to this.

Fist of all stereotyping is not a binary but comes in degrees. Some games, like Overwatch, use stereotypes as more central to the characters looks and behaviors. This is a good thing for that style, stereotyping is what helps us identify with the characters. In the case of D:OS2 the use of stereotyping is very mild in comparison.

Secondly, both the male and the female characters in D:OS2 are made very attractive on purpose (except for the weird faces?). Attractive does not mean sexy. For most characters they use the general stereotype that elegant/stylish females are attractive and males are attractive when looking dominant/cool. There is nothing wrong with this approach and the females are not being singled out in the slightest here.

If you don't like this approach, or if you are intimidated by attractive men/women, or if you feel a game is more authentic with less attractive people in center, then that is perfectly fine and I will stand by your opinion. But don't try to paint this as sexism or oppression of women, because it's not; it's simply an artistic style that you personally don't enjoy.

Ah, yes "trying something new". I agree, people do enjoy trying something new and innovative if its good. Now are you arguing that this does not exist in the market place? Because if it does then people are trying it and allowing it success based on its popularity. That is already happening and has been happening for decades.

What you are talking about does exist. Some people do prefer that and buy games with that in mind. Some people like to have exactly this kind of thing be part of the games they play (including women). As long as you are not talking about banning something then whatever is popular is going to regulate the sucess of products and dictate who gets to stick around and make more products. For now this is an element prominent in many sucessfull products.

Have you ever been to a convention? Ever seen any of the women who go there in full cosplay? Do they tend to pick really modest outfits from modestly dressed characters, or is it a total cleavagefest?
Its not just men propagate the stereotype of scantily clad women. Women take an equal part in that as well, and have done so for a long time.

If you would really really like to see your moral sensibilities catered to in the video game market then put your money where your mouth is and try to create that type of game yourself. It is easier than ever to become a video game developer. You could gather people who share your sentiment. But as long as all you do is talk about how other people should gamble with their money because of your cultural preferences, then why should anyone take you seriously?

Edit: GepardenK +1

So I have to wait until an issue becomes all pervasive before I can argue about it? That's just ridiculous. You don't speak up about a problem once it becomes too large, you speak up about it before it ever reaches that point.

You're talking about popularity as if all consumers who pay for their games agree that the way sexiness works in videogames is awesome and enjoyable, which is not the case. The fact that these posts garner so much controversy is proof of that.

Like I said previously, the market can supply demand but it can also create it. The issue of sex appeal has not been created by the consumer only, it has been created by devs as well. Just as they can create games that rely on these tired old stereotypes they can choose to create games that don't. I should also add that going for variety instead of repeating the same choices can also be a good sales tactic.

What entitles you to tell me that I can't ask for more of something? Aren't you doing the same thing I'm doing, telling me that I should be ok with what we have because you don't have the same perspective I do?

So I'm asking people to gamble with their money now? By asking for more variety and diversity for female characters? Lol.

Should every gamer be forced to create a game to fulfill a need that the gaming industry can't supply, or to fill a vacuum in said industry? If the answer is no, then I'm just as entitled to voicing my complaints as anyone regardless of how much you disagree with me or believe my opinion is silly.

That depends on what your argument is. I'm sorry to say but you are not framing them very well.

For example, one of my positions on this is that art should not be controlled. That creators should be allowed to freely express whatever they envision and that famous artists will be those whos work a lot of people agree is worth their money and attention.

So no, when I say artists should be free to create what they want, I am not doing the same thing as you when you start rambling about how you find certain types of art somehow problematic.

Ofc you can voice your opinion that you think its wrong that some things tied to human sexuality happen to be popular.
But unless you bring any convincing arguments I am going to call you out for having poor arguments.

So lets hear it more clearly, why exactly is wrong with having some forms of artistic media present women in a sexually appealing way.
(and before you settle for the "because it creates bla bla stereotype X about women) keep in mind what I said about women helping to create and popularize these views of female sexuality. If you are going to argue that a game creates this view of women, you need to:

A) describe why that is wrong, and how it is not sexist by you to assume women do not have any meaningfull agency in how their sexuality is expressed in culture.

B) show the connection. If your argument is this you need to somehow demonstrate that games actually does cause whtever it is you think they cause.

But lets hear your actual arguments. Perhaps this isnt at all the direction you were heading in.

Way to backpedal.

Why should I have to re-phrase my arguments for you when I have been doing that this whole time? I've spent enough time arguing with you about this as it is, I'm not about to go on another long speech so that you can finally understand what I'm saying. I don't want to have to repeat everything I've said just because you've failed to see where myself and those who think like me are coming from.

EDIT: And of course I went on another long speech. bleh.

I mean Ayvah, the person contributing most to the thread, has provided argument upon argument and proof upon proof but none of it seems to resonate with those who disagree. S/he has more than addressed all the questions you're asking here and yet you still require more explanation.

I'm respectfully agreeing to disagreeing.

I will say, though, that there is nothing wrong with having sexual undertones present in video games. I believe that video games can be understood as an art form, and as an art form video games should be free to express any part of the human experience, including sexuality.

The problem with the way the gaming industry depicts sexuality is that it (sexuality),

1) Tends to be emphasized on female characters over male characters. (I emphasize tends here because there clearly are sexualized male characters as well).

2) Tends to be used as a cheap advertising tactic to get straight male gamers to purchase a game. How many game advertisements have you seen with a semi-naked female character enticing you to try the game out?

3) It is at times the only defining trait or at least the most defining trait of a female character. Ivy from Soul Calibur? Quiet from MGSV?

4) Contributes to the idea that a female character can only be interesting if she looks sexually attractive.

5) Tends to be used in an unrealistic fashion i.e. bikini chain-mail armor.

6) Limits diversity in body types and shapes for women. At least if we assume that "sexy" is defined as being skinny with large breasts, which I think is the idea of sexy that most devs and consumers focus on.

7) Is typically not used to create female characters with a sexual agenda of their own, but as characters whose looks indicate that they can and should be exploited by the main character.

I could list a few more but these are the ones that jump out at me. Feel free to disagree with me on any of these points, but at least for now I'm stepping away from this discussion.

But a lot of us are disagreeing about the art displayed here. So I guess that means the artists at Larian will not be famous? So maybe they should change things then?

Your logic is betraying you here.

"variety and diversity"

Such nice words.

By that you mean what exactly? You mean that they make a gorillion different body types? what for?
Look at statistics. Nobody in MMOs plays femael Dwarves or female beast races. Not men not women.

Making unattractive female body designs is a waste of money as nobody ever uses them.
Im glad we got female lizards in this game but face the facts: Nobody needs ugly femael models.

This is something i have seen pushed a lot as of late "realistic" women, by which they mean ugly. This thing infests pretty much any hipster game by now and guess what nobody cares.

People want to see beautifull humans men and women thats why almost all male character models are muscular and almost all female models are slim.

Its a simple matter of cost efficiency.

its also funny that the same guys that argue its about "realism" now want Land Whales as Warriors.

You know, for all the people here arguing about the "female" models and sexism....what about the "male" ones? What of the stereotypes inherent in those? The traditional values being pushed? The fact that every single concern one raises about those "sexist" values plaguing female characters is mirrored in some manner in male characters?

Do those issues not matter? If you raise one concern why not both? And if a game does indeed perpetuate both (ie D:OS) than why focus on just one side?

I find many of the points raised in this thread both moot in the clear bias shown, overblown, and self-indulgent in a false bid to raise concern for an unconcerned party that clearly doesnt want to be represented by them.

The goal posts of those with concerns and the envelope they use to package and structure those concerns keep getting pushed further and wider.

We've gone from a singular character model pose all the way to indirect historic sexism (which is ridiculous to bring up since the word didnt' rightly exist at the time and gender roles were embraced -> don't push your own moral values by evaluating a culture/time not your own as wrong or unjust) to arguing "sexism" in an industry and how it should be "improved" or made "better" cause obviously moral social "progressive" values are so utterly important to a commercial product or artistic creation.

I'm not trying to be scathing in my interpretation of others views but I am flummoxed and indignant that an individual(s) can come off as feeingl so....utterly like they have the moral high ground and are simply informing the rest of us shallow mortals how we can be improved in their infinite mercy and understanding.

Once again, I'll say it: you're arguments for change are failing on nearly all fronts. You're discussions would make far more progress by arguing for add-ons that create a more inclusive environment to satisfy yourselves. Arguing for adding in a naked barbarian doing ballet would do more for more you than arguing why a female model pose is "elegant" and "unreal." In fact, I dare say, many disagreeing with you about sexism and such would be right behind you in wishing for a modern dancing Conana character.....hell, I would. That sounds fun and different and doesn't detract from anything at all

Do either of these characters look unattractive or unappealing to you?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Jzt0HGixY/maxresdefault.jpg

http://cdn.segmentnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Overwatch-Mei-Guide.jpg

Asking for diversity in female character design does not mean going, "LOL let's make all female characters completely unattractive and unappealing amirite? XD XD."

tumblr hair and problem glasses. kekd.

If thats the "diversity" you want then no, i want none of that.

Those are still stereotypes of another flavor ya know?

........Also, glasses would be too sexy if you think the poses go too far already :P SHE HAS A POWER LEVEL OVER 9000!!
<3 <3

I don't care if you're an artist or animator and think you know what good character design looks like - I'm a SJW and I know better than you. ALL characters, both male and female, should look like the global average for each gender (in a binary sense, of course). Every video game female should look like the world's average female, but there also should be an option to make her look male to represent the trans community. Likewise for male characters. It is important for players to be able to identify with their characters so what I think would be best is infinite customization options so that everyone is happy and nobody will have any complaints about the characters in your game - that is reasonable, I am sure. I would know this, I'm a SJW.

I also don't care if you're including lizards, elves, dwarves or whatever else as playable characters. There is a high chance that depending on what proportions and features you choose for your fantasy characters, I will be triggered. Do you really want to risk me making a blog post about this? I have 12 followers on tumblr who will be sure to see and boycott your so called 'game'.

I really hope you'll take my morally righteous opinion as law and disregard the hateful bigots who disagree with me.

Thank you.

It's nature trying to warn us.

Well I hope none of you play Overwatch if you get triggered by Zarya and Mei's design because they remind you of tumblr feminists. Even though they stand well enough as their own characters and are pretty well-liked by the community.

For all the accusations that we're the oversensitive and ridiculous ones, you guys are pretty sensitive and ridiculous yourselves.

No but they just said that they didn't like them, they didn't demand that the characters should change. They are allowed to have a personal preference.

If on the other hand they had gone over to the Overwatch forums and demanded change because of some sense of righteous social superiority (Saying something like "the characters must change because they perpetuate tumblerism and social hysteria scheming" or some crap like that) then you would have a point and I would be right there with you defending the Overwatch design.

But as far as I know they don't. They probably just stay away from the game or from those characters and play something they enjoy instead. Weird that.

Because - oh wonder - no serious player gives a damn about stuff like that and instead bases a perception of a certain character on actual ingame value and not which agenda you're trying to push with it. (Except for a few extrema)

It's however blatant pandering to the worst of all minorities.




You tried to push this completely unrelated topic and these completely unrelated characters into this thread and this discussion. It's you that has the need to justify their existance, even if nobody cares.

That's the definition of being oversensitive.




Also... did you just assume my gender identity? Triggered.

Lol, thats so cute.
Sorry but a few people ranting on a forum does not equal millions of customers voting with their wallet.
The game should not "obviously change" because a few nitwits on this forum feels they are having their moral sinsibilities trampled by this game.

Instead of making a long speech of fail, how about you adress the basic flaw of your entire argument.
Not all games available use the "naked women card", thus even customers who share your sensibilities have a choice, yet despite this choice having existed for decades, the naked ladies games are (according to you) the majority of games.
That means a majority of people like that flavor of game and buy that flavor of game.

If you want to argue that other people should have less of something you do not like, bring a convincing argument to the table. But remember, you are not arguing for your favourite flavor of game to have the right to exist, it already has. What you are arguing for there to be less of other peoples favourite flavor of game. You don't give a damn if people like chocholate ice cream, you prefer banana mint ice cream and there should be more of that and less chocholate because you want it.

See how silly that sounds? Untill you provide some form of statistical argument for why your analysis of the video game market is correct and why a majority of games studios analysis of the market is incorrect, all you are saying that your impopular opinion is more important "because reasons".
(While you are at it how about you go get a job as a market consultant for some large video game industry. Since you have this unique understanding of what people "actually" want you should be able to make a fortune with this special knowledge, right?)

Also @ Lyrhe, many many +1. We gotta show them whos the attack helicopters around here. ^^

Please blow up this thread.

I see I should have written "cue triggered fanboys" right after my post lol.

@lyrhe if you had read what we've said you would have understood why I posted those pictures. But sure, say whatever fits your narrative of what I've said.

So designing female characters away from the norm is pandering? Even when they are well liked and received? Lol. You do realize how silly you sound right?

@skalleywag

When did I provide an analysis of the video game market lol? The only thing I've suggested is that variety and diversity can be profitable, and I don't think I need evidence to make that point. Of course with that I'm implying that female character diversity can improve videogame sales, which I also think is a fair assumption to make. More varied heroes=greater number of relatable characters. The more varied the characters the greater the chance more people will find it worth buying.

If you want an example look at Overwatch, an awesome game with a wide variety of female and male characters. It is highly succesful and well enjoyed by pretty much every gamer. Creating more varied female characters does not spell the doom of the gaming industry, even though that's what you want me to believe.

If you see money as votes, then a lot of people voted for more diversity.

Lyrhe is right in one regard, though. This has gotten too off-topic and benefits no one. I will stop talking about this particular topic unless it moves back to OP's post and DOS2.

Nah this is great, its the unofficial shit post thread so that the rest of the forum stays pretty.

So, in conclusion. Stop getting wood for characters made out of wood.

Ad-Hominem, keep it going.
Also you assumed my gender-identity again.



I read it and I still think it was a poorly executed out of the context strawman.



In fact, Zarya is not that well liked because of her out of the norm design - if you believe that you are honestly out of your mind and should probably come out of your cloud Palace.

She's one of the most criticized heroes due to her design and that's the reason why a fair part jumped for the olympic skin; to change that god dam aweful tumblr muh-stronk-womyn hairstyle. We shouldn't forget here that you can't see your own characters face/model in Overwatch making these slightly unorthodox design choices irrelevant for most people anyway. She's well received because she's an incredible fun tank with great damage and an even better ultimate.



lmao no lol



Notice how it is slowly derailing because of their own bait? I called it a few sites ago and still believe that none of them are actually really argumenting out of believe but just to troll the rest of the forum.

I assumed you were being facetious about the gender identity stuff. I'll stop with the gendered language.

If Zarya is so unliked where are the petitions of gamers demanding she be taken out of the game? Where's the fan outrage and the hate over such a god-awful design? I even took a look at the OW forums and found no evidence of this outrage you speak of. You're drawing at straws.

If you're trying to prove she's an unpopular character you're not doing a very good job at all. She's fun to use and looks badass, what's not to like?

Bleh. Now I'm done.

Yes you do in fact need to provide some form of evidence for your position to be legitimate.

You say that there is too much of a specific type of game and that type of game needs to make room for another type of game.
That means you could be arguing one of two things.
1) Either the other type of game is not available at all so people who might want that do not even have the option to support it.

2) or the thing you want is simply less popular and thus fewer people buy it. SO you want it to be more popular, and the "solution" you suggest is to simply produce less of the first type of game.

Do you actually not understand how the free market works? The video game industry does not exist within a planned economy where "the party" decide what and how much of everything should be produced.
It exists in a global free market economy. If a studio decided to cave in to unfounded ideas like yours and simply go against what the actual market desires from them they will fail as a studio and a new one that understands what people want would take its place.

If most games have nudity in them thats because people like it. You do not get to decide what other people like and get to have. Now go away with your puritan nonsense.

Thanks, my pronouns are God emperor/Mr President and Mr President God Emperor.



Why would you need that? Why do you assume most people give the same shit about something visual irrelevant like that? In fact that just refutes your own argument from earlier on. Get in your mindset that there are people that don't feel the need to cry about imaginary problems.

And yet you are here being sensitive about the simple fact that people don't pick her because they put out their fleshrod to an androgynous pink haired musclegirl? Do you really think the guy picking her for the perfect comp. in a ranked is doing it because he likes her design so much?

Do you really wanna argue the normal beauty standard is a 120kg female bodybuilder with pink hairs?



If you look around on the internet you will find somewhere a salechart of the different skins in the game - there's a reason why (except for the olympic skin) zarya has the worst salenumbers of all heros.



I never did that and never said that, you should try reading my post again.



She looks more like a caricature of stereotypes as if someone tried to hard to make an epic strong woman character. There are other and better ways to do that.

This post is filled with prejudices.

Look, I don't find them particularly attractive. That's fine though, we're all allowed to have our own taste in what we find attractive. I also understand the desire to have characters in a game fit your ideals when it comes to female sexuality. I'm sure you'd also like the men to be somewhat attractive as fits your personal ideals, so you can feel more comfortable wearing their skin. I presume that none of the women from your image are likely to visit these forums, but none of this is any excuse for prejudice or personal attacks.

Personally, I don't think Overwatch provides a good reference point. An explicit component of its design is diversity. This is particularly clear when you observe that it includes, for example, a New Zealand Maori character as part of a cast of very diverse nationalities.

However, the first thing we need to recognise is that characters exist to serve the narrative, particularly in a story-driven example like D:OS or MGSV, so it's highly jarring when a character's design is based on external factors instead of the character's narrative role. This jarring feeling changes into discomfort when you then have to reflect on those external factors and realise that they actually have sexist origins.

A female warrior should be idealised for her strength. A female mage/scholar should be idealised for her intellect. If you find her strength or intellect sexy, then good for you. If not, then get over it.

Men get to be idealised for strength and be sexy because of their strength, not in spite of it. This a big part of the problem of catering to traditional ideals of sexiness. It's true that men should also have the freedom to be idealised in traditionally feminine roles (such as ballet), and perhaps there's room to style both men and women in this manner for the "finesse" roles.

Why is it that people "should" be idealized by certain aspects? Are you trying to argue that men and women should be idealized to the same degree for the same things?

Why? Why should that be? Do you believe there are no differences between men and women?
Because if you are able to see how men and women are different in many many aspects, why would you expect them to have the same strengths or weakneses, and to be idealized for the same things?

If we pit 1.000.000 people from Kenya in a long distance race with 1.000.000 people from Japan, do you think one of those groups would perform statisticly better than the other? Could it be that they are different in this regard?

I just wanna ask why people care so much about a pose you see for, at most, 10 minutes?

For the same reason they complained about how video games made kids violent, or before that how the wrong kind of music would make you worship the devil.

There will always be moral authoritarians around shrieking about one thing or another. Its just a matter of playing whackamole untill they go away for the moment.

The problem with the current generation of them is that they ridiculize the cause of "equality" to a degree where it's hard to tell it apart from a massive joke.

Just look at Ayvah can you take anything serious from him/her? Besides only circlejerking around "dats sexist" i couldn't find a single worthwile argument that isn't based on personal views, subjective perception and downright trollposting. I know I'm getting baited but just look at:



It's difficult not to take the bait after starting a counter argumentation with a downright killer-statement that so wrong in itself that you don't even notice the complete lack of arguments behind it. Instead he/she jumps right to a PERSONAL narrative of PERSONAL opinnions. Why everyone else should have less of what he/she doesn't like.



I don't even... what is that even supposed to tell us? A character isn't just the developers tool to show you an interactive movie. It's the god damn players avatar to interact with the given narrative - that includes in the very definition a design of external factors. That includes the stylization of an aesthetic beauty standard.

Except you telling me a woman can't be a hero and fighter without avoiding her given sex and the identity connected to that. BTW, that would be pretty sexist from you.



And again we go; stop liking what I don't like. This time against all norms and the standard of what we find attractive. Which is infact hardcoded into our genes.

There's a reason why most people don't find fat persons attractive and why females prefer the athletic guy with muscles and prominent bone structure. Why guys doing ballette and wearing tutu's aren't exactly popular when it comes to partnersearch.



Thats a privilege of our western cultural luxury and after your own arguments doesn't fit inside the narrative of a medieval world fighting over a forbidden dark magic and struggling for survival between apocalyptic events, wars and insane kings.

No thanks.

It is as you say actually impossible to tell if these kinds of opinions are being posted for trolling purposes or by someone dead serious. The way I see it its enough that some people actually believe their vacuous arguments about how terribly sexist art is. Since not all of them are trying to be clowns, and they sometimes actually manage to garner some influence or change that means someone needs to point out and counter their bullshit. Sometimes a troll might get what they want, but I think its better to counter one more SJW nonsense thread isntead of starting an investigation to try to separate fake insane persons from actually insane people. ^^

Right you are.

It just irritates me that somwhere a guy like this:


Sits infront of his screen smirking about how many people took that bait.

All hail Merlin and hit hot copious magic!

@Lyrhe
You, sir, deserve a million +1's for your well made point by point counters

Also, this thread might be a crap thread but it's like watching a slow car crash at this point :P It maintains interest for some inane reason

If you took 1 million people from Australia and pitted them against 1 million people from America, which group would be statistically better at swimming? (Hint: Not the Americans)

The problem with this is that any genetic variations are minor when compared to the cultural differences between these places. You'd have to convince many Americans (or Australians) to get up off their fat butts first before we can even start to understand their athletic potential.

Bringing this back on topic, the athletic disparity between genders is much bigger than any apparent differences between races. But that does not mean we shouldn't respect a strong woman for her strength. And given that we are intellectually equal, there is absolutely no justification for not respecting a woman for her intelligence.

Actually there's a proven big difference in how men and woman perform in different fields of intellectual tasks. Most men, for example, have an easier time with geometrical mathematics.

There are a lot of other things that sepperate the two biological sexes, viewed in a neuroscientific way.

Woman are better in:
- Optical tasks where it comes to remembering small details
- Are more fluid with languages and have an easier time picking new words and languages up
- Exact calculations
- Motor function of the hand

- And they have a higher speed of perception

Men are better in:
- Ability to abstract
- Mathematical deducations and conclusions
- Target oriented precise throwing and catching
- Optical abilities to perceive hidden objects



I can't remember anyone saying something against that, are you arguing against strawmans again?

Its facinating how that makes sense in your mind. So you rightfully acknowledge that the differences between men and women are significantly greater than whatever genetic differences can be observed in different ethnic groups, and yet somehow this should not influence peoples general impression of men and women?

Women are generally not associated with great physical strength because it is a much more uncommon trait, and even when women who do show an exceptional level of physical capacity show less of it than her male counterpart would. This means that what you are arguing is that games should take a trait that is a much more commonly displayed trait in one sex than the other and focus equally on this characteristic for both sexes. Again we return to the question why? Why should things be presented this way?

Also on a quick side not regarding intelligence, have you actually looked on any of the data for this?
It is true as you say that there is no significant difference in intelligence based on sex. There is however a difference in intelligence distribution. If you draw a bellcurve of intelligence distribution for men and women, you get a noticable gender difference. Women are more centered around the middle of the curve, while men have more representation at both the high and low edge of the curve.
So at the top levels of intellectual performance, there are actually statistically more men than women, but the same is also true for the very low end of the scale. More men than women.

Another point about intelligence is that it seems to work a bit differently for men and women. Take the top level or math prodigys for example. Men who are really gifted with math often have a much more specialized area of mental capacity. Their math genious comes at the cost of language and social skills. (So kind of the rainman stereotype.)
Women with great mathematical talent on the other hand do not display this pattern. They tend to be just as linguistically and socially gifted as they are mathematically gifted.

Now what do you think that means for the top level of math as an academic field? Even if there was a 50/50 distribution bewteen male and female math geniouses (which there isn't, but for arguments sake) if the men in this category of intelligence tend to be limited to their one gift in life and struggle in other areas, how likely do you think it is that they will end up spending their life on that specific talent?
Now look at an equal number of women with the same talent for math, but who also have a bunch of other options equally open to them because they are just generally gifted, would you find it suprising if not all of them chose to focus their lives on their mathematical talent?

Men and women are different, and thus are perceived differently. Im sorry if you are unable to deal with that fact, but you have yet to produce an actual argument for why the video game industry in general and this game in particular ought to display things differently than it is currently.

Jesus christ

Jesus got bored and left a while ago :P