Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 12 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Joined: Jun 2013
N
stranger
Offline
stranger
N
Joined: Jun 2013
Personally I much prefer ladies in heavy armor. I prefer it this way for many reasons... Aesthetics, equality, fresh change from tired tropes and cliche's.

Now this might be counter to some of the outcry of the controversy... But I like a lady in full armor. Personally I find that more attractive than the striperrific (and I don't mean that in a mean way) outfits that most games put their women into now adays and I feel that . I've just become so insensitized that most of the "tittilation" is lost on me. So if the skimpy armor isn't attractive to me I am left to judge the outfit based on its merits. When I do this I have to ask myself...

Does the outfit fit the character? How does the outfit hold up without the tittilation? How do the outfits look compared to the male characters?

Most of the time I have to answer no. Skimpy character designs are largely boring. Everyone has the same design and there are only so many ways you can draw a bikini on a character before it gets boring. At least with armor you can design and decorate it in so many different ways that it is hard to get bored.

Now I can't comment on Larian's design as the game isn't out yet and we have had a limited pool of npc's seen... But from what I can see I didn't really like the design. It was rather ridiculous.

To sum up my feelings though... The artist has the right to make whatever he wants. However he is beholden to the company, who is beholden to its playerbase. If the company wants to appeal to a larger audience... (an audience that includes women probably sick to death of this kind of character design) then they will want to change the cover. If the artist doesn't want to do that its his right to find work somewhere that will let him express himself rather than where he is right there.

Personally I support the change because I like the change. I am sorry the artist doesn't feel the same and understand his distress.

Joined: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Larian Studios
Offline
Larian Studios
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Originally Posted by My name is Shar
3. As Raze said, quote follows below, theres people actually not backing or even withdrawing pledges for the sake of bikini armor.
I don't see pro bikini people react like that.

I don't know of anyone who withdrew their pledge because of the cover art (after all, they had seen it before backing). The issue was people having the original artwork as the initial representation of the game, and then wondering if they needed to look into it any further if that was either the maturity level of the game or indicative of how woman would be portrayed.

For example, one person made a comment in the forum about liking the new design shortly after it was changed, and got some rather negative responses from the pro-bikini side. It actually made them second guess backing the game and wonder about the portrayal of women in the previous Divinity games. They emailed support to ask if the forum was usually so hostile and which design was more representative of the game (which got forwarded to me because support wasn't following the forum discussion closely). I responded to their concerns, and they were actually fine with the female warrior in DD starting off in pretty much a metal bikini since the male warrior started with gladiator style attire. Their main issue with the original artwork was the difference in designs, rather than the bikini armour itself.

The armour designs in the game were always realistic. That was part of the reason the cover art was changed. I'm sure modders will design some bikini armour, though (not that that would make a huge difference when the character is an inch high on screen).

Joined: Mar 2013
Location: Austria
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2013
Location: Austria
Originally Posted by My name is Shar
I am really, really sad and i just can't stress enough the really part, to see this discussion about armors. The whole topic just makes me sad.
I am really, really sad that it is still necessary.

Originally Posted by My name is Shar
as long as it makes sense for the setting it belongs to
That's the whole issue in a nutshell. A warrior wearing nothing but a bikini (or loincloth) only makes sense if said warrior is invulnerable and/or if that particular culture hasn't developed armor (or any real clothes, really) yet and/or if there are laws preventing one or both sexes (of for example a lower caste) from wearing protective gear.
*Chainmail* underwear (due to massive chafing) and boob plates (due to extremely counterproductive extreme lethality) only make sense if invulnerable and/or required by law.
Fantasy as a genre means that magic and made-up creatures exist, not that absolutely everything goes - at least not if you want the setting to be anything more than a pure joke that doesn't take itself seriously at all.

Originally Posted by My name is Shar
I like women looking like women and not dwarves with beards, suggesting that i appreciate armors for females to be more feminine.

This is exactly the same argument as if one were to argue for form-fitting metal crotch guards with separate compartments for each crown jewel instead of only a nondescript bulge you have appropriate freedom in. You know, I also like my characters to look good, but form follows function, so I have nothing nice to say to that view of yours, especially phrased as it is.

Originally Posted by My name is Shar
And why there's no topics for male armors then? How they should look like etc? Male armor appearance can be ugly as long as it's not bikini?
Erm, yes, duh? I do assume you mean "plain-looking"? It can be ugly, but it doesn't have to be for either sex without leaving the realms of believability even one step behind, let alone miles and miles.
If you mean "silly spiky oversized mess" (armors *and* arms), then that shouldn't be there, either, but being silly without naked skin *is* less problematic than being such with all vital organs readily accessible, so people do naturally discuss it less, particularly when D:OS and especially P:E have been much less guilty of that to begin with.
And I always see people on your side throwing around barechested male characters in fiction as a justification for the objectification of the female form, but never do I see them arguing for the implementation of topless or even belly-free armors for men. Quite the opposite in fact; nothing but sneering disdain and mockery for such "gay" designs (fairly common in Asian works, where they are nevertheless still much rarer than the female equivalents) other than the Conan archetype. All we want is equality.

Originally Posted by My name is Shar
My answer would be. If possible, make a few options for pro bikinis, a few options for anti bikinis and the rest in between. When i say few could be 1 - 2 i don't know. Depends on the workload.
If you want nonsensical armor, than at the very least appropriately abysmal stats ought to reflect the design. Wanting to ogle eye candy yet refusing to live without überstats is exactly one thing: sexist.

Originally Posted by My name is Shar
Save the boob plate
Never. Kill it with fire.


Proud Probatanthrope

Tor.com: Boob Plate Armor Would Kill You (cf. "ball plate armor" - Just think about it.)
Joined: Oct 2004
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2004
Are people really named Shar ?
--

Normally i woudln't edit a message to place a note as follows but on reflection it occurred to me that my comment could be taken wrong hence this once in a lifetime disclaimer:

Btw Shar I have no problem with your post; it is fine and the comment is unrelated to your post itself so please don't take it that way.

Last edited by meme; 03/08/13 04:49 PM.
Joined: May 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2013
I can think of at least two categories of people from which you could find people legally named that way.


Unless otherwise specified, just an opinion or simple curiosity.
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
There's a slope here which looks like it might be slippery. So I'll lower someone on a rope carefully a bit at a time until we find out the spot where it gets too slippery to walk on, the point where someone is going just too far.

Kein (or anyone else pro-bikini who wants to answer), if a woman dislikes the image of how women are portrayed in a game (eg. in bikini armour), is it okay for her to complain about it? To be clear: JUST complain - not "refuse to buy", not "demand a change", not "call for a boycott or ban", just complain on the developer's forums.

Joined: May 2013
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: May 2013
Originally Posted by meme
Are people really named Shar ?
--

Normally i woudln't edit a message to place a note as follows but on reflection it occurred to me that my comment could be taken wrong hence this once in a lifetime disclaimer:

Btw Shar I have no problem with your post; it is fine and the comment is unrelated to your post itself so please don't take it that way.


No problem but either way my name is not Shar. Just a random DnD related screenname i chose. I also had Shar herself as an avatar before i switched to the current one. Though you had me curious and i did a brief googling and there's actually people with Shar as a name.

Let me say once more that i prefer the new cover art more, the armor looks interesting, subtly feminine and generally on the spot.

Bikini armors aside, i can't understand why people have an issue with boob plates. Its not the medieval period. There were very few women to fight or wear armor back then. It was a man's thing.

To me it just sounds like you walk in a store that sells only women clothes and you have to pick something to wear. There was no necessity to fashion armor considering women.

If the society has developed in a way that does not resemble the middle ages and women are actually equal (and i don't think women were considered equal in middle ages) and women in military positions were a lot more commonplace then why there shouldn't be armors fashioned in a more female friendly way?

Joined: May 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: May 2013
Bikini armour is an extreme case of female-specific armour (I wouldn't call it female-friendly armour), so taking the argument away from this extreme is at best going off on a tangent.


Unless otherwise specified, just an opinion or simple curiosity.
Joined: May 2005
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: May 2005
Female-friendly armour? Iron thong not good. Grokina no like! (I suppose.)
(A bit long winded)
The exterior of armour would probably be designed mostly according to the threats it needs to fend off. Padding would protect the wearer from the armour itself, and regular armour would probably be more friendly to the female body than metal swimwear.

I perceive the metal bikini as a sexy attire symbolic of its function (armour) and its wearer's role (warrior).

Often, though, the extravagant man-containers (big metal suits) have a similar place, yet reveal less skin (therefore looking more protective).

In those cases, the discrepancy might have more to do with the differences in perceived "sexiness". (The man isn't better covered because the artist thought he should have more armour, but because the artist doesn't see his <or her> male hero running around in skin-baring attires to begin with.)

That, of course, could be a discussion of its own (I start game, be man in hotpants with supersized frontal bulge, feel uncomfortable; I start game, be woman in bikini, not so bad; I start game, be man in casual clothes, feel alright). But I don't know enough about women or games to say if female sexuality is generally misrepresented. There's often some need to stylize a character anyway.
So I'd be ok with chainmail bikinis if they represented the wearer's style/mode of clothing, provided a context where armours generally represent a wearer's style. Such a game might feature men and women in other unrealistic armours as well, unless it portrays all women (or even men) as ardent bikini-wearers.

There could also be "boob plates" in more realistic games. These would be held or used by idiots, actors/liveroleplayers and others who might prefer appearance over function.

In short: Save the boob plate for the right occasion.

<Clarification: By "I'd be ok" I mean "It wouldn't strike me as too odd", as I'm otherwise mostly ok with stuff to begin with.>

Last edited by Sinister; 05/08/13 07:23 PM. Reason: Clarification
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Z
stranger
Offline
stranger
Z
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Originally Posted by Stabbey
There's a slope here which looks like it might be slippery. So I'll lower someone on a rope carefully a bit at a time until we find out the spot where it gets too slippery to walk on, the point where someone is going just too far.

Kein (or anyone else pro-bikini who wants to answer), if a woman dislikes the image of how women are portrayed in a game (eg. in bikini armour), is it okay for her to complain about it? To be clear: JUST complain - not "refuse to buy", not "demand a change", not "call for a boycott or ban", just complain on the developer's forums.


The correct answer here is yes. Anyone is entitled to complain about a product if they feel so inclined.

But those are not the women people generally have a problem with. Except for people who are knobs in general and probably treat everyone they come across like crap.

The problem is when you start encountering people who insist changing it to give you more options is "not good enough", or if pointing out more options already exist and nothing needs to be changed, start getting spiteful and demanding things be removed or they'll tell everyone you're a such and such who hate women.




Originally Posted by Raze

I don't know of anyone who withdrew their pledge because of the cover art (after all, they had seen it before backing). The issue was people having the original artwork as the initial representation of the game, and then wondering if they needed to look into it any further if that was either the maturity level of the game or indicative of how woman would be portrayed.

For example, one person made a comment in the forum about liking the new design shortly after it was changed, and got some rather negative responses from the pro-bikini side. It actually made them second guess backing the game and wonder about the portrayal of women in the previous Divinity games.


And this is a prime example of the height of ridiculousness some people will go to, to see others conform to their personal beliefs. Anyone who purposefully equates the reaction of other customers to demands they view to be outlandish,[equates them] to the way the DEVELOPER portrays or treats women, aside from the patent absurdity of such a conflation, must have some kind of self-image issues floating about in their head.


And which point we arrive at the age old garbage headline of "The video game made me do it" that so many cling to, despite no real solid proof.

Joined: Jan 2014
Location: Chicago
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2014
Location: Chicago
Without diving into the depths of this controversy once again, like has been touched on upon in the alpha discussion with Scarlet's heels, I would like to put down that I dislike an armor bikini far more than excessive armor because of the obviousness that this is impractical in the extreme.

Super heavy armor is also a bit annoying because of how cumbersome it is (which is why I have always appreciated how D&D has athletic skill check penalties and movement speed slows for heavy armor), but it's easier to err on the side of too much armor without triggering red flags in people like myself.

As such, I would also like a compromise between these two extremes and have some armor with some sex appeal for those inclined to such things, and some that's a bit more realistic, for those like me that prefer that. This of course won't work perfectly; the compromise would be a lot of time and effort for probably little return for the team.

As such, I think that ultimately the art team will have to decide which aesthetic they focus on while only having some things to suit others, I personally enjoy complete cover while avoiding the walking fortress look. It might be a bit impractical using more than chain armor or leather, but it's far less impractical than not wearing any armor over any organs (until reaching the fortress problem that is, where you could probably hardly maneuver).

Edit: I want to re-iterate that I'm making an aesthetic argument around the idea that I find things roughly being believable (in the world I know practically) is aesthetically appealing and gratifying. I'm not saying hardcore realism. Just in the realm of reasonable protection that makes some sense, however imperfect.

Last edited by YoungFreshNewbie; 25/01/14 03:24 AM. Reason: clarity
Joined: Jan 2014
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Jan 2014
Women in leather bikini's are a pillar of the fantasy genre. Please don't change it.

Joined: Jan 2014
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2014
Don't much care for the look of the armor in most cases, just want something realistic for an archer, though the image I have in my head will have to be something I make with the editor.

Joined: Jun 2013
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2013

Joined: Jan 2014
B
stranger
Offline
stranger
B
Joined: Jan 2014
As Sin is supposed to be a very open Game how about having both and let people decide themself what they want to wear

Joined: Jan 2014
Location: Chicago
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2014
Location: Chicago


Noting my previous post a few posts up, I find that this suggestion might just be the compromise most reasonable people could be happy with. Some of that armor is pretty sexy and unrealistic from boob slots, etc etc., but it's also full cover that allows suspension of disbelief at least in my case to wear that and not really mind.

So I think something like this might just be the way to go for appealing to the sexy crowd and the pragmatic/realistic crowd in equal measure. I would strongly encourage the art team to at least take a look through these.

Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Soviet Empire
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Soviet Empire
http://steamcommunity.com/app/230230/discussions/0/540731690785708992/

Community (a better part of it) is working to bring things back to the game, instead of removing them. There is a lot of work ahead, but it's a start.

Joined: Jan 2014
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by My name is Shar

Bikini armors aside, i can't understand why people have an issue with boob plates. Its not the medieval period. There were very few women to fight or wear armor back then. It was a man's thing.


If you want a serious answer to this, "boob plate" simply doesn't work as armor and shows a gross misunderstanding of how armor works.

Here's an accurate explanation:
There's three major reasons for this: firstly, mammary tissue is fat, not muscle, so there's no reason you can't strap them down*; secondly, the last thing you want is a stress point / join where protrusions funnel attacks either into the armpits (one of the easiest and deadliest ways to disable an attacker, there's nerve bundles there) or up into the neck / jaw (again, the neck being a weak spot in armor) and thirdly, it shows a lack of understanding of just how layered plate armor was/is. Think - underwear, padded layers, chain underlay for weak spots (i.e. neck) and then plate on the top. Breasts would be under a thick layer of padding before the chest plate went over the top.

Basically, "boob plate" is worse than "bikinis" - at least bikinis can exist ~ shaped breastplates with separate "boobs" are purely cosmetic, as the breasts don't actually fit inside them, unless you're wearing faux cosmetic costumes.


Lastly, real plate armor doesn't look anything like you imagine it to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Smythearmour2.jpg. It's far more barrel shaped than you imagine.


/thread


*Ask your mother / sister / close female friend about sports bras, binding and how easily bruised they are.

Last edited by SteamUser; 25/01/14 09:06 PM.
Joined: Jan 2014
S
stranger
Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Jan 2014
I prefer realism, with properly functional armor, as it aids immersion for me and helps me take my, and others' characters more seriously. We already have tons of RPGs with skimpy "protective" outfits for female characters. It's a trite design. We get it. Women have tits and skin. In the way of media, there's an abundance of erotica and pornography for that. I'd like media to tone down titillation.

However, that doesn't rule out doing what Neverwinter, and perhaps other games, do, which is that they allow characters to have a set of "casual" clothes, that they can switch to wearing, while simultaneously having a set of combat clothes equipped, whose stats are still in effect, even while casual clothes are displayed on the character. Non-combat clothes is a nice feature for roleplaying purposes, too.

Joined: Nov 2010
D
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
D
Joined: Nov 2010
The thing is, if you are going for realism, then women shouldn't even be out on the battlefield fighting to the equal ability of men in the first place. Hell, they should barely be able to move (for very long anyway) in the heaviest armor, which would require a level of strength and constitution in real life.

As far as I'm concerned, if you can suspend disbelief for that, you can suspend disbelief for skimpy female armors. They are both unrealistic IMO. The most realistic would be to prevent women from wearing heavy armor, or even doing any hand to hand combat, but games will pretty much always portray women as equal to men in all facets in games these days to be politically correct.

I'm happy enough to suspend my disbelief with that, though I never play as a female, so I don't have to as much.

Last edited by Dundalis; 27/01/14 05:05 AM.
Page 8 of 12 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5