A year or two down the line we will hopefully get something similar to the customization in Skyrim SE. That level of freedom is where my two cents would go. I dont mind skimpy or revealing armour for both men and women as I think we are making a choice outwith the "normal" constraints of reality. Besides, most real, historical fighting armour was pretty bland and utilitairian. You need it to stop steel, not look good. I wonder if however there could be "some" benefit from wearing little or even no armour in battle real or fantasy. The Picts (probably some of my ancestors) took on the Romansand each other (allegedly) in the nip (nude although adorned with some blueish paint). I mean yes, they did probably lose a lot of fights, but the Picts did prevent the Romans completely dominating their culture. Perhaps there is something in charging bollock naked at your enemy.... You might just distract them enough to get a sneaky stab in whilst they oggle your ... bits. So sexy armour? Yes please but make it a choice or let us mod that choice. Which I'm sure they will.
I'm in no way an expert on this, but if you're referring to medieval armor i believe it did look good way back when with its narrow waist and wide shoulders look, which is also how they depicted people in their art. Much like how greeks were really into simmetry, perfect proportions and peak physical conditional, and that blended into armors having abs, nipples and all that.
Very true, there are some beautiful examples of armour throught history. I was thinking more about day to day armour that the average soldier could afford and maintain. If you want to outfit an army, I guess you want to keep the costs down as much as possible so no expensive filigree or gold etching. A lord or baron etc would absolutely most likely have gone for elaborate armour.