Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tack]

But the real question is, does armor HAVE to be functional in order to be gender-fair?

I believe the answer is no. We like to give our artists 'artistic license'. Outrageously spiky armor is one of those things, along with massive pauldrons and tits you cou- waait a sec.

[Sheo]

But the real question is, does armor HAVE to be functional in order to be gender-fair?

I believe the answer is no. We like to give our artists 'artistic license'. Outrageously spiky armor is one of those things, along with massive pauldrons and tits you cou- waait a sec.

Well, see, full disclaimer, my opinion is that games should have whatever design they want and people should choose with their wallet.

But seeing things from an "ideal" perspective, I think the fair would be like this:

In games where armor is already fantasized up to eleven, with spikes and unnecessary additions, sexualization's fine. You're not going for realism anyway.

In game like MB, full realism means fully realistic armor. You can see this both in MB and DkS.

However, even in "realistic" games stuff like boob plate exist, but I hardly think boob plate is sexist. It's less about sexualization and more about stylization - if you find someone who actually thinks metal curves are "hot", then go ahead and prove me wrong.

Also, about something someone said earlier, that men in loincloth are strong looking while women in bikinis are stupid looking, if you don't think the Barbarian from Dragon's Crown looks strong as all hell we live in different planes.

[Neonivek]

Artistic license is fine.

It is why women aren't running around with their hair shaved off.

Though yes Sheo does bring in a good point since it is another one of those things that I've had people tell me over and over again is supposed to be fetish clothing, but I've never EVER found sexy.

And yes Boob Plate in all forms isn't "Bad", it is often just enough so you aren't hiding their forms under thick armor.

Boob Plate can get quite egregious though.

[Virtz]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

[Helgoland]

Didn't Roman officers have spear-counterpart boob plates?

[Neonivek]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

"Male Power Fantasy" is truthfully a vague term and honestly applies to so many things that you might as well forget about it entirely.

Especially when the idea of a "Female power fantasy" is actually outright debated to even exist.

Meaning that "Male Power Fantasy" is more or less used to mean "Immature adolescent Male Pandering"

Didn't Roman officers have spear-counterpart boob plates?

What I do find interesting is Romans DID have "Sexy Armor", same with the Greeks. It isn't like the embellishments in the bronze armor made it deflect blows better.

Mind you, for men... but it does go to show that "Boob Plate" is a thing that exists.

The major difference being... We are used to the Roman Sexy Armor and Greek Sexy armor. So it has stopped being sexualized armor to us.

[scriver]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is.

[Neonivek]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is.

I never liked this Thought Crime approach to judgment.

Would Agatha Christie's novels suddenly be bad if we found out it was actually written as fetish fuel for some man by some guy and he just gave her all the credit?

I think it should stand on its own merits rather then what you can psychically determine from the creator.

[Sheo]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is.

I never liked this Thought Crime approach to judgment.

Would Agatha Christie's novels suddenly be bad if we found out it was actually written as fetish fuel for some man by some guy and he just gave her all the credit?

I think it should stand on its own merits rather then what you can psychically determine from the creator.

+1

Also, I'm working on the thread about that game concept if anyone is still interested. Detailing the concept and discussing it with people I know - if anyone is interested in discussing and being involved, add me on Skype (dharengw2)

[scriver]

I never liked this Thought Crime approach to judgment.

Would Agatha Christie's novels suddenly be bad if we found out it was actually written as fetish fuel for some man by some guy and he just gave her all the credit?

I think it should stand on its own merits rather then what you can psychically determine from the creator.

You'll never get to the root of any problems if you do not take into account what reasons people have for doing whatever it is they do.

[Rolan7]

I still have no problem with nearly naked "barbarian armor" when it's not tied to just one gender.

Ok I did a google image search

Here is what I found

Women's Bullet Proof Vest
http://www.safeguardclothing.com/media/wysiwyg/fempro-stealth-black.jpg

Standard Bullet Proof Vest (which is PROBABLY unisex)
http://ep.yimg.com/ay/yhst-64617591706811/the-bulletsafe-bulletproof-vest-45.jpg

From what I can see bullet proof vests are designed a BIT differently when they are for women and some of them do have breast room to an extent. I should note that I DOUBT that women's bullet proof vest is typical.

Though truthfully the major difference between them actually seems to be the shoulders.

Yeah also that's a "Fempro Stealth" vs "Bulletsafe bullet-proof vest".  I think the Fempro one just happens to be a lighter design, there are light male vests too.  And despite being custom-fitted fabric, no mysterious cleavage.  Sure the chest extends farther, but it isn't molded into boobies like Femshep's metal chest.
Here's a bulletproof armored vest actually being worn, though it may be a heavier model with ballistic plates:
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1297864.1364148558!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/vest25n-2-web.jpg

Mass Effect armor has a "damage protection" rating that mitigates damages even after shields are down, it's designed to stop space-weapons-fire.  That's why heavy armor has bracers and pauldrons and such.  Examples (showing both genders for comparison):
Medium: http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100209162744/masseffect/images/9/95/Medium-human-Ursa.png
Heavy: http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100209161744/masseffect/images/f/f8/Heavy-human-Ursa.png
Which makes it ridiculous that the armor is designed to be display cuppable metal breasts.  If the chestplate is thick enough to be useful (again, there are *pauldrons*) then the breasts aren't taking up those spaces.  They're purely "aesthetic".

[Neonivek]

I still have no problem with nearly naked "barbarian armor" when it's not tied to just one gender.

No I agree there are instances. Red Sonya looks completely normal when next to Conan.

[Virtz]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is.

So if a gay man or a hetero woman makes a game where women wear heavily revealing clothing, it's no longer sexualized?

[Tack]

Well Bayonetta was made by a woman, right?

Mass Effect

None of those pictures are from ME3, which kinda renders your argument invalid- because they've already taken some of those design changes on board.
You're preaching to the past.

This being said, the newer armor still features 'cuppable breasts'.
But I personally don't see an issue with it. If it's not intended to be noticeably useful, then what's the harm in asserting your femininity?
Which do you think would bring down more fire, if Femshep had boobplate, or that she 'looked like a man'.

[scriver]

Personally I prefer that armour be practical for the most part. It's just a matter of setting believability for me. Like I'll take Mount & Blade and Dark Souls over any medieval fantasy game where people wear "anime" armour.

Though I do find it a bit hypocritical how revealing male armour seems to be considered "power fantasy" while revealing female armour is considered "sexualized". I can tell you from experience that most gay men would find a big buff guy with skin showing pretty sexy.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is.

So if a gay man or a hetero woman makes a game where women wear heavily revealing clothing, it's no longer sexualized?

No, not necessarily. "The difference lies in who is the creator, their reasons for making them look like that, and who the target audience is".

edit: And yes, a depiction can still be sexist despite of an author's intentions because of how it plays into the general culture of the society it is made it.