Originally posted by ZenonSeth

I guess it ain't gonna change in GW2, or any existing game, but I'd like to see at least one major MMO without skimpy female armor.

If a game let you be a fashion designer, like APB, or the upcoming WoD, would you get pissy about how most female characters are ran by males and *still* wear skimpy stuff? Would you complain that the option is there and being overused? Does it ruin your good time enough to avoid playing it at that point?

You had me at the word... prostitute 

wood!

Originally posted by MMOarQQ

Moving to the mountains and jerking it to 1940s Sears catalogues: Always an option for some. 

"Look at that slut..."

haha actually made me lol !

Why is this a problem? Sex is a natural part of life. It is up to you on whatever you want your character to wear.

There are transmutation stones. 

If this is a true gamebreaker for you then I pity that fool.

Well being that you put this poll in the Guild Wars 2 forum, I voted no.  The female character armor looks very nice and there are plenty of non skimpy(yet still fairly sexy) options which makes me happy.   Tera on the other hand which I currently play is ridiculous.  

The game is pretty fun which is why I still play, but the female armor in that game is way oversexualized.  So much so that I rolled a male human(I wanted to play a human) but I could not get over the ultra muscled look of the character.  When I was running around with him in Tera I felt like I should have been green screaming "NOW HULK SMASH!"  Needless to say I deleted him not too long after and made a female human like I wanted to originally.

But in conclusion I see nothing wrong with Guild Wars 2's female characters.  Their outfits are a step in the right direction in my opinion.

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

I guess it ain't gonna change in GW2, or any existing game, but I'd like to see at least one major MMO without skimpy female armor.

If a game let you be a fashion designer, like APB, or the upcoming WoD, would you get pissy about how most female characters are ran by males and *still* wear skimpy stuff? Would you complain that the option is there and being overused? Does it ruin your good time enough to avoid playing it at that point?

What ruins my experience is when you get a female warrior that's suppose to be wearing some highly protective armor yet it's very revealing. Or, as I mentioned earlier, when the stuff you call "armor" turns out to look less protective than "clothes". 

I'm just for more immersion, and if skimpy outfits were put in the clothes category, I wouldn't really care that much. Hell, in a cash-shop game, that would be a great selling clothing item I imagine.

No, I don't care who plays what... I don't see how this has anything to do with anything.

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

Originally posted by tinuxnl

I am very surprised that this topic is able to fill 15 pages on a forum..... People worried about pixels that might just show a little bit too much virtual pixelated side boob.

On the news people die of starvation, floods, atomic bombs, nuclear disasters, diseases, murder (etc, etc, etc) and we get this served on a daily basis by every medium available today....  

 

/me is worried about mankind!

I don't think anyone is worried, we're just discussing these issues. It's actually not very resource consuming to post on a forum about an issue we (and you) have an opinion about. We can still post here AND care about people dying.

Besides, if you're so worried, why are you even on this forum? Shouldn't you be somewhere helping people? :)

Did you just miss my point? Aaaah...thats too bad.... I'm so sorry you didn't get it. ^.-

/ontopic  OP I think it's you... but I think it's amazing how many pages about this topic get filled on these forums. *reads on* :)

[edit] and what http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5114123 said :) 

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

I guess it ain't gonna change in GW2, or any existing game, but I'd like to see at least one major MMO without skimpy female armor.

If a game let you be a fashion designer, like APB, or the upcoming WoD, would you get pissy about how most female characters are ran by males and *still* wear skimpy stuff? Would you complain that the option is there and being overused? Does it ruin your good time enough to avoid playing it at that point?

What ruins my experience is when you get a female warrior that's suppose to be wearing some highly protective armor yet it's very revealing. Or, as I mentioned earlier, when the stuff you call "armor" turns out to look less protective than "clothes". 

I'm just for more immersion, and if skimpy outfits were put in the clothes category, I wouldn't really care that much. Hell, in a cash-shop game, that would be a great selling clothing item I imagine.

No, I don't care who plays what... I don't see how this has anything to do with anything.

Because when you have a choice in styles, like GW2 has (and arguably, Tera does as well) a lot of men will be led by libido to go with the skimpies that ruin your good time. Hate the player, not the game.

Though, as a fellow man, I think you have issues for being turned off by sexy.

~and Realism left the building ages ago, don't even go looking for it anymore. If you have room to complain that armor should look realistically protective, then I expect you to also demand that a single swordblow should potentially kill - otherwise, you is nitpickin'.

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

Originally posted by GTwander

Because when you have a choice in styles, like GW2 has (and arguably, Tera does as well) a lot of men will be led by libido to go with the skimpies that ruin your good time. Hate the player, not the game.

Though, as a fellow man, I think you have issues for being turned off by sexy.

~and Realism left the building ages ago, don't even go looking for it anymore.

The reason why you'd hate the game is for providing so many skimpy outfits that don't make sense. In GW2 only some of the caster classes suffer from this, so it's mostly fine.

I appreceate your concern, fellow man, but I think you have trouble accepting that everyone has a different definition of "sexy".

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Mesmer_armor - this is some sexy female armor, without being too skimpy (most of it anyway).

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

What ruins my experience is when you get a female warrior that's suppose to be wearing some highly protective armor yet it's very revealing. Or, as I mentioned earlier, when the stuff you call "armor" turns out to look less protective than "clothes". 

I'm just for more immersion, and if skimpy outfits were put in the clothes category, I wouldn't really care that much. Hell, in a cash-shop game, that would be a great selling clothing item I imagine.

No, I don't care who plays what... I don't see how this has anything to do with anything.

Most of the armor in the game is highly protective. However, you seem to be under the assumption that all armor that's ever existed has provided full coverage. You would be wrong. The typical 'full plate' armor type that most westerners think of when they hear the word armor, is primarily a europian armor type. Yet, even in europe you had less protective armor types in favor of more mobile armor. You can see this especially w/ the greeks & romans.

The reason you don't think of the same armor types being applied to women, is because women weren't allowed to fight back then in most cases. It was highly taboo. The women who did get themselves into battle were usually wearing male armor. Very few had armor that was custom fitted for their bodies.

GW2 gives you a range of options in this regards.

Again, this is a fantasy world taking influence from our world's history & cultures. They have utilized different cultures to make this game. Assuming that all aspects of the game should stick to a strictly knights & castles view of armor is a bit closed-minded. Not all cultures preferred the heavy, bulky, slow full armor choice. Some cultures prefered to only protect key parts of their body in favor of better mobility & visibility.

There's a reason why the more revealing heavy armor in GW1 & 2 is called 'gladiator armor'.

Originally posted by GTwander

We have such a strong porn industry because the entire nation is sexually repressed. Everyone puts up a front, then behind closed doors they are into the nastiest shit you can imagine.

See Japan.

What's funny is while gentials are to be partially censored in pornography in Japan (by law) they have a quite a bit more freedom in regards to pornography than here in the US.  Some examples is that it's not uncommon to see someone "reading" pornographic material on the Subway, there are festivals dedicated to male genitalia (Kanamaru Matsuri), the popularity of Illusion games, panty machine vendors, and even a certain town having a mascot with an erection that is even made into children's dolls.  I'm certainly no Puritan and even find those too be a bit too much.

But I agree, Americans are a sexually repressed bunch.  We are extremely fearful of our children seeing any form of nudity.  I'm not going to go into a debate about religion here (not the thread for it), but it's definitely one of the biggest reasons.

Originally posted by aesperus

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

What ruins my experience is when you get a female warrior that's suppose to be wearing some highly protective armor yet it's very revealing. Or, as I mentioned earlier, when the stuff you call "armor" turns out to look less protective than "clothes". 

I'm just for more immersion, and if skimpy outfits were put in the clothes category, I wouldn't really care that much. Hell, in a cash-shop game, that would be a great selling clothing item I imagine.

No, I don't care who plays what... I don't see how this has anything to do with anything.

Most of the armor in the game is highly protective. However, you seem to be under the assumption that all armor that's ever existed has provided full coverage. You would be wrong. The typical 'full plate' armor type that most westerners think of when they hear the word armor, is primarily a europian armor type. Yet, even in europe you had less protective armor types in favor of more mobile armor. You can see this especially w/ the greeks & romans.

The reason you don't think of the same armor types being applied to women, is because women weren't allowed to fight back then in most cases. It was highly taboo. The women who did get themselves into battle were usually wearing male armor. Very few had armor that was custom fitted for their bodies.

GW2 gives you a range of options in this regards.

Again, this is a fantasy world taking influence from our world's history & cultures. They have utilized different cultures to make this game. Assuming that all aspects of the game should stick to a strictly knights & castles view of armor is a bit closed-minded. Not all cultures preferred the heavy, bulky, slow full armor choice. Some cultures prefered to only protect key parts of their body in favor of better mobility & visibility.

There's a reason why the more revealing heavy armor in GW1 & 2 is called 'gladiator armor'.

Quiet you!

People are not allowed to make sense in the face of personal prejudices.

Originally posted by infeeect

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Personally i think espescially the female cloth stuff looks way to Asian.... but there are some pieces that save the day..

 

Have you ever played guild wars 1?, do you know where guild wars 1 + 2 come from... comments like this make me laugh my head off because lack of knowledge!

its not because a company is in the US that the art style have to be us (western) they can still use asian cloth or other thing from them, You are the 1 that make no sense here.

Originally posted by aesperus

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

What ruins my experience is when you get a female warrior that's suppose to be wearing some highly protective armor yet it's very revealing. Or, as I mentioned earlier, when the stuff you call "armor" turns out to look less protective than "clothes". 

I'm just for more immersion, and if skimpy outfits were put in the clothes category, I wouldn't really care that much. Hell, in a cash-shop game, that would be a great selling clothing item I imagine.

No, I don't care who plays what... I don't see how this has anything to do with anything.

Most of the armor in the game is highly protective. However, you seem to be under the assumption that all armor that's ever existed has provided full coverage. You would be wrong. The typical 'full plate' armor type that most westerners think of when they hear the word armor, is primarily a europian armor type. Yet, even in europe you had less protective armor types in favor of more mobile armor. You can see this especially w/ the greeks & romans.

The reason you don't think of the same armor types being applied to women, is because women weren't allowed to fight back then in most cases. It was highly taboo. The women who did get themselves into battle were usually wearing male armor. Very few had armor that was custom fitted for their bodies.

GW2 gives you a range of options in this regards.

Again, this is a fantasy world taking influence from our world's history & cultures. They have utilized different cultures to make this game. Assuming that all aspects of the game should stick to a strictly knights & castles view of armor is a bit closed-minded. Not all cultures preferred the heavy, bulky, slow full armor choice. Some cultures prefered to only protect key parts of their body in favor of better mobility & visibility.

There's a reason why the more revealing heavy armor in GW1 & 2 is called 'gladiator armor'.

I'm actually aware of historical armor designs, and that the few women who have donned armor wore male armor. In fact the breast-bumps on plate armor that are present on most female game armor are counter-productive to what that armor is suppose to do - namely deflect the blows away from the center, and try to avoid putting pressure on the chest when struck.

I agree with you that not all armor is designed for maximum protection, making some of it skimpier than others.

The problem isn't with taking historically skimpy armor and putting it into games, the problem is fantasy armor that's intentionally designed to be revealing, with only minor thought given to any sort of protection. (as the GW2 art director put it "it has to be eye-candy")

In any case though, if you are going to talk about how some armor was designed for mobility - yes, it was, and thus being designed for mobility, it offered LESS protection (aka, not as higher armor rating). It would be interesting if skimpy armor in games actually increased your mobility while offering less protection, instead of game designers taking sort of a cheap cop-out and saying "it's got the same armor rating as this really protective looking plate, beacse we said so".

sigh, obviously everyone here just wants to have skimpy armor, and I'm sure there's a thousand good reasons you can come up with to have it. I'm tired of trying to explain why I'd like it to be different. 

Originally posted by GTwander

 

Quiet you!

People are not allowed to make sense in the face of personal prejudices.

Did you just imply that people arguing against skimpy armor (aka me) have a personal prejudice? Please go back and re-read my posts to point out my personal prejudice.

You might also mean "opinion" instead.. in which case I'm sure you like surpressing any opinion that doesn't match your own.

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

Originally posted by GTwander

 

Quiet you!

People are not allowed to make sense in the face of personal prejudices.

Did you just imply that people arguing against skimpy armor (aka me) have a personal prejudice? Please go back and re-read my posts to point out my personal prejudice.

You might also mean "opinion" instead.. in which case I'm sure you like surpressing any opinion that doesn't match your own.

Yes, you have a personal prejudice against that which isn't realistic, when obviously - some of it is.

So, it's just *you*.

I loves boobies!

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

 

Yes, you have a personal prejudice against that which isn't realistic, when obviously - some of it is.

So, it's just *you*.

GW1 Gladiator armor I can pass off as realistic,  to an extent. Nothing screams obvious about it to me, but sure, you must be an armor expert to find that stuff "obviously" realistic.

What about the stuff that's obviously not realistic and extremely skimpy? Is that also just *me*? Or are we ignoring the unrealistic skimpy armor which is so commonly present in games for the sake of your argument?

GW2 Is far from the worse in this respect. It actually has some pretty good armors, but as I said, at least a few of the casters have some ridiculously skimpy outfits. Not that bad, I guess, considering the rest of the fantasy mmo genre.

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

I agree with you that not all armor is designed for maximum protection, making some of it skimpier than others.

The problem isn't with taking historically skimpy armor and putting it into games, the problem is fantasy armor that's intentionally designed to be revealing, with only minor thought given to any sort of protection. (as the GW2 art director put it "it has to be eye-candy")

In any case though, if you are going to talk about how some armor was designed for mobility - yes, it was, and thus being designed for mobility, it offered LESS protection (aka, not as higher armor rating). It would be interesting if skimpy armor in games actually increased your mobility while offering less protection, instead of game designers taking sort of a cheap cop-out and saying "it's got the same armor rating as this really protective looking plate, beacse we said so".

sigh, obviously everyone here just wants to have skimpy armor, and I'm sure there's a thousand good reasons you can come up with to have it. I'm tired of trying to explain why I'd like it to be different. 

Uhm.. wow. Well, now you're starting to talk about a completely different way of handling combat mechanics. As they've already said they want their equipment to be mostly cosmetic, that would be problematic.

Btw this is entertainment. It's art. There is always going to be a balance between form & function. They could just strap a box of steel over a character, but that is hardly interesting. It's not a documentary, so expect some liberties to be taken. After all, even historically accurate armor had liberties. No armor was perfect, and they all had their flaws. Again, these are armor types being made by different cultures, for different purposes. Will all of them be 100% accurate from a blacksmith's perspective? Of course not. However, they do make sense in the context they're in.

Again, it's not like TERA where you have heavily armored thongs on the battlefield. The heavy armor types in this game do cover key areas. And, the most revealing are the gladiator armor types. And yes, if you want to play a character that you feel is 100% historically accurate, roll a warrior, don that gladiator armor, 2 swords (or 2 axes), and make a speed build.

And again.. you are being extremely closed-minded about this. The point isn't that there is some armor that is a bit more revealing. The point is that you are given a choice. Not everyone here does want super skimpy armor. Hell, the only class where I actually prefer to have a slutty outfit with is the mesmer. However, that is a large part of their persona, their ability to charm others and manipulating them. And indeed, the most revealing armor in this game goes to that profession.

The heavy armor for the most part is highly covered. There really are only a couple exceptions. The most revealing armor in the game is the light armor (and surprise! it doesn't offer as much armor!). Again, it's about freedom of choice. Would you honestly want a game that forced you to play skimpy, because everyone else wanted it? It's no different than what you are saying here. It sounds like you want to take away that option, just because you personally don't like it. It's an option, you don't need to use it, and it's certainly nowhere near as bad as TERA, Aion, Lineage II, Lineage I, Age of Conan, Warhammer online, or a slew of other MMOs.

I don't see the point in getting upset over whether or not an armor is "realistic" or not.  I can understand getting upset over whether or not an armor is oversexualized (it is objectification of women), but you have to understand it's a fantasy game.  Nothing about it is suppose to be realistic so armor or even physics not working as they would in real life is acceptable.  Science fiction is suppose to be a more realistic version of the fantasy genre so it's understandable if you were complaining about realism in that genre (and nearly all science fiction does something wrong in that regard, but that's a whole other rant), but fantasy rarely tries and shouldn't have to be "realistic".  It really wouldn't be fantasy if that were the case.