Sexy fantasy armor...

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

Ugh I can't believe we still have to talk about this.

Sexy armour by itself is neutral. Sexy armour when only put on women and not on men and the women being posed all sexxay all the time ignoring internal consistency in the game is stupid.

There is nothing wrong with sexy. There is something wrong with a game culture that demands all females be sexy but men can be whatever.
You wanna make a game that features male and female elves fighting in their underwear? Great. Sign me up.

But don't just do it to one gender and pretend you can't possibly see why anyone would have a problem with that.

Dammit just give me some more shirtless sexy boys and we'll call it even, kay?

Just out of question, what do you think about Kill la Kill in that regard? Both males and females have a lot of fanservice moments and Trigger tried (to varying degrees of sucess) in integrating the fanservice into the plot?

 

[Phasmal]

Just out of question, what do you think about Kill la Kill in that regard? Both males and females have a lot of fanservice moments and Trigger tried (to varying degrees of sucess) in integrating the fanservice into the plot?

Hold up, I've only seen the female characters of KLK.

Googling...

I found one picture of a guy with no shirt on?

Frankly, I don't know enough about KLK to comment, but from what I've heard, pretty much all the characters ditch clothes at some point?

Which I suppose would put it in the `fairly consistent on both genders` category, if that's true.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

Just out of question, what do you think about Kill la Kill in that regard? Both males and females have a lot of fanservice moments and Trigger tried (to varying degrees of sucess) in integrating the fanservice into the plot?

Hold up, I've only seen the female characters of KLK.

Googling...

I found one picture of a guy with no shirt on?

Frankly, I don't know enough about KLK to comment, but from what I've heard, pretty much all the characters ditch clothes at some point?

Which I suppose would put it in the `fairly consistent on both genders` category, if that's true.

Look up "Nudist Beach" and just look at the uniforms (or rather lack of) that they wear

You will probably laugh

 

[sageoftruth]

I actually brought these discussions up with my aunt last weekend (I'll wait until you're done laughing). She's definitely a feminist, but when I brought up female characters in games and discussed the argument as to whether a sexy strong-willed character is a "Piece of eye candy for the guys" or a "Strong willed, independent woman who doesn't care how she dresses" (I didn't use examples, so there's no obvious answer to this one), she responded that this was more a matter of stereotypes rather than sexism.
Unfortunately, we had to cut it short due to some family events, but I hope to continue it later. Still, I think we can all agree that games are more engaging when they flesh their characters out more regardless of gender, provided it doesn't distract them from making a game with good mechanics and design.
I'm seeing her again this week. I'll try to keep you posted if I learn anything new.

 

[Phasmal]

Look up "Nudist Beach" and just look at the uniforms (or rather lack of) that they wear

You will probably laugh

Ah, lol.

Yeah, I'd say that doesn't violate it's own internal consistency.

And really, that's all I ask for. You wanna pose people sexy, pose everyone sexy. Want bikini armour? Everyone should have it. Makes sense to me.

 

[jackpipsam]

If it's not practical and real normal woman wouldn't wear it.
Then I don't like it.

It just feels sleazy, I feel developers are just trying to pander to me too much.

 

[Albino Boo]

Extrem sexaul violence was a stock in trade in the arena. You could see women being raped by specially trained animals, followed by the naked crucifiction of some woman and then setting bears on them and to finish off, the rape and execution of pre-pubescent girls. All done in carnival atmosphere, you could place bets on which naked woman the bear would kill first or laugh at the woman being raped by a giraffe.

Er, do you have a citation for that? Because I'd not heard that. Exceedingly nasty executions and topless gladiatrices, yes, but not rape, or animal rape.

Wouldn't be that much of a surprise, though, I'd just not heard of it.

On the use of animals, there is a first hand account by Juvenal during the reign of Domitian. There are plenty of secondary sources, such as the Golden Ass, mosaics and writers citing works now lost. It does not appear to be an everyday occurrence but something that was used on special occasions.

The rape and execution of pre-pubescent girls was common place and regarded as unremarkable. The killing of virgin was an offence against the gods and anyone involved would be ritually polluted. This concept of ritual pollution dates back to bronze age Greece and was removed by pouring the blood of pig over oneself. The Roman state being much larger than Bronze age city meant the use of pigs blood was not possible for the entire Roman hierarchy, so the Romans, being of practical turn of mind, used rape to solve the problem.

 

[Thaluikhain]

On the use of animals, there is a first hand account by Juvenal during the reign of Domitian. There are plenty of secondary sources, such as the Golden Ass, mosaics and writers citing works now lost. It does not appear to be an everyday occurrence but something that was used on special occasions.

Ah, ok, google says you are right.

EDIT: Actually, not so sure now. A lot of people mention it, but are vague about the sources, might be a later myth attributed to the arenas when people got bore with hearing about people being punished with ordinary stuff like being eaten alive or crucified.

The rape and execution of pre-pubescent girls was common place and regarded as unremarkable. The killing of virgin was an offence against the gods and anyone involved would be ritually polluted. This concept of ritual pollution dates back to bronze age Greece and was removed by pouring the blood of pig over oneself. The Roman state being much larger than Bronze age city meant the use of pigs blood was not possible for the entire Roman hierarchy, so the Romans, being of practical turn of mind, used rape to solve the problem.

Fair enough, I just didn't know this was done as a spectacle.

 

[mecegirl]

I think the truly fascinating thing about this thread is the amount of people who will dismiss 'internal consistency' on the grounds of 'magic isn't realistic'. The Secret World had armour stats generated entirely from invisible talismans, while the visual outfit was entirely down to the player's aesthetic choices. I don't remember many, if any, sexualised clothing sets for female characters despite it being modern clothing and there being an in-universe reason why armour is unnecessary.
That's all it would take to justify most of this. In Skyrim, you are a being who draws power from the souls of dragons. As you level up, you become tougher, and the fact is you become on par with at least a demigod by the time you can take a direct hit from a giant. That's why that is. Beyond that, you're gonna find armour pretty useful.

At least one opinion in this thread is that internal consistency has no bearing on immersion, and that's a frankly bizarre stance to take. If the internal consistency breaks, so too does the immersion.

Who is even making this armour? For every set of chainmail bikinis, somebody has painstakingly crafted those links. This means there's a standard within the game's world where blacksmiths universally decided that women don't want practical armour.

"Excuse me sir, can I get some of that plate mail?"
"Men only."
"I don't understand - it looks like it'd fit."
"Men only."
"Please?"
"Chainmail bikini?"
"Platemail cuirass."
"Men only."

No no. You see all female adventurers are just the strong sexy independent type. They don't need no man to make their armor. They make their own. They also all have the exact same taste in clothing...All of them!

Either that or this...

Spoiler

 

[Thaluikhain]

If it's not practical and real normal woman wouldn't wear it.
Then I don't like it.

It just feels sleazy, I feel developers are just trying to pander to me too much.

Eh, a lot of clothes in fantasy are things "normal" women wouldn't wear...except maybe Lady Gaga.

Doesn't have to be sleazy for that, though.

 

[Erttheking]

and do they ever give a reason why someone can survive and shrug off lightning bolts, or other magical spells that would destroy entire buildings (or even cities) as nothing more than an annoyance? Or being attacked by a giant? Why "leveling up" allows you to face creatures and opponents that would realistically be impossible for your character to defeat no matter how hard s/he trained? Your whole argument comes down to realism, but realism doesnt fly in a fantasy setting, or else it WOULDNT BE A FANTASY SETTING.

Hell, we have games in which people use swords and guns (like modern guns, not muskets) and the two are just as effective as each other and they never explained it.

Explaining why the fantasy setting is that way is kinda rare. Attack on Titan explain why cannons and guns are not effective against titans, but once again that kind of explanation is rare.

Leveling up? Lightning bolts? That has jack all to do with a fantasy setting. That's because it's a video game. And no, it isn't about realism. Game of Thrones has Dragons, Giants, frost zombies and blood magic, but people still wear full body practical armor. Why? Because George Martin wants people to take the story seriously and didn't say, "welp, I wrote a dragon now, I don't have to stick to any kind of consistency to the serious tone of my story. I can write women running around in chaimail bikinis despite the fact it would make about as much sense as female soldiers being deployed to the front lines in WW I in lingerie." And really I don't get the whole "Oh, it's fantasy, it doesn't have to be realistic" Fantasy is grounded in reality, no matter how much you deny it. There's gravity, people need to eat, the sun goes down every night, and being decapitated kills you. The whole point of fantasy is that it is grounded with the exception of a few points that the author points out because that makes it believable. In Lord of the Rings, Aragon could not just out of nowhere fly towards Mt. Doom and kill Sauron with his laser vision because "It's fantasy" and Eowyn would not put on a bikini while fighting the Witch King, it's completely missing the point of what the story is supposed to be like. To quote Linkara improperly "Willing suspension doesn't mean all logic goes out the window, it just means I believe that Superman can fly and the Flash can run really fast. It doesn't mean I'll just buy everything thrown at me, that's asking me to not think". So a question, if women don't have to wear armor because "It's fantasy" then how come men wear armor? Because if armor is so unnecessary, how come they even bother wearing it?

It's simple, it's a video game. Guns have more range while melee weapons do more damage. It's called balance. This has nothing to do with realism and everything to do with the tools that developers have to work with to make games balanced. If guns were realistic, knives would never be used in games.

 

[SUPA FRANKY]

It depends on the Universe that is presented I guess. But I don't see the point in policing people's imagination. besides, it's not like there is actually that many Sexy Bikini Armor, it's mostly niche barring some.

 

[Ryotknife]

and do they ever give a reason why someone can survive and shrug off lightning bolts, or other magical spells that would destroy entire buildings (or even cities) as nothing more than an annoyance? Or being attacked by a giant? Why "leveling up" allows you to face creatures and opponents that would realistically be impossible for your character to defeat no matter how hard s/he trained? Your whole argument comes down to realism, but realism doesnt fly in a fantasy setting, or else it WOULDNT BE A FANTASY SETTING.

Hell, we have games in which people use swords and guns (like modern guns, not muskets) and the two are just as effective as each other and they never explained it.

Explaining why the fantasy setting is that way is kinda rare. Attack on Titan explain why cannons and guns are not effective against titans, but once again that kind of explanation is rare.

Leveling up? Lightning bolts? That has jack all to do with a fantasy setting. That's because it's a video game. And no, it isn't about realism. Game of Thrones has Dragons, Giants, frost zombies and blood magic, but people still wear full body practical armor. Why? Because George Martin wants people to take the story seriously and didn't say, "welp, I wrote a dragon now, I don't have to stick to any kind of consistency to the serious tone of my story. I can write women running around in chaimail bikinis despite the fact it would make about as much sense as female soldiers being deployed to the front lines in WW I in lingerie." And really I don't get the whole "Oh, it's fantasy, it doesn't have to be realistic" Fantasy is grounded in reality, no matter how much you deny it. There's gravity, people need to eat, the sun goes down every night, and being decapitated kills you. The whole point of fantasy is that it is grounded with the exception of a few points that the author points out because that makes it believable. In Lord of the Rings, Aragon could not just out of nowhere fly towards Mt. Doom and kill Sauron with his laser vision because "It's fantasy" and Eowyn would not put on a bikini while fighting the Witch King, it's completely missing the point of what the story is supposed to be like. To quote Linkara improperly "Willing suspension doesn't mean all logic goes out the window, it just means I believe that Superman can fly and the Flash can run really fast. It doesn't mean I'll just buy everything thrown at me, that's asking me to not think". So a question, if women don't have to wear armor because "It's fantasy" then how come men wear armor? Because if armor is so unnecessary, how come they even bother wearing it?

It's simple, it's a video game. Guns have more range while melee weapons do more damage. It's called balance. This has nothing to do with realism and everything to do with the tools that developers have to work with to make games balanced. If guns were realistic, knives would never be used in games.

being able to create energy or mass out of nothing =/= grounded in reality. That alone basically screws up a lot of our knowledge about the natural world and science.

And thank you for making my point for me. Balance for the sake of enjoying the game. They add chainmail bikinis because some people enjoy chainmail bikinis. Its as simple of a reason as to why swords are as powerful (in some cases more powerful) than guns.

I'm getting a serious "stop liking what i dont like" vibe here.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I'm getting a serious "stop liking what i dont like" vibe here.

People can like whatever they want. And nobody is blaming them for that. They should just admit to what they're liking, and why. And stop trying to justify their preferences with all sorts of bonkers reasons why those skimpy armours they love are in fact not less "realistic" at all.

Because clearly the existence of magic or dragons means that plate mail doesn't protect women from getting stabbed in the stomach with a dagger anymore. Only men.

 

[Ryotknife]

I'm getting a serious "stop liking what i dont like" vibe here.

People can like whatever they want. And nobody is blaming them for that. They should just admit to what they're liking, and why. And stop trying to justify their preferences with all sorts of bonkers reasons why those skimpy armours they love are in fact not less "realistic" at all.

Because clearly the existence of magic or dragons means that plate mail doesn't protect women from getting stabbed in the stomach with a dagger anymore. Only men.

it seems like people ARE blaming them for their preferences and implying their preferences are causing them to not be able to enjoy whatever.

 

[Frankster]

snap

There's a difference between Fantasy and full on Calvin Ball where you're just making it all up as you're going along ya know? If Aragon was said to have laser vision on account of descending from some ancient king cursed/gifted with such a gift or was given the power of flight (as far as I understand he still wouldn't have been able to fly to mt doom any easier then if he had gone on the back of a giant eagle anyways) at the start I don't think anyone of us would have batted an eyelid if it got established that this specific fantasy universe allowed for it.

How much a fantasy might be grounded in reality is dependent on a case by case basis, not all universes will follow the same laws.

Also leveling up is a trope that isn't just limited to videogames, a character getting progressively stronger and learning new fantastical abilities and becoming overall stronger and faster even though IRL would be kinda hard to improve beyond a certain physical peak is a trope that you can find outside gaming, at the very least I know of mangas/anime that integrate that idea into the story.

In the specific case of "sexy" armor and under equipped armor in general, in a universe where you can enchant clothing so they give you the exact same protection (in fact this is what I assume in RPGS and the like when you have a bunch of characters in various states of armor yet no in game difference between them, and not just bikini armor either) then it doesn't really break the laws of internal consistency or suspension of disbelief anymore then any other fantastical element, or at the very least you have to concede that this is largely in the eye of the beholder.

I mean jeez, have you played the kinda of MMOS that have this and been all like "Cat people? Check. Characters levelling up and growing in power so a NAKED lvl99 can beat up a fully geared lvl10? check. Armor and weapon effectiveness having little to do with their appearance? Check. WTF SOMEONE ISNT WEARING ARMOR THAT WORKS IRL OMG MY IMMERSION AAAH!"

Also it's funny you quoted Linkara, because I happen to find superheroes fighting in tights and skimpy clothing to be more believable then Superman and his sheer godliness, but that's just me Just goes to show how people have very different ideas of what breaks a setting.

Heck want an example of something thatbreaks MY immersion more then bikini armor? Evil characters saying they will kill someone for entire games, finally capture the character, and instead of killing them imprison them on a poorly defended prison ship to be rescued by the protagonist (talking about starcraft 2 since just played campaign recently, and specifically mengks/raynor, wtf mengsk? You could have friggin won if you just killed the hero when you had the fucking chance like you said you would AAAAAARGH MY IMMERSION).

"So a question, if women don't have to wear armor because "It's fantasy" then how come men wear armor? Because if armor is so unnecessary, how come they even bother wearing it?"
Silly outdated sexist reasons and gender norms imo. Personally I'd wish for there to be more naked buff dudes in settings where there is bikini armor stuff because I damn well agree that if we're going for that kinda fantasy, only fair girls get eye candy aswell. Settings where you have dudes all armored and the ladies wearing nothing is kinda jarring. But I really got no prob when both genders are equally in a state of undress, so by itself a mankini/bikini armor isn't automatically a bad thing, this is bloody fantasy after all, let's fantasize!

 

[Erttheking]

and do they ever give a reason why someone can survive and shrug off lightning bolts, or other magical spells that would destroy entire buildings (or even cities) as nothing more than an annoyance? Or being attacked by a giant? Why "leveling up" allows you to face creatures and opponents that would realistically be impossible for your character to defeat no matter how hard s/he trained? Your whole argument comes down to realism, but realism doesnt fly in a fantasy setting, or else it WOULDNT BE A FANTASY SETTING.

Hell, we have games in which people use swords and guns (like modern guns, not muskets) and the two are just as effective as each other and they never explained it.

Explaining why the fantasy setting is that way is kinda rare. Attack on Titan explain why cannons and guns are not effective against titans, but once again that kind of explanation is rare.

Leveling up? Lightning bolts? That has jack all to do with a fantasy setting. That's because it's a video game. And no, it isn't about realism. Game of Thrones has Dragons, Giants, frost zombies and blood magic, but people still wear full body practical armor. Why? Because George Martin wants people to take the story seriously and didn't say, "welp, I wrote a dragon now, I don't have to stick to any kind of consistency to the serious tone of my story. I can write women running around in chaimail bikinis despite the fact it would make about as much sense as female soldiers being deployed to the front lines in WW I in lingerie." And really I don't get the whole "Oh, it's fantasy, it doesn't have to be realistic" Fantasy is grounded in reality, no matter how much you deny it. There's gravity, people need to eat, the sun goes down every night, and being decapitated kills you. The whole point of fantasy is that it is grounded with the exception of a few points that the author points out because that makes it believable. In Lord of the Rings, Aragon could not just out of nowhere fly towards Mt. Doom and kill Sauron with his laser vision because "It's fantasy" and Eowyn would not put on a bikini while fighting the Witch King, it's completely missing the point of what the story is supposed to be like. To quote Linkara improperly "Willing suspension doesn't mean all logic goes out the window, it just means I believe that Superman can fly and the Flash can run really fast. It doesn't mean I'll just buy everything thrown at me, that's asking me to not think". So a question, if women don't have to wear armor because "It's fantasy" then how come men wear armor? Because if armor is so unnecessary, how come they even bother wearing it?

It's simple, it's a video game. Guns have more range while melee weapons do more damage. It's called balance. This has nothing to do with realism and everything to do with the tools that developers have to work with to make games balanced. If guns were realistic, knives would never be used in games.

being able to create energy or mass out of nothing =/= grounded in reality. That alone basically screws up a lot of our knowledge about the natural world and science.

And thank you for making my point for me. Balance for the sake of enjoying the game. They add chainmail bikinis because some people enjoy chainmail bikinis. Its as simple of a reason as to why swords are as powerful (in some cases more powerful) than guns.

I'm getting a serious "stop liking what i dont like" vibe here.

You're getting a strong stop liking what I don't like vibe? I'm getting a strong strawman argument vibe.

How many times do we have to say this? This is NOT about realism! It is about internal consistency. The fact that plate armor is worn by men and chainmail bikinis are worn by women is not consistent. Either make it so that both genders are in full plate armor or both genders run around in metal thongs. Don't give me the one in skimpy armor that is designed purely to titillate and try and pull a fast one on me by saying "it's fantasy". If you can't keep consistency in your world, then you are a god damn awful story teller! In Game of Thrones men and women wear plate armor, it is internally consistent and I like it. In Loren the Amazon Princess, men and women run around in metal thongs, it is consistent and I like it. In Dragon Age, what is basically a metal bikini is considered very good female armor while men get full plate armor as good armor. I like the game, but I hate that part of it It's laziness, pure and simple.

I don't think that you quite got my points with balance. I was talking about balance from a GAMEPLAY experience. Gameplay mechanics. Guns require shooting from a distance, while blades require getting close to your enemy. There is no gameplay mechanic difference from having your armor being plate armor or chainmail bikini, it's purely visual. In other words, you completely missed the point of my argument. Not to mention this argument of yours falls flat on its back when it takes place outside of video games.

I can't help but notice that you seem to be avoiding people throwing the "it's not about realism" argument at you and you constantly seem to be ignoring it. Please stop.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I'm getting a serious "stop liking what i dont like" vibe here.

People can like whatever they want. And nobody is blaming them for that. They should just admit to what they're liking, and why. And stop trying to justify their preferences with all sorts of bonkers reasons why those skimpy armours they love are in fact not less "realistic" at all.

Because clearly the existence of magic or dragons means that plate mail doesn't protect women from getting stabbed in the stomach with a dagger anymore. Only men.

it seems like people ARE blaming them for their preferences and implying their preferences are causing them to not be able to enjoy whatever.

Oh well, their preferences being catered to are causing me as well to not enjoy games as much as I otherwise would. But that's about the same for any game feature that other people happen to like but I do not, so I'm not sure if "blaming" is the right expression here.

Although admittedly this particular question is a bit different, because it is not just any feature, but we're touching a bit upon questions of inclusivity, sexism, gender equality, social responsibility and so on here.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

But that's just it. If it was established as part of the universe, it would be internally consistent.

This is very true. Like I said, Loren the Amazon Princess has bit titted women running around in their underwear...and it also has sexy men running around in their underwear. Therefore it is consistent. (Also there's a Gandalf guy...huh)

True, but they don't really do it the same way video games do, they have the character getting better by practicing the skill they want to get better at, usually over long periods of time. As opposed to Fallout where you get better at lockpicking after shooting your hundredth Raider in the head.

I'd be perfectly ok with that, but it drives me up the wall that if people could do that then neither gender would bother with armor. My main gripe with this is that people tend to stick women in sexy armor while men get full plate armor. Either make both sexy or neither sexy.

Well there's a difference between developers designing a sexy character and player shenanigans. Gaming wouldn't be half as fun without the latter.

That's probably because Superman is a little too OP. Can see where you're coming from there.

Yup. That is pretty bad writing.

It seems like we're on the same page. In that case, you may want to check out Loren the Amazon Princess on steam. It goes for just that.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

Here's the bottom line - people want "internal consistency" right? That will happen as soon as the audience that is PLAYING these kinds of games become "consistent".
Secondly, sexy armour being forced onto females (while not on males) in fantasy games is nowhere near as prevalent as people are making them out to be. This whole thread so far one giant exaggeration trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

I somehow doubt that. I can't remember having ever encountered such an opinion here.

Then you shouldn't have responded.

You seem the thing with putting sexy armours in otherwise pretty grounded, 'realistic' worlds is that game designers are willing to violate internal consistency just for the sake of tititilation, and internal consistency is a quality of any virtual world (apart from the totally absurd ones anyway).

Which games and which designers? Please list a few examples so I can relate to what you're talking about.

Oh, and how generous of you to proclaim that you'd be fine if there were games that don't cater to your preferences in this regard. Not that this is a pretty easy thing to say when you belong to the group that is catered to ALL THE TIME.

How generous of me indeed. But such is reality, I can't change it.

The existence of magic doesn't make the world unbelievable in any other regard. But yea other posters before me have already argued how absurd such a statement is, no need for me to do the same. Whatever fantastical elements there might be in some fantasy world, we still expect the world to operate believable within its own set of rules.

And for what it's worth, many people still believe in magic, and many more did in earlier times. And all those monsters and undeads and vampires and what not you see in fantasy games, they're often based on creatures that people believed to be real too. In this sense, many fantasy games are much more grounded than you believe them to be.


Yea, only 1% of games from only two countries pander specifically to "men" (well, boys), and all other games don't... sure... whatever you believe buddy.

You seem to be complaining about a rather large number of games that don't exist. It would REALLY help if people listed some examples of games where such a thing is still prevalent.

Oh well, their preferences being catered to are causing me as well to not enjoy games as much as I otherwise would.

Which games?