Support NeoGAF

[Valkerionseven]

Should have gone the Vagrant Story route and given most of the males assless pants. Now that was a good design (or most people did not realize it)

All in all though I do side on its simply a badly designed look. The boots and gauntlets clearly look like a part of a larger set which is not there. It clashes so much with the rest of the non armored outfit/character its odd. Its like looking at a character in a game where you can wear individual items but have not completed the set. Personally think either lose the heavy armor arms and legs and go for a streamlined look as a whole or go full armor, not half and half. It looks like two different designs in one picture. Bikini armor at least looks like a full set where it was made to go together, here it does not.

Thats my gripe anyway :/

 

[SolidSnakex]

That kind of response is subjective and if it makes them uncomfortable, then they shouldn't ever have to deal with it. Better to kill it now before it discomfits more people.

Gaming should be inclusive to all users. Not repellent.

That seems like a very dangerous can of worms to open.

 

[Lime]

I see no shorsighted arguments on that shity bingo car. All I see is someone trying to shut down all arguments that he/she does not want to hear.

I mean, yeah, this really works to show those people who have an opinion which is the exact same as yours EXACTLY how much you agree with them!

Look, there is an important issue here. The bingo card argument has nothing to do with female stereotyping. Literally nothing. It is instead about the social costs of NOT agreeing with the opinion of those who made the image in the first place. It's an in joke. It is NEVER going to convince anyone, because it is the argumentative equivalent of patting your friends on the back and chuckling.

Please, if you want people to take you seriously, actually come up with a logical argument that isn't "But all your arguments are completely illogical." That doesn't do anything but further peoples beliefs that YOU are wrong.

http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/78944172315/female-armor-rhetoric-bingo

A week after successfully publishing the Female Armor Bingo, I present to you its spin-off: Female Armor Rhetoric Bingo!

This card refers to the defenses/apologia that’s used against the critique of skimpy female warrior outfits. I did my best to collect the most pervasive arguments used to justify bikini armors and similar costumes.

Keep in mind that actual arguments, depending on a given discussion, may be worded a bit differently, but if the general idea is the same, you can cross the relating square:

"Men are sexualized too!"
No, they are not, especially when it comes to battle wear. Nothing is better example of male character serving as power fantasy than putting him in bulky armor while his equally strong female peers run around half-naked.

"She would look too manly in a regular armor!"
What about “She would look actually protected in a normal armor”?
Also (unless it has a giant codpiece), a regular armor is not masculine be default, we’re just taught to associate it with men.
Also also, there are many ways to make armor feminine, yet fully protective.

"This outfit is normal for her culture/climate!"
Talking about made-up culture that this made-up character is from? It’s not like the creators just… created this fictional culture and located it in a hot climate to suit their (and/or their audiences) preferences to excuse a silly outfit, riiight?
Also, when she’s not in her homeland’s climate, why wouldn’t she dress more appropriately for the weather?

"Male barbarians also fight half-naked!"
Yeah, they do. Funny how their half-nudity looks so much more comfortable and practical than that of lady barbarians.
If only lady barbarians could also fight wearing only loincloths instead of fur bikinis…

"Don’t expect fiction to be realistic!"
I don’t. But I expect it to be consistent.

"It helps with her agility!"
(Born from the double-standard belief that male characters are supposed to be strong, while female ones should be agile.)
Oh yeah, a chafing, pinching chainmail bikini or floppy underboob or that spiky variation of Borat’s mankini would be SO COMFORTABLE and non-restricting compared to a leotard (or anything made from actual fabric)… Totally!

"She CHOSE to dress like that!"
Let me quote rheiders:

A strong female character is still a character—she has no agency, she has no choice. Everything about her appearance and actions is dictated by her creator. It is only through good storytelling and character writing that we begin to believe the character is alive and possessing of free will, but that’s just an illusion. SHE IS STILL JUST A CHARACTER, created by someone else.

And unless the character is supposed to be a suicidal dumbass, she wouldn’t choose to dress like that for combat.

"Her strength comes from uncovered skin!"
Also known as “There’s A GOOD REASON for her to be almost nude!”.
If her powers come from being exposed… Why doesn’t she run around naked? Oh, I get it, she’s too decent for that!
Then why the minimal outfit she chose looks so uncomfortable and/or defies physics? Is there a special reason for that too?

"It’s (just) fantasy/sci-fi! Magic/science protects her!"
Okay, I can buy that. Does the magic/science is also what holds her improbable bikini in one place?
And if it protects her male peer in the same way, how come his outfit isn’t equally “light-weight”?

"It’s stylized!"
The cheapest excuse for any type of bad artwork.
"Style" itself does not explain anything! A well-designed style is ought to be consistent. It’s not a good style when there’s obvious double standard at work.

"Women are weak, so they need light armor!"
Ignoring for a second how sexist and ridiculous it is to suggest that women are naturally that much weaker than men… LIGHT ARMOR EXISTS. There are numerous types of it. And it can (and should be) fully-covering!
Search for leather armor or gambeson and stop suggesting it’s better to expose a character’s torso than to dress them in something not made of metal.

"Girls are SUPPOSED to look sexy!"
So much wrong with it I don’t even know where to start.
It brings half of the population to one objectifying function.
It implies “sexy” has one fixed meaning.
It implies an outfit can’t be sexy appealing and functional at the same time.
It implies there are no other times during which a warrior character can focus on being sexy (as in, times outside of battle).
TL; DR: There is nothing girls or women are ‘supposed’ to be!

"That’s the best way of marketing to men!"
A.K.A. “Sex sells!”
Why is this even used as an excuse?
Not only it implies that there are no women or homosexual/asexual men in the audience, but also that straight men are by definition sex-obsessed morons who can’t say no to a patch of female skin showing. An argument that insults every possible group at once!

„She was designed in a country where sexualization is cultural!”
(This one usually refers to Japan or Korea)
As much as respecting cultural differences is important, it really does not excuse objectifying half of the world’s population. It just exposes that there might be some deeply-ingrained problem among any nation that creates such things as part of their culture.

„Stop complaining and make it yourself!”
A.K.A. “If you don’t like how women are represented games/comics/movies then go and create one yourself!”
Because instead of being critical of faulty content creators everyone should become a content creator themselves!
It’s not like making a game/comic/movie takes TONS of time, money and effort… or that even in the era of crowdfunding through Kickstarter indie projects still don’t reach the same audiences as big studio productions.
Creating things is so easy and we don’t see better representation just because we’re too lazy to take care of it ourselves, RIIIGHT?!

"It suits her fighting style!"
Are the inevitable nip-slips part of her fighting style? And what kind of martial art is suited for high heels and metal bikinis?

"She embraced her sexuality! She’s empowered!"
A phrase almost inseparable from the Strong Independent Woman archetype.
It’s not a bad idea to create a female character that consciously takes advantage of her sexuality and feels empowered by that… But insisting that being sexual is the only way to make women empowered is restricting, misogynistic and unoriginal.
And making every female character like that takes any power from the idea. It then becomes just a very obvious excuse to have as many “sexy” women as possible without feeling guilty about it.

„There’s nothing wrong with showing a bit of skin!”
MOST DEFINITELY! There is nothing inherently wrong about nudity or partial nudity. Just keep in mind that in context of a battle it makes no sense to expose random parts one’s body!
There are actually ways of fighting topless that do make sense! Take notes!

„Why do you even care? It’s just for fun!”
A.K.A. “Don’t take everything so seriously!” or “Stop making everything about feminism!”
Dunno why I care, probably because media actually affects people and their opinions?
Because women are not catered with fanservice in the same way as (straight) men are?
Because women are actively excluded from many forms of entertainment and thus not allowed to have same kind of fun as men?
If we’re at it, why do you care so much to prove me wrong?

"Art shouldn’t be censored!"
A.K.A. “You’re banning creativity!” or “You should not criticize artist’s choice!” or “First Amendment!”
Asking for logical and respectful designs is not censorship. And simply criticizing art is not against the freedom of expression, quite the opposite. By giving constructive criticism to a piece of art, I’m exercising my own freedom of speech.
It’s also not that artsy or creative anymore when overtly objectifying outfits are considered a norm in popular media.

"She defeats her enemies through distraction!"
Let’s just hope all of her enemies are horny idiots who loose their focus when a bit of female body is in sight. Or that she doesn’t distract her male friends in the same way.
Otherwise…

„She’s indestructible! She doesn’t need any protection!”
Fair enough. Does it mean the outfit is also not uncomfortable or embarrassing to her? Or that this costume can defy any laws of physics? Being indestructible, doesn’t she feel cold or chafed?
Wouldn’t it make more sense for her to fight naked?

„You want every woman to be covered from head to toe!”
Well, only if every man is covered in the same way. Other than that, I just expect logic and consistency from all the designs.

„She’s so badass that she needs no armor!”
She’s also so badass that she consciously chose outfit as impractical and uncomfortable as possible, just to prove how badass she is by wearing it!
It’s not like she could just go topless, like her equally badass male peers.

„Great story makes up for those ridiculous designs!”
A.K.A. “She has a great personally, so it doesn’t matter how she looks!”
So we’re not expecting visual media to be holistic anymore?
The art and story are allowed to contradict each other for no good reason?
The audience’s immersion is not broken when a dramatic story clashes with silly visuals? Willing suspension of disbelief has no limits from now on?
Good to learn! Guess I need to forget everything I learned about storytelling theory.

 

[SkeptiMism]

I see no shorsighted arguments on that shity bingo car. All I see is someone trying to shut down all arguments that he/she does not want to hear.

Are you serious?

I agree with veloxStrix that it shouldn't be used because while it's very true on a lot of points (arguable on some), it doesn't help the cause at all, but instead it just puts the person on defensive.

But to say there are no short sighted arguments at all..? What..?

 

[Giever]

I think the intent of the post went over your head. So...you've got that going for you.

In these kinds of discussions it would probably be better to just say what you mean, or think, than go for some overly rhetorical point, or at least put a disclaimer.

It isn't always clear when someone is being sarcastic, or trying to lead someone into a certain thought with points that they don't actually mean, especially if one isn't following the whole context of the conversation. You may end up further solidifying views of people that you actively disagree with.

 

[Kinsei]

Are you serious?

I agree with veloxStrix that it shouldn't be used because while it's very true on a lot of points (arguable on some), it doesn't help the cause at all, but instead it just puts the person on defensive.

But to say there are no short sighted arguments at all..? What..?

At this point anything you say will put them on the defensive. There's no sense in tone policing anymore.

 

[Almighty]

As I have argued before bikini armor is shit no matter what gender is wearing it. Mostly because it is so stupid when you think about it. "I will go into battle only protecting my arms and legs. After all that is where all my vital organs are."

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I don't really buy the argument that we need to reach some parity between bad sexy male designs and bad sexy female designs before we can criticize the design. A bad design is a bad design, and this one (sexy or not) in my opinion is a bad design.

 

[Mister Chippy]

The same could be same of action movies that feature scantily clad women and gratuitous sex scenes. These are movies that are targeted toward men. There are also other movies like Taken that basically feature neither, and are more welcoming to women (I guess). It's always going to be a variety of products available within the industry.

You're exactly right. Action movies as a whole should be accessible towards all action fans, not just those attracted to women. Lesbian porn is targeted directly to men, Senran Kagura is targeted to men, both those are exlusively for people who are attracted to women and offer almost nothing for people who aren't. There are some action movies that basically cater only to men as well, such as the Fast and the Furious. The problem isn't that movies or games targeted towards one gender exist, the problem is when an entire genre gets targeted towards a specific sexual preference. There isn't any inherent reason why action films should be exclusively targeted towards people who like women and the fact that some studios understand this and try to add in some variety is a good thing.

This issue only arises when a genre starts narrowing it's focus on one group to the detriment of other groups that should also be able to enjoy the genre just as well as the first, causing the variety of things available to be lost. I honestly don't think the existence of sexy costumes in games is a problem at all, only that we need to have more variety in who gets made sexy so people stop feeling left out.

 

[Shouta]

I don't play games to get horny



You can't? Why not? Its fantasy, right?

I mean, this is especially true when in reality some people actually DO enjoy being hit (remember, there is no such thing as a universal reinforcer or punishment).

So applying this logic to fantasy, maybe they are highly reinforced by the feeling of hits on their skin and wear bikini armor.

Hey, why not.

Let me put it this way. If you want to feel pain in battle, why even wear bikini armor? You could just go into battle with plain clothes. The fact that someone would wear bikini armor means they want some sort of protection. In that case, it does not provide much to the user at all. That's why it doesn't make sense.

 

[Astral/H3X]

That armor is entirely too busy.

Vaan was good. This... Its all over the place. Put the man in a skin tight suit if you must, but damn at least make it look good.

 

[Parakeetman]

That image of a female mechanic may be more common with folks but it isn't the only image of a female mechanic that can exist. I don't really find that something is wrong because we expect it to be this way a very compelling argument, personally. I've seen the underlying argument against bikini armor to be that it's foregoing practicality for sexiness which makes sense. Armor serves to defend yourself against attacks and bikini armor really doesn't in that case because of exposed skin.

In the case of Cidney's design, I don't think that the practicality argument holds up as well as it does for bikini armor. There's an element of necessity in armor because of its function. That doesn't exist in the case of a mechanic, I think. The mechanic's clothing serves as a way to avoid getting dirty while doing the work. If the mechanic doesn't mind getting dirty then do they need that full outfit? There are perhaps other reasons for it but all the safety reasons I can think of can be mitigated by not doing work on a vehicle during certain situations.

The most obvious reasons for the standard mechanic outfit vs what Bazztek points out are external to the situation of the mechanic and the car, to me anyway. They're a business and they're in public. Professional mechanics are going to be seen by people and they represent their employer. So they need to dress for that occasion.

Mind you, I actually don't like Cidney's design either. It veers far too much into sexy territory than necessary. I've seen a similar design in other JRPGs that work better overall. Maggie from Growlanser IV is a mechanic and scientist supporting the team and has a similar concept behind it.

This is a little more practical than Cidney's design but still in the sexy territory. There are a bunch of details Urushihara forgot to account for, like that suit is not going to zip up all the way with the material shown, but the concept is there, lol.

One thing that we still do not know about Cidney's character is if she actually has the hots for someone in the "boyband" group hence the possibility of why she has her top like that in order to gain said persons attention within the story.

As stupid as it may sound, would not rule it out as a possibility.

 

[SeanR1221]

Let me put it this way. If you want to feel pain in battle, why even wear bikini armor? You could just go into battle with plain clothes. The fact that someone would wear bikini armor means they want some sort of protection. In that case, it does not provide much to the user at all. That's why it doesn't make sense.

Maybe they only like certain parts of their body hit.

I just don't buy the "it's practical for armor but let's throw the argument out for the mechanic" argument.

 

[SkeptiMism]

At this point anything you say will put them on the defensive. There's no sense in tone policing anymore.

If you don't bother to explain why an argument is wrong, then you shouldn't enter a discussion at all. If the person in that case gets on defensive and ignores your argument, then its his bad. If you don't explain why the person is wrong but just say they're wrong, then it's your bad.
(Talking generally, not about this case anymore as Lime posted a slightly better explanation.)

 

[Metroidvania]

At this point anything you say will put them on the defensive. There's no sense in tone policing anymore.

If you place people into 'us' or 'them', you're putting everyone of 'them' into a giant hivemind which assumes that you're never going to be able to reach that second group.

Hypothetically, if you really believe that you're not going to reach 'them' through being polite, is shocking them/shaming them going to work any better? And in that case, why even enter the argument in the first place?

edit: Beat, kinda.

One thing that we still do not know about Cidney's character is if she actually has the hots for someone in the "boyband" group hence the possibility of why she has her top like that in order to gain said persons attention within the story.

As stupid as it may sound, would not rule it out as a possibility.

I mean, Cidney's technically not going into combat, but as a mechanic, it does seem kind of odd, knowing from experience how easy it is to cut yourself or get shit all over you while working underneath a car.

 

[veloxStrix]

http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/post/78944172315/female-armor-rhetoric-bingo

Ahem..

It's an in joke. It is NEVER going to convince anyone, because it is the argumentative equivalent of patting your friends on the back and chuckling.

You just linked me to an article full of one liners that MIGHT play the role of a launch pad for some sort of actual constructive article, but fails to. There is actually a reason that this article is NEVER going to be of value, and it's going to piss you off at first: Because it's Tumblr.

One of my friends at college recently did an article about "social media politics". You see, arguments don't run on a point scale where whoever makes the funniest stabs at the opponent become the most convincing. However, social media does. People are posting articles like these to get likes, shares, followers, etc. These articles aren't meant to be convincing, they are barely even meant to make a point. Going back to my quote, these are meant for people who already agree with you. To see that, yes, there are other people who share your opinion. Safety in numbers and all that.

You aren't convincing anyone of anything by just telling them that they are wrong over and over. My issue isn't even with your point of view. I imagine we share a perspective that overlaps in my areas. My point is that this type of "argument" just solidifies other peoples contradictory viewpoint.

 

[Clefargle]

Here is the thread I was asking for in that thread. Lol, at the logic behind "we need more bad male designs" mentality. I'd rather have as few bad designs as possible, male or female.

 

[Parakeetman]

If you place people into 'us' or 'them', you're putting everyone of 'them' into a giant hivemind which assumes that you're never going to be able to reach that second group.

Hypothetically, if you really believe that you're not going to reach 'them' through being polite, is shocking them/shaming them going to work any better? And in that case, why even enter the argument in the first place?

edit: Beat, kinda.

I mean, Cidney's technically not going into combat, but as a mechanic, it does seem kind of odd, knowing from experience how easy it is to cut yourself or get shit all over you while working underneath a car.

Or burned for those who have had to mess with anything to do with vehicle maintenance from something thats just been running. Sleeves on work overalls are there for a reason. Besides getting caught in pieces of machinery.

 

[Shouta]

Maybe they only like certain parts of their body hit.

I just don't buy the "it's practical for armor but let's throw the argument out for the mechanic" argument.

I'd like to see the armor that was designed so they only got hit there. Actually, that would be kind of interesting as a plot point...

But if you don't buy that argument, then give me some reasons why a jumpsuit is absolutely required. the practical for armor argument makes sense despite the fantasy stuff.

 

[silvermember]

I don't play games to get horny

Good, but what exactly does that have to do with your original comment? You can find something appealing or attractive without being horny.

It seems to me, you have an issue separating finding something appealing and being horny, but I am not a shrink so what do I know.

 

[Shouta]

If you place people into 'us' or 'them', you're putting everyone of 'them' into a giant hivemind which assumes that you're never going to be able to reach that second group.

Hypothetically, if you really believe that you're not going to reach 'them' through being polite, is shocking them/shaming them going to work any better? And in that case, why even enter the argument in the first place?

edit: Beat, kinda.

I mean, Cidney's technically not going into combat, but as a mechanic, it does seem kind of odd, knowing from experience how easy it is to cut yourself or get shit all over you while working underneath a car.

Or burned for those who have had to mess with anything to do with vehicle maintenance from something thats just been running. Sleeves on work overalls are there for a reason. Besides getting caught in pieces of machinery.

Cuts I can see though you'd probably get cut through your clothes anyway, lol. Burned? I thought most mechanics would actually do work on a cold vehicle or wait until it was cooler to avoid that situation.

 

[Toxi]

Maybe they only like certain parts of their body hit.

I just don't buy the "it's practical for armor but let's throw the argument out for the mechanic" argument.

At that point it's clear you're trying to justify a design with rules of the setting, not the other way around.

Your suggestion is like saying that women in the setting must wear bikini armor or else the gods strike them down. Sure, now bikini armor makes sense in the rules of the setting, but the rules of the setting now seem really dumb. It's lazy-ass writing and comes across as contrived.

 

[AlucardGV]

That kind of response is subjective and if it makes them uncomfortable, then they shouldn't ever have to deal with it. Better to kill it now before it discomfits more people.

Gaming should be inclusive to all users. Not repellent.

there's no such thing as "games should be". as all kind of media some are inclusive, some are aimed at certain people

 

[Giever]

I think that the argument that sexy female armor designs are bullshit because they are impractical kind of fails for me personally, at least. There are tons of reasons to be bothered by ridiculously sexualized armor on women in games (especially if they are mostly exclusive to women throughout the industry), but I don't buy impracticality as one of them.

In almost every RPG I've ever played, almost every character is wearing impractical armor (basically clothes, really) to battle. Usually the practicality is sacrificed purely for aesthetic reasons, because it looks cooler, etc. Sometimes it's also to make the design more sexually appealing. From Final Fantasy 7 alone, pretty much every playable character would easily be sliced in two by a sword, riddled full of bullets, etc. They're just wearing cloth for the most part.

I don't know, maybe I don't play many of these RPGs with some semblance of sensible armor. Maybe it's mostly an occasional WRPG thing. *shrugs* But sacrificing the practicality of armor for the sake of coolness, nice aesthetics, sexualization, whatever, doesn't really bother me whatsoever. For the same reason, I'm not really bothered by not having to drink and eat and sleep constantly in games. Those realities are sacrificed for the sake of the gameplay not becoming horrible (though some people like those survival aspects).

I guess my point is that I can understand being bothered by the disproportionate amount of sexualization of women versus men in games throughout the industry, but I don't buy the argument of being bothered by the impracticality of armor, since most, if not all, games I play have all of the characters wearing fairly impractical armor.

 

[Parfait]

The solution to dealing with the heat and sun of a desert is not to go shirtless.

If he lives in the desert, there is another reason why he should not go dress like that. He got metalboots ffs.

This is how he should dress if he doesn't want to get sunburned all day.

It's not the Sahara

It's an actual, built town in the desert. It's likely super uncomfortable to wear a shirt, not because of the sun, but because it's directly hot.

 

[Shouta]

I think that the argument that sexy female armor designs are bullshit because they are impractical kind of fails for me personally, at least. There are tons of reasons to be bothered by ridiculously sexualized armor on women in games (especially if they are mostly exclusive to women throughout the industry), but I don't buy impracticality as one of them.

In almost every RPG I've ever played, almost every character is wearing impractical armor (basically clothes, really) to battle. Usually the practicality is sacrificed purely for aesthetic reasons, because it looks cooler, etc. Sometimes it's also to make the design more sexually appealing. From Final Fantasy 7 alone, pretty much every playable character would easily be sliced in two by a sword, riddled full of bullets, etc. They're just wearing cloth for the most part.

I don't know, maybe I don't play many of these RPGs with some semblance of sensible armor. Maybe it's mostly an occasional WRPG thing. *shrugs* But sacrificing the practicality of armor for the sake of coolness, nice aesthetics, sexualization, whatever, doesn't really bother me whatsoever. For the same reason, I'm not really bothered by not having to drink and eat and sleep constantly in games. Those realities are sacrificed for the sake of the gameplay not becoming horrible (though some people like those survival aspects).

I guess my point is that I can understand being bothered by the disproportionate amount of sexualization of women versus men in games throughout the industry, but I don't buy the argument of being bothered by the impracticality of armor, since most, if not all, games I play have all of the characters wearing fairly impractical armor.

The impracticality argument actually comes into play when it's actual armor. If everyone is wearing regular clothing it's one thing. But if everyone wears armor into battle and it's skimpy, then it doesn't make sense.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Just who is the intended audience here? It seems like they created a armor design that would be better off in a game marketed solely to women. The majority of the fallen audience is male so it is kinda stupid to be taking this move.

 

[RangerBAD]

One thing that we still do not know about Cidney's character is if she actually has the hots for someone in the "boyband" group hence the possibility of why she has her top like that in order to gain said persons attention within the story.

As stupid as it may sound, would not rule it out as a possibility.

I honestly think we can eliminate that. I'm not saying she might not fall for one of the guys, but that was presented as a first meeting. She did introduce herself. I think Cidney isn't really categorized under "bikini armor" just fanservice which one may or may not like.

 

[Parakeetman]

Cuts I can see though you'd probably get cut through your clothes anyway, lol. Burned? I thought most mechanics would actually do work on a cold vehicle or wait until it was cooler to avoid that situation.

Generally yeah unless something was a rush job. Or like when vehicles are constantly brought in and out of someplace for maintenance.

We actually had something like these around for those who chose to use it. Helped prevent burns on the arms and such.

 

[akira28]

Here's something revolutionary.

How about make it count? Don't focus on it, but give the player the option to wear effective armor, and sexy armor, in a Dark Souls perma-death Nintendo hard grindy battle game, and watch people flock to dressing their sexy rogues and red headed sorceresses like soup cans and refrigerators.

This would probably force the common sense of the issue. You can have your sexy armor, but don't expect it to do anything. Just like you could dress your character up in the sexy Fairy Dress but it had 0 armor protection, and this was obviously stated.

 

[Mister Chippy]

Just who is the intended audience here? It seems like they created a armor design that would be better off in a game marketed solely to women. The majority of the fallen audience is male so it is kinda stupid to be taking this move.

I think this might have to do with the fact that the mobile market is hugely female compared to console and PC. I'm guessing they're hoping to attract some new fans.

 

[Toxi]

It's not the Sahara

It's an actual, built town in the desert. It's likely super uncomfortable to wear a shirt, not because of the sun, but because it's directly hot.

People walking in the Sahara desert wear long robes to protect themselves from the sun (Which is fucking brutal) and sand. The clothes actually provide a cooling effect through convection, so they're much more comfortable than walking without a shirt.

There are places in the world people often go shirtless, but the Sahara isn't one of them. It's just too hot and dry and you will be raw from sunburn.

 

[RM8]

Impractical fighting clothes in games are awesome, and I prefer them over realistic designs. Just imagine if everyone in Street Fighter would be wearing MMA-like outfits :/ So the argument against the "bikini armor" should be that it's pretty tasteless and off-putting for plenty of people, but not really that it's not practical IMO. I say, cool, classy, 100% impractical designs for everyone!

 

[Parakeetman]

I honestly think we can eliminate that. I'm not saying she might not fall for one of the guys, but that was presented as a first meeting. She did introduce herself. I think Cidney isn't really categorized under "bikini armor" just fanservice which one may or may not like.

Thats a good point also.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Haha, I submitted the thread to the tumblr blog. Didn't know it'd get retweeted by Brianna and cause a shitstorm, but hey, if it can create a conversation... (Also, GAF -> Internet -> GAF in motion xD)

I don't think the blogger was being serious about the quota thing, mind. I certainly don't want males to have the same shitty "armours" females ubiquitously have. But it's true that the tears are delicious, so to speak.

Definitely agree. Women's armor should look like this.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/59/ea/93/59ea93afb65323c2831cb6019add272c.jpg

Boobplate. No thanks.

Only, she hasn't. Because she didn't in any shape or form demonstrated that those that made those comments approve of bikini armor, nor that they represent a relevant percentage/majority. Evidence of a double standards needs to show two standards.

Uh, where have you been in all the past conversations about this? Sexy female armour has been defended time and time and time and time again. Not only that, but whenever anyone so much as mildly criticize a design, they get shat on and called prudes. I know because it happens to me in every thread on the subject. I've even been called a no-fun thread shitter who wants to ruin the game for everyone in a Monster Hunter thread (a game I'm a fan of). Also:

This is how heavy armors worked for both genders in Dragon Age: Origins. You should have seen the amount of complaints on the Bioware forums.

So people complain about non-sexist armour... that's really sad.

If we based all designs on practical outfits, we'd have some really boring characters.

I disagree. These are boring (and everywhere):

This is lazy and uncreative:

These are cool-looking and badass:

 

[SeanR1221]

I'd like to see the armor that was designed so they only got hit there. Actually, that would be kind of interesting as a plot point...

But if you don't buy that argument, then give me some reasons why a jumpsuit is absolutely required. the practical for armor argument makes sense despite the fantasy stuff.

I'd say a good one is grease and oil can be a bitch to get off your skin and having that much skin exposed would become annoying fast.

Good, but what exactly does that have to do with your original comment? You can find something appealing or attractive without being horny.

It seems to me, you have an issue separating finding something appealing and being horny, but I am not a shrink so what do I know.

Nah. I showed the picture to my wife and her immediate response was

"Ew, do people jerk off to that?"

I have no problem separating them actually. I'm also not blind to fanservice and what the designers intentions are.

 

[Giever]

The impracticality argument actually comes into play when it's actual armor. If everyone is wearing regular clothing it's one thing. But if everyone wears armor into battle and it's skimpy, then it doesn't make sense.

But I feel like, in that case, the real concern comes from the discordance between the characters with full armor versus characters with skimpy armor, not from the impracticality of the skimpy armor in itself. If most or all of the characters in a specific game wore outright armor, but it was unprotected or skimpy in areas, I don't think there would be as much concern.

Basically, I think people are actually bothered by the whole male/female dichotomy of the males usually having the full-on armor, and the females having the skimpy armor, and they latch onto the impracticality as a possible argument against it, and also because it's funny. But that's kind of a red herring, since the impracticality doesn't really matter, and you don't even need something else to latch onto, since the armor differences between male and female characters alone are enough to complain about.

Changing the focus of the conversation to one about practicality of armor shifts the concern from what really matters to something trivial that leads to arguments about what is really practical, fantasy magic shields, and so on.

 

[Kangi]

I am a-okay with more mindless manservice in the name of balance. Just sayin'.

Also, this is the kind of female armor I'd like to see more of. The Wardens from Warcraft:

Too bad they have pronounced boobplates in-game.

 

[StayDead]

Here is the thread I was asking for in that thread. Lol, at the logic behind "we need more bad male designs" mentality. I'd rather have as few bad designs as possible, male or female.

You think these designs are bad, many do not. Therein lies the problem, it's subjective and as a media we should cater to both sets of people.

 

[KingJ2002]

hmmm.... "bikini armor" have been in Japanese titles for years... Voldo from Soul Calibur is a good example that someone pointed out before

this is nothing new.

In this case... the armor looks bad because it doesn't make any sense... there's no protection of any vital points.

maybe the protagonist has an arrogant personality and thinks... even with all his vitals exposed no one can reach him. That would turn this from being stupid design to "not bad"

in any case... the hyper sexualization is nothing new... even when it comes to men. Most men just don't notice because many would rather relate to a tall, muscular, man with convictions & ideals and no shirt:

rather than a short, fat guy who believes in nothing and and wastes his life away.

:/

 

[Banana Aeon]

.

Eh, it depends. In a realistic fantasy game, sure, but in a high fantasy game, those are boring.

I just want more good sexualized designs in general. Males have a very few little good designs, while females have too many terrible ones.

 

[zeldablue]

Ha!

Happy to see both sexes complain over stuff like this. xD

 

[……forgetit]

Haha, I submitted the thread to the tumblr blog. Didn't know it'd get retweeted by Brianna and cause a shitstorm, but hey, if it can create a conversation... (Also, GAF -> Internet -> GAF in motion xD)

I don't think the blogger was being serious about the quota thing, mind. I certainly don't want males to have the same shitty "armours" females ubiquitously have. But it's true that the tears are delicious, so to speak.


Boobplate. No thanks.


Uh, where have you been in all the past conversations about this? Sexy female armour has been defended time and time and time and time again. Not only that, but whenever anyone so much as mildly criticize a design, they get shat on and called prudes. I know because it happens to me in every thread on the subject. I've even been called a no-fun thread shitter who wants to ruin the game for everyone in a Monster Hunter thread (a game I'm a fan of). Also:


So people complain about non-sexist armour... that's really sad.


I disagree. These are boring (and everywhere):

This is lazy and uncreative:

These are cool-looking and badass:

Too be fair alot of the cool looking/badass armors you posted aren't actually practical either. If everyone wore practical armor, men and women would be indistinguishable in games. A lot of the ones you posted would be too restricting and near impossible to fight in. That said it's a design that I prefer to bikini armor. In truth you can either accept that the art is heavily sexualized and be okay with it or not be okay with it. Practicality really shouldn't come into play IMO.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I've been thinking about it, and one thing that came to mind is the cherry picking of examples from different universes. Theres Tera, and right now mostly discussion of FF. I think a better solution of whether or not something would be offensive or not is comparing it within its own universe. So example you have Rikku in FFX who wears short shorts, and in comparison with Yuna who wears a dress. Likewise for guys in that game you have Auron wearing a heavy overcoat and suit underneath, and in comparison we have Wakka whos wearing just shorts and a headband.

What Im trying to say, if we cherry pick examples and try to put those examples as a blanket generalization, is no bueno. So maybe the guy with the impractical...leg plates fits in his universe. If he doesnt stick out like a sore thumb amongst other characters in that game...on phone so its hard to illustrate my point with research. I hope the gist of what Im trying to say makes sense.

 

[Toxi]

Impractical armor can look great. Ornstein's armor in Dark Souls is impractical as all hell and yet it looks awesome.

Yet despite how it's obviously impractical, this armor at least looks protective. There's not a gap in the chest or ass section showing clear vulnerability. The problem with bikini armor is that its impracticality feels absurd because it defeats the point of armor. You wear armor to protect yourself. If your armor doesn't protect yourself, why are you wearing armor in the first place? It's way more uncomfortable than normal clothing. And the visual of bikini armor brings attention to that flaw.

I think practicality is an underrated part of character design, but it's certainly not necessary. An impractical design just has to not have its visual language clash with the concept.

 

[Fehyd]

From the cosplay point of view, I don't have an issue with it. People are free to complain and mock, but I say let an artist design whatever they want, and consumers will decide if they like it and purchase it.

I've had friends dressed in "boob armor" and skintight spandex harassed by other women, because the character they were cosplaying as was "obviously sexist and for the male gaze".

I guess the cosplay community looks at these issues from the gaming community, since the cosplay community is more or less female-dominated.

If someone likes a design, more power to them.

 

[SolidSnakex]

This is lazy and uncreative:

These are cool-looking and badass:

Isn't the one on the right from Dragon's Dogma? Where characters can also look like this

 

[……forgetit]

Also for the love of God stop defending the FF mechanic. It's stupid, and no mechanic in real life would dress like that. You can be okay with the character looking like a centerfold model or you can dislike it, but don't act like it makes sense or has a basis in reality.

 

[pinkurocket]

sexualization does not come from the clothes one wears, it comes from how they act and present themselves in said outfits. Or, how the developer chooses to present the character.
I don't mind eye-candy from male or female characters, but let me own those outfits and not have a skimpily clad female that needs a man in strong armor to protect her.

 

[Objectively Bad Opinion]

I don't have a problem with it. But then I do not have a problem with skimpy female designs either. I do think it's ugly, though.

I feel like people are co-opting negative opinion into a gender issue. The design is bad. Don't defend it just cause you want more boy booty in videogames. You gotta be pretty thirsty to resort to that. And for those here that are arguing just because they feel this design balances some scale... well...

What I'm saying is... this could be eye candy just as well without the thunder thighs.