Support NeoGAF

[BreezyLimbo]

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.

But earlier in this thread someone posted female mechanics who dressed like that...

 

[……forgetit]

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

SO wait....is that just the "no armor" option in every rpg ever?

 

[Desi]

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

thanks, i was wondering what game that pic was from because they literally just took the armor off of her and put her in modern underwear (back when underwear wasn't popular).

edit:but i see boob plate!! All is lost.

 

[Kinyou]

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

Yeah, it's from Dragon's Dogma. And I'm also not sure if that's an actual armor set, or just someone who undressed their character to the point where she looked like that.

 

[SolidSnakex]

SO wait....is that just the "no armor" option in every rpg ever?

I'm not sure if it's the no armor look since I never did that with my character. DD definitely has "sexy armor", but the overwhelming majority of it is more in line with the one I posted.

 

[krazykei]

Let's all take a step back and activate critical thinking mode. Why are people disliking this armor? It's because it goes against the gender stereotype that male characters have to be muscular armored up bad asses, not hypocrisy. Masculinity has become a prerequisite for being a man and being cool so anything that goes against this ideal is met with this kind of backlash. For this to be a "sexy armor hypocrisy" it would have to be a male backlash against overly masculine male characters (where men accept the stereotyped image of women, but hypocritically do not accept the stereotyped image of men).

How about female bikini armor? Of course for a lot of the male audience it looks appealing for a female character to look sexy, but the backlash it receives from feminists (male and female) have taken into consideration that these character designs pigeon-hole people into accepting gender stereotypes and advances the sexualization of women.

I want to note that this view comes from 21st century Western ideals. Gender roles and stereotypes change depending on culture and this has to be taken into consideration not only when media originates from a certain culture, but when it enters a different culture. Judith Farquhar observed the changing views of sex in post-socialist China and was surprised by the different views on femininity by the women there during this time. China began importing and consuming Western media at a time when the depiction of women in Hollywood was beginning to be criticized by feminists, but women in China were more than accepting of bikini clad women and sexualized (in Western views) images as a depiction of femininity. The women were transitioning from an era where the ownership or the wear of even a skirt was not tolerated.

Please take into consideration the origin of media and the social and cultural situation of said origin, before forcing your own cultural and social views onto it.

Note: Judith Farquhar wrote "Appetites: food and sex in post-socialist China" and others. It looks at how politics and society can change a person's body and psyche, damn good read.

 

[……forgetit]

But earlier in this thread someone posted female mechanics who dressed like that...

Only one of those pictures were remotely comparable to how Cindy looks, and changing your own oil doesn't automatically mean mechanic.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Too be fair alot of the cool looking/badass armors you posted aren't actually practical either.

I didn't say they were. I said they looked good.

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.

Which ones?
Keeping this in mind:

And https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCvOC2VwDc

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

I disagree completely. None of these look boring to me. And here are some more high fantasy and heavily stylized designs:

I just want more good sexualized designs in general.

But why sexualized armour? Having sexy witches or whatnot, ok, whatever.

Yet despite how it's obviously impractical, this armor at least looks protective. 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.

Indeed. I'd wear normal underwear over a bikini armour every single time. Underwear isn't degrading, and it's far more comfortable.
Which is why I'm annoyed when people compare half-naked barbarian women to Conan and go "see? he's half naked too!". False equivalence. A female equivalent of Conan would look more like this (minus the, uh, all those silly belts... xD) or the picture on the right here.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

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

http://abload.de/img/dddarkarisen002bmpjpgvfu48.jpg

Yes, it's from Dragon's Dogma.

SO wait....is that just the "no armor" option in every rpg
ever?

Nope. It's actual equipment. The bottom part is the Silk Lingerie (female only, of course). It looks skimpier than the default "no armour" look. The top part of that pic I posted is the Silver Chestplate. It looks like this when equipped on a male Arisen or Pawn:

Dragon's Dogma has some really cool armour designs. But it also has some egregiously bad ones too.

 

[Verendus]

Look as stupid as I remember.

 

[GreenLiquid]

I read through some of the Bikini Armor Tumblr blog a while back, and there was a major inconsistency in its logic that it seemed to me was never pointed out. When the blog criticizes armor designs, it uses what are basically two categories of argument. The first is the argument of equity: female characters are disproportionately sexualized, and in games and genres that should be enjoyable by both genders the appearance of such designs can give the impression to women that it's "not for them." The second is the argument of practicality: armor designs that are bikinis, have no pants, have boob windows, etc. are silly and illogical and damage suspension of disbelief because such armor would not afford much protection from actual weapons. When the author of the blog criticizes bikini armor and such designs, she generally uses both of these arguments.

But when a sexualized male design comes along, it gets a thumbs-up because of the argument of equity: it's good to see sexualized designs aimed at the appreciation of women. However, the other argument, the argument of practicality, gets thrown out the window. So we get bikini chainmail being criticized as sexist and impractical, while male sexualized armor gets a thumbs up as supporting gender parity... never mind that it's impractical. Which gives me the impression that the argument of practicality isn't actually important to the author of the blog -- that it is just instrumental to the argument from equity, and that what actually bothers the author is the lack of gender parity in designs, not actually the designs themselves. Now, I do agree that the problem of gender representation in games is an important one, so I would like to cut the author some slack, but I feel that arguments like the ones used in the blog produce more of the argumentative dishonesty that Tumblr is infamous for and discredits feminist causes; namely, the employment of lesser arguments to the service of a major argument or cause, while pretending that the lesser arguments are important for their own sake. If gender parity in games is important for its own sake -- and I would say it is -- then it deserves to be grappled with on its own without 'proxy battles' being fought over things like armor practicality, unless the author really believes that armor practicality is important for its own sake... and when I see inconsistencies like the ones the author falls into, I get the impression that this is not really the case.

 

[……forgetit]

I didn't say they were. I said they looked good.


Which ones?
Keeping this in mind:

And https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCvOC2VwDc


I disagree completely. None of these look boring to me. And here are some more high fantasy and heavily stylized designs:



But why sexualized armour? Having sexy witches or whatnot, ok, whatever.


Indeed. I'd wear normal underwear over a bikini armour every single time. Underwear isn't degrading, and it's far more comfortable.
Which is why I'm annoyed when people compare half-naked barbarian women to Conan and go "see? he's half naked too!". False equivalence. A female equivalent of Conan would look more like this (minus the, uh, all those silly belts... xD) or the picture on the right here.

See the gif you posted is what I meant by men and women being indistinguishable in actual body armor, but I actually meant this one

Which has a solid metal plate adhering to to her figure across her upper body, it would be impossible to bend in that. Real armor, like armor you posted in the video and gif, flares out and it's layered that way to offer mobility, but like I said regardless of gender, everyone looks the same in it.

 

[……forgetit]

Yes, it's from Dragon's Dogma.

Nope. It's actual equipment. The bottom part is the Silk Lingerie (female only, of course). It looks skimpier than the default "no armour" look. The top part of that pic I posted is the Silver Chestplate. It looks like this when equipped on a male Arisen or Pawn:

Dragon's Dogma has some really cool armour designs. But it also has some egregiously bad ones too.

Now that is hilarious, Yeah no redeeming that shit what so ever.

 

[Desi]

Yes, it's from Dragon's Dogma.

Nope. It's actual equipment. The bottom part is the Silk Lingerie (female only, of course). It looks skimpier than the default "no armour" look. The top part of that pic I posted is the Silver Chestplate. It looks like this when equipped on a male Arisen or Pawn:

ah ok. Comes off like a fan service outfit especially going by the stats and the amazing item description "Customary attire in the western lands, it is said"

 

[Banana Aeon]

But why sexualized armour? Having sexy witches or whatnot, ok, whatever.

I just want designs to look good. Practically is not something that I care for.

If the world is realistic or gritty, I want the designs to be realistic or gritty. If the world if is heavily glamorized and fabulous, like Jojo, I want the designs to be heavily glamorized and fabulous.

Mind you, I'm was mentioning males too.

 

[Toxi]

Which ones?
Keeping this in mind:

And https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCvOC2VwDc

Way too many people buy into the "clunky tin can" stereotype of plate armor. Glad to see that gif posted.

I read through some of the Bikini Armor Tumblr blog a while back, and there was a major inconsistency in its logic that it seemed to me was never pointed out. When the blog criticizes armor designs, it uses what are basically two categories of argument. The first is the argument of equity: female characters are disproportionately sexualized, and in games and genres that should be enjoyable by both genders the appearance of such designs can give the impression to women that it's "not for them." The second is the argument of practicality: armor designs that are bikinis, have no pants, have boob windows, etc. are silly and illogical and damage suspension of disbelief because such armor would not afford much protection from actual weapons. When the author of the blog criticizes bikini armor and such designs, she generally uses both of these arguments.

But when a sexualized male design comes along, it gets a thumbs-up because of the argument of equity: it's good to see sexualized designs aimed at the appreciation of women. However, the other argument, the argument of practicality, gets thrown out the window. So we get bikini chainmail being criticized as sexist and impractical, while male sexualized armor gets a thumbs up as supporting gender parity... never mind that it's impractical. Which gives me the impression that the argument of practicality isn't actually important to the author of the blog -- that it is just instrumental to the argument from equity, and that what actually bothers the author is the lack of gender parity in designs, not actually the designs themselves. Now, I do agree that the problem of gender representation in games is an important one, so I would like to cut the author some slack, but I feel that arguments like the ones used in the blog produce more of the argumentative dishonesty that Tumblr is infamous for and discredits feminist causes; namely, the employment of lesser arguments to the service of a major argument or cause, while pretending that the lesser arguments are important for their own sake. If gender parity in games is important for its own sake -- and I would say it is -- then it deserves to be grappled with on its own without 'proxy battles' being fought over things like armor practicality, unless the author really believes that armor practicality is important for its own sake... and when I see inconsistencies like the ones the author falls into, I get the impression that this is not really the case.

You're spending more time waffling about "argumentative dishonesty" than actually arguing.

There are two main reasons people dislike bikini armor: Gratuitous sexualization of women and impractical design stretching the suspension of disbelief. Sexualized male armor is still impractical and stretches the suspension of disbelief. However, it does at least get rid of the first problem; if both sexes are wearing the armor, it's not gratuitous on the women. It may not be ideal for some folk (Like me), but it at least fixes one of the main issues.

 

[Giever]

I read through some of the Bikini Armor Tumblr blog a while back, and there was a major inconsistency in its logic that it seemed to me was never pointed out. When the blog criticizes armor designs, it uses what are basically two categories of argument. The first is the argument of equity: female characters are disproportionately sexualized, and in games and genres that should be enjoyable by both genders the appearance of such designs can give the impression to women that it's "not for them." The second is the argument of practicality: armor designs that are bikinis, have no pants, have boob windows, etc. are silly and illogical and damage suspension of disbelief because such armor would not afford much protection from actual weapons. When the author of the blog criticizes bikini armor and such designs, she generally uses both of these arguments.

But when a sexualized male design comes along, it gets a thumbs-up because of the argument of equity: it's good to see sexualized designs aimed at the appreciation of women. However, the other argument, the argument of practicality, gets thrown out the window. So we get bikini chainmail being criticized as sexist and impractical, while male sexualized armor gets a thumbs up as supporting gender parity... never mind that it's impractical. Which gives me the impression that the argument of practicality isn't actually important to the author of the blog -- that it is just instrumental to the argument from equity, and that what actually bothers the author is the lack of gender parity in designs, not actually the designs themselves. Now, I do agree that the problem of gender representation in games is an important one, so I would like to cut the author some slack, but I feel that arguments like the ones used in the blog produce more of the argumentative dishonesty that Tumblr is infamous for and discredits feminist causes; namely, the employment of lesser arguments to the service of a major argument or cause, while pretending that the lesser arguments are important for their own sake. If gender parity in games is important for its own sake -- and I would say it is -- then it deserves to be grappled with on its own without 'proxy battles' being fought over things like armor practicality, unless the author really believes that armor practicality is important for its own sake... and when I see inconsistencies like the ones the author falls into, I get the impression that this is not really the case.

I 100% agree, this is exactly the point I was just making earlier. I really do think that, in most cases, the practicality argument is a side-point that mainly gets brought up because of how easy it is to poke fun of, but when it comes down to it the real concern is the lack of equal treatment between male and female designs/armors/what-have-you.

I think it would be better to drop the whole practical armor conception and focus instead on the disproportionate amount of sexualized women in games, since that's obviously the real concern here. Focusing instead on the practicality of armor leads to silly and fruitless arguments about how practical things need to be, whether sacrificing practicality for other aesthetic reasons is fine, whether there are fantasy reasons that the armor is actually practical or not, and so on.

 

[Kinyou]

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.

I was generally surprised that people were bothered by the outfit at all.

The first image we saw Cidney in had her standing right next to a half naked dude

The style of the game seems clear to me. Sexy/stylish comes first, practical/realism later.

The argument if there are mechanics who look like that or not seems irrelevant to me.

 

[sensui-tomo]

Is it wrong to tolerate sexy stuff? From what i'm seeing it appears like i should be ashamed for liking sexy armors (for either sex no matter how ridiculous it is) and that I'm a pervert because i obviously view wo/men this way in life.
also for whatever reason that cidney thing is about, I introduce another mechanic that people didnt have an issue with (to this degree)

 

[Toxi]

I just want designs to look good. Practically is not something that I care for.

If the world is realistic or gritty, I want the designs to be realistic or gritty. If the world if is heavily glamorized and fabulous, like Jojo, I want the designs to be heavily glamorized and fabulous.

Mind you, I'm was mentioning males too.

Sexualized armor just doesn't look as good to me. Quality of an artistic design is subjective, but the entire visual of bikini armor brings attention to how stupid it is. If you want a sexy design, just use actual sexy clothing like low-cut dresses. It looks nicer and almost always makes more sense in-universe.

Jojo is a good example of that; you don't see the characters wearing ridiculous armor, they're wearing actual clothes and just looking sexy with them. They don't look impractical (Other than Josuke's stupid hair).

Is it wrong to tolerate sexy stuff? From what i'm seeing it appears like i should be ashamed for liking sexy armors (for either sex no matter how ridiculous it is) and that I'm a pervert because i obviously view wo/men this way in life.

You are addressing a strawman.

 

[krazykei]

I read through some of the Bikini Armor Tumblr blog a while back, and there was a major inconsistency in its logic that it seemed to me was never pointed out. When the blog criticizes armor designs, it uses what are basically two categories of argument. The first is the argument of equity: female characters are disproportionately sexualized, and in games and genres that should be enjoyable by both genders the appearance of such designs can give the impression to women that it's "not for them." The second is the argument of practicality: armor designs that are bikinis, have no pants, have boob windows, etc. are silly and illogical and damage suspension of disbelief because such armor would not afford much protection from actual weapons. When the author of the blog criticizes bikini armor and such designs, she generally uses both of these arguments.

But when a sexualized male design comes along, it gets a thumbs-up because of the argument of equity: it's good to see sexualized designs aimed at the appreciation of women. However, the other argument, the argument of practicality, gets thrown out the window. So we get bikini chainmail being criticized as sexist and impractical, while male sexualized armor gets a thumbs up as supporting gender parity... never mind that it's impractical. Which gives me the impression that the argument of practicality isn't actually important to the author of the blog -- that it is just instrumental to the argument from equity, and that what actually bothers the author is the lack of gender parity in designs, not actually the designs themselves. Now, I do agree that the problem of gender representation in games is an important one, so I would like to cut the author some slack, but I feel that arguments like the ones used in the blog produce more of the argumentative dishonesty that Tumblr is infamous for and discredits feminist causes; namely, the employment of lesser arguments to the service of a major argument or cause, while pretending that the lesser arguments are important for their own sake. If gender parity in games is important for its own sake -- and I would say it is -- then it deserves to be grappled with on its own without 'proxy battles' being fought over things like armor practicality, unless the author really believes that armor practicality is important for its own sake... and when I see inconsistencies like the ones the author falls into, I get the impression that this is not really the case.

I think the issue shouldn't be "appreciation," but a deeper look at what a certain look accomplishes. The continued depiction of masculine male armor and models cements the view that "that's what is manly and cool" and in that sense the more sexualized (feminine) male images serve to change the status-quo and should be welcomed. Although the overall destination is correct, the way people get there is slightly off.

 

[……forgetit]

I was generally surprised that people were bothered by the outfit at all.

The first image we saw Cidney in had her standing right next to a half naked dude

The style of the game seems clear to me. Sexy/stylish comes first, practical/realism later.

The argument if there are mechanics who look like that or not seems irrelevant to me.

I should have been more clear, the design itself doesn't bother me, it's supposed to be sexy and impracticable, just like every other thing in that game, like the male models going off roading in a luxury car and killing giant monsters without a spec of dirt getting in their perfect hair. It's stupid, but perfectly okay to enjoy. My issue is where people want to claim that an actual mechanic would dress that way, which is silly.

 

[Steiner84]

is this supposed to be a guy?

well, those games always seemed weird to me, so, it fits, kinda..

 

[GreenLiquid]

Way too many people buy into the "clunky tin can" stereotype of plate armor. Glad to see that gif posted.

You're spending more time waffling about "argumentative dishonesty" than actually arguing.

There are two main reasons people dislike bikini armor: Gratuitous sexualization of women and impractical design stretching the suspension of disbelief. Sexualized male armor is still impractical and stretches the suspension of disbelief. However, it does at least get rid of the first problem; if both sexes are wearing the armor, it's not gratuitous on the women. It may not be ideal for some folk (Like me), but it at least fixes one of the main issues.

I would agree, but in the blog post from the OP, the author is actually calling out those who are saying that the impractical male sexualization looks bad. She says: "The thing is, we’re waaaaay past the 'badly designed sexy female armor' quota, so there’s lots of 'badly designed sexy male armor' quota to meet. And until balance of the two is restored, I don’t really think anyone is in the position to request male sexyness to be up to some arbitrary design quality standard." This is entirely an argument from gender equity. It is indifferent to the actual quality or reasonableness of impractical armor so long as it is equally represented by both genders. I think it is somewhat dishonest to focus the argument on what it is about impractical armor that makes it look silly, break suspension of disbelief, etc. and then come in later when that same impractical nonsense design gets foisted onto the other gender and say, "yeah, it's about time there are male impractical nonsense designs too!" If impractical armor is bad for its own sake, then the author ought to supply a thumbs-down in both cases.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I was generally surprised that people were bothered by the outfit at all.

The first image we saw Cidney in had her standing right next to a half naked dude

The style of the game seems clear to me. Sexy/stylish comes first, practical/realism later.

The argument if there are mechanics who look like that or not seems irrelevant to me.

Which goes back to one of my previous posts, we should ask ourselves: Does this outfit make sense in the context of the universe that it is portrayed in? For Cidney, I feel it does. None of the guys are wearing clothes that would protect then from guns, magic, monsters, or swords either.

 

[Banana Aeon]

Sexualized armor just doesn't look as good to me. Quality of an artistic design is subjective, but the entire visual of bikini armor brings attention to how stupid it is. If you want a sexy design, just use actual sexy clothing.

Jojo is a good example of that; you don't see the characters wearing ridiculous armor, they're wearing actual clothes and just looking sexy with them. They don't look impractical (Other than Josuke's stupid hair).

I really don't like the bikini armors either, because they often fail to be sexy, and fail to be cool. I won't defend them.

I will defend sexualization, if it's fair. If females are sexualized, I not only expect, but want males to be sexualized, otherwise it creates an uneven balance between character designs.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

I should have been more clear, the design itself doesn't bother me, it's supposed to be sexy and impracticable, just like every other thing in that game, like the male models going off roading in a luxury car and killing giant monsters without a spec of dirt getting in their perfect hair. It's stupid, but perfectly okay to enjoy. My issue is where people want to claim that an actual mechanic would dress that way, which is silly.

People like to draw as many comparisons as they can for justification as its a pretty standard way to argue. People won't accept "Its just a sexy design" as a counter argument. Fortunately for me, thats a good enough reason.

I like Cidney, open top but dirty says a lot about the character already. Makes me wish she actually had a major role because I find all the guys uninteresting from what we have seen so far.

 

[RangerBAD]

Cidney is a non-combatant, so the topic with her really doesn't pertain to the topic of 'bikini armor".

 

[Freshmaker]

Why do people keep bringing up vaan's design

He lived in a goddamn desert. Many other NPCs didn't have shirts on.

Everyone jelly because he's so ripped you could cut fruits with those abs

Dressing like that in a desert is a terrible idea.

 

[reptilescorpio]

That's some shitty armor alright.

 

[Mechanized]

I want to know how this "men playing as ripped handsome dudes = male power fantasy" logic permeated our culture. I think the age of the male power fantasy as it were doesn't even exist. When I play something like, Dragon Age, or Mass Effect, or pretty much any game with a character creator I make the male look like me. A slightly out of shape, balding, white dude. When playing something like Arkham Asylum I don't feel powerful because Batman is ripped, it's because of what he can do. If a fat middle-aged bald dude could do the same shit it would feel just as rewarding. It's so easy to say MALE POWER FANTASY every time someone brings up handsome, muscular protagonists with great hair being the equivalent to playing as a pretty girl in a revealing outfit, but from my male perspective it really is the same. The "power fantasy" comes from your actions, the character is just a proxy by which that is delivered. Again, playing Batman, after an hour Batman might as well not even exist. If he was replaced with a fat, balding white dude, or even a lady wearing a g-string and boots, it wouldn't matter(in the context of; it doesn't matter who the player character actually is outside of say, marketing purposes). Same with any game really. I don't think WOOOAH I'm Batman, I'm so ripped and cool, a millionaire playboy with all kinds of ladies hanging off him, instead I think, I just grappled off this Gargoyle and kicked the shit out of 5 dudes, I did that, I'm awesome. The power comes from the actions. I can think a character is cool, I can like the things he or she does, or want to be like them physically or in their lifestyle. But that doesn't translate to actually playing a game. I think that the stereotypical handsome, ripped, uber-confident alpha male protagonist can also be as damaging to the male psyche as the equivalent(as I presented it) is to women.

If I do a sick combo with Ryu in Street Fighter I'm not living vicariously through him. I did the combo, Ryu is just an avatar, whether he looks cool or not doesn't matter. It could be why I picked him at first, but I don't look at him and say, "I'm not like this in real life so I enjoy playing as him because he's ripped as fuck". It's because he can throw fucking fireballs, do that combo, and he's dressed up like a kung fu man. His physical attributes have nothing to do with that.

So I think that the answer here isn't to even the scales by objectifying men as much as women. That's short sighted. Women should be portrayed better in media, including games, as something other than sex objects. But to say that men live this amazing existence where they have this constant male power fantasy going and only women are objectified for our whims and only they suffer the effects of that is weak. Men have to deal with unrealistic images in media and our daily lives that we have to struggle with as well and that's not ok just because I get to beat up some enemies as a ripped handsome dude in a game and have images of pretty girls in revealing outfits thrown at me.

Also the bikini armor in Dragon's Dogma is an outlier, most of the female armor is really plain and normal just like the male armor.

 

[sensui-tomo]

I just wish devs put the time to make multiple outfits in games, like persona 3,4 with how they wear different uniforms for the seasons, Why the heck cant any other dev do this when they go to different areas, like in an winter like area, wear heavy warm clothes to not catch hypothermia or frostbites and in hot desert/beach areas wear clothing thats appropriate to the area. an example would be go to a shop and more or less force the player into buying an outfit, or give penalties for wearing non clothing appropriate clothing. basically making more costumes for the character to wear.

 

[RangerBAD]

I just wish devs put the time to make multiple outfits in games, like persona 3,4 with how they wear different uniforms for the seasons, Why the heck cant any other dev do this when they go to different areas, like in an winter like area, wear heavy warm clothes to not catch hypothermia or frostbites and in hot desert/beach areas wear clothing thats appropriate to the area.

Ni no Kuni did that.

 

[sensui-tomo]

Ni no Kuni did that.

Right I forgot about that (and kingdom hearts sorta did it in some cases)

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

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.

I feel like in the context of creative works it does mostly amount to what one wears and looks like. It's why Lara Croft (from the old Tomb Raiders) is considered a sexualized character despite being highly athletic, competent, independent and intelligent and those aspects also being present in the game

 

[SolidSnakex]

I feel like in the context of creative works it does mostly amount to what one wears and looks like. It's why Lara Croft (from the old Tomb Raiders) is considered a sexualized character despite being highly athletic, competent, independent and intelligent and those aspects also being present in the game

Yeah, Lara from the older games was a much better character than the new one. Yet the new one is the one that gets praised.

 

[GreenLiquid]

I think the issue shouldn't be "appreciation," but a deeper look at what a certain look accomplishes. The continued depiction of masculine male armor and models cements the view that "that's what is manly and cool" and in that sense the more sexualized (feminine) male images serve to change the status-quo and should be welcomed. Although the overall destination is correct, the way people get there is slightly off.

I think I can agree with that. If a culture were to move away from disproportionate sexualization of one gender, it would be more expedient for the other gender to be sexualized more than for the original gender to just stop being sexualized. But I don't think anyone really has the political or social power to make this happen, so it's hard for me to see an example of sexualization in the opposite direction and think "perfect, this is shifting the average more towards the middle." I would rather see less sexualizing designs in general in games that aren't overtly sexual, instead of a greater parity but still a large number of sexualized designs.

 

[MotionBlue]

„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.

Wow. So any culture that doesn't abide their personal opinions, has deep running gender/sexuality problems?

 

[StayDead]

I think I can agree with that. If a culture were to move away from disproportionate sexualization of one gender, it would be more expedient for the other gender to be sexualized more than for the original gender to just stop being sexualized. But I don't think anyone really has the political or social power to make this happen, so it's hard for me to see an example of sexualization in the opposite direction and think "perfect, this is shifting the average more towards the middle." I would rather see less sexualizing designs in general in games that aren't overtly sexual, instead of a greater parity but still a large number of sexualized designs.

I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again in the fact that this is entirely subjective. That's great for you, but what about the people whoo actually like the designs the way they are? By saying that there should be less of what they (including me) like you're somewhat limiting the creative freedoms of a developer. If Takaki wants to make Senran Kagura like he does he should be able to be given the creative freedom to do it. If someone else wants to make a game about a female detective in 1920s style detective clothing they should be able to do that.

It really should be a matter of more people should be making games, look how many films there are and compare it. There's bigger variety, because there's more films being made. Everyone wants to make comparisons between games and other media all the time and another huge example of this is books. Yes there's erotica for both men and women, but there's hundreds of thousands if not millions of other books you can go and read if you don't like it.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Yeah, Lara from the older games was a much better character than the new one. Yet the new one is the one that gets praised.

Yeah, it's weird, but the perception of Lara as a good female game character would be completely different if her old design wasn't as ridiculous. Like a complete 180

 

[PHOENIXZERO]

It's "fan service" and it's annoying.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

Is it wrong to tolerate sexy stuff? From what i'm seeing it appears like i should be ashamed for liking sexy armors (for either sex no matter how ridiculous it is) and that I'm a pervert because i obviously view wo/men this way in life.

2014 has seen the rise of the new bigotry in videogames. There is something awfully sad and toxic in how some people want to reign over how other people have fun.


“Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm; but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.”

- T.S. Eliot

 

[Easy_D]

Those abs might be more effective than the armor plating.

Maybe a more durable version of Vaan's cardboard abs chest plate

 

[Annubis]

Way too many people buy into the "clunky tin can" stereotype of plate armor. Glad to see that gif posted.

To be fair, there is a certain 'clunkiness' due to the weight.
I once wore a full plate mail and that thing was about 120 pound.
Even if the armor can bend, I wasn't going to try anything stupid when I was encumbered.

EDIT: meant full PLATE mail... not full chain mail.

 

[Toxi]

Wow. So any culture that doesn't abide their personal opinions, has deep running gender/sexuality problems?

It's the conclusion reached when you take the shitty "it's cultural" defense seriously. Shielding a few works of fiction from criticism by saying "it's part of the culture" is doing a disservice to the variety of fiction made in that culture. Nobody should say with a straight face that shitty fanservice is a part of Japanese culture.

 

[GreenLiquid]

I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again in the fact that this is entirely subjective. That's great for you, but what about the people whoo actually like the designs the way they are? By saying that there should be less of what they (including me) like you're somewhat limiting the creative freedoms of a developer. If Takaki wants to make Senran Kagura like he does he should be able to be given the creative freedom to do it. If someone else wants to make a game about a female detective in 1920s style detective clothing they should be able to do that.

It really should be a matter of more people should be making games, look how many films there are and compare it. There's bigger variety, because there's more films being made. Everyone wants to make comparisons between games and other media all the time and another huge example of this is books. Yes there's erotica for both men and women, but there's hundreds of thousands if not millions of other books you can go and read if you don't like it.

I don't mean to reduce the creative freedoms of developers in general (not that I have the power to do that anyway), but I would criticize games that sexualize their female characters for little or no benefit. Senran Kagura is of course an overtly sexual game, and as I said I don't have a problem with overtly sexual games being sexual. But we have way too many cases in video games of sexualized content being stuffed into places it doesn't belong and usually to the benefit of only one gender. Why do the only two female heroes in Hearthstone have clothing as skimpy as the succubus card? Why does Samus need to sneak around in a skintight leotard? My criticism of these things isn't just (or really at all) that they are impractical, but that they lend no benefit to the game they are in but manage to give female players the sense of being leered at and judged by their culture. It's harmful for some while offering no real benefit to the game, and that harm is externalized from studios because those studios produce in a milieu that considers female sexualization ordinary.

It's true that with more variety, there would be something for everyone out there and that players who want sexualization can have it, those who don't can avoid it, and everyone in between can find something to like as well. But culture and games culture in particular don't work that way. The set of every game ever made is limitless, but the space of well-known, relatively large budget games is not. What people criticizing sexualized armor designs are generally looking for is more parity within the space of games people actually hear about -- because there is always going to be erotica and sexualized games in the margins, as with any other fringe genre you can imagine. I guess what I'm getting at is that a single homemade film that smartly addresses a cultural problem does nothing to cure the social problem, because the realm of social problems is in the social space, and since people's brains are limited, only a certain number of games can inhabit that space at once. When those games are tilted toward a particular gender, this is a problem that no amount of extra variety in the margins can solve, unfortunately.

 

[MotionBlue]

It's the conclusion reached when you take the shitty "it's cultural" defense seriously. Shielding a few works of fiction from criticism by saying "it's part of the culture" is doing a disservice to the variety of fiction made in that culture.

I get it. Its like shielding a poorly argued opinion piece with a "bingo sheet".

 

[Taruranto]

Haha Presa....lool.

Her VA was pretty darn good.

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.

do you think she felt pain

 

[SkeptiMism]

I want to know how this "men playing as ripped handsome dudes = male power fantasy" logic permeated our culture. I think the age of the male power fantasy as it were doesn't even exist. When I play something like, Dragon Age, or Mass Effect, or pretty much any game with a character creator I make the male look like me. A slightly out of shape, balding, white dude. When playing something like Arkham Asylum I don't feel powerful because Batman is ripped, it's because of what he can do. If a fat middle-aged bald dude could do the same shit it would feel just as rewarding. It's so easy to say MALE POWER FANTASY every time someone brings up handsome, muscular protagonists with great hair being the equivalent to playing as a pretty girl in a revealing outfit, but from my male perspective it really is the same. The "power fantasy" comes from your actions, the character is just a proxy by which that is delivered. Again, playing Batman, after an hour Batman might as well not even exist. If he was replaced with a fat, balding white dude, or even a lady wearing a g-string and boots, it wouldn't matter(in the context of; it doesn't matter who the player character actually is outside of say, marketing purposes). Same with any game really. I don't think WOOOAH I'm Batman, I'm so ripped and cool, a millionaire playboy with all kinds of ladies hanging off him, instead I think, I just grappled off this Gargoyle and kicked the shit out of 5 dudes, I did that, I'm awesome. The power comes from the actions. I can think a character is cool, I can like the things he or she does, or want to be like them physically or in their lifestyle. But that doesn't translate to actually playing a game. I think that the stereotypical handsome, ripped, uber-confident alpha male protagonist can also be as damaging to the male psyche as the equivalent(as I presented it) is to women.

If I do a sick combo with Ryu in Street Fighter I'm not living vicariously through him. I did the combo, Ryu is just an avatar, whether he looks cool or not doesn't matter. It could be why I picked him at first, but I don't look at him and say, "I'm not like this in real life so I enjoy playing as him because he's ripped as fuck". It's because he can throw fucking fireballs, do that combo, and he's dressed up like a kung fu man. His physical attributes have nothing to do with that.

So I think that the answer here isn't to even the scales by objectifying men as much as women. That's short sighted. Women should be portrayed better in media, including games, as something other than sex objects. But to say that men live this amazing existence where they have this constant male power fantasy going and only women are objectified for our whims and only they suffer the effects of that is weak. Men have to deal with unrealistic images in media and our daily lives that we have to struggle with as well and that's not ok just because I get to beat up some enemies as a ripped handsome dude in a game and have images of pretty girls in revealing outfits thrown at me.

Also the bikini armor in Dragon's Dogma is an outlier, most of the female armor is really plain and normal just like the male armor.

Generally when people watch a movie or play a game, or even just read something, they have a tendency to relate to characters in different levels. If you read a book or watch a movie, you relate most to characters that are more similar to you. When you play a game, you often relate to the main character because that's "you".

When we think about ourselves, we like to imagine ourselves as more successful/good looking/strong than what we really are. Thus it makes sense that we also like to see our characters in games as powerful and good looking.

Also, since the dawn of mankind strength has been a thing that's generally respected in men (for obvious reasons). This has also been shown in art throughout centuries, especially so in ancient Greece. I'd argue that we still have this ideal image of man, and naturally a lot of men want to be like that.

It seems you don't really relate much and I feel like that's why you're so confused about this in the first place. Some people are like you, but I'd imagine majority of people aren't.

But I dunno, I'm tired and these are just some quick thoughts about it before going to sleep.

Wow. So any culture that doesn't abide their personal opinions, has deep running gender/sexuality problems?

I don't know about Korea, but Japan certainly has a lot of problems running deep in their culture, regarding sexuality and gender equality.
Perhaps the author worded that slightly poorly though.

I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again in the fact that this is entirely subjective. That's great for you, but what about the people whoo actually like the designs the way they are? By saying that there should be less of what they (including me) like you're somewhat limiting the creative freedoms of a developer. If Takaki wants to make Senran Kagura like he does he should be able to be given the creative freedom to do it. If someone else wants to make a game about a female detective in 1920s style detective clothing they should be able to do that.

It really should be a matter of more people should be making games, look how many films there are and compare it. There's bigger variety, because there's more films being made. Everyone wants to make comparisons between games and other media all the time and another huge example of this is books. Yes there's erotica for both men and women, but there's hundreds of thousands if not millions of other books you can go and read if you don't like it.

With all due respect that seems like the typical censorship argument. Nobody's trying to censor anything (and nobody is able to do it like that). The devs are free to create whatever they want, but we are free to criticize them for whatever reason we feel is justified to us. Perhaps someone thinks it is in bad taste, perhaps someone thinks it's overly sexualized or objectified. Perhaps someone just doesn't like it and can't describe why.

This isn't any different than criticizing Mario Kart because of boring battle mode or Destiny for bad story. We criticize anything we like and we absolutely should do it if we feel something isn't as good as it could be. This is also good for developers because that way they get feedback. The developer can then completely ignore it in the first place, listen to it and do something about it, or listen to it and decide to not do anything about it.

2014 has seen the rise of the new bigotry in videogames. There is something awfully sad and toxic in how some people want to reign over how other people have fun.


“Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm; but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.”

- T.S. Eliot

The person you quoted made an obvious strawman.

 

[Toxi]

To be fair, there is a certain 'clunkiness' due to the weight.
I once wore a full plate mail and that thing was about 120 pound.
Even if the armor can bend, I wasn't going to try anything stupid when I was encumbered.

EDIT: meant full PLATE mail... not full chain mail.

Training matters. People who can move like in the gif have gotten used to the extra weight, but you're definitely going to have some difficulties when you first wear it.