Amris said:Rachael said:The begining of my post was in response to Padame who stated she wants a character to look like a Luis Royo painting, which when I googled them was basically women wearing lingerie.
How about you provide some examples of what you like and think is "feminine"? :)
When you say every example given doesn't look "feminine" or doesn't "look like a woman" what else is there other than exposed cleavage/midrift/legs that would make a character look more "feminine" in plate armour? Not trying to be confrontational just genuinly curious as to what you want, which may be helpfull for people to understand and for dev's to understand as well. :)
I am not a person who cares very much about the "tankini" thing. I know a lot of women enjoy wearing it on their characters. I have worn stuff in WoW in town that many on this thread would be in an uproar about.
BUT, the devs have made it clear that they are going a conservative route. I'm also okay with that... unless "conservative" means 110% covered and asexual, which is how the human in the stream looks.
Here's the problem with these sorts of discussions, and why answering your question is hard... I don't mind a bit of cleavage, an exposed midriff, or somewhat exposed legs. I would PREFER some cleavage showing, the others I am okay with either way, as long as it's minor, not "tankini" (since that doesn't fit the model of the game).
The real issues arise with this... if I say that I would prefer to have cleavage, I'm not met with, "how much?"; rather I am met with, "so you want to run around in pasties and a thong!" which has inherent within it, an inference that wanting to show ANY skin at all makes me a whore, a ****, or a Jezebel. And that's where the intellectual dishonest arises.
The same people who take this attitude (and I'm not necessarily referencing you, though you do appear to be taking that attitude, even if you don't intend to be doing so) is that they are so incredibly dishonest about it. Their statement always turns to "realism". Yet I don't see even a single person here, not one, arguing against the greatest oxymoron EVER in the English language, "cloth armor". No person should go onto a battlefield in cloth alone. Period. Why is it that 'casters' can run around in cloth and get hit by a broadaxe and nobody bats an eye... but put a "tank" into something a bit of skin poking out and suddenly the whole game is "unrealistic" because of it?
It isn't about realism, that's the excuse that is used. If it were about realism, then all cloth wearers would DIE IMMEDIATELY upon being struck by ANY blow with a serious weapon. Not to mention, nothing in the whole game without claws would be able to do anything remotely coming close to the DPS of someone/thing using a claymore, a broadaxe, etc.
I get really tired of the "no skin" arguments, because they are intellectually dishonest. The EXACT SAME people who argue against it, don't so much as blink at the idea of cloth "armor".
So we can't actually have any kind of real, genuine, equitable conversation about this. The reason is simple... because there isn't any honesty in the conversation to begin with.
One group of people should not be constrained by "realism" in a fantasy game while the rest can run around in "pasties and a thong" in the form of "cloth armor" (no matter what it looks like). Cloth and even leather have no place on a battlefield of beings or things that can do substantial damage to plate armor. Once we accept that NONE OF IT IS REALISM, then we can have a frank discussion about how far we can go afield with SOME women's armor in order to avoid demonizing any woman who 'wants to show a little skin' as being tantamount to 'pasties and a thong'.
I don't necessarily want pasties and a thong, though I don't really have a problem with it. On the other hand, I don't want my cleric to have to run around in a Victorian-era chastity belt just because "realism" while the caster beside me is wearing a robe and a pair of slippers... are you KIDDING me? But hey, even the cloth armor will likely look like a Victorian era chastity belt, lol. I mean, uh... "realism". :p
The other issue, by the way, is how they've made women's clothing (in either direction) all about men. I CAN'T wear 'sexy' things because men might get excited. The attitude is, in essence, that there's something wrong with me if; a. I don't have a problem with men getting excited (let's be honest, men still got 'excited' in the Victorian era, so what women wear has nothing to do with it) and b. I want to wear something sexy. What I wear should be about what I want to wear, and not about men. EVEN if what I want to wear is ACTUALLY pasties and a thong. Did you know that there are cultures in this world that don't sexualize breasts? They're actually for feeding babies, but the controversy over women breastfeeding in public continues apace because women's breasts are all about MEN still...
Couldnt agree more with you Amris. I hope that VRI puts in choice for all types.
My wife made a good point last night. Looking at the Ogre in the stream, he was 1/2 naked showing off all his manly meat. Why? Because for guys that looks cool. Why isn’t he covered up in plate? How come he can show off his skin? Why is it a big deal that the woman playing this game would like to be noticed as a woman without it being done only with close inspection. Why can’t female armour at least be shapely to curve to the female form? Silhouettes should be done of the female and male forms. From there you will see the real problem. They all look the same other then long hair.
Even going back to EQ1, full plate, 100% covered up and you can tell from a distance its a female avatar. Even the stance looks feminine.
Nanfoodle said:My wife made a good point last night. Looking at the Ogre in the stream, he was 1/2 naked showing off all his manly meat. Why? Because for guys that looks cool. Why isn’t he covered up in plate? How come he can show off his skin? Why is it a big deal that the woman playing this game would like to be noticed as a woman without it being done only with close inspection. Why can’t female armour at least be shapely to curve to the female form?
That is a valid point, and the Archai character was only wearing a kilt, though I think that was more to show off the detail of the character model than anything else. The ogre I think might have been displaying more cultural armor, like maybe they don't wear full plate? Perhaps some concept art with different armor styles, both female and male, could give everyone an idea of where their heads are at when it comes to that. Just a thought :)
This post was edited by Rominian at February 17, 2017 8:12 AM PST
Amris said:I am not a person who cares very much about the "tankini" thing. I know a lot of women enjoy wearing it on their characters. I have worn stuff in WoW in town that many on this thread would be in an uproar about.
BUT, the devs have made it clear that they are going a conservative route. I'm also okay with that... unless "conservative" means 110% covered and asexual, which is how the human in the stream looks.
Here's the problem with these sorts of discussions, and why answering your question is hard... I don't mind a bit of cleavage, an exposed midriff, or somewhat exposed legs. I would PREFER some cleavage showing, the others I am okay with either way, as long as it's minor, not "tankini" (since that doesn't fit the model of the game).
The real issues arise with this... if I say that I would prefer to have cleavage, I'm not met with, "how much?"; rather I am met with, "so you want to run around in pasties and a thong!" which has inherent within it, an inference that wanting to show ANY skin at all makes me a whore, a ****, or a Jezebel. And that's where the intellectual dishonest arises.
The same people who take this attitude (and I'm not necessarily referencing you, though you do appear to be taking that attitude, even if you don't intend to be doing so) is that they are so incredibly dishonest about it. Their statement always turns to "realism". Yet I don't see even a single person here, not one, arguing against the greatest oxymoron EVER in the English language, "cloth armor". No person should go onto a battlefield in cloth alone. Period. Why is it that 'casters' can run around in cloth and get hit by a broadaxe and nobody bats an eye... but put a "tank" into something a bit of skin poking out and suddenly the whole game is "unrealistic" because of it?
It isn't about realism, that's the excuse that is used. If it were about realism, then all cloth wearers would DIE IMMEDIATELY upon being struck by ANY blow with a serious weapon. Not to mention, nothing in the whole game without claws would be able to do anything remotely coming close to the DPS of someone/thing using a claymore, a broadaxe, etc.
I get really tired of the "no skin" arguments, because they are intellectually dishonest. The EXACT SAME people who argue against it, don't so much as blink at the idea of cloth "armor".
So we can't actually have any kind of real, genuine, equitable conversation about this. The reason is simple... because there isn't any honesty in the conversation to begin with.
One group of people should not be constrained by "realism" in a fantasy game while the rest can run around in "pasties and a thong" in the form of "cloth armor" (no matter what it looks like). Cloth and even leather have no place on a battlefield of beings or things that can do substantial damage to plate armor. Once we accept that NONE OF IT IS REALISM, then we can have a frank discussion about how far we can go afield with SOME women's armor in order to avoid demonizing any woman who 'wants to show a little skin' as being tantamount to 'pasties and a thong'.
I don't necessarily want pasties and a thong, though I don't really have a problem with it. On the other hand, I don't want my cleric to have to run around in a Victorian-era chastity belt just because "realism" while the caster beside me is wearing a robe and a pair of slippers... are you KIDDING me? But hey, even the cloth armor will likely look like a Victorian era chastity belt, lol. I mean, uh... "realism". :p
The other issue, by the way, is how they've made women's clothing (in either direction) all about men. I CAN'T wear 'sexy' things because men might get excited. The attitude is, in essence, that there's something wrong with me if; a. I don't have a problem with men getting excited (let's be honest, men still got 'excited' in the Victorian era, so what women wear has nothing to do with it) and b. I want to wear something sexy. What I wear should be about what I want to wear, and not about men. EVEN if what I want to wear is ACTUALLY pasties and a thong. Did you know that there are cultures in this world that don't sexualize breasts? They're actually for feeding babies, but the controversy over women breastfeeding in public continues apace because women's breasts are all about MEN still...
Not once did I call or insinuate that you are a "whore" for wanting to show skin (in a video game none the less), not once did I "demonize" any woman that wants to "show a little skin", not once did I even mentions "pasties". I did ask you to post examples of what you'd like but you won't even do that.
One main reason why casters are able to wear cloth armour in an RPG game, is because there are TANKS, tanks that are meant to take the hit, the caster is not meant to be hit, thus does not need to have the armour. (Not to mention that, no, you're wrong, cloth armor (even paper armour) has been used throughout history as a very effective means of protection on the battlefield.)
All I've posted was what I would personally like to see in the game, not once did I say you don't have the right to do so as well.
Again, why not try to be constructive and post what you would like to see, before this thread gets locked because of all the unnecessary personal attacks thet are being flung around. :)
I think we are all friends here. Bottom line is this:
There should be options for all angles. Cloth armor should be padded and sown with layers - let's remember alot of EQ1 cloth robes just looked like a colored blanket. Left up to the imagination of the individual viewing it. Nothing wrong with this. Also, does anyone remember Wood Elves in leather? I do. =) =) There was a bit of everything. Even High Elven Clerics with metal dresses. Let's just tone down the rhetoric and encourage the development team to provide a little bit of both.
You can go both routes, and leave it up to the individual. I am sure the styles will be a mix - if evidenced at all by the teams previous bodies of work.
HemlockReaper said:Zorkon said:I've been staying out of this one as I'm a male and I won't be playing a female. And as such I belive this is the females call.
So your saying that since I'm a male, who will be playing a male, then its my call if I want to parade around town with my ranger in his fig leaf armor or show up to a raid in my banana hammock?
Lol, yes, I am... to each his own, live and LET live.
I don't want you or anybody else telling me I "need to cut my hair, at 50 years old I should be looking more professional, or, respectable, or Presentable..." I heard em all. So to live with that freedom, I need to allow you to let your hammock swing if you choose.
Zorkon said:HemlockReaper said:Zorkon said:I've been staying out of this one as I'm a male and I won't be playing a female. And as such I belive this is the females call.
So your saying that since I'm a male, who will be playing a male, then its my call if I want to parade around town with my ranger in his fig leaf armor or show up to a raid in my banana hammock?
Lol, yes, I am... to each his own, live and LET live.
I don't want you or anybody else telling me I "need to cut my hair, at 50 years old I should be looking more professional, or, respectable, or Presentable..." I heard em all. So to live with that freedom, I need to allow you to let your hammock swing if you choose.
Fair enough.
Nanfoodle said:My wife made a good point last night. Looking at the Ogre in the stream, he was 1/2 naked showing off all his manly meat.
oh, so thats why its called Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen.
HemlockReaper said:Nanfoodle said:My wife made a good point last night. Looking at the Ogre in the stream, he was 1/2 naked showing off all his manly meat.
oh, so thats why its called Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen.
Verdic said:I think we are all friends here. Bottom line is this:
There should be options for all angles. Cloth armor should be padded and sown with layers - let's remember alot of EQ1 cloth robes just looked like a colored blanket. Left up to the imagination of the individual viewing it. Nothing wrong with this. Also, does anyone remember Wood Elves in leather? I do. =) =) There was a bit of everything. Even High Elven Clerics with metal dresses. Let's just tone down the rhetoric and encourage the development team to provide a little bit of both.
You can go both routes, and leave it up to the individual. I am sure the styles will be a mix - if evidenced at all by the teams previous bodies of work.
I guess that's part of the issue here. You can't very well have sexy plate armor AND sturdy full body tank armor as options for these folks unless they make two versions of all higher drops to satisfy the options people may want, as there will be no transmog/glamour in this game (thankfully). That said, I fully agree with Rachael and I want to see examples of these feminine armors being suggested because pretty much all the full body female armors that have been posted have been very feminine to me, no problem recognizing that they are women at all.
"The other issue, by the way, is how they've made women's clothing (in either direction) all about men. I CAN'T wear 'sexy' things because men might get excited. "
I think that is a bit disingenuous, no? The lingerie armors and "tankini" stuff seems almost entirely meant to cater to men's desires. The ads you see for fantasy games on websites that are a busty barely clothed elf or the youtube videos that use images of women in underwear as the thumbnail are primarily to get men to click on them. I really don't think full plate females is because men might get excited so much as it makes sense that a tank is wearing full plate/as much armor as possible to absorb hits. I know it is a "fantasy" game but that doesn't mean it has to follow the "norm" of others, it can very well go more Game of Thrones style of fantasy. The sexy tank thing is done in pretty much every other game so to me this is a very refreshing thing to see.
Again, I just want to see some examples of what you are talking about. I don't think anyone is going to jump down your throat or point fingers. I know I just want to understand.
I would respectfully disagree. I think we can have both. Maybe not of the same *exact* item. But certainly different styles of the different armor types. Also, as you pointed out to me over the Paladin Race thing - we won't really know if there's anything to get upset over until we've seen all the options available. Right?
Iksar said:Verdic said:I think we are all friends here. Bottom line is this:
There should be options for all angles. Cloth armor should be padded and sown with layers - let's remember alot of EQ1 cloth robes just looked like a colored blanket. Left up to the imagination of the individual viewing it. Nothing wrong with this. Also, does anyone remember Wood Elves in leather? I do. =) =) There was a bit of everything. Even High Elven Clerics with metal dresses. Let's just tone down the rhetoric and encourage the development team to provide a little bit of both.
You can go both routes, and leave it up to the individual. I am sure the styles will be a mix - if evidenced at all by the teams previous bodies of work.
I guess that's part of the issue here. You can't very well have sexy plate armor AND sturdy full body tank armor as options for these folks unless they make two versions of all higher drops to satisfy the options people may want, as there will be no transmog/glamour in this game (thankfully). That said, I fully agree with Rachael and I want to see examples of these feminine armors being suggested because pretty much all the full body female armors that have been posted have been very feminine to me, no problem recognizing that they are women at all.
"The other issue, by the way, is how they've made women's clothing (in either direction) all about men. I CAN'T wear 'sexy' things because men might get excited. "
I think that is a bit disingenuous, no? The lingerie armors and "tankini" stuff seems almost entirely meant to cater to men's desires. The ads you see for fantasy games on websites that are a busty barely clothed elf or the youtube videos that use images of women in underwear as the thumbnail are primarily to get men to click on them. I really don't think full plate females is because men might get excited so much as it makes sense that a tank is wearing full plate/as much armor as possible to absorb hits. I know it is a "fantasy" game but that doesn't mean it has to follow the "norm" of others, it can very well go more Game of Thrones style of fantasy. The sexy tank thing is done in pretty much every other game so to me this is a very refreshing thing to see.
Again, I just want to see some examples of what you are talking about. I don't think anyone is going to jump down your throat or point fingers. I know I just want to understand.
Pyde said:*pics*
I have no issues with any of those except Wonder Woman. They seem appropriate enough to the portrayed classes; the shaman looks shamanistic, the rogue looks like a rogue, the casters and bard look fine.
Wonder Woman looks ridiculous, but I've always felt that way. I guess she could run around naked for all anyone cares since she has bracelets that protect her from just about anything.
@Rachael
I liked your pics and as a dude think that pic of Ciri is actually kinda sexy.
@Flak
I approve of the much needed Giggity!
@Pyde
Nice pics! I want that female shaman to kick my ass and make me like it.
So now for my contribution!!!!
I demand equality! All tanks regardless of gender are to wear battle dresses like this and must have cute anime faces and every sentence must end with a cat sound:
or this!
Amsai said:So now for my contribution!!!!
I demand equality! All tanks regardless of gender are to wear battle dresses like this and must have cute anime faces and every sentence must end with a cat sound:
Only tanks? Come on man it's 2017, all parts of the military should be able to join! As for cat sounds, BBBBBRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTT kinda sounds like a cat purring. A cat with a uzi.
Seeing as there seems to be a disagreement on feminity ..I looked it up Merriam-Webster dictionary:
1: the quality or nature of the female sex
To me, as a woman..I believe that subtle is "sexier" than letting it all hang out leaving nothing to the imagination. There is no form of tyranny in that belief. As for expressing one's "sexuality" isn't it better to do that in real life, instead of some on-line game with millions of anonymous observers? Why is it so important to advertise one's sexuality in a game? I believe that is purely personal...meant for people that you care about in your life. Just my humble opinion.
Cana
K maybe Louis was not exactly the best of examples.... I should have calrified I like some of his top peices.... the bottoms do need some work.... LOL here are some more examples of what I mean.... Can we PLS PLS PLS maybe get a small heal on our boots?
![Valla [Diablo]:](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/04/61/6d/04616d1aab618a4e512dbee161b6ad34.jpg)
Personally I feel like there are other ways to express femininity other than bare stomachs and cleavage.
Posture would be a big one imo. But maybe also things such as accessories of the armour are places and similar.
Compromising the armour for the sake of being more femenine (Something that seems to mean sexiness here) shouldn't be in a game like Pantheon imo, it is fantasy yes, but also medieval fantasy trying to be authentic and not something super stylized like Tera.
