Skimpy armors

fiachsidhe

No

People like the OP ruined Nexus Mods. Turned the place into some lonely nerd paradise. Stop being such a damn stereotype gamer boy. It's embarrassing trying to find a good armor mod when 70-90% of what I see are anime stripper fantasy mods.

If you need every waking second of your online gaming time bombarded by *** and ass, go play one of the many Korean mmorpgs out there and leave this one to its aesthetic dignity.

I mean how hard up are you, that you need to make ultra realistic nude body mods for a game primarily played in FIRST PERSON? Yeah photo-realistic ***...time well spent Poindexter.

Bhakura

Yes

murklor007neb18_ESO wrote: »

Well, there is a HUGE difference between these two:

- Slutty skimpy outfits (ie every Asian MMO in existance)

- Just showing some skin (ie western MMOs).

As an example, skimpy armor that's seem to consist of fishscales and spider webs (random Tera armor I browsed for):
http://tera-online.cc/gallery/castanic-fl/3728-castanic_f_l17.html

Showing some pretty boob skin yet still being a very beefy outfit (GW2 Nord cultural armor):
http://www.gw2armor.com/norn/female/c2/light/display_looks.php

So which is this poll about?

I prefer the last one
Im amazed at the heavy negativity here, i wonder where all those skimpy armor mod downlaods and all those people wearing golden saint or dark seducer costume come from.
Guess times have changed
And to be fair i wasnt asking for plain nudity so i can "drool on a female naked body because i never seen one irl" as some stated.
I love the female form, and wearing armors that shows skin but not enough to be sexist only amplifies the natural beauty of the female form.
If this is sexist, i have a serious misunderstanding of what the word means.
And it wasnt only meant for females, armors worn by gladiators in Spartacus are pretty badass too. Never heard anyone cry that was sexist because the guys where half naked or more most of the time?

A good skimpy armor accentuates the body its encompassing, not reveals everything there is to reveal, i didnt ask for lingerie.

Loxy37

No

Absolutely no! Last thing this game needs is to become Tera Online. Now I'm not completely against them in Single player games as I used some in skyrim but I really don't wanna see Armourless, armour! Everyone with a female character would be running around looking like a Bimbo!

rhoekieb16_ESO

Yes

Again,having a right good laugh,reading some of the reactions.

Most of them coming from prudish,prissy,tight-laced and hypocrite citizens of the good old US of A,hiding behind words as: sexism and fetishized even.
It`s all about freedom of choice here,skimpy...or not to go skimpy...period.
And respect those who will...or won`t.

I for one couldn`t care less,the huge ammount of flaws in this game upsets me more.

Aeradon

Yes

For ESO, I think these are acceptable.

This is what I want my character to be wearing.

Female. Chain and leather chest + leather legs (medium armour)


Male. I want it without the ketchup bottles.


Then this for light armour. They have to make shorter light armour, with some breathing space. The robes in ESO other than the argonians and bosmers, looks so uptight and book-wormish. I mean look at Valaste!



And yes, nexus is filled with boy fantasy hentai crap. But there are still some good finds, most modders make amazing concepts, boy fantasy modders either get bored or die young. jk.

Glurin

Yes

A few that shows some skin (or fur or scales ) is OK, just don't go overboard with it. I don't think people around here would stand for the two bottle caps and a bandaid armor of invulnerability that other titles have.

ozgod22_eso

Yes

Yes. Because we all like perving on our lusty Argonian maid character.

someuser

Yes

Absolutely!

I've been very disappointed I can't "dress-up" my female toon

However, like @Laura said, it should go both ways AND it should not be mandatory. This PC BS is getting way out of hand.

Evergnar

No

No, but with an exception. I would love to see more minimalist (revealing) armor for Khajiit & Argonian races.

SanguineReaper

Yes

Let me start this out by saying that I voted yes specifically for freedom of choice. I don't see a point in putting armor like you can find in Tera in this game; but I see nothing wrong with having a few armor pieces or costumes that show a bit more skin. Freedom of choice has always been what ES stands for, so why not like what others have said, a few armor pieces similar to what Skyrim had with the Forsaken armor.

All of you that keep saying "no" because it objectifies women need to get over yourselves. Women CHOOSE to wear the things they do. There aren't men going from house to house and forcing women to wear the clothes they put on each morning. Women are CHOOSING to pose in Playboy and be a Victoria Secret model. So please stop with all of the "we need to stop objectifying women" BS. Feminists aside, women choose to dress the way they do and a lot of them actually enjoy the attention they get from men when doing so.

Gilandred

No

No to skimpy "armor," if we're talking about heavy armor. Light armor can be skimpy, because it's not really armor. So my answer is really more like "yes and no" than a definitive no.

Naguur86

No

rhoekieb16_ESO wrote: »

Again,having a right good laugh,reading some of the reactions.

Most of them coming from prudish,prissy,tight-laced and hypocrite citizens of the good old US of A,hiding behind words as: sexism and fetishized even.
It`s all about freedom of choice here,skimpy...or not to go skimpy...period.
And respect those who will...or won`t.

I for one couldn`t care less,the huge ammount of flaws in this game upsets me more.

I would be fine with it if it was optional but this would mean 2 seperate armor skins for each mode. Don't think this is gonna happen.

I personally would not want it. As some already stated: if there were such armor and even if it's just a decorative one, a whole lot of people would run around with this exact armor in the cities and my character would not be able to concentrate while crafting when there boobs everywhere.

It just doesn't fit in for me (the Arena cover does not change this^^) even if I am from Europe where, as everybody knows, everybody is having sex in the public. So no prudery here

yelloweyedemon

No

No, GOD NO! Too many mmo's out there made for 15 year old boys, featuring "slutty" costumes and schoolgirl outfits. Would be a disgrace if an ES game fall under this category...

The less childish a game is, the better!

Mortuum

No

@Aeradon those you posted are actually really ok, medium armor is not heavy that it has to vover every inch of character skin. It need to allow agile and fast movement, giving some protection.
Nothing wrong as well with sexy dress for sorcerer or mage.
What i was against voting and posting here are heavy armor sets like tiny-little-mini-micro-invisible panties+bare chest(hell a lot of protection you know ) and of course high heels, because they allow for better movement duriing combat.

Or something what RIFT did few months ago, adding VERY skimpy schoolgirl costume to store...Thats a bit too much and that is what i dont want to see in ESO.

Comments calling people prudish and hypocrites because of that i just ignore, same as i do with every idiot i meet.

Preachan

No

No. Just no.
Male teenagers who want to see naked flesh can do so on various *** sites.
Leave this game alone and get your kick somewhere else.

redspecter23

Yes

I say add in all sorts of new armor types, skimpy and non-skimpy, male and female. Players LOVE motifs. We have like 15 of them. We should have 100 of them. The game is new and I'm sure we'll get there in time. I'm not suggesting that armor styles are the most important thing for the development team right now, but at some point, I think we should have way more options than we have currently.

As much as some players might want the traditional chainmail bikini, I'm sure male players might also want the shirtless barbarian style.

DireKit

No

No.

Being female real-life wise, We can definitively say that 'sexy' is a frame of mind and exposing a tonne of skin and cleavage is NOT sexy in our opinions, it's trashy. Others may have their own opinions on the subject, but that's us.

Not to mention also being a practitioner of the Martial Arts, We understand the need for practical armour, making the armour skimpier than it already is would be unrealistic and detract from the immersion of the game.

The only way We'd agree to this is if the male characters had to be subjected to skimpy armour as well. And then only if it was a skimpy iron or leather thong, NOTHING ELSE AND NOTHING MORE.

And there better be junk in dat trunk, DERE BETTER BE JUNK IN DAT TRUNK.

Aeradon

Yes

SanguineReaper wrote: »

All of you that keep saying "no" because it objectifies women need to get over yourselves. Women CHOOSE to wear the things they do. There aren't men going from house to house and forcing women to wear the clothes they put on each morning. Women are CHOOSING to pose in Playboy and be a Victoria Secret model. So please stop with all of the "we need to stop objectifying women" BS. Feminists aside, women choose to dress the way they do and a lot of them actually enjoy the attention they get from men when doing so.

Agreed. Playboy part may be because of the market generated by lust, but VS is a fine example.

But for implementation in games.
"I can choose what I put on my character, it's my choice, be it skimpy or normal. I'm fine with it."
"Oh, she's a female playing a female and she chose to wear skimpy. Her choice, I can't stop her. Oh well, time to gather some nodes."
"He's a guy playing a female toon but dressed her up as a sloot? Hmm.. *insert own thoughts as everybody is different*"

I'd go with, "Wow, nice. What trait do I need to find for the gloves again? OMG, medium or light?!"

PVT_Parts

Yes

Bhakura wrote: »

It is rated M, might as well put in the racy outfits.

Aeradon

Yes

@Mortuum‌ Logically speaking, no matter ow skimpy it gets, ZOS would not implement chest piece that is just a tube. That's just too lazy.

I forgot what was the nexus modder's name, but here's a sample of what I want to see in game. With the ESO touch of course.
I believe females will have to be more agile than males, mobility precedes armour, and requires a blend for maximum survivability.


*edit* you have to right click and open in new tab.

HandofBane

Yes

I will be more than happy to roll around in nothing but a Dwemer Codpiece on my balding overweight bank alt. In exchange, I merely request a proper Breton Maid outfit and Lifts-Her-Tail to demonstrate it.

Sakiri

Yes

Mortuum wrote: »

Huge selection of armor, costumes, dresses, casual clothing etc etc-YES!
Metal bikini for little boys who never seen piece of female body-NO!

xxx sites -> this way

Excuse me, I *have* those parts and I fully enjoy the option to not look like a nun, thanks.

Maverick827

No

SanguineReaper wrote: »

Women CHOOSE to wear the things they do.

I'm not really a feminist myself, but I did take a feminism course to cover a "diversity" credit in college, so I know a bit about the arguments they make, and I like arguing, so:

While no one is physically forcing women to like/wear revealing clothes, pose in Playboy, etc., society has essentially brainwashed them into believing that "being sexy" is their only form of worth. It should be obvious to anyone who lives in this world to see that young girls aren't told that being smart, athletic, or powerful is what makes them valuable as human beings, just being sexy for men.

They don't even know that they've been brainwashed because it starts at such a young age (Disney princesses, barbie dolls, etc.), so they don't know that their own opinions and beliefs have been placed in their heads with the intent of making them more pleasing to men.

We're actually starting to see a turnaround in this line of thinking. If you haven't noticed, there are a lot more "teenage girl" action stories coming out these days like The Hunger Games and Divergent that have never existed on this scale in the history of mankind. Twilight tries to do it but hilariously fails when placed under a microscope. Disney is trying to make a more empowered "princess" role model for girls with movies like Brave and Frozen.

Men, on the other hand, are told that their worth comes from power (physical or otherwise), intelligence, and all sorts of actually positive things to have. This is why "skimpy" armor on men (while still dumb for other reasons) isn't as exploitative as "skimpy" armor on women. Sai Sahan isn't being exploited as a sexual object by wearing that armor (or the lack thereof), he's being empowered as a warrior. It shows his strength and his ability to dominate others. Shirtless warriors like Conan the Barbarian and He-Man aren't created for women to ogle at, they're created so that men can admire their prowess.

Skimpy armor is still very dumb simply for the reason that, while this is a fantasy game, even fantasy needs to observe and obey its own rules. It stands to reason that, since armor exists in this world, then it must exist for a reason. It would make no sense for armor to exist if everyone had "magically" resilient skin, or whatever nonsense some people come up with to justify skimpy armor. No one would wear full plate if they didn't have to. And yet they do. Ergo, armor matters.

Mortannia

Please No skimpy armor. If you do offer it, make the protection realistic with a huge penalty in protection. Please just keep it realistic.

Zarkaz

No

No. Why ? Because every time i see some kind of crazy "skimped" armor i imagine how i will stab that persong with my sword in a belly, put my plate armor hand inside pull out guts and smash face with a shield to no recognition. Cmon you should watch more brutal medieval\fantasy movies.

Sakiri

Yes

sylviermoone wrote: »

I don't really want to wear anything "skimpier" than what is already available.

But if others (and this should be available for both genders) want to, that's fine by me.

Id like for the higher level stuff to show *something*.

Low level gear has midriffs showing, bosmer robes arent floor length ballgowns...

Then you get higher level and suddenly you look like a tin can or a nun.

Some of it doesnt even look realistically feasible so please dont give me that "realism" excuse. Plate armors in this game look like you shouldng be able to move.

vicviper0_ESO

Yes

its common knowlege. when dealing with female characters. the less the armor covers, the better it protects

JosephChip

No

SanguineReaper wrote: »

All of you that keep saying "no" because it objectifies women need to get over yourselves. Women CHOOSE to wear the things they do. There aren't men going from house to house and forcing women to wear the clothes they put on each morning. Women are CHOOSING to pose in Playboy and be a Victoria Secret model. So please stop with all of the "we need to stop objectifying women" BS. Feminists aside, women choose to dress the way they do and a lot of them actually enjoy the attention they get from men when doing so.

Yes, except that the general issue is much bigger than that. But just to answer your argument: the majority of players using those new skins would be males. Males dressing up women to cater to their sexual instinct. You don't see the objectification in this? Please. It's not a problem as long as it isn't inappropratel placed, like in this case.
Also I am pretty sure you aren't the official spokesman for women. It seems reasonable to think there are women who would like that, as there are women who would hate it. That's irrelevant at the end of the day. Throwing away decency because some individuals may want to isn't a realistic option. Even in normal society a woman may feel the desire to go out naked, it does not mean she should be able to do that and it does not concern personal preferences.
An online videogame isn't the place for such things. Pure and simple. There are all kind of other activities you can dedicate yourself to that will satisfy your need. I am sure a large part of the community wouldn't want to see their game turn into a soft-po-rn recreation.
For reference, what "skimpy" means is portrayed in the 4th post of this thread. I have seen a few people posting examples of outfits they would like and they are perfectly ok.

Sakiri

Yes

Maverick827 wrote: »

SanguineReaper wrote: »

Women CHOOSE to wear the things they do.

I'm not really a feminist myself, but I did take a feminism course to cover a "diversity" credit in college, so I know a bit about the arguments they make, and I like arguing, so:

While no one is physically forcing women to like/wear revealing clothes, pose in Playboy, etc., society has essentially brainwashed them into believing that "being sexy" is their only form of worth. It should be obvious to anyone who lives in this world to see that young girls aren't told that being smart, athletic, or powerful is what makes them valuable as human beings, just being sexy for men.

They don't even know that they've been brainwashed because it starts at such a young age (Disney princesses, barbie dolls, etc.), so they don't know that their own opinions and beliefs have been placed in their heads with the intent of making them more pleasing to men.

We're actually starting to see a turnaround in this line of thinking. If you haven't noticed, there are a lot more "teenage girl" action stories coming out these days like The Hunger Games and Divergent that have never existed on this scale in the history of mankind. Twilight tries to do it but hilariously fails when placed under a microscope. Disney is trying to make a more empowered "princess" role model for girls with movies like Brave and Frozen.

Men, on the other hand, are told that their worth comes from power (physical or otherwise), intelligence, and all sorts of actually positive things to have. This is why "skimpy" armor on men (while still dumb for other reasons) isn't as exploitative as "skimpy" armor on women. Sai Sahan isn't being exploited as a sexual object by wearing that armor (or the lack thereof), he's being empowered as a warrior. It shows his strength and his ability to dominate others. Shirtless warriors like Conan the Barbarian and He-Man aren't created for women to ogle at, they're created so that men can admire their prowess.

Skimpy armor is still very dumb simply for the reason that, while this is a fantasy game, even fantasy needs to observe and obey its own rules. It stands to reason that, since armor exists in this world, then it must exist for a reason. It would make no sense for armor to exist if everyone had "magically" resilient skin, or whatever nonsense some people come up with to justify skimpy armor. No one would wear full plate if they didn't have to. And yet they do. Ergo, armor matters.

That doesnt justify putting women in burkas or dressing is like Mennonites.

The official reason used for dressing them like that is because men are weak and will do immoral things should they see skin, like women have this magical power by existing or something.

Asasinka

Yes

Everyone mentioning armors that do not fullfill it's function should reconsider.
This game isn't "real world", you can use magic in it so there can be also armors which look like something and are something else or it can be magicaly powered to use a force field.