We would like more feminine armors

UrQuan

bellanca6561n wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

Keron wrote: »

Still, a full plate wearer, no matter the customization and craftsmanship, will drop dead after a 100m-run. Give him 500m if he is highly trained. It's no wonder that heavily armed fighters were usually mounted or using war carriages. Every foot soldier was clad in something like "medium armor", even if that consisted of a mail shirt.

Um, no. You're very very misinformed on this. Full plate weighs less than the full combat gear of most modern soldiers (you're typically looking at roughly 50-60 lbs for full plate, vs around 90-100 lbs for typical modern infantry combat gear). On top of that, unlike mail or modern gear, the weight is relatively evenly distributed around the body, which makes it much less tiring (as long as you're used to it - if you're not then the very fact that you've got added weight on your arms and legs is going to tire you out faster). During the time period when both mail and plate were common, a man wearing plate could wear his armour for much longer than a man wearing mail before being too tired out by the weight to fight effectively, even though the mail typically weighed somewhat less.

If a 120 lb female US Army second lieutenant can run a full marathon (that's 42,195m) wearing an 85 lb bomb suit, a trained knight wearing a 60 lb suit of full plate can definitely run over 500m without dropping dead.

You also have no understanding of medieval warfare if you think that foot soldiers always wore "medium armour" during the era of full plate. Do a little research on the Hundred Years War and the War of the Roses and you'll find that battles often consisted of thousands of men-at-arms on foot in full plate, typically alongside archers and cavalry. Often the majority of the foot were in full plate, and infantry charges (which would be over distances greater than 100m) were common.

Me too, UrQuan....couldn't have made it through school without the middle ages. Oops, picked that up from another of your posts.

But this is a dangerous road. When War of the Roses was released - the game I mean - folks went wild about its realism.

My thought was, oh god, I hope the hell not. I mean, hours and hours of hacking and hewing, trying like mad, using those weapons, to make someone die.

It wasn't pretty or easy. Nor was the game. Imagine this, an online game where it took some work to get an opponent down. Then, for full credit, you had to ram whatever pointed weapon you had into any gap you could find in their helmet - ram right into the eye socket, yes sir!

And, as the victim, you lay there helplessly, hands raised as if pleading for mercy, as you saw the person straddling you body shove a sword into your face as the screen went black.

Oh, what a community builder that tender title was.

Do not imagine, do not entertain the notion that realism is what you want here. It was not an entertainment activity. It was gruesome, it was slow agony in most cases, and it stank.

And the vast majority of soldiers who perished died of disease.

No. Online fantasy roleplaying games are about ritual. And ritual is the enactment of a myth. Thus what we're discussing here is mythology and the imagery that either serves that mythology or detracts from it.

I never played that game, but from your description of it I'm actually very curious to try it. I don't think I'd necessarily enjoy playing it, but I'm sure I'd find it very interesting. I'm much happier playing games with a healthy dose of fantasy in them, but when it comes to a historical game with a high realism component, I'm always curious. Of course, I'm typically the guy who watches Braveheart and complains that the real William Wallace was a noble who wore full armour and such... I have real trouble enjoying any form of entertainment based on actual history if I see anything in it that I know is historically inaccurate. That's a large part of why I usually prefer fantasy for my entertainment

Side note: my all-time favorite air combat game was a World War I dogfighting game for the Amiga (I've long since forgotten the name), and a huge part of why I liked it was because your character, as a pilot, was mostly responsible for the maintenance of his own plane (as was common then), and if you didn't raise your maintenance skill your chances of having things go wrong in-flight were increased. It may be frustrating as hell when your machine guns jam in the middle of a dogfight because you didn't maintain them properly, but dang if that isn't a good reflection of what actually happened!

And yes, I've been a history geek (especially with regards to medieval history) ever since I was a kid. Based on that, maybe it's a little odd that I ended up in an IT career where I could be considered an entirely different type of geek...

MercyKilling

I would also like to point out that the whole suit isn't armor.
Technically the only parts armored are her bewbs, shoulders, upper arms, she's gauntleted, belt and kneepads...with minor upper thigh armor. Her belly is completely exposed as well as groin/*** area. On Krypton, any stab or cut or shot to those uncovered areas would be very disastrous.

I leave you to look at and hate or love this armor. So want to see it in this game.




Edited to show picture of Faora Ul

UrQuan

MercyKilling wrote: »

I would also like to point out that the whole suit isn't armor.
Technically the only parts armored are her bewbs, shoulders, upper arms, she's gauntleted, belt and kneepads...with minor upper thigh armor. Her belly is completely exposed as well as groin/*** area. On Krypton, any stab or cut or shot to those uncovered areas would be very disastrous.

I haven't seen the movie that's from, so I can't say for sure, but it looks to me like the areas you point out as being unarmoured are actually protected by some form of mail.

MercyKilling

UrQuan wrote: »

I haven't seen the movie that's from, so I can't say for sure, but it looks to me like the areas you point out as being unarmoured are actually protected by some form of mail.

They aren't. It's the same material as Superman's costume, as shown here:




There's a scene in the movie where Zod breaks out of his armor and he's wearing the same thing under it that Kal-El is. Well, except not red and blue. Point being, it most certainly is not chain mail.

UrQuan

MercyKilling wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

I haven't seen the movie that's from, so I can't say for sure, but it looks to me like the areas you point out as being unarmoured are actually protected by some form of mail.

They aren't. It's the same material as Superman's costume, as shown here:




There's a scene in the movie where Zod breaks out of his armor and he's wearing the same thing under it that Kal-El is. Well, except not red and blue. Point being, it most certainly is not chain mail.

Well then, I'm glad i qualified my statement by saying that I couldn't say for sure because I haven't seen the movie, and I defer to your greater knowledge on the topic

MercyKilling

UrQuan wrote: »

MercyKilling wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

I haven't seen the movie that's from, so I can't say for sure, but it looks to me like the areas you point out as being unarmoured are actually protected by some form of mail.

They aren't. It's the same material as Superman's costume, as shown here:




There's a scene in the movie where Zod breaks out of his armor and he's wearing the same thing under it that Kal-El is. Well, except not red and blue. Point being, it most certainly is not chain mail.

Well then, I'm glad i qualified my statement by saying that I couldn't say for sure because I haven't seen the movie, and I defer to your greater knowledge on the topic

I've watched the movie several times because I actually like it. Weird, I know. I can recommend it to anyone simply on the merit of the fight scenes alone.
But back on track.

Options are a good thing. At least give us the OPTION to use different designs on a racial motif. Don't just arbitrarily take things away.

Iduyenn

Those pictures are just Inspiration. Or do we have to ask Sheldon Cooper why cryptonian Marmelade cant be washed out on earth?

Its impossible to discuss about Reality in Computergames. Reality may Even disturb immersion sometimes.
I think we talk about Personal preferences.

And some of us dont like the explicyty of certain games (concerning cloaths
Iron bra and much naked skin.

For me that doesnt help with my immersion.
I have a bad feeling, like taking away the gravity of my virtual existance. Reducing it to sex/gender.
My character may have a fit figure, when she removes her cloaths, but she is practical, smart an strong.

Its like... Not sending my underage daughter with top and hotpants to school.

The good thing is; in Virtual space you can pretty much do, what you want.

Like a pink hello kitty kajit.

I just dont want to be urged/obligated to wear prostitute-wear in a game like this.

There should be options...

MornaBaine

UrQuan wrote: »

[ Of course, I'm typically the guy who watches Braveheart and complains that the real William Wallace was a noble who wore full armour and such... I have real trouble enjoying any form of entertainment based on actual history if I see anything in it that I know is historically inaccurate. That's a large part of why I usually prefer fantasy for my entertainment
...

Whereas I'm sitting there bitching about those ridiculous panne' stretch velvet gowns the (admittedly gloriously beautiful) princess was wearing. Oh and the fact that it's highly unlikely Wallace managed to impregnate her since she was like seven years old at the time I think. Memory fails but I'm pretty sure that was it. LOL

bellanca6561n

UrQuan wrote: »

bellanca6561n wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

Keron wrote: »

Still, a full plate wearer, no matter the customization and craftsmanship, will drop dead after a 100m-run. Give him 500m if he is highly trained. It's no wonder that heavily armed fighters were usually mounted or using war carriages. Every foot soldier was clad in something like "medium armor", even if that consisted of a mail shirt.

Um, no. You're very very misinformed on this. Full plate weighs less than the full combat gear of most modern soldiers (you're typically looking at roughly 50-60 lbs for full plate, vs around 90-100 lbs for typical modern infantry combat gear). On top of that, unlike mail or modern gear, the weight is relatively evenly distributed around the body, which makes it much less tiring (as long as you're used to it - if you're not then the very fact that you've got added weight on your arms and legs is going to tire you out faster). During the time period when both mail and plate were common, a man wearing plate could wear his armour for much longer than a man wearing mail before being too tired out by the weight to fight effectively, even though the mail typically weighed somewhat less.

If a 120 lb female US Army second lieutenant can run a full marathon (that's 42,195m) wearing an 85 lb bomb suit, a trained knight wearing a 60 lb suit of full plate can definitely run over 500m without dropping dead.

You also have no understanding of medieval warfare if you think that foot soldiers always wore "medium armour" during the era of full plate. Do a little research on the Hundred Years War and the War of the Roses and you'll find that battles often consisted of thousands of men-at-arms on foot in full plate, typically alongside archers and cavalry. Often the majority of the foot were in full plate, and infantry charges (which would be over distances greater than 100m) were common.

Me too, UrQuan....couldn't have made it through school without the middle ages. Oops, picked that up from another of your posts.

But this is a dangerous road. When War of the Roses was released - the game I mean - folks went wild about its realism.

My thought was, oh god, I hope the hell not. I mean, hours and hours of hacking and hewing, trying like mad, using those weapons, to make someone die.

It wasn't pretty or easy. Nor was the game. Imagine this, an online game where it took some work to get an opponent down. Then, for full credit, you had to ram whatever pointed weapon you had into any gap you could find in their helmet - ram right into the eye socket, yes sir!

And, as the victim, you lay there helplessly, hands raised as if pleading for mercy, as you saw the person straddling you body shove a sword into your face as the screen went black.

Oh, what a community builder that tender title was.

Do not imagine, do not entertain the notion that realism is what you want here. It was not an entertainment activity. It was gruesome, it was slow agony in most cases, and it stank.

And the vast majority of soldiers who perished died of disease.

No. Online fantasy roleplaying games are about ritual. And ritual is the enactment of a myth. Thus what we're discussing here is mythology and the imagery that either serves that mythology or detracts from it.

I never played that game, but from your description of it I'm actually very curious to try it. I don't think I'd necessarily enjoy playing it, but I'm sure I'd find it very interesting. I'm much happier playing games with a healthy dose of fantasy in them, but when it comes to a historical game with a high realism component, I'm always curious. Of course, I'm typically the guy who watches Braveheart and complains that the real William Wallace was a noble who wore full armour and such... I have real trouble enjoying any form of entertainment based on actual history if I see anything in it that I know is historically inaccurate. That's a large part of why I usually prefer fantasy for my entertainment

Side note: my all-time favorite air combat game was a World War I dogfighting game for the Amiga (I've long since forgotten the name), and a huge part of why I liked it was because your character, as a pilot, was mostly responsible for the maintenance of his own plane (as was common then), and if you didn't raise your maintenance skill your chances of having things go wrong in-flight were increased. It may be frustrating as hell when your machine guns jam in the middle of a dogfight because you didn't maintain them properly, but dang if that isn't a good reflection of what actually happened!

And yes, I've been a history geek (especially with regards to medieval history) ever since I was a kid. Based on that, maybe it's a little odd that I ended up in an IT career where I could be considered an entirely different type of geek...

I think I recall that game....the part (I think) I remember is that your combat accomplishments were recorded in a diary you kept. Wings, I think it was called.

I worked on Air Warrior for many years and that audience also thought they craved realism. And the subject matter was sacred there too because the appeal of it, for many, was to get just a taste of a harrowing experience that actually happened. The average age of online gamers then was 37 thus they were realistic about what a computer game could deliver.

And, at every Air Warrior Convention, we'd have a pilot who was a veteran of that war. It wasn't easy to convince them always but they were always startled by their reception and the questions asked in the Q&A. They were not expecting "computer gamers" to know so much about history and ask such intelligent questions.

But still you had to be careful with realism...particularly non-tactical realism, nuisance realism, systems management realism or you'd have a customer base of ten.

What was important to get right was aircraft performance. You need to employ the same tactics if you were in a Messerschmitt 109 fighting a Spitfire as the real pilots did. Yes, a Focke Wulf 190 had very high lethality but it couldn't turn with a Spitfire. That sort of thing.

Simulations were the foundation, particularly in high performance graphics and back end technology, of contemporary MMOs. But people nowadays prefer fantasy for many reasons.

And when I hear a fantasy gamer bring up the subject of realism.....yeah....I can feel one of my eyelids start to twitch

Rune_Relic

Slurg wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Slurg wrote: »

curlyqloub14_ESO wrote: »

...

I think the real issue is that these requests are almost always targeted at female characters. It hits on a much deeper issue - men wanting to objectify women. I know it is not the case 100% of the time, but this is really why you have so many people (a lot of whom are women) so vehemently opposed to it. Maybe it wasn't such a big deal in the past because there were less women playing games. Maybe back in the 90's that ghastly Arena cover that has been linked so many times would be ok. I wonder the ratio of male/female players in those games back then versus today. But as gaming has become more mainstream and attracted a larger female audience, there is a much larger resistance to the p*rn armor, and for good reason. Sorry guys, but this is no longer a man's world. To all those guys who keep arguing "but I play a female character and I want to [be turned on when I] look at her"...tough sh*t. There are plenty of other outlets where you can get your T & A fix - by yourself, where the rest of the world doesn't have to see it also. Unless of course you'd like to see male characters also running around in speedos and codpieces... but I don't see too many requests here for that.

If what the OP and pretty much every male in this thread who defines feminine as skin-baring is requesting comes to pass, I can't wait to create my muscular blond Nord beefcake male and put him a thong chainkini. Any skimpy costumes introduced should be equally revealing on either gender, to stay in line with the spirit of equality that I so appreciate in this game.

But I would be strongly opposed to changing any of the armor styles to show more skin. If people want to dress their characters less, costuming their own characters is the way to get there. Don't force me and other female characters to cater to the men who want to see more T and A in game by changing our armor. Practically speaking, developing a wider variety of exposure in costumes for the crown store seems like it would be quite profitable based on some of the comments in this thread.

Of course you have the right to ask for that. I don't think any male would object to that to be honest. I am sure many would have a good laugh and joke about it along the lines of the nords wearing the wedding dresses. You have just as much right to covet, desire and lust after the male physique as men do for the female physique. Go see the Chippendales or something.

I guess its how male and female view the world. To me it seems women want to be viewed for their character rather than their form and deny that form is part of their personality now days. Men dont have that hang up. If you can call it a hang up. I am sure there has been a lot of cultural history that's developed this view point.

I am a male after all so I could have this view all twisted and biased....correct me if you wish.
I have absolutely no issue with women requesting more C & A.
In fact I would positively encourage it TBH.

BUT...yes. Save the smut for the out of combat clothing. No point having a butt flap on heavy armour....practical or not.

The point is more that if our characters are to be viewed as sex objects in the game, you bet I'm adding some beefcake to Tamriel for parity. All in good fun of course.

Yes there is a lot of cultural history that results in some women getting a little snippy about being told their armor in a game should be converted into a fur-kini or something equally ridiculous to look more "feminine". Many women in many cultures have always been viewed only for their form as you put it and rarely for their character at all. It's worse for attractive women. I dont think most men have had the daily experience of being judged by their looks and not their personality so I agree most men would probably not have that "hang up". So while this is just a game, it is also someplace an attractive woman can go and just be a lizard or an orc and whomp on monsters for a while and not have to worry about some *** following her around and telling her she has a nice ass.

We all come to this game with different experiences and that colors what we want in the game. And that's perfectly fine, nothing wrong with that. I would just want the sort of thing being requested by the OP to be optional costuming, not taking up an armor style, and that there be equivalent options for both genders.

You know how I met my wife ?
She use to work behind the bar in a social club for extra money.
I used to visit after the gym for a nice relaxing pint.
Evidently I had an arse she couldn't resist (not brains or cash I guess).
We are still together 20 years later.
I even had 'nice arse' comments form a gang of girls on a swing once.
lol.

I take it in the spirit its intended.
Some take offence at a derogatory comment.
Some are flattered at a complement I guess.
/shrugs

I look forward to more sexy female armour and male armour too then.
I draw the line at floral designs though.
:d

pokinatchapunx

Shimmer

ChuckyPayne wrote: »

My wife asked me to write to you.

As women in general, love to dress up. They like the beautiful feminine clothes. This is same in the game.
Argonian Cloth Lvl1 armor or the Dark Seducer costume is feminine armor.
It was pretty much the lineup the rest of armors is not feminine.

Of course this is a subjective opinion with a woman eye.

Your wife is a smart woman. As a woman, im pretty much underwhelmed with my options of clothing. The wedding dress is atrocious. PLEASE give us better clothing. Im sick of looking like a dude.

TheShadowScout

IrishGirlGamer wrote: »

Heavy armor is heavy armor. Covers all the vital organs. Gotcha.

Medium Armor is leather armor. Still should get most of the organs but leave some room for movement.

Light armor is .... clothing. Without a separate clothing class, that's all light armor is. And clothing should look like ... clothing.

Actually there now IS a seperate clothing class. So far, it can only be obtained by thieving, but... there are peices of common clothing you can steal, launder, dye and wear. Who knows, they might someday even set up a vendor to buy those, and add more of them. Perhaps even introduce them to clothier as craftables. Those would be perfect for all the roleplaying clothes you might dress up in when not out looking for a fight...

And... long robes have been around a lot during medieval times, for monks, scholars, priests, sages and so on - that's where the magica-support light armor comes from I reckon. And yeah, also for noblewomen.
In ESO, seeing that "light armor" gives a good deal more protection then the newly introduced "clothing", and some other boons, I'd say its indeed more then just cloth. Reinforced robes, perhaps? A bit of padding and maybe some leather here and there?

Also, heavy armor seems to be mostly plate mail, while medium armor sometimes is leather & chainmail, depending on crafting style.


...that stated...

I stand by my earlier notion that it would be nice to have more options. Summer/winter designs for each crafting style would be neat, so you can mix and match while keeping things "looking right" together - which is sometimes hard to do if you mix different styles (they often even dye differently)

IrishGirlGamer wrote: »

...Maybe some kilts for the guys, eh?

Definitely another option I'd like to see - much like we have the "robe or jerkin" option for light chest, I'd want an "pants or skirt/kilt" option as well...

bellanca6561n

Saw the weirdest thing today - a female character wearing a wedding dress.

No, really....

Keron

bellanca6561n wrote: »

Saw the weirdest thing today - a female character wearing a wedding dress.

No, really....

Impossibru! It's technically restricted to male Nord and Orks. No other people can wear it. That must have been a hacker.

(At least that is what the current application of the wedding dress indicates. No sarcasm targeted at you, @bellanca6561n )

Lettigall

bellanca6561n wrote: »

Saw the weirdest thing today - a female character wearing a wedding dress.

No, really....

Report that cheater!!! How low people can go, using hacks to wear costume which was made specifically for nord and orc males!

bellanca6561n

Keron wrote: »

bellanca6561n wrote: »

Saw the weirdest thing today - a female character wearing a wedding dress.

No, really....

Impossibru! It's technically restricted to male Nord and Orks. No other people can wear it. That must have been a hacker.

(At least that is what the current application of the wedding dress indicates. No sarcasm targeted at you, @bellanca6561n )

Hell, no.....it's been friggin hilarious. And the discipline folks have shown! The only wedding dresses I've seen until today were worn by characters with five o'clock shadows and chest hair.

bellanca6561n

Was feeling a little burned out on the game and was going though some of my screenshots. Came across this armor style that each of our characters currently gets to wear but once.

It's extremely ornate but one of the most compelling looks in the game. And it's flattering if a bit overdone

Varicite

@bellanca6561n That's the Emperor's Regalia.

You can wear it anytime you like if you manage to become Emperor at least once. : P

bellanca6561n

Varicite wrote: »

@bellanca6561n That's the Emperor's Regalia.

You can wear it anytime you like if you manage to become Emperor at least once. : P

Oh! Nice to know they found another use for it and it sounds like it suits the title, so to speak.

But, for me, that ain't gonna happen

No, that gal is a Templar who hit the Molag Bal ball just as Tango Uniform was coming out.

She's at VR11 as of last night and this is what she wears where she's questing now in Malabal Tor....it's a Crown costume and it's sexy. But mostly it looks like she's gone native. Plus you can see how the color works with dark Dunmer skin for camouflage.

Okay, okay, there's not so much as a molecule of purpose to camouflage in this game

Plus there are colors that work better with her skin tone and hair....I like this color scheme for her which is why I did not buy the Argonian costume.

Looks a bit like Egypt of antiquity to my eye. And, yes, they wore practical clothing....for Egypt. Don't know if there was a society more comfortable with sex than Egypt of long ago. When the Greeks - THE GREEKS - said their society was decadent....well....sorry, I digress

Sylveria_Relden

Choice is always a good thing- as long as it's not forced on everyone else as a default.

PKMN12

For those saying "elder scrolls has more practical armor, so stop", I laugh in your face and point out the Ancient nord armor, nocturnal's robes, Almexia's armor (and might i point out she is called a warrior in her lore, so she clearly went into melee with that armor even before she was a god), Vivec was a walking shirtless scene 24/7, and about half the female daedra, especially from the shivering isles all point out the stupidity of this statement.

Sylveria_Relden

Laugh in other's faces all you want... they're not going to make ESO armor look like TERA online, and there's a costume system in place if you'd like to alter your own appearance.

bellanca6561n

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Choice is always a good thing- as long as it's not forced on everyone else as a default.

Unfortunately that's a problem in online games - people do feel that fashion is forced on them when they have to look at it.

For example, I laughed and laughed HARD when I saw all those burly guys wearing the Crown Store wedding dress. But others felt very differently about that.

Which is why no matter how good or bad an online game is, the forums supporting it tend to be so, so negative and always have been, alas.

Sylveria_Relden

bellanca6561n wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Choice is always a good thing- as long as it's not forced on everyone else as a default.

Unfortunately that's a problem in online games - people do feel that fashion is forced on them when they have to look at it.

For example, I laughed and laughed HARD when I saw all those burly guys wearing the Crown Store wedding dress. But others felt very differently about that.

Which is why no matter how good or bad an online game is, the forums supporting it tend to be so, so negative and always have been, alas.

That's why labeling, categorization, stereotyping and judgment are negative in general. If you're happy with yourself- it really shouldn't matter what others think. Sadly, the perpetuation of judgmental thinking is the real issue- not choice. I'm all for what others choose to do in their own lives- when it starts affecting my own ability to choose is when we start having problems.

IMO, people really need to have a good hard look at how they view the world- but it's up to them to do so. Until such time... we'll have people who think it's OK to decide for others what's "right" and what's "wrong".

For those who think my view is "unrealistic", If you're arrogant enough to think that your own opinion is the *only* opinion- perhaps you should apply the same logic to yourself.

(apologies for drifting off into an "existential and sociological" discussion, but I think it applies to subjects like these)

milkbox

Hexi wrote: »

But don't worry, they will add revealing outfits into the crown store sooner rather than later. All they have to do is look at SWTOR, that stuff is the number one selling point in their awful RNG boxes and they know it.

huh... I'm new(ish) to the forums, and had been wondering why they boob-nerfed my seadrake disguise along with some of the redguard and orc armors. At first, I thought some weird wave of puritanism had overcome the designers- but now I think it might have been a money-grab.

Want boobs? We got your boobs, right here. Crown store. Fork it over.

#boobnerf

Zorrashi

As a female player I always disliked how females are usually portrayed in MMOs as always wearing skimpy armor.

This is literally the only MMO I can think of where the armor is more than palatable for the female gender. It's not about realism (for me), but about personal comfort in what I am portrayed to be wearing.
I do not want armor in game to be changed that drastically to what will probably only appease a primarily-male audience.

That being said, if a person wants to wear a skimpy set of armor or a more revealing costume, then go on ahead and make your avatar more physically appealing to you. I'm sure they can afford to put in a few sets that meet those qualifications. Just don't make it that atrociously prevalent in the game itself.

The_Drexill

Not having any actual feminine armor is going to ultimately drive most females away long term. I know my wife doesn't want to wear a turtle neck all the time... Understood that this isn't Tera, however... It is a fantasy game, and it could at least offer clothing and such that is at least up to the standard of previous Elder Scrolls titles.

All the armor is pretty bland and uninteresting, but females get it worse imo.

MornaBaine

I'm just trying to figure out why, in fantasy games, we must either be nuns (ESO) or hookers (most other fantasy genre games). Are there truly no female designers on the art team for this stuff? Because the art of dressing BEAUTIFULLY, as opposed to painfully conservative or downright tarty seems to be lost...which baffles me since women have been mastering it since time immemorial.

Varicite

MornaBaine wrote: »

I'm just trying to figure out why, in fantasy games, we must either be nuns (ESO) or hookers (most other fantasy genre games). Are there truly no female designers on the art team for this stuff? Because the art of dressing BEAUTIFULLY, as opposed to painfully conservative or downright tarty seems to be lost...which baffles me since women have been mastering it since time immemorial.

The number of people who think that "feminine" is a synonym for "slutty" amazes me.

It shouldn't, but it does.