Shasti wrote: »

As a female player I would love to have some "sexy" armor. Nothing stupid and outrageous of course.
To the people who have such a HATE for this idea... Look at Real Life Ancient history. Some of the most fearsome warriors of the time wore very little (Picts), leather (germanic, celts) to the Greek, Roman skirts. So there are options out there to stay somewhat realistic in our world of fantasy for us female players and the males.

They also hid between gigantic shields and shield walls, and were known for hiking all over Europe and parts of Asia and Africa. I'd say a lot of what the Romans & Greeks wore falls under 'Medium' armor more than Heavy. Cloth armor actually was a thing, and depending on the padding and thickness actually could protect you to a degree. There is a difference between light armor and no armor at all. I think there should be a place for No Armor skill line that includes clothes. This will make all the flaunters out there have their fun, but still pay an appropriate price for their choice. I've got no problem with you baring your titties on the battlefield as long as you have no problem with my jamming a greatsword between your exposed ribcage and into your heart, or making a nice quick slice across your exposed jugular because you want your neckline sexy. Look I understand wanting to look at a female form, but it is nice to have a battlefield look slightly even remotely believable. I'll admit the tactics used in Cyrodiil are not realistic, even if magic were real. The Zerg Ball was never a thing, because people can't occupy the same space as each other. They did have shield walls and all manner of battle formations though. So I'll admit the game doesn't really compare to reality.

That being said I do think if you're going to flaunt it, there should be a price paid for it. If they open up some kind of monk style khajiit training to represent your proficiency in semi nudist giblet showing Almalexia armor then have at it. I actually like some of the bosmer styles. They look pretty good and believable. The only problem that I have is they probably should not be classified as 'medium armor'.

Because if it's sexy it isn't armor... I have no problem with ZOS releasing skimpy armor sets, as long as the pieces have 0 armor value on them.

Because, having armor that covers less of you doesn't make sense. I understand people like it but the game needs to keep some artistic integrity so the lore and the worlds physics don't go "lolwatevs". If it covers you more it should have more armor.


The only exception i find to this is cloth armor. It's OK to make sexy cloth armor since the point of that armor isn't to protect.

Gidorick wrote: »

BigInGlenumbra wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

BigInGlenumbra wrote: »

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

BigInGlenumbra wrote: »

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

BigInGlenumbra wrote: »

Not only that, but I think it's immoral as you are defining much of your character only by it's sexual value, as any human being will recognize their clothing as sexy, and defining your character by it's sexual value is stupid because there are far more superior values that are respectable and worth something good.

Wow, just wow. You just called a woman who wants to be able to play a video game and make her character LOOK like a woman immoral.

I happen to know many female gamers and many of them like to dress up their characters so they look nice. My wife and my sister talk about styles long before they craft armor and the look will almost at time trump stats. As kids, girls like to play dress up, why is it "immoral" that they want options in a video game to do this?

When I was a kid, my friend and I took cut off broomstick handles and painted them red and blue and put bike handle grips on the bottom and had light saber battles. I still get enjoyment in ESO from crafting a great looking sword.

There's things in video games that call back to times of playing dress up or having epic fantasy battles in your head and that's okay. In fact, it's kind of the point.

I think the only thing "immoral" is going on inside your head and someone like you should be able to prevent others from playing dress up in a video game.

- No, I'm not calling the woman or whoever playing immoral, I'm calling the act immoral.

- I think the fact that girls are influenced to value physical beauty (sexual appeal) and play dress up over other objectively superior values is pretty stupid and pathetic, and the fact that it is common among young girls is not a reason to allow for the acceptance of sexual appeal over consistency and immersion. One of the most hilarious things is how people call themselves feminists yet argue it's okay for women to dress themselves like pro strippers from Hungary. But that's an entirely different discussion

- I am not arguing there should be NO customizing or playing around with your character, I am arguing that the game should not cater to armor based on looks and sex appeal as some want it to, and when I'm talking about armor with sex appeal I'm talking about MMOs like TERA where the sex appeal is blatant and directly displaying that sex appeal is more important than other values you or your character holds that is consistent with a medieval-fantasy world.

Showing a little cleavage is fine. Covering your breasts with a sliver of cloth or metal with a metal bikini is completely stupid and inconsistent with ANY setting, even modern. You're overly displaying sexual appeal, and thus you are giving value to sex appeal when in reality it should not be considered a worthy value.

It's been made very clear here that no one is asking for eastern themed (i.e. Tera style) armor. I haven't really read one post in this thread truly asking for that, however people have poked fun as it's over the top. Currently in ESO there are very few if any options to do exactly what you just said (show a little cleavage), and the point of this thread by the OP is to point out that there are few options.

Yes I understand. I just said on a separate note that ZOS should not even think about going there.

I actually think this is one point we can all agree on. But there has got to be a middle ground between this:

and this:

Oh god definitely. Don't think we have anyone supporting for the latter.

Even if ESO had armor like that, it would still be nothing compared to elins so we're definitely in good territory.

I had to look elins up... I have no words.

Yea, it's pretty bad.

Yes it was directed at you. Towards the end there. Mainly because of the comments directed at me. Your right. *** for tat is pretty immature but I was merely trying to make a point, MY point that everyone seemed to misinterpret and in turn put words in my mouth. I never try relenquish myself of something I'm responsible for I merely tried to correct misleading statements because I never called anyone a lesbian yet somehow it came up that I did. as well a few other comments but I'm over that now.
I will challenge you this though. At what point did I generalise and say "everyone on this thread is a disturbed perv"?
That's rhetorical since I believe we've reached a silent agreement to drop it..

So on topic you reckon ay.
No worries.
Look at the photos you've just posted/quoted. Then look at OP and the first page of this discussion.
What you posted and what was posted on the first page are chalk and cheese.
I agree that the stuff on your post isn't bad at all but on the first page. Some of those suggestions are literally border lining virtual *** and that's where I objected. There one that's "armor" is literally wispy wire that just, JUST covers the naughty bits. Actually I just looked and there's 2. Comment # 17 and #18. Like I said I realise those few are nothing more than a joke but equally I'd be unsurprised if it was a joke in disguise.
Like I said before though there's nothing you, me or anyone on this thread can do about it besides make a thread about it and hope that something is or isn't done about the matter.
Plus parents are MUCH more vocal than me. Some parent sees their kid playing a game as some half clad she elf and they gonna be right on that phone/email/everything they can to have said feature removed... It's probably why it got nerfed and made more conservative in the first place.
Uptight parents and children trying to defy those uptight parents by playing as a sexy naked elf but shooting themselves in the foot in the process.. And the cycle continues. Catch 22 anyone lol
Even with the tame versions that you posted @Gidorick. That's still too much for some..

Noomfy-Mop wrote: »

Yes it was directed at you. Towards the end there. Mainly because of the comments directed at me. Your right. *** for tat is pretty immature but I was merely trying to make a point, MY point that everyone seemed to misinterpret and in turn put words in my mouth. I never try relenquish myself of something I'm responsible for I merely tried to correct misleading statements because I never called anyone a lesbian yet somehow it came up that I did. as well a few other comments but I'm over that now.
I will challenge you this though. At what point did I generalise and say "everyone on this thread is a disturbed perv"?
That's rhetorical since I believe we've reached a silent agreement to drop it..

So on topic you reckon ay.
No worries.
Look at the photos you've just posted/quoted. Then look at OP and the first page of this discussion.
What you posted and what was posted on the first page are chalk and cheese.
I agree that the stuff on your post isn't bad at all but on the first page. Some of those suggestions are literally border lining virtual *** and that's where I objected. There one that's "armor" is literally wispy wire that just, JUST covers the naughty bits. Actually I just looked and there's 2. Comment # 17 and #18. Like I said I realise those few are nothing more than a joke but equally I'd be unsurprised if it was a joke in disguise.
Like I said before though there's nothing you, me or anyone on this thread can do about it besides make a thread about it and hope that something is or isn't done about the matter.
Plus parents are MUCH more vocal than me. Some parent sees their kid playing a game as some half clad she elf and they gonna be right on that phone/email/everything they can to have said feature removed... It's probably why it got nerfed and made more conservative in the first place.
Uptight parents and children trying to defy those uptight parents by playing as a sexy naked elf but shooting themselves in the foot in the process.. And the cycle continues. Catch 22 anyone lol
Even with the tame versions that you posted @Gidorick. That's still too much for some..

Parents complaining about clothes in a rated M game...

The clothes on those posts you listed are too much, and noone here is saying they want that style armor. Again, just dont want to look like I stepped out of a convent is all, something with pretty jewels or a TAD more skin like the armor used to look.

@Sylance9
Stranger things have happened and some parents are borderline psychos that will complain about anything to within an inch of their life. Even further if they think it'll benefit their kids.
"Stepped out of a convent" They're not THAT bad though are they!
Yes I see where your coming from but really all your asking for is a bit of cleavage and some mid drif aren't you?
Going off what Gidorick posted that's the only difference I can see.
And yes I agree the posts I commented on are ridiculous which is why I took such a stand. If someone had have posted the pics that Gidorick did and didn't show the "extreme" version then I don't think I would have had such a problem.
And when you say "how the armor used to look" do you mean pre-console ESO on PC or do you mean the type of stuff from Skyrim or Oblivion?

@BPpsy
Didn't know what you ment for a second there then I saw it. That's a bit of a joke really..
Hence why it's amusing I guess lol.
It's not even a swear word in that context is it??
It's not a swear word in ANY context is it?
Maybe if I said TIC for tac... You know.. Like tic tac toe lol
*shakes head*.. That was awful lol.

Well there you go..
ZOS has already made them :P

I don't know about "sexy" armor, but I would like more choices for medium armor that leans, appearance wise, more toward the light side than heavy. Most of the medium armor available isn't very far from looking like heavy armor, IMO.

Initially I loled when I saw this. I thought this thread was spawned by a 14 year old boy who's family uses parental monitoring. I don't think heavy armor for either gender should be revealing, but the point about light armor is fair. I don't think the removal of skimpy clothing was motivated by conservatives, there is a lot of left wing political rubbish mixed into the game, witness the Sarkeesian effect......

Shasti wrote: »

As a female player I would love to have some "sexy" armor. Nothing stupid and outrageous of course.
To the people who have such a HATE for this idea... Look at Real Life Ancient history. Some of the most fearsome warriors of the time wore very little (Picts), leather (germanic, celts) to the Greek, Roman skirts. So there are options out there to stay somewhat realistic in our world of fantasy for us female players and the males.

Youre right they had very little armor. Some of them even ran into battle nude. And most of them died due to the lack of protection that real armor provided. But they didnt run into battle with very little on because they thought 'Oh, I need to look sexy for this fight'. They did it because they lacked the knowledge to craft strong and protective armor suitable to what they were walking into, they didnt have enough metal in the first place since mining was in many ways in its infancy, they believed it was something their god demanded/struck fear in their enemies.

Tamriel is covering many different time periods of our own history when it comes to armor. From nothing more then leather scraps, to full on chainmail and armored suits. And while I dont mind looking at a little skin, the reality is boobs nearly bursting out of the top of a armor brazier is just a nip slip waiting to happen. Its not actually providing the wearer any protection and would server a better purpose as a ceremonial outfit then an actual battle ready armament.

My personal opinion is let players wear what they want to wear. But if the Devs decide that some of the items need to be tweaked visually to be more in line with other items. Then thats the end of it.

Lol. Yes, must have more digital cleavage showing. Wtf...

They need to just change all alcoholic beverages to juice and make this a t for teen game.
It's far from mature.

Tholian1 wrote: »

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

They need to just change all alcoholic beverages to juice and make this a t for teen game.
It's far from mature.

You must not have had the pleasure of experiencing voice chat on the console version of the game.

"online interractions not rated by the ESRB"

Frantastick wrote: »

Because, having armor that covers less of you doesn't make sense. I understand people like it but the game needs to keep some artistic integrity so the lore and the worlds physics don't go "lolwatevs". If it covers you more it should have more armor.


The only exception i find to this is cloth armor. It's OK to make sexy cloth armor since the point of that armor isn't to protect.

just so frustrating to try and type out something and have people ignore it. Why should the people who want less armor have to pay a price, but the people who want fake heavy armor shouldn't have to pay a price?
You all realize that the period of heavy armor, as in the plate and scale you are all wearing, was very short? And that it featured huge amounts of deaths before they realized that a highly trained longbowman or slightly trained crossbowman countered it very cheaply? Or that fire/oil pretty much took them out because they were too slow to escape a lot of the siege defenses? The heavy armor you see late in game, or even mid-game, has been well documented as: few and far between, only worn by the extremely wealthy who only fought in battles by sitting on a horse or in a chair well behind the battle lines, and (most often) was only ceremonial/burial armor? Mobility in it is almost nonexistent.

Yet it isn't unrealistic to run around in armor that had almost no visibility, no ability to turn, negated all agility/dexterity, and was too heavy to ever run away in? I know we're supposed to be heroic characters and all, but I have to suspend reality much more watching you all run around and dodge rolling in that crap than I ever would watching someone with parts of their arms bare, or the backs of their legs, etc...Oh, and whoever said the crap about the shield-walls, yes Romans had huge shields, but check out the Normans, Saxons, Vikings, and many others....many had very small circular shields with less than 30cm diameter...have any of you ever looked at actual history, not some History Channel crap documentary with re-creations that are completely Hollywood-ized?
Why does the game only cater to the 14-28 demographic's complete non-understanding of reality and history? But it would be "too fake" to have players run around in anything less than full body covering?

If your life depended on it, YOUR actual life, you would wear extremely heavy armor when going off into a very large battle in which you would be standing in battle lines moving in unison SLOWLY or holding position, but in all other ventures you would never want armor under the armpit, or restricting your knees, ankles, or hips too much. Nothing too heavy, as you don't want to get too exhausted traveling, or drown bending over to drink some water. Those ridiculous in-game helmets would snap even the most muscular of necks if worn all day...I put on a Corinthian, full-metal helmet once...less than 5 minutes (I was a strong young man at the time) and I was feeling it, with my uncle warning me ahead of time that I had to be careful because the weight of it could snap my neck if my head tilted to one side too much. I had to lay down on the floor so that when he helped to remove the helmet we didn't have to worry about him putting too much pressure on the helmet and hurting my neck.