[Female Avatars] How did we go from . . .

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:

This entire discussion has been derailed by misogynistic trolls

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:

Historically there are many instances of people fighting in the nude. In fact tactically if you aren't wearing armor, the clothing you might be wearing serves no protective use and could actually be used against you by your opponent. Besides it can be quite intimidating to see a horde of naked men with the crazy hair charging at you waving swords.:XD:

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:

Despite the fact that you perceive it as a blind stab at you, that is not the case...but believe as you wish. I was directing it towards the entire general grouping of people who automatically assume that abbreviated clothing somehow translates into loose morals or the desire to use less-than-cloistered attire to walk the streets and physically pleasure another person for monetary remuneration. This IS all in the mind of the beholder. Not any one person, specifically. There are simply far too many people with this odd mentality for me to make insinuations against any one person, plain and simple. However, I WILL direct something at you. Namely a question: As long as you, yourself, may continue to wear what is now available, without fear of having it taken away from you (and as I have said before, there is no chance it WILL be taken away - face it, SOE put enough money into the salaries of the people who designed it for them to simply swap it out), why would you deny the right of other people to choose such articles for their avatars? If they have no objection to you wearing what you prefer, why can they not be afforded the same courtesy?

Counter question. Why does it have to be armor? Why arent you satisfied with good looking social clothing (Note. There is already good looking armor in the game, but that gets ignored by most people. I wonder why...)? 1. 90% of all people will wear what gives the better stats. ANd when the "feminine" armor offers the better stats we will have anotehr WoW where a armor gets better the less it actually would protect. 2. Many players like that the characters look like that they are really fighting for their lives and that includes wearing armor which would really work. As long as the armor is believable functional I have nothing against new armor styles or new textures. But again, there are already good looking armor sets in teh game. Its just that not every runn of the mill armor looks like it was made for a king. But it seems that some people are simply not satisfied with good looking believable armor. They want unbelievable armor (or feminine armor, no idea what they really mean with that) and for some reason don't settle with social clothing (what some of their ideas would be).

[p] Three things:[/p][p]1: Creating a whole raft of new looks for existing armour types (i.e. 3 different variant styles of cloth, leather, chain and plate) at each tier would take indescribably huge resources, which would result in effectively no other art development.[/p][p]2: Fundamentally changing the art style of the game impacts everyone not just those who choose to wear something.[/p][p]3: A game, to me, needs a "look" to call its own. EQ2 has one, for all its flaws, that is actually unique and not stuck with all the stereotypes many other games see bound into. I would hate to see it become a hotchpotch of whatever are the most "popular" visual styles, or hopelessly inductry-generic.[/p][p]Finally it aint never going to happen. Its just too LATE for a game in EQ2s position to remodel itself so.[/p]

I havent even denied it up till now. whatever SoE decides to do with the games direction is entirely up to them. Im merely voidcing my opinion about how having lingere armor would spoil the "feel" part of it. Having more beutiful armor, yes, having armor with more skin, yes. As long as it is done with taste, and feel in mind. Some of the examples having been portrayed here, such as the dark elf on what cant be described as more than body string outfit, are not a very good example of either those, but I can see how it would appeal to specific demographics, and honestly, I'd probably just turn a blind eye to it. Its all just a bitmap (or several) laid out over a mesh after all. and having been a gamer for, oh, 20 years, I've seen it all already. The thing I want, if girls get those skimpy clothes, is the same skimpy style for males. honestly. Or mesh shirts, black leather pants and other interesting pieces of equipment. Heck, crossdressing too. you could do it in the beginning of eq2.

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:

That's fair enough. As I said, all some of us are asking for is the pre-release examples we were shown (thus most of the work HAS been done - they're simply choosing not to do anything with it, unless it's coming out with the skeletal re-working). That, and the xamples that were on the covers of the EQ2 boxes. They showed us one thing, they gave us something entirely different. In my book, this is false advertising.

For myself, I don't insist on 'lingerie armor', as you put it. They never showed anyone wearing it (with the possible exception of Antonia Bayle, if that's what one wants to call her clothing), thus if we never see it, I won't cry over it. I too have gamed for many a long year (since 1979 - yes, I am a Geritol diceman)...I still have the tattered remnants of the original boxed set lying around somewhere (and for those of you who know what I mean...well, you know what I mean). But believe it or not, if girls DO wind up getting the battle-bikini, battle-speedos are only fair. You'll get no argument from me on that point. If that troll berserker likes his BattlePlate Fruit-of-the-Looms, more power to him (I will play with a sickness bag next to my keyboard. :XD: )

As to crossdressing...I am willing to bet it hasn't been done only because a male can't equip female clothes.

Your point about 'spoiling the feel' is well-taken...but then we come back to 'choice'. If someone else chooses to wear it, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to. In the long run, it is equally your game as theirs and vice-versa. It is easier to avoid someone else's avatar than to avoid your own (obviously) - thus, in my opinion, what one chooses for their own avatar should have primacy over what someone else wants to see on that same avatar.

For example, some people prefer elves in SOGA form. I think, for the most part, that SOGA elves resemble those in WoW, and look almost comically ludicrous. But that is my opinion, and I am not going to tell them that they can't set their Options tab to show elves in SOGA, because it is not my avatar, and I have no right to dictate to them what their appearance should look like. Were I unable to retain the Norrathian look for elves and forced to view them in SOGA mode, it would 'spoil the feel' for me...but when you come right down to it, that would be my tough luck - it is not my avatar, and therefore not appropriate for me to dictate. I would grit my teeth, but I would have the grace to allow them their choice without criticizing them.

Anyways - thank you for your answer. I do appreciate at least ONE person giving me a straight answer without picking a Kunark-sized field of nits.

[p]Drakonous@Najena wrote: [/p]

[p]I can't touch this, I'm chuckling too much. :lol:[/p][p]I really wouldn't mind additional options in regards to clothes entering the game. More options are cool, offering choice and a means to allow people to enjoy situations. But, from a look and feel standpoint, I'd consider even those options needing to adhere to the existing imagery, retaining the integrity of the look and feel direction of the game ('s'why I can't stand that comedy sword the guards in Darklight Woods have ). [/p][p]Social clothing, ceremonial armour, quest related outfits, bring 'em on. Artisan based clothes for specific crafts, half plate and all manner of social clothes, beachwear ostensibly for some random quest but not eaten by the quest, it's all good (though I can't help but picture that prudish victorian beachware rather than the modern bits of string ). I dare say they'd get as much use as those existing crafted peasent clothes or guild level rewards, that is, hardly any, but fun cosmetic options that don't negatively impact the overall look and feel as far as I'm concerned and offers folk options that occasionally cause a smile. [/p][p]But alloting adventuring worthy stats to them elevates cosmetic fancies to another level. With stats people would use them that may otherwise not. It'd no longer be some frivolous option, not wearing them wouldn't be enough as everyone would see them all the time. The look and feel would change. The holisitic imagery of the game would be altered. EQ2 could not retain the integrity of and be EQ2 anymore, it'd be some mish mash of conflicting styles, trying to be all things to all men. SOGA is bad enough. [/p][p]We chose this game knowing it's art, or at least having a clue about it. Some of us don't play other games because of the look and feel of them. Buggring up EQ2's look and feel could be more detrimental than it could be good. [/p][p]Tweaks and occasional cosmetic asides would be fun options, but chain mail bikinis may be a step too far.[/p]

#1. I am not sure it would take all that much, but your point is well-taken. However, they COULD do work on the pre-release articles (which have the lion's share of the work done on them already), plus items such as the purloined Blissful Awareness (yes, I am planning on hammering that one to a bloody, greasy death), and introduce (or re-introduce) them into the game. The resource expenditures would be correspondingly minimal, and the reaction generated would be well worth it in terms of word-of-mouth advertising (not to mention a slight improvement in many people's opinion of the company). #2 You are absolutely correct in this assertion. But why should people who want a choice NOT enjoy their avatars simply for the sake of not impacting someone else? This strikes me as being rather discriminatory. #3. I am willing to give the art department the credit to be able to introduce new styles of armor to supplement what is there, and still retain a uniquely Norrathian experience at the same time. I have always believed that it is (in a small part) the fault of the development teams and (in a larger part) some penny-pinching fathead at SOE Main Office that has been stifling such things. As it is, Norrath is 'cookie-cutter land' - and there isn't as much of an 'experience' as there is potential for it. EQ2 has a lot of potential...all we need is for the dimwits who make the decision to take the leashes off of the artists and programmers. #4. Never say never...

Counter-answer #1: It doesn't. Give social clothing the stats to adventure in, and we'd have no problems. And why aren't I satisfied? Because social clothing is not readily available to everyone, and there's precious little of it, anyways. And yes, there are a couple of good looking armor pieces in the game...but not everyone can wear them. The rest is visual sewage. Counter-answer #2: I have no problems with those 'Many players'...they can be fighting for their lives in whatever they choose. I am only saying, please afford that same courtesy to others who do NOT like what is available to them right now. No one is forcing you to interact with them. If it repulses you that much, stay away from them. I see no reason why armor must be pigeonholed according to what some people believe as 'believable funtionality'. Sorry, but in a world of magic, non-humans, and exploding moons that do not wipe out all life on the planet (which it would in the 'real world'), such things as less-than-wholly-realistic armor are hardly an experience-destroying concept. Despite having answered your queries, I am not holding you to answering mine, as you have deftly evaded doing so to this point. But my contention still stands. Let people choose for themselves. Anything else seems to me to be more than just a tad bit selfish.

Actually, I've seen a male dude wearing a dress in this game. you used to be able to. the soga argument misses the point a bit though, since if I dont like Soga, I cans imply turn them off. I doubt that would be the case with clothes. honestly, I'd prolly run around as a troll female in skimpy gear if there were any. And an ugly as possible troll at that. ,)

1. Actually no it wouldn't. That is just a cop out. Frankly I really don't get this type of argument. Why bother doing anything since its going take time and resources to do. The art department is there to well DESIGN ART. That's their job. Case in point... Hats... hmmm wait thats a lot of effort to create hats for each class. They have stated in the past that they would hope to release new armor/equipment more regularly but they can't because their initial skeleton model made it too difficult. 2. Again you're wrong. This happens all the time in games. Its called expansions and updates. They drastically changed the combat system with EoF and they will be doing it again with RoK. I would guess that for most people that changing the fundamental rules of the game has a bigger impact that whether I'm wearing a leather skirt or pants. 3. Still wrong. EQ2 "look" is a complete cop out. Its not what the game designers had hoped for but its all they could manage at the time of release. There is zero personality in the armor and equipment. Its repetitive and dull. The reason its repetitive and dull is because they rushed it and weren't able to implement what they wanted. It's never too late unless the game is dead. Let's flash back to a little game call Everquest and a expansion called Scars of Velious. Who can recall one of the major additions to the game? Was it: all new character designs? And new armor looks? OMG! Yes it was!!! SHOCK! But wasn't that too LATE? Apparently not. I'm sorry. All your arguments are impotent. I understand that you fear everything looking like it was borrowed from WoW or some such. Some people keep drumming up that beat of fear. OH NO! PLATE BIKINIS EVERYWHERE! What should I do? My innocent eyes! I don't see this happening. Some people keep using words like prostitute and harlot to degrade women in this thread. Its up to you how you spend your money but please keep your fantasies to the bathroom. This conversation goes beyond plate and there are certainly more examples of what can be feminine beyond a bikini. I've seen good examples for cloth and leather in this and other threads but those never get discussed because you keep hijacking the thread back to the plate bikini. Someone mentioned social clothing.... Most "social clothing" is bad. Its the same thing with different colors. Nothing about the individual. The formal ensemble (which is the best looking piece of social clothing) looks the same on everyone. There is no variance in color or style. My guess is that those who keep talking about "social clothing" as an option wear the same things as their buddies every day. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having stylish/good looking clothing that has stats fit for any quality tier in the game. I've yet to hear a legitimate reason for not having such, only emotional rhetoric and drumming. Hmm... I'm sensing a fear of anything different.

[p]As mentioned earlier, warriors from many cultures historically fought without armour or even naked: spartans, zulus, germans. celts etc. I think mitigation and avoidance are probably of equal value in melee combat, though not against missiles. Most of the cultures that fought naked or unarmoured didn't use fast missiles much and had huge shields.[/p][p]I can see how some people might feel the immersion of the game might be detracted from if there was skimpy plate that had the same mitigating effect as full plate. If the game mechanisms were designed so that mitigation/avoidance were more of a continuum instead of two seperate paths then you could have one set that gave a bit of mitigation and only a small penalty to avoidance while another set had a big bonus to mitigation and a big penalty to avoidance. This thread has highlighted a gap for a conan type warrior class sort of like the monks but more barbarian-ish. (The berserker should fit this given the name.)[/p][p]I understand the argument about "this is fantasy" but i can still understand how some people, including me to an extent, would feel it looked a bit silly unless it was about mitigation vs avoidance rather than pure mitigation.[/p][p]I think the argument over plate is seperate in that aspect from the general argument.[/p][p]Personally i see a lot of players running around in gear that i think looks really good. There's also stuff that makes me cringe. I like the overall style of EQ2 but there does seem to have been a decision to unisex the clothing. I don't see anything wrong in having gear that accentuates shape, triangular for males, hourglass for females. I don't think "feminine" equates to harlot. People who think that way are causing enough grief in the world without bringing it to games too.[/p][p] [/p]

Neither do I, but I dont think feminine equates to chainmail thong bikini either.

[p]No one on earth would develope armor if it were just equal to naked avoidance(even without ranged weapons), there is a reason why those people didn't used armor:[/p][p]money.. or cost(+repaircost)+material+time[/p][p]for example the celts, they were capable to produce chain armor, it was very labour intensive so only the richest/noble ones were able to wear it, everyone would have used it but this was immpossible, almost no one of them fought naked later, when they were able to produce armor more frequently. And one of the main advantages of the spartans was armor+phalanx.[/p][p]Imo the armor on plate fighters should remain pretty functional in appearance, more diverse(ornate, plate skirt, fancy girdles.. whatever) of course but this is tied to the skeletal problem[/p][p]medium and leather armor should be a mix, some skin would be okey imo or some parts of leather or cloth on the medium armor.[/p][p]Cloth armor could be everything up to almost nothing if one realy demands this imo, only casters use them and magic should be their main protection.[/p]

Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:

Um WHERE in this post does Salonkolya equate feminine to chainmail thong bikini? Please people, PLEASE re-read the posts that have been in support of more feminine clothing and LOOK for the requests for bikini armor. Why do I ask this? Because they are very FEW and FAR between, and mostly used to make a point, NOT to actually request that type of armor. Most of the posts talking about bikini and lingerie armor are the ones screaming "no new armor styles!" Many of us don't necessarily want bikini or lingerie style armor, but we do want armor that doesn't give the feel of a tin can or a boring bathrobe. Some of the end game and near end game armor does offer this look, but very little in the lower tiers. Some leather and chain do have good looks, but again, it is much like the plate and cloth. Mostly high end and not common or easily available. (Is that redundant?) I don't understand why people are so afraid of new armor styles. That can be the only reason for all the dissent in this thread that I see. It seems to me that only an absolute and total fear going through their panicked brains at the mere postulated idea of bringing the concept art into the game could cause them to not see the WHOLE idea that others here are asking for. The idea of a BROADER RANGE of styles for armor as well as social garb. - Katsi

I've asked some of those same questions Katsi, and they keep playing the broken record: "platemail bikini", "realism", and so forth. Several idea for cloth and leather have been linked but apparently the only thought in there head is that its all going to turn into something out of WoW. I guess there was a traumatic experience in their past. They want to cripple any armor that isn't covering every inch of a person. I suppose the mere suggestion that someone might wear a skirt or vest inspires them to stone that person. As for the future I'd rather aim high and hope and expect the best. I'm not all that confident that the model revamp is going to even get done by RoK. (Lack of communication isn't a good sign SOE.) So the ones not wanting a change probably have nothing to worry about any time soon. Like I said before... I'd like to see suggestions of what people would like to see, even if I don't like it. Cloth armor needs some serious redesign. Most of it is embarrassingly bad (ie redundant, frumpy, and not at all I would imagine a caster wearing). Anyone seen the EoF Fabled Illusionist set? I can't write the words that best describe that set, they'd be censored.

I second that question. Why does it have to be social clothing only? I mean there is social clothing already in the game and some of it is quite sexy. Why not just just take the graphic from the current social clothing and put some stats on it or something? It would make a good alturnative for cloth wears instead of the boring bath robe they have been wearing for the last three years. It seem such waste to use such an interesting graphic on fluff where it could be recycled and reused for high end adventuring rewards.

Because armor with no protective value should not protect. When people want mor extravagant clothing which because of the design would make very poor armor then they should get that as social clothing or ceremonial armor like the one you can buy from the city merchant. But on the field of battle the adventurers should look like soldiers which includes protective (looking) armor and not clothes which makes you look like you are on a holiday (except of course you are willing to accept the dowsides of not wearing armor in combat). Oh and by the way. I looked through the broker and found several non robe cloth armors (yes, with stats). So when you do not like the "bathrobe" look, why not wear them?

Ok explain to me how a bath robe or any cloth will protect better than a sexy dress. Anyway we are not talking about mitigation here. Cloth wearers don't really need physical protection. Cloth wearers use magical roots, stuns, mez, pets, and mana shields to protect themselves. We are talking about stats as in mostly INT and extra MP. So how does any piece of armor make someone more inteligent? I don't think it has anything to do with how much skin is showing or how low the neckline is. I am sorry but your explanation does not hold any water or make any sense what so ever.