I would argue it's not that there are fewer women playing games but that there are more male developers than female developers, and a whole lot of those developers were raised on the comic book style of drawing their characters. I saw an article or video a long time ago about it. It was a book that almost everyone who learned to do art in those circles had learned from at some point. I think it might have been this one: https://ratcreature.livejournal.com/175099.html Or one similar at least.
I agree with the last part though I just don't think hypersexualization fits the theme of the game at all.
As far as the comic book thing goes, I can't ever follow along with the "Oversexualized/unachievable" argument to design of characters in comics. Theyre meant to be unachievable and as a result desirable. The idea of the "realistic/everyday average looing" heroes is just narcissist's self inserting themselves as their own characters usually. Super is Super... not a typical or even optimal human being.
I might be misunderstanding what you mean here, and if so sorry. But super isn't just super in comic books. The male superheroes are not drawn in a sexual way. They are generally not sexy at all to women reading the comics. They are drawn to show big muscles and powerful poses.They don't have the full lips and eyes or facial expressions that the women are drawn with. The women are mostly drawn in sexualized poses with one purpose in mind: To show as much tits and ass as possible, to titillate all the teenage boys they believe will read the comics.
Anyway, I'm getting somewhat off topic now
Male superheroes are ridiculous oversexualized when compared to female superheroes. Female comic book superheroes have obtainable bodies. A guy is not going to obtain anywhere the amount of muscle that a male comic book character has. Most of the time the male super heroes are drawn with muscles where there should not be muscle.
I would argue it's not that there are fewer women playing games but that there are more male developers than female developers, and a whole lot of those developers were raised on the comic book style of drawing their characters. I saw an article or video a long time ago about it. It was a book that almost everyone who learned to do art in those circles had learned from at some point. I think it might have been this one: https://ratcreature.livejournal.com/175099.html Or one similar at least.
I agree with the last part though I just don't think hypersexualization fits the theme of the game at all.
As far as the comic book thing goes, I can't ever follow along with the "Oversexualized/unachievable" argument to design of characters in comics. Theyre meant to be unachievable and as a result desirable. The idea of the "realistic/everyday average looing" heroes is just narcissist's self inserting themselves as their own characters usually. Super is Super... not a typical or even optimal human being.
I might be misunderstanding what you mean here, and if so sorry. But super isn't just super in comic books. The male superheroes are not drawn in a sexual way. They are generally not sexy at all to women reading the comics. They are drawn to show big muscles and powerful poses.They don't have the full lips and eyes or facial expressions that the women are drawn with. The women are mostly drawn in sexualized poses with one purpose in mind: To show as much tits and ass as possible, to titillate all the teenage boys they believe will read the comics.
Anyway, I'm getting somewhat off topic now
Male superheroes are ridiculous oversexualized when compared to female superheroes. Female comic book superheroes have obtainable bodies. A guy is not going to obtain anywhere the amount of muscle that a male comic book character has. Most of the time the male super heroes are drawn with muscles where there should not be muscle.
No, that's not sexualization, that is about power. It is ridiculous yes, but sexy it's not, because it's not designed to be. Again, it's about a power fantasy. It is a pretty crucial difference actually.
A power fantasy in this context is designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to be like that!” Well, or at least closer to that than they are now. I also agree it's often so over the top that it's stupid. One aspect of a male power fantasy is to make men believe that women find that sexy, so they'll have sex with the man. A lot of action movies and other media is trying hard to make you believe that, so I completely understand the misconception and confusion about this that a lot of guys have. I had it too when I was young. And sure there are exceptions of course, but they are just that... exceptions.
Sexualized women in comic books or video games are male sex fantasies. They are designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to bang that!” as opposed to “ooh, I want to be like that!”. Generally speaking the women aren't drawn to show power and big muscles.
Try a little thought experiment. If big, muscly and powerful action heroes and super heroes are that oversexualized, why aren't more women into watching them? Women like sex, so if "sex sells", why do they prefer movies without those male power fantasies?
No, that's not sexualization, that is about power. It is ridiculous yes, but sexy it's not, because it's not designed to be. Again, it's about a power fantasy. It is a pretty crucial difference actually.
A power fantasy in this context is designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to be like that!” Well, or at least closer to that than they are now. I also agree it's often so over the top that it's stupid. One aspect of a male power fantasy is to make men believe that women find that sexy, so they'll have sex with the man. A lot of action movies and other media is trying hard to make you believe that, so I completely understand the misconception and confusion about this that a lot of guys have. I had it too when I was young. And sure there are exceptions of course, but they are just that... exceptions.
Sexualized women in comic books or video games are male sex fantasies. They are designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to bang that!” as opposed to “ooh, I want to be like that!”. Generally speaking the women aren't drawn to show power and big muscles.
Try a little thought experiment. If big, muscly and powerful action heroes and super heroes are that oversexualized, why aren't more women into watching them? Women like sex, so if "sex sells", why do they prefer movies without those male power fantasies?
Mate, you're still locked in the relativisation of hypersexualization of man, and still unable to comprehend that you're only looking at media mainly directed at the male public.
It's like someone going to watch/read some romantic media mainly directed at the female public and getting mad at the hyper romantization of man in that type of media.
It's like someone going to watch/read some romantic media mainly directed at the female public and getting mad at the hyper romantization of man in that type of media.
And "50 shades of grey" are so popular with women...
I have seen my share of "rekt" threads, and that anime was still off-putting at times... Yet women seem to love it...
I just don't think I will understand why some people like the things they like. Likewise, I don't expect people to understand why I think the chain mail bikinis in those old heavy metal magazines are more badass than sexually attractive.
And "50 shades of grey" are so popular with women...
I have seen my share of "rekt" threads, and that anime was still off-putting at times... Yet women seem to love it...
I just don't think I will understand why some people like the things they like. Likewise, I don't expect people to understand why I think the chain mail bikinis in those old heavy metal magazines are more badass than sexually attractive.
In general numbers, women are commonly more submissive than men, both Redo of healer and 50 shades of gray play at that alluring aspect of submission that quite often resonates with women, and believe it or not those medias that go with that thematic aren't rare and are almost a genre in of itself.
But, in the end of the day, people like what they like, as long as it isn't a crime, as much as someone dislikes it, that's all they are able to do, dislike it.
No, that's not sexualization, that is about power. It is ridiculous yes, but sexy it's not, because it's not designed to be. Again, it's about a power fantasy. It is a pretty crucial difference actually.
A power fantasy in this context is designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to be like that!” Well, or at least closer to that than they are now. I also agree it's often so over the top that it's stupid. One aspect of a male power fantasy is to make men believe that women find that sexy, so they'll have sex with the man. A lot of action movies and other media is trying hard to make you believe that, so I completely understand the misconception and confusion about this that a lot of guys have. I had it too when I was young. And sure there are exceptions of course, but they are just that... exceptions.
Sexualized women in comic books or video games are male sex fantasies. They are designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to bang that!” as opposed to “ooh, I want to be like that!”. Generally speaking the women aren't drawn to show power and big muscles.
Try a little thought experiment. If big, muscly and powerful action heroes and super heroes are that oversexualized, why aren't more women into watching them? Women like sex, so if "sex sells", why do they prefer movies without those male power fantasies?
Mate, you're still locked in the relativisation of hypersexualization of man, and still unable to comprehend that you're only looking at media mainly directed at the male public.
It's like someone going to watch/read some romantic media mainly directed at the female public and getting mad at the hyper romantization of man in that type of media.
It's unreasonable.
Mate, you just explained my whole point in different words! Thank you And I fully comprehend about the media directed at the male public. That is the entire friggin' point. Again, that is what action movies and super hero comic books are, and a shit-ton of other movies really. And a majority of computer games too, in the categories where it even makes sense to apply it. Media directed at women have different types of men in them, because women generally don't find the male power fantasy sexy.
And I am not getting mad, I am trying to explain to people that don't understand the difference what it is, and you pretty much just wrote another way of saying that. The men in the two categories look and act differently. Again, generally speaking.
I wonder why nowadays for some reason we people can't dress how we want... You know that if my armor is ofending you, the problem is only yours, righ?
This has never actually been true. While it may well be your decision, that doesn't mean it doesn't affect others.
People need to realize that their decisions do impact other people. No one really wants to see some overweight hairy guy in a mankini.
Sure, it's his decision, but I still want to rip my eyes out.
Well I never said I like it or not. But I'm not responsible of other people feelings. A feeling is personal and belongs only to one person, so the same action could affect differently depending on the person. Each person has to work his mind firstly, that's the problem.
I agree to set limits in this armor discussion, but racional ones. Because seeing an overweight hairy guy in a mankini in Verra makes no sense. In the other hand there is nothing that points out wearing skimpy outfits is bad or shouldn't be there.
Now we can all be chaste and virtuous. All players, male and female, will have to where this outfit, so no one is offended.
Heh. Maybe you haven’t spent enough time in Italy where nuns are hypersexualized and objectified because their habit hides so much.
I think these fetishes arise from our fundamentally Puritanical perspective on sex, rather than the costumes themselves. ‘Sex sells’ is kind of an inaccurate description of modern marketing (in the US market). I’ve always thought that ‘sexy’ sells - the allusion to sex without crossing the line - ‘sex’ is still too transgressive an act to sell.
An example, in Australia there was a commercial with a couple having sex to sell yogurt. You could never even come close to this in the US to talk about sex, let alone sell something completely unrelated. It’s a weird type of Victorianism, so we fetishize the modern ‘ankle’ of fashion and form.
I agree to set limits in this armor discussion, but racional ones. Because seeing an overweight hairy guy in a mankini in Verra makes no sense. In the other hand there is nothing that points out wearing skimpy outfits is bad or shouldn't be there.
Ok, so you are ok with skimpy outfits, as long as you find what is underneath to be attractive - real or in game.
I think we all know enough about you as a person now.
My over all opinion on what should or should not be in Ashes isn't what I am discussing here, I am simply pointing out the flaw in your assertion that ones decisions don't affect others - this is a popular yet factually incorrect stance.
Now we can all be chaste and virtuous. All players, male and female, will have to where this outfit, so no one is offended.
Heh. Maybe you haven’t spent enough time in Italy where nuns are hypersexualized and objectified because their habit hides so much.
I think these fetishes arise from our fundamentally Puritanical perspective on sex, rather than the costumes themselves. ‘Sex sells’ is kind of an inaccurate description of modern marketing (in the US market). I’ve always thought that ‘sexy’ sells - the allusion to sex without crossing the line - ‘sex’ is still too transgressive an act to sell.
An example, in Australia there was a commercial with a couple having sex to sell yogurt. You could never even come close to this in the US to talk about sex, let alone sell something completely unrelated. It’s a weird type of Victorianism, so we fetishize the modern ‘ankle’ of fashion and form.
Obviously, my post was meant as satire. I was referencing the Puritan views from the 17th century. The issue over censorship has been debated on Reddit and the Internet for several years. I do understand that the allusion of sex sells. Cascade made a funny commercial awhile ago.
Im fine with any clothing as long as it fits the Fantasy setting and the occasion.
Fighting a Dragon in underwear is maybe not the best idea..
Revealing clothers in open world are ok, like cleavage and skirts for classes it fits.
Or Barechested for more berserkerish classes.
Maybe have some casual option in towns etc you can toggle for more revealing clothes (not overboard)
I guess Fantasy is closest to medival times, where bikinis etc were not even invented.
Those that consider the impact of their decisions on others (at least on rational people), and those that do not.
There are two kinds of people in the world, those that think they're right and those that search the truth. My kind is the second one and we are very few.
When did I say that I'm not considering the impact of my actions on other people? All my life I did care about other people and that ended up making me very unhappy that I had a depression.
Now I keep trying not to negatively impact other people as well, BUT what I'm saying is that if something happens and you get offended, the problem is yours because you don't have the maturity to receive that stimulus appropriately.
I can say that because I succeed on it. I do not care anymore what do people think about me, nobody can't offend me, and I've never been so happy.
Now, I am not saying that one of these types is a better person than the other type... actually, yes I am, that is exactly what I am saying.
And you can say whatever you want but you are nobody to judge anything about other people because you don't know nothing, and even knowing, you are no God. Trust me I'm not saying it to attack you or deffend myself, I'm saying it with no ego, because I have no ego, I'm only a scientific person.
My over all opinion on what should or should not be in Ashes isn't what I am discussing here, I am simply pointing out the flaw in your assertion that ones decisions don't affect others - this is a popular yet factually incorrect stance.
Again I've never said that. I said that is people's own responsibility to take the others actions in a good way (And I'm not saying is easy or never have problems).
I have no problem with you or your opinions I'm just saying that you can't decide what is correct out of the scientific method. You can convince me if you show real facts and data. I have no need to maintain my position if it is not correct.
I agree to set limits in this armor discussion, but racional ones. Because seeing an overweight hairy guy in a mankini in Verra makes no sense. In the other hand there is nothing that points out wearing skimpy outfits is bad or shouldn't be there.
Ok, so you are ok with skimpy outfits, as long as you find what is underneath to be attractive - real or in game.
I think we all know enough about you as a person now.
My over all opinion on what should or should not be in Ashes isn't what I am discussing here, I am simply pointing out the flaw in your assertion that ones decisions don't affect others - this is a popular yet factually incorrect stance.
Ok, but you should also point out that this goes both ways. You saying you don't like seeing skimpy outfits because you are offended, therefore they shouldn't be in the game is equally as intrusive on someone else's experience as having people wear them in the game where you can see them.
So both sides of the aisle are stepping on the other sides toes by saying the game should have what they want in it.
If there is a discussion to be had it should be how do you give both sides what they want, is that possible?
Probably have something similar to the ability to shut off transmogs/costumes on your end, but have a filter setting for outfits considered 'revealing'?
You saying you don't like seeing skimpy outfits because you are offended, therefore they shouldn't be in the game is equally as intrusive on someone else's experience as having people wear them in the game where you can see them.
I am not saying that at all though.
I haven't given my thoughts on the topic at all.
All I am saying is that the poster I replied to suggested that you shouldn't take other people in to consideration when making decisions, and that is not a good way to be.
I wonder why nowadays for some reason we people can't dress how we want... You know that if my armor is ofending you, the problem is only yours, righ?
Now, if they aren't the words you meant to use, that is on you.
The above sentence means that if some overweight hairy guy wearing a mankini puts you off, then that is your issue. You seem to be ok with a world where you are standing in line behind that overweight hairy guy to get some ice cream, while he is pulling that mankini out from between his cheeks.
While a person has the 'legal' right to do this in most of the western world, that doesn't mean they should. That doesn't mean that when they got up that morning and decided to wear that mankini to the beach, they shouldn't have spared a thought for the impact it would have on those around them.
You said that this man need not consider this as it is other peoples problem (again, your words, if the words you used don't convey the meaning you wanted to convey, that really is an issue you need to address). I say it should be at least a consideration that this person thinks through.
Again, this says everything we need to know about you as a person. As far as you are concerned, it is all you, and no one else matters.
II would try to separate RL and ingame when it comes to discussing what you feel is ok to wear. It's quite different for me at least.
In real life I don't give a damn what you wear when just walking around. Naked, mankini, clown costume, whatever. You do you. I only care about basic hygiene, which means if you want to sit on a public bench or train/bus seat you need to wear shorts at the very least. A shirt too if you lean your back on anything. And a mask as applicable.
In the game I want to keep it as thematic and lore adjacent as possible. Skimpy is fine if it fits the lore and setting, like it did with Age of Conan, and it's equal for all.
II would try to separate RL and ingame when it comes to discussing what you feel is ok to wear. It's quite different for me at least.
In real life I don't give a damn what you wear when just walking around. Naked, mankini, clown costume, whatever. You do you. I only care about basic hygiene, which means if you want to sit on a public bench or train/bus seat you need to wear shorts at the very least. A shirt too if you lean your back on anything. And a mask as applicable.
In the game I want to keep it as thematic and lore adjacent as possible. Skimpy is fine if it fits the lore and setting, like it did with Age of Conan, and it's equal for all.
Are we cool?
Personally, I think the Conan aesthetic is badass and could fit into most MMORPGs well.
You saying you don't like seeing skimpy outfits because you are offended, therefore they shouldn't be in the game is equally as intrusive on someone else's experience as having people wear them in the game where you can see them.
I am not saying that at all though.
I haven't given my thoughts on the topic at all.
All I am saying is that the poster I replied to suggested that you shouldn't take other people in to consideration when making decisions, and that is not a good way to be.
That was a generic 'you', not a specific 'you'...
I agree with you, that you should be mindful of others when making decisions... But they should be doing the same.
I love Frazetta’s art. The whole Conan story, like the writing itself, has a pretty fascinating story behind it. Worth reading up on to see how odd the muse can be.
I think my favorite is still Larry Elmore though. Have a few of his signed works hanging in my office.
I love Frazetta’s art. The whole Conan story, like the writing itself, has a pretty fascinating story behind it. Worth reading up on to see how odd the muse can be.
I think my favorite is still Larry Elmore though. Have a few of his signed works hanging in my office.
Yeah, it's all so classic to me. I love it. As it relates to the thread. It feels like SJWs would prefer to purge influence of some of these older artists from modern fantasy in favor of more modest designs.
When I feel like artists are censoring themselves to appeal to a larger crowd, it makes me not want to take them seriously.
I enjoyed playing Diablo 2 Resurrected, but the censorship was upsetting. Luckey, for me, I already experienced the story as it was intended decades ago. I just sucks to see the art censored and know that there are going to be new generations of Diablo fans experiencing the art in a restricted form.
I don't think I would like Lost Ark as a game, but I love to see developers behave like this. It is refreshing to see creators stick to their guns. Steven apologized for something he said a while ago(I think it was a hot take on new world). I understand why he did it, but I would be lying if I did not say I would have preferred to see him double down. Apologies like that to me comes off as self-censorship. Not saying that is the case, but it felt that way at the time.
The Mortal Online devs don't seem to care at all what people think. They have a vision for the game and are quick to shut down any ideas of censorship or making things more accessible. That is the kind of behavior that really makes me admire a development team.
You saying you don't like seeing skimpy outfits because you are offended, therefore they shouldn't be in the game is equally as intrusive on someone else's experience as having people wear them in the game where you can see them.
I am not saying that at all though.
I haven't given my thoughts on the topic at all.
All I am saying is that the poster I replied to suggested that you shouldn't take other people in to consideration when making decisions, and that is not a good way to be.
That was a generic 'you', not a specific 'you'...
Fair enough.
I am not going to hold you responsible for the shortcomings of the English language.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I love Frazetta’s art. The whole Conan story, like the writing itself, has a pretty fascinating story behind it. Worth reading up on to see how odd the muse can be.
I think my favorite is still Larry Elmore though. Have a few of his signed works hanging in my office.
I got to meet Elmore. The nicest guy. He was a family friend to a friend of mine and she introduced me to him. I totally geeked out because he was my favorite fantasy artist and he was totally humble about it.
I bought two different art books of his from Kickstarter and I have them as a set. I’m really proud of them. They even include an original drawing he did, an actual unique drawing of a dragon as part of the reward. So awesome. I mostly supported his projects though because he was such a nice guy, as nice as his talent, and I thought he deserved it.
II would try to separate RL and ingame when it comes to discussing what you feel is ok to wear. It's quite different for me at least.
In real life I don't give a damn what you wear when just walking around. Naked, mankini, clown costume, whatever. You do you. I only care about basic hygiene, which means if you want to sit on a public bench or train/bus seat you need to wear shorts at the very least. A shirt too if you lean your back on anything. And a mask as applicable.
In the game I want to keep it as thematic and lore adjacent as possible. Skimpy is fine if it fits the lore and setting, like it did with Age of Conan, and it's equal for all.
Are we cool?
Personally, I think the Conan aesthetic is badass and could fit into most MMORPGs well.
I loved the Age of Conan and Conan Exiles aesthetics. They fit the world building perfectly imo.
II would try to separate RL and ingame when it comes to discussing what you feel is ok to wear. It's quite different for me at least.
In real life I don't give a damn what you wear when just walking around. Naked, mankini, clown costume, whatever. You do you. I only care about basic hygiene, which means if you want to sit on a public bench or train/bus seat you need to wear shorts at the very least. A shirt too if you lean your back on anything. And a mask as applicable.
In the game I want to keep it as thematic and lore adjacent as possible. Skimpy is fine if it fits the lore and setting, like it did with Age of Conan, and it's equal for all.
Are we cool?
Personally, I think the Conan aesthetic is badass and could fit into most MMORPGs well.
Notice the different poses? Classic power pose of Conan that is believable at least, vs. super fucking weird "spreading my legs" squat-pose by the woman signalling something different, and that no one sane would do IRL. That is a classic example of what I was talking about earlier.
You already linked two barbarian sets which I think are fine. A few more like those achievable ingame would be cool. I didn't get them either.
Comments
Male superheroes are ridiculous oversexualized when compared to female superheroes. Female comic book superheroes have obtainable bodies. A guy is not going to obtain anywhere the amount of muscle that a male comic book character has. Most of the time the male super heroes are drawn with muscles where there should not be muscle.
No, that's not sexualization, that is about power. It is ridiculous yes, but sexy it's not, because it's not designed to be. Again, it's about a power fantasy. It is a pretty crucial difference actually.
A power fantasy in this context is designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to be like that!” Well, or at least closer to that than they are now. I also agree it's often so over the top that it's stupid. One aspect of a male power fantasy is to make men believe that women find that sexy, so they'll have sex with the man. A lot of action movies and other media is trying hard to make you believe that, so I completely understand the misconception and confusion about this that a lot of guys have. I had it too when I was young. And sure there are exceptions of course, but they are just that... exceptions.
Sexualized women in comic books or video games are male sex fantasies. They are designed to make guys think, “ooh, I want to bang that!” as opposed to “ooh, I want to be like that!”. Generally speaking the women aren't drawn to show power and big muscles.
Try a little thought experiment. If big, muscly and powerful action heroes and super heroes are that oversexualized, why aren't more women into watching them? Women like sex, so if "sex sells", why do they prefer movies without those male power fantasies?
Mate, you're still locked in the relativisation of hypersexualization of man, and still unable to comprehend that you're only looking at media mainly directed at the male public.
It's like someone going to watch/read some romantic media mainly directed at the female public and getting mad at the hyper romantization of man in that type of media.
It's unreasonable.
Aren't we all sinners?
Be me...
Trying to figure out why this:
https://nicchiban.nichegamer.com/redo-of-healer-more-popular-with-women-according-to-creator/
And "50 shades of grey" are so popular with women...
I have seen my share of "rekt" threads, and that anime was still off-putting at times... Yet women seem to love it...
I just don't think I will understand why some people like the things they like. Likewise, I don't expect people to understand why I think the chain mail bikinis in those old heavy metal magazines are more badass than sexually attractive.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
In general numbers, women are commonly more submissive than men, both Redo of healer and 50 shades of gray play at that alluring aspect of submission that quite often resonates with women, and believe it or not those medias that go with that thematic aren't rare and are almost a genre in of itself.
But, in the end of the day, people like what they like, as long as it isn't a crime, as much as someone dislikes it, that's all they are able to do, dislike it.
Aren't we all sinners?
This has never actually been true. While it may well be your decision, that doesn't mean it doesn't affect others.
People need to realize that their decisions do impact other people. No one really wants to see some overweight hairy guy in a mankini.
Sure, it's his decision, but I still want to rip my eyes out.
Mate, you just explained my whole point in different words! Thank you
And I am not getting mad, I am trying to explain to people that don't understand the difference what it is, and you pretty much just wrote another way of saying that. The men in the two categories look and act differently. Again, generally speaking.
Well I never said I like it or not. But I'm not responsible of other people feelings. A feeling is personal and belongs only to one person, so the same action could affect differently depending on the person. Each person has to work his mind firstly, that's the problem.
I agree to set limits in this armor discussion, but racional ones. Because seeing an overweight hairy guy in a mankini in Verra makes no sense. In the other hand there is nothing that points out wearing skimpy outfits is bad or shouldn't be there.
Heh. Maybe you haven’t spent enough time in Italy where nuns are hypersexualized and objectified because their habit hides so much.
I think these fetishes arise from our fundamentally Puritanical perspective on sex, rather than the costumes themselves. ‘Sex sells’ is kind of an inaccurate description of modern marketing (in the US market). I’ve always thought that ‘sexy’ sells - the allusion to sex without crossing the line - ‘sex’ is still too transgressive an act to sell.
An example, in Australia there was a commercial with a couple having sex to sell yogurt. You could never even come close to this in the US to talk about sex, let alone sell something completely unrelated. It’s a weird type of Victorianism, so we fetishize the modern ‘ankle’ of fashion and form.
There are two kinds of people in the world.
Those that consider the impact of their decisions on others (at least on rational people), and those that do not.
Now, I am not saying that one of these types is a better person than the other type... actually, yes I am, that is exactly what I am saying. Ok, so you are ok with skimpy outfits, as long as you find what is underneath to be attractive - real or in game.
I think we all know enough about you as a person now.
My over all opinion on what should or should not be in Ashes isn't what I am discussing here, I am simply pointing out the flaw in your assertion that ones decisions don't affect others - this is a popular yet factually incorrect stance.
Based, Now i want a Priest Cassock Skin.
Aren't we all sinners?
Obviously, my post was meant as satire. I was referencing the Puritan views from the 17th century. The issue over censorship has been debated on Reddit and the Internet for several years. I do understand that the allusion of sex sells. Cascade made a funny commercial awhile ago.
Fighting a Dragon in underwear is maybe not the best idea..
Revealing clothers in open world are ok, like cleavage and skirts for classes it fits.
Or Barechested for more berserkerish classes.
Maybe have some casual option in towns etc you can toggle for more revealing clothes (not overboard)
I guess Fantasy is closest to medival times, where bikinis etc were not even invented.
0dbea148-8cb8-4711-ba90-eb0864e93b5f
When did I say that I'm not considering the impact of my actions on other people? All my life I did care about other people and that ended up making me very unhappy that I had a depression.
Now I keep trying not to negatively impact other people as well, BUT what I'm saying is that if something happens and you get offended, the problem is yours because you don't have the maturity to receive that stimulus appropriately.
I can say that because I succeed on it. I do not care anymore what do people think about me, nobody can't offend me, and I've never been so happy.
And you can say whatever you want but you are nobody to judge anything about other people because you don't know nothing, and even knowing, you are no God. Trust me I'm not saying it to attack you or deffend myself, I'm saying it with no ego, because I have no ego, I'm only a scientific person.
Dude, read it again. What part of "making sense" did you not understand?
Again I've never said that. I said that is people's own responsibility to take the others actions in a good way (And I'm not saying is easy or never have problems).
I have no problem with you or your opinions I'm just saying that you can't decide what is correct out of the scientific method. You can convince me if you show real facts and data. I have no need to maintain my position if it is not correct.
Ok, but you should also point out that this goes both ways. You saying you don't like seeing skimpy outfits because you are offended, therefore they shouldn't be in the game is equally as intrusive on someone else's experience as having people wear them in the game where you can see them.
So both sides of the aisle are stepping on the other sides toes by saying the game should have what they want in it.
If there is a discussion to be had it should be how do you give both sides what they want, is that possible?
Probably have something similar to the ability to shut off transmogs/costumes on your end, but have a filter setting for outfits considered 'revealing'?
I haven't given my thoughts on the topic at all.
All I am saying is that the poster I replied to suggested that you shouldn't take other people in to consideration when making decisions, and that is not a good way to be.
The above sentence means that if some overweight hairy guy wearing a mankini puts you off, then that is your issue. You seem to be ok with a world where you are standing in line behind that overweight hairy guy to get some ice cream, while he is pulling that mankini out from between his cheeks.
While a person has the 'legal' right to do this in most of the western world, that doesn't mean they should. That doesn't mean that when they got up that morning and decided to wear that mankini to the beach, they shouldn't have spared a thought for the impact it would have on those around them.
You said that this man need not consider this as it is other peoples problem (again, your words, if the words you used don't convey the meaning you wanted to convey, that really is an issue you need to address). I say it should be at least a consideration that this person thinks through.
Again, this says everything we need to know about you as a person. As far as you are concerned, it is all you, and no one else matters.
In real life I don't give a damn what you wear when just walking around. Naked, mankini, clown costume, whatever. You do you. I only care about basic hygiene, which means if you want to sit on a public bench or train/bus seat you need to wear shorts at the very least. A shirt too if you lean your back on anything. And a mask as applicable.
In the game I want to keep it as thematic and lore adjacent as possible. Skimpy is fine if it fits the lore and setting, like it did with Age of Conan, and it's equal for all.
Are we cool?
Personally, I think the Conan aesthetic is badass and could fit into most MMORPGs well.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
That was a generic 'you', not a specific 'you'...
I agree with you, that you should be mindful of others when making decisions... But they should be doing the same.
I think my favorite is still Larry Elmore though. Have a few of his signed works hanging in my office.
Yeah, it's all so classic to me. I love it. As it relates to the thread. It feels like SJWs would prefer to purge influence of some of these older artists from modern fantasy in favor of more modest designs.
When I feel like artists are censoring themselves to appeal to a larger crowd, it makes me not want to take them seriously.
I enjoyed playing Diablo 2 Resurrected, but the censorship was upsetting. Luckey, for me, I already experienced the story as it was intended decades ago. I just sucks to see the art censored and know that there are going to be new generations of Diablo fans experiencing the art in a restricted form.
On the flip side, you see stuff like this that give you hope:
I don't think I would like Lost Ark as a game, but I love to see developers behave like this. It is refreshing to see creators stick to their guns. Steven apologized for something he said a while ago(I think it was a hot take on new world). I understand why he did it, but I would be lying if I did not say I would have preferred to see him double down. Apologies like that to me comes off as self-censorship. Not saying that is the case, but it felt that way at the time.
The Mortal Online devs don't seem to care at all what people think. They have a vision for the game and are quick to shut down any ideas of censorship or making things more accessible. That is the kind of behavior that really makes me admire a development team.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I am not going to hold you responsible for the shortcomings of the English language.
I got to meet Elmore. The nicest guy. He was a family friend to a friend of mine and she introduced me to him. I totally geeked out because he was my favorite fantasy artist and he was totally humble about it.
I bought two different art books of his from Kickstarter and I have them as a set. I’m really proud of them. They even include an original drawing he did, an actual unique drawing of a dragon as part of the reward. So awesome. I mostly supported his projects though because he was such a nice guy, as nice as his talent, and I thought he deserved it.
I loved the Age of Conan and Conan Exiles aesthetics. They fit the world building perfectly imo.
Notice the different poses? Classic power pose of Conan that is believable at least, vs. super fucking weird "spreading my legs" squat-pose by the woman signalling something different, and that no one sane would do IRL. That is a classic example of what I was talking about earlier.
You already linked two barbarian sets which I think are fine. A few more like those achievable ingame would be cool. I didn't get them either.
Which racial lore would they fit though? Humans as depicted I suppose. Tulnar too perhaps?