Female Expression In AoC

As a Female MMO gamer I would like to suggest giving more effeminate options in armor styles. My concern is that I would like to have the option for dressing effeminately. The reason I am suggesting to make it optional is so people can dress as feminine or masculine or neutral as the player choses. This aids players self expression. Different armor styles as well as jewelry and makeup would be very helpful in this goal. I understand that you would like to keep things on the more practical side but this could be stifling to the communities creativity. Self expression and fashion is very important to me as a player I would like as many options as possible in creating my character.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Jhoren

IMO, heavy armor should not show any skin period. It looks super stupid. It doesn't have to be full plate, but definitely everything covered in sturdy looking armor. Also for women.

Medium and light, sure, show some skin if it fits the culture ingame, but cover the vital organs at the very least. Boob-windows also look stupid for armor. Armor can be plenty feminine without any skin showing at all.

High heels are straight up a no-go in any situation involving armor and combat.

Intrepid is leaning heavily towards cosmetic items, but I really, really hope they don't let players wearing heavy plate put on cosmetic items (other than the full body suits) that shows the player in a revealing evening gown. I hope they match the cosmetics with the proper armor class items.

Dygz

*meh*
If it's all based on mundane, non-magical European armor. Sure.
Verra is a high magic world. Which includes illusions.

Nerror

Jhoren wrote: »

High heels are straight up a no-go in any situation involving armor and combat.

This is a pet peeve of mine. No high heels please.

Sybil_Lanel

Dygz wrote: »

*meh*
If it's all based on mundane, non-magical European armor. Sure.
Verra is a high magic world. Which includes illusions.

I agree with that. FFXIV had glamours a.k.a illusions that explained these things. I also agree that high heels and bikini armor are a no go. That shouldn't mean I can't have a nice set of armor that looks appealing. Maybe a nice pair a boots while i'm at it?

Azherae

Jhoren wrote: »

IMO, heavy armor should not show any skin period. It looks super stupid. It doesn't have to be full plate, but definitely everything covered in sturdy looking armor. Also for women.

Medium and light, sure, show some skin if it fits the culture ingame, but cover the vital organs at the very least. Boob-windows also look stupid for armor. Armor can be plenty feminine without any skin showing at all.

High heels are straight up a no-go in any situation involving armor and combat.

Intrepid is leaning heavily towards cosmetic items, but I really, really hope they don't let players wearing heavy plate put on cosmetic items (other than the full body suits) that shows the player in a revealing evening gown. I hope they match the cosmetics with the proper armor class items.

I wasn't gonna weigh in on this thread (figured I'd catch the next train) but I've just thought about something based on some design stuff I watched another group member do a while back for a character model.

Though some of the kinematics would be affected, there are a lot of situations in which this doesn't have to be a binary choice, relative to exposed spots on armor and heels. I have no skin in the game here because I hate clothes and run around with as much skin exposed as possible (to keep cool, you see), and while I absolutely see how one can consider that sexualized, or even to want to do so because it makes one feel attractive, wearing as little as possible just comes to mind as my default because I... don't like clothes.

I would love a game where armor sets had certain 'layer points' that you could just turn off. Sometimes it's cloaks, sometimes it's the hood, sometimes it's a scarf or other decoration, so now I wonder... why not heels? Why not back-out portions and if necessary, even 'boob windows'.

I don't like the idea of forcing anyone to wear more clothes than they want to, though obviously I'll swing in the direction of realism, but we've been talking about 'clothes that accentuate the form' as a way of getting around this and producing something 'tasteful' (no one's words but mine). That's not gonna fly for me, because given that incredible character creator, and the variations in races, we aren't going to know what that means for base models, far less individual players.

So, yeah, I want back-out top armor on Cleric. I want others to be able to sling the heels if they want to, in the same armor set, without me having to do it. I want our cosmetic options to go beyond 'color' and 'is my cape on or not'. If Intrepid has got us to the point of 'tattoos', I want everyone to be able to roll up their sleeves and walk around with their rippling biceps and whatnot on display, be they male or female, Ren'Kai or Nikua, without even thinking about 'why did Intrepid give that heels?'

I wanna think "why did that PLAYER give that outfit the heels?"

Except not really, I want to just never think about it at all because it's someone else's choice. If Ulricht Stormhammer of the Dunir Royal Guard has his bare chest revealed and is swinging a halberd around in 3-inch heels, well good for him for being three inches taller.

Thank you for enduring my rant.

Lithion

Dygz wrote: »

*meh*
If it's all based on mundane, non-magical European armor. Sure.
Verra is a high magic world. Which includes illusions.

This. It also includes magical enchantments and tattoos. Like i can probably have a max level ring that gives more defense than a full set of level 1 gear lol. Thats why i never understood the "cant show skin or it breaks immersion" thing. Like, were in a world of magic and the rules of our world don't apply here. its also a video game

Leiloni

Jhoren wrote: »

Armor can be plenty feminine without any skin showing at all.

High heels are straight up a no-go in any situation involving armor and combat.

Why can't I have both feminine armor that also shows skin? And make it heavy armor if I want to be more survivable? And heels make armor look more feminine, which is a huge problem with heavy plate armor, so that's a stylistic choice that makes us women feel prettier. It's less of an issue with leather or cloth.

But I don't want to be forced to wear in game armor merely for it's looks - I want whatever weight armor I choose to look pretty so I can make the best build choice for my character.

We have horns and tails and fling magic - reality was never on the table. If I want to look pretty, who are you to tell me no? Because you feel like it's not "appropriate"? Who decides that in a high fantasy video game? Let players have choices.

I felt like my Aion examples were stylish and tame and something everyone could agree on. I'd be ok with even more skin, but those are probably the best way to go.

JustVine

Hmm, fully customizable gear huh. You could design certain layers of the outfit to be separated (if they aren't already) on the back end fairly easily I would imagine. Might be harder on some pre-existing outfits than others due to lack of clear segmented layers, but once this design strategy was adopted as a guideline it'd be easier and easier to add new outfits with this capacity.

I wouldn't expect this to be hard to implement given everything I know about the back end tech for this kind of thing and the design process for cosmetics. A couple months at most (and really the less they care about clipping the easier on the amount of time it'd take up.) I don't think it really need to be available at launch in a perfect form as long as we know that it's a priority post launch in either case meaning they have plenty of time/resources to achieve something like this in the long term.

It certainly would offer the ultimate form of choice on an outfit and make the question of 'more skin showing vs not' kind of moot. It certainly would assuage MY particular worries since Intrepid would be incentivized to make even MORE armor that skewed towards 'hard' designs that can be 'softened' depending on which layers you reduce.

The more clothing/layers pre-existing on outfits in such a system, the more customizable it could be, and therefore while there would certainly still be outfits that just had less layers than others and were more skewed towards dresses and such, the player base would over time incentivize intrepid towards more customization (if choice is really more important to people) with the their wallets.

You mean I can have the same outfit skew sexy at sometimes and badass in others? Or even mix and match layers to get things just right to my own taste rather than it being decided from the start in a board room? That's the ultimate dream to me! IS would certainly get a ton of money from me if they game was good and they implemented something like this.

I like the idea a lot the more I think about it, although they'd need to have several templates for the work flow to keep the outfits from feeling too cookie cutter. Better yet, maybe there are different types of layering you could apply via different blue prints... It'd take more resource to implement that way, but it'd keep things fresh in the long run and could be a continuing development goal after launch. Either way it's a very achievable goal given everything I have seen about their back end so far via the cc and the skill their art team shows, so I wouldn't worry about it taking up too many resources from other things in the slightest.

Freya

Kreed wrote: »

I agree, players who chose a female character should be able to dress their character up in a fashion that makes them look really good and has some sex appeal.

male characters too. appearance shouldnt be locked to the player gender but customizable so either can look as masculine,androgynous or feminine as they want

Leiloni

The monthly cosmetic this month is a perfect example of what we're asking Intrepid not to do. Even in concept art they're not even trying to make this gear fit the female form better and have a different, more feminine design. Frankly it's ugly. This is the level of ugly I expect from New World (and I wrote in many a forum thread the same thing I'm writing here, albeit in more detail because I had in game armor screenshots to criticize). Please Intrepid change direction while it's still early.

monthly_cosmetics_05_20221920---Voyager-Plus---Background_JPG.jpg?fm=webp&q=80&w=1280

monthly_cosmetics_05_20221920---Voyager-Plus---Background_JPG.jpg?fm=webp&q=80&w=1280

WuqingYe

As a fellow girl, I completely agree on this point. Even though I play a lot of male characters, I still love to have the option of cute or sexy options for when I do play as a female. Obviously, as you've stated, Intrepid wants to keep a more realistic approach to the world of Verra but I would definitely love to see some of the more effeminate options available as well. There are many ways to keep realism in the game while tackling the task of incorporating a cute armor look! I hope they do this! I have a soft spot for frills and I'd love to make a girl alt who wears plenty of them :')

Azherae

Leiloni wrote: »

The monthly cosmetic this month is a perfect example of what we're asking Intrepid not to do. Even in concept art they're not even trying to make this gear fit the female form better and have a different, more feminine design. Frankly it's ugly. This is the level of ugly I expect from New World (and I wrote in many a forum thread the same thing I'm writing here, albeit in more detail because I had in game armor screenshots to criticize). Please Intrepid change direction while it's still early.

I'm not sure what you mean here, so I'm genuinely asking. Looking at that set, i can't think of what someone would want to be different about it? To me personally, this looks exactly normal and what I would want. The underlying form of the character would determine the overall look of this gear.

So, uh... what would you want changed here?

George_Black

Azherae wrote: »

Leiloni wrote: »

The monthly cosmetic this month is a perfect example of what we're asking Intrepid not to do. Even in concept art they're not even trying to make this gear fit the female form better and have a different, more feminine design. Frankly it's ugly. This is the level of ugly I expect from New World (and I wrote in many a forum thread the same thing I'm writing here, albeit in more detail because I had in game armor screenshots to criticize). Please Intrepid change direction while it's still early.

I'm not sure what you mean here, so I'm genuinely asking. Looking at that set, i can't think of what someone would want to be different about it? To me personally, this looks exactly normal and what I would want. The underlying form of the character would determine the overall look of this gear.

So, uh... what would you want changed here?

It simply isnt modeled for female gamers. It's a copy paste of the male design.
Personally I like the low quality monthly cosmetics. They keep their word when they said "best stuff will be found ingame".

Now back to the topic...

Just like if you asked every guy "would you like to look stronger", they would all say yes, similalry all girls would say yes when asked "would you like to look more attractive." And vise versa.

No guy or girl would say yes to "would you like to seem more average?".

And that is shown by players (both male and female) creating strong and goodlooking male or female characters.
Some irronically create funny looking characters.

Does this mean bikini armors? No. Should there not be high heels? No.

This months cosmetic is a safe female model. Average. The female gamers and horny dudes on this topic have posted good looking female designs.

The politically motivated people on this topic have talked about sexualization and objectification of the female armors, have called for revealing male outfits here, instead of creating a topic "we want revealing male designs and here are some pictures", some have mentioned cross dressing which is offtopic. I for one dont care if the devs allow for male characters to wear wedding dresses. It's still offtopic.

Some go the other route of cant have openings in the armor to show boobs, it's not realistic. Ye right, because taking 10 sword hits or fireballs is realistic.
Should we make armors looking like modern day bomb disarm gear? More realistic for you? Shut up....

George_Black

Let go of your hate people...

Realize that those that feed you scripts on the name of equality between sexes and sexual prefrences arent looking to heal, but divide, since they NEVER cured the social diseases, but just treated the symptoms.
Division serves them, and the more you attack each other the more you further their goals. All the same like being their mouth piece.

What's wrong with having video game armors (spoiler alert: no real) look attractive since people want them?
They themselves have stated "no to bikinis and asian anime female forms".
Why do you keep on hating?

How can we argue about attractive armors in a video game, when in real life those that pretend to speak against inequality and female objefication collect taxes from onlyfans.

Is this the fight for female empowerement online? Video game armor conservatism while our classmates daughters, sisters friends etc etc do onlyfans?

There should be realistic armors, attractive armors, high heels, no heels. It's ok. It's not a "male dominated blah blah blah" crime.
There shouldnt be bikini armors and anime boobs and waists. It's REAL sexualization, with minors exposed to it.

Azherae

George_Black wrote: »

It simply isnt modeled for female gamers. It's a copy paste of the male design.

It's 'a design'. It fits both. I want it, just not in that color. My hype for gear pieces in Ashes when I see the below:

That's probably all that's worth saying to that...

George_Black

Azherae wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

It simply isnt modeled for female gamers. It's a copy paste of the male design.

It's 'a design'. It fits both. I want it, just not in that color. My hype for gear pieces in Ashes when I see the below:

That's probably all that's worth saying to that...

Nothing worth saying if you aim to score status quo balance points. And that's all Im getting from your posts.

"It's a design". You dont say. Could we do without it? 100%. It doesnt amaze anybody. Except you, when you pretend to.
Video games need to amaze and excite gamers. Not making sure they dont risk "offending".

Azherae

George_Black wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

It simply isnt modeled for female gamers. It's a copy paste of the male design.

It's 'a design'. It fits both. I want it, just not in that color. My hype for gear pieces in Ashes when I see the below:

That's probably all that's worth saying to that...

Nothing worth saying if you aim to score status quo balance points. And that's all Im getting from your posts.

"It's a design". You dont say. Could we do without it? 100%. It doesnt amaze anybody. Except you, when you pretend to.
Video games need to amaze and excite gamers. Not making sure they dont risk "offending".

If it is this difficult for you to respect the preferences of others, there's not much to say.

Intrepid, please keep doing what you're doing, there's a specific piece that I liked so much that I absolutely want it, but I couldn't find it to add to the post and make the point, so I chose the closest thing.

It's really not my business whether or not others 'don't believe I can be real' because I think that armor type looks coolest, it's only my business whether or not I get my armor, and preferably without preventing others from getting theirs.

You can just assume everything I said is 'pretense', George, that way you don't have to engage on it any further. As long as I get the armor and similar armor, it's fine if you don't believe I'm real.

CROW3

George_Black wrote: »

Nothing worth saying if you aim to score status quo balance points. And that's all Im getting from your posts.

Your opinion. And that’s all it is.

Nerror

Leiloni wrote: »

The monthly cosmetic this month is a perfect example of what we're asking Intrepid not to do. Even in concept art they're not even trying to make this gear fit the female form better and have a different, more feminine design. Frankly it's ugly. This is the level of ugly I expect from New World (and I wrote in many a forum thread the same thing I'm writing here, albeit in more detail because I had in game armor screenshots to criticize). Please Intrepid change direction while it's still early.

The above costume isn't my cup of tea either, but the gear is clearly fitting the female form. You can at a glance immediately see which one is male and female. Bosom, waist, hips are clearly different. I get you don't like the aesthetic, but for what it is, the form is perfectly fine and distinctive. Sometimes they differentiate a lot between male and female, and sometimes they are similar. In Alpha 1 they even changed the color of a cloak depending on the sex of the wearer.

In the past they've sometimes differentiated heavily between male and female designs for some costumes. These below look very different depending on which sex wears the exact same costume piece:

4._Costume_PNG_original-1920.png

They have also made some where the difference is less blatant, but still with distinctive design differences based on the sex. For example this armor set:

And then we have some like the current one where the design is almost a mirror, but the shape is clearly form fitting and different between male and female.

I like the variety. I certainly don't want all the costumes to be wildly different between male and female, but on the flip-side I am also happy some are, and that some are close in design, yet still different.

Dygz

I don't like male versin of this month's cosmetic either.
But, it's OK to have some sets that are basically gender-neutral.

For me, how feminine I want my armor depends on the specific character and class.
And personality. I've had at least one character who is a male skank in sexily revealing armor.
And one male character who likes to appear a bit more feminine without being a skank.

Child Item