Curse

lyra_song · Jan 28, 2007, 06:32 PM // 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhCrapLions

If anything the male body types are the only ones with any diversity in their models, the FEMALES however are all the same.

Lets see...

Assassin body type.

Ranger / Warrior Body Type

Necromancer Body Type

Elementalist / Mesmer body type

Monk Body type

Ritualist Body type

Nope. Not all the same.

Some classes uses slightly modified proportions. They are not the same. Plus specific armors change the proportions also. Some armors give a bigger bustline, etc. The diversity WITHIN each class needs to increase however.

Torikae · Jan 28, 2007, 07:58 PM // 19:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhCrapLions

But for the most part, I think the proportions are appropriate for their classes. who is the warrior type in real life? Line backers, body builders, bullies, ring fighters.

I agree that they are technically appropriate, but only in the males.
If my skinny little female warrior can manage that big-mofo hammer, why can't a nice lean guy do the job too? :P
I just find it annoying that I can make a passably attractive female in basically any class, but when I try to make nice-looking males... EPIC FAILURE

Franco Power · Jan 28, 2007, 08:16 PM // 20:16

rofl, your friends won't buy GW because they can't dye their Male warriors underwear, haha

that just made me laugh

dr_forest · Jan 28, 2007, 08:29 PM // 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralli Pemirl

I meant to have these extra character creation options in the character creation screen, not in game.

Anyone see how involved character creation is in Oblivion? It's pretty cool.

We need conservative clothes options. More variety can't be bad, either.

I agree some variety of options would be nice. Personally I like the characters as is but I'd be happy to have others make the characters they like. As to Oblivion, I agree it is ripe with options, BUT, all the option still lead to hideous human-beasts. My wife even complains about how awful they look and wonders if Bethesda dislikes women in general. She's not a game player but oblivion's women appal her.

LifeInfusion · Jan 28, 2007, 10:01 PM // 22:01

To OP, how often do you take off your armor? In over a year, I have not taken off my armor at all. If I need to swap armor I just swap it, without taking it off.

Seriously it's a game.

And you don't have to wear skimpy outfits.

Deagol · Jan 28, 2007, 11:26 PM // 23:26

/signed

I think it is fair that most of the character options are very young and very pretty, as that is probably what most players want. But put in a few more faces that are older and/or uglier.

I'd love to be able to make other adjustment to the body type than simple scaling, but I guess that would be expensive to implement, and probably not worth it for a game like CORPG. But a few more faces should be cheap.

Ralli Pemirl · Jan 29, 2007, 12:52 AM // 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by LifeInfusion

To OP, how often do you take off your armor? In over a year, I have not taken off my armor at all. If I need to swap armor I just swap it, without taking it off.

I didn't explain clearly. Sorry. I meant clothes to hide skin when chars wear skimpy armor, not when they weren't wearing armor at all. I like the look of the current underwear.

The idea came from WOW's undershirts. See, my husband plays a nightelf druid in WOW whose chest piece would show her stomach. He put a blue shirt under it to hide her skin (undershirts are an option in WOW). He just doesn't like looking at her belly button as she shoots moonbeam or whatever she does. She doesn't look much different. It seems like a simple option a few players like. (When I played a WOW female paladin I wished they had a leg tights option also, because the strongest leg armor I could find at one level looked like a thong bikini).

If such an option existed in GW, I might wear a white tank top under my paragon's top, just because I want her to look more like what I'd imagine a professional Sunspear to look like and less like a cheerleader showing off how tight her abs are. (Really, the fact that her tiny arms surely couldn't hold, much less harm things with her spears bothers me a little more. She looks so wimpy.) It's a minor deal, I love playing that character. Just an idea.

If I rolled a female warrior on Prophecies or Factions, I might like the option of wearing black tights under the leg armor, too, while she was in the starter set. Maybe. If I got tired of seeing her thighs before I could afford new sets. It seems like it wouldn't be expensive for the developers to incorporate such options.

The extreme example is the elementalist female starter armors in Nightfall. THey are just rediculous. I love magic, but... what is that holding up their boobs, a scarf? It would look silly with a shirt beneath it, but come on, it looks silly already. Faction and Prophecies elementalist starter sets are much nicer. For those who own Factions and Prophecies. I don't.

It's not a big deal. There are some very conservative armors, true. There are lots of options, true. The game is fun and looks aren't important, TRUE.

(By the way, what does OP stand for? Forgive my noobiness)

BahamutKaiser · Jan 29, 2007, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Original Post and Original Poster.

Kakumei · Jan 29, 2007, 02:16 AM // 02:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by BahamutKaiser

I find it rather natural that combatants be physically fit, and naturally phyically fit bodies are more attractive. But I do agree, the bimbo, C and D cup, functionally weak revealing armor and simply slutty attire on female characters are rather silly and unorthodox for combat.

Please don't try to drag realism into this discussion; it's entirely irrelevant. This complaint is purely about cosmetics and our lack of options thereof, which, admittedly, is a very valid complaint.

Though I'll still never understand what's wrong with characters being paragons (not Paragons, mind you) of beauty.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Jan 29, 2007, 02:29 AM // 02:29

I think that of all the possible criticisms of the game, character customizations has to be very far down on the list. Truly, there are more options available in Guild Wars than many of its competitors.

Comparing it to Oblivion or Morrowind isn't fair, those are single player games that can be modded. My Dark Elf Trickster has been running around nude for a long time now.

It strikes me as funny that in many ways, Guild Wars comes very close to being a strong RPG environment for serious RPG'er even though it was never trying to do that...

Series · Jan 29, 2007, 02:39 AM // 02:39

I do like the idea of under-armor clothing. I understand what you mean and I think it would be kinda cool.

I also agree that there should be more variety. My male paragon looks like such a... well, let's just say a pair of pants armor would do em some good. If you want to be a guy running around in a short skirt and bright white clothing, that's fine... but I don't think everybody who wants a male paragon should have to.

Lexar · Jan 29, 2007, 03:10 AM // 03:10

About facial hair.. that male mesmer one with the beard.. looks like he's from the village people. Same goes for the few nightfall bearded characters, Anet doesn't seem to get the beards right. I think the faces lack a certain variaty in the way of roles.
Instead of a smooth face, an older looking face, a face with a scar or some feature or a plain porcelein doll look (like the necro's in cantha), instead we'd need something halfway between expressions and stereotypes, like an arrogant looking face, a heroic looking face, a lombroso-type criminal face, a goofy harmless face etc. That would be a much richer and meaningfull way to expand on rpg characters in the future. Instead of ken's and barbies you'd still have an rpg world where men are men, and where women are models, like it has always been, and for a fantasy game probably always should be that way but the player characters would have.. character. Right now character traits are too much profession oriented. All monks have a vacant look, all necro's look sickly or creepy, all female mesmers look arrogant. This should be emphasised on more and spread out over all the professions more equally.

Eroth · Jan 29, 2007, 03:23 AM // 03:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by manitoba1073

There Not Dolls Damn It There Action Figures

:d :d :d

AMEN!!! (jk jk)

I know it would appeal to others to have more in depth character options, but you have to remember that Guild Wars is supposed to be somewhat of an Anti-Christ to WoW. If you want wow options go play it instead of this.

BUT I wouldn't mind the under Armor thing. Say I'm running the Beacons Perch -> Droks run and I need to take my chest armor off. I don't want my guy freezing his nipples off. I think something like a Japanese cloth wrap underneath would be cool. Yes it would kill a lot of the guys who make Female characters, strip them and dance around LA but it would be a cool idea.

seraphite86 · Jan 29, 2007, 04:00 AM // 04:00

My friend Courtney has noticed that with every progressing/new campaign, the female's "assets" seem to get bigger and bigger.

cellardweller · Jan 29, 2007, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhCrapLions

But for the most part, I think the proportions are appropriate for their classes. who is the warrior type in real life? Line backers, body builders, bullies, ring fighters. Mesmer? Magicians, artists, actors, none of those seem specifically "buff" to me, actually I think the mesmers look a little too beefy for the kind of people they are suppose to be. But I suppose being the idle of sensory pleasing would allow a number of proportions... I think the Dervish and Paragon class males should be a little bigger. Necromancers are proportionally skinny for the "emo" type they are.

What part of the monk lifestyle is responsible for the man-boobs? :P

draxynnic · Jan 29, 2007, 04:31 AM // 04:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eroth

BUT I wouldn't mind the under Armor thing. Say I'm running the Beacons Perch -> Droks run and I need to take my chest armor off. I don't want my guy freezing his nipples off. I think something like a Japanese cloth wrap underneath would be cool. Yes it would kill a lot of the guys who make Female characters, strip them and dance around LA but it would be a cool idea.

I would guess the intent is for under-armour clothing to be optional - so people can still make female characters and strip them if that's what floats their boat...

On the armour thing: There are two sides to this coin. On the 'realism' side: This is a world with magic, and since the nonelite top-AL sets are often identical in appearance to lower AL sets, it's probably a fair judgement that the protection afforded by various sets mostly comes from enchantments on the materials than the materials themselves (the difference in the latter simply being the difference between classes). From this, it's a reasonable conclusion to come to that the magical protection may cover more than the materials do - an Elementalist's or Ritualist's, ahem, chest piece may not physically cover her belly, but the magical protection on it might provide such protection anyway.

However, Ralli isn't asking for the scanty outfits to be abolished - just for more options, especially near the start. It doesn't really help much that there are more modest outfits later in the game if, to take the female Nightfall elementalist as an example, you have to put up with looking like an escapee from a harem for 75% of the game if you don't have the other chapters. Even if you only have one chapter, if you don't like the 'scanty' look, you shouldn't have to wait until the later stages of the game and pay the price for an elite armour set to get something that a woman could wear as everyday clothing without the likelihood of being labelled as promiscuous as a result.

Essentially, it's not just a question of the armour sets being available - it's a question of those same sets being available right from the start. In Nightfall, for some class/gender combinations (the female Elementalist being the worst case - it took me a month or so to be able to pick the difference without a side-by-side comparison, and if someone mixed the sets I'd probably only be able to tell by looking for the Sunspear insignia) the differences between the non-elite sets aren't really enough to present any real choice at all.

(Besides, from the eye candy aspect, I personally find women wearing proper, but attractive, clothing to be sexier anyway. Just doesn't seem like it'd be as special when the time does come when she'll take it off for you (or let you take it off for her) if she almost might as well not be wearing it in the first place...

)

Vinraith · Jan 29, 2007, 04:46 AM // 04:46

Is there a case other than the female eles in NF where there's no reasonable option? Because yeah, I don't understand why they did that...

HawkofStorms · Jan 29, 2007, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by seraphite86

My friend Courtney has noticed that with every progressing/new campaign, the female's "assets" seem to get bigger and bigger.

Umm... has your friend looked at the female sin from Factions?

Ironically, I remember a lot of posts complaining about how the female sin looked "annorexic" at the time of the preview event, when really it was mostly prepubecent boys complaining about her flat chest.

draxynnic · Jan 29, 2007, 05:08 AM // 05:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Is there a case other than the female eles in NF where there's no reasonable option? Because yeah, I don't understand why they did that...

Male Paragons - you can't get a set without a bare midriff until Consulate Docks, and probably the only set I'd consider taking a full set of rather than mixing and matching to get something that looks decent is the Vabbian set.

Females don't have any sets without the bare midriff, but in their case it looks more like they're just keeping their armour light rather than making them look like workers in the adult entertainment industry...

Also, a lot of people object to male Mesmers. I don't think they're that bad... that said, however, my own Mesmer primary is female.

And having been inspired by the person who posted while I was making the first draft of this one: Female Assassins also have few options early on that don't leave more bare skin than seems prudent for a profession that, theoretically at least, does most of her work through stealth. That's fairly easy to compensate for by mixing sets, though - combining an Imperial top with Seitung leggings, for instance.

Vinraith · Jan 29, 2007, 05:34 AM // 05:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Male Paragons - you can't get a set without a bare midriff until Consulate Docks, and probably the only set I'd consider taking a full set of rather than mixing and matching to get something that looks decent is the Vabbian set.

Females don't have any sets without the bare midriff, but in their case it looks more like they're just keeping their armour light rather than making them look like workers in the adult entertainment industry...

Also, a lot of people object to male Mesmers. I don't think they're that bad... that said, however, my own Mesmer primary is female.

And having been inspired by the person who posted while I was making the first draft of this one: Female Assassins also have few options early on that don't leave more bare skin than seems prudent for a profession that, theoretically at least, does most of her work through stealth. That's fairly easy to compensate for by mixing sets, though - combining an Imperial top with Seitung leggings, for instance.

Err, Shing Jea armor is pretty conservative for female assassins, Paragon sunspear armor doesn't look unreasonable to me either on males. Certainly neither case is anything compared to the belly dancer outfits for eles. The odd thing about that is that, as others have said, there's so little difference between the two sets.