Please do NOT alter Dark Knight AF for female characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mahri

Hahaha, it's like clockwork. See what I mean about them not actually reading my post?

Nearing 300 upvotes for the point made. Listen to the kiddos scream.

---

Only problem with this is there are no downvotes. so there may be more who disagree but cant vote, just sayin :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by myahele

http://www.platformnation.com/wp-con...10/11/Yuna.jpg And most of her other costumes.

Lightning (especially) and also all her other costumes

---

Gratuitous as it may seem, there's actually some narrative and thematic justification for the FFX-2 costume changes. For Yuna, it represents liberation -- she's changing her image at the urging of her friends (Rikku in particular), and attempting to be a "normal" teenager, dressing in the light-and-breezy style.

For the setting of Spira, half the denizens have interpreted "Eternal Calm" as "Eternal Spring Break".

I say change it to an extent.

It's perfectly understandable for a female to be lighter armored due to that women are commonly known to not be able to carry the amount of equipment men can carry. However, this is not always true.

I'm all for skimpy armor in a game, I'm also all for practical armor with differences between male and female sets, be it different colors or design differences (though looking quite a bit alike), what I'm against is people actually whining and complaining about it like the differences between DRG male and female AF.

It's a damn shirt, and [spoiler]they both (the AF set for male and female DRG) look like garbage[/spoiler], but people will like what they want and complain about what they don't like. It's entirely why the 1.0 Miqo'te booty thread went as long as it did because everyone wanted the baddunkadunk back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parryacg

I say change it to an extent.

It's perfectly understandable for a female to be lighter armored due to that women are commonly known to not be able to carry the amount of equipment men can carry. However, this is not always true.

I'm all for skimpy armor in a game, I'm also all for practical armor with differences between male and female sets, be it different colors or design differences (though looking quite a bit alike), what I'm against is people actually whining and complaining about it like the differences between DRG male and female AF.

It's a damn shirt, and [spoiler]they both (the AF set for male and female DRG) look like garbage[/spoiler], but people will like what they want and complain about what they don't like. It's entirely why the 1.0 Miqo'te booty thread went as long as it did because everyone wanted the baddunkadunk back.

---

Average women can carry a child through pregnancy for nine months, ask a guy to carry a ten lb wight for a week.

I know this thread is two months old, just wanted to share some art i found online. Not sure what to make of this, seems to be Item level 90 DRK AF recolor. Also of note, the character seems to be smaller than previously pictured. Possibly a first look at a female character in DRK AF. All of this is of course unconfirmed speculation.

http://i.imgur.com/bJvFhIb.png

please alter dark knight AF for female characters.

/closethread

playing devils advocate here, but i personally think the female drg AF looks good and would be perfectly fine if they made female DRK AF a tad bit more feminine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stormsoul

playing devils advocate here, but i personally think the female drg AF looks good and would be perfectly fine if they made female DRK AF a tad bit more feminine.

---

Tanks should always be to look like tanks. Plated and heavy. That said, you can have plated and heavy AND still show off some curvature and pronounce figure. If you look at the WAR's AF the chest piece actually does have mild boob socks, nothing too dramatic so as to not ruin the aesthetic structure of heavy plate, but it's a nice touch. Literally cropping out pieces of a gear just to show skin should not be what equates to 'femininity'. So I can only hope they do nothing so cheap and gimmicky with such a killer looking set of gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stormsoul

playing devils advocate here, but i personally think the female drg AF looks good and would be perfectly fine if they made female DRK AF a tad bit more feminine.

---

They can make it feminine without making it impractical. No swordswoman in her right mind would step onto the battlefield with her belly exposed. You can still have an elegant design that looks good on a woman without cutting away half the equipment.

See the big issue here is that people expect immersion when we already have half naked tanks running around providing the same functionality as a fully armored Tank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FallenArisen0990

See the big issue here is that people expect immersion when we already have half naked tanks running around providing the same functionality as a fully armored Tank.

---

/endthread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FallenArisen0990

See the big issue here is that people expect immersion when we already have half naked tanks running around providing the same functionality as a fully armored Tank.

---

To be fair, it was the player community, who requested a glamour system, that enabled this type of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FallenArisen0990

See the big issue here is that people expect immersion when we already have half naked tanks running around providing the same functionality as a fully armored Tank.

---

I don't think anyone (or at least not many) want the ability to look impractical removed. We just don't want to be forced into it by having it on AF gear. AF gear is supposed to define the look of the job we're playing. It's for use when we want that level of immersion, at least for our own characters. If other people don't want that immersion and would rather glamour their tank gear to look like a swimsuit, well, that's their business. But let people of either gender who play a dark knight and want to look like one be able to look like a dark knight. (And preferably, allow dragoons who want to to look like dragoons, without silly nonsensical holes in their armour, though it's a bit late for that.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FallenArisen0990

See the big issue here is that people expect immersion when we already have half naked tanks running around providing the same functionality as a fully armored Tank.

---

I'd prefer if actual tank armor looked like...armor.

Whatever you do after is up to you. I mean. I glamour a vest for crying out loud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nyalia

The majority of female gamers I know, including myself, do like having the option of revealing/sexy armor, but having no other options is really demeaning. FFXIV has, in general, been wonderful in this regard. The vast majority of armors that are key to progression are not skimpy. Battlemage, Infantry, Foestriker, Apprentice, Protector, Sentinel, Allagan, High Allagan, Dreadwyrm, non-DRG AF1, Soldiery, Ironworks - those are examples of what I would consider armor that's part of progression, and none of those are skimpy. I can only think of three sets that fall into the "skimpy/revealing" category that are part of progression - female DRG AF1 and the two Coliseum sets. The Coliseum sets get a pass though, in my opinion, because not only do they perfectly fit their stated theme (armor that would be worn for gladiatorial combat which is meant to be provocative, not protective), they look essentially the same on male characters.

If players want to wear skimpy clothing, the glamour system exists to allow them to do so. Both male and female characters have tons of options for skimpy "armor" if they want it, and that's great. I just find it really annoying/demeaning when I feel forced to wear such outfits. Sure, you can say that the glamour system can be used in these cases to hide the demeaning armor, but there's a difference between an "opt-in" and an "opt-out" system.


Personally, I don't put my characters in anything I wouldn't wear (or haven't worn) in public myself. I don't really get why people would do otherwise, unless they are playing a different gender than themselves and objectify that gender...

That DRG armor looks insanely uncomfortable, with the metal digging into a bare belly and all. You're supposed to wear padded clothing under platemail, not have it touching exposed skin. And the bit "protecting" the chest would actually direct force inward, amplifying blows instead of dampening them. If a female DRG slips and falls (and, of course, we're talking about DRGs here <_<), she could crack her ribcage from the impact with the ground alone. That's why "boobmail" is so utterly impractical - it does the exact opposite thing that armor is supposed to do. Sure, fantasy armor doesn't have to be practical, but there has to be a line somewhere...

---

This ^^ as a woman I completely agree!

The majority of female gamers I know, including myself, do like having the option of revealing/sexy armor, but having no other options is really demeaning. FFXIV has, in general, been wonderful in this regard. The vast majority of armors that are key to progression are not skimpy. Battlemage, Infantry, Foestriker, Apprentice, Protector, Sentinel, Allagan, High Allagan, Dreadwyrm, non-DRG AF1, Soldiery, Ironworks - those are examples of what I would consider armor that's part of progression, and none of those are skimpy. I can only think of three sets that fall into the "skimpy/revealing" category that are part of progression - female DRG AF1 and the two Coliseum sets. The Coliseum sets get a pass though, in my opinion, because not only do they perfectly fit their stated theme (armor that would be worn for gladiatorial combat which is meant to be provocative, not protective), they look essentially the same on male characters.

If players want to wear skimpy clothing, the glamour system exists to allow them to do so. Both male and female characters have tons of options for skimpy "armor" if they want it, and that's great. I just find it really annoying/demeaning when I feel forced to wear such outfits. Sure, you can say that the glamour system can be used in these cases to hide the demeaning armor, but there's a difference between an "opt-in" and an "opt-out" system.


Personally, I don't put my characters in anything I wouldn't wear (or haven't worn) in public myself. I don't really get why people would do otherwise, unless they are playing a different gender than themselves and objectify that gender...

That DRG armor looks insanely uncomfortable, with the metal digging into a bare belly and all. You're supposed to wear padded clothing under platemail, not have it touching exposed skin. And the bit "protecting" the chest would actually direct force inward, amplifying blows instead of dampening them. If a female DRG slips and falls (and, of course, we're talking about DRGs here <_<), she could crack her ribcage from the impact with the ground alone. That's why "boobmail" is so utterly impractical - it does the exact opposite thing that armor is supposed to do. Sure, fantasy armor doesn't have to be practical, but there has to be a line somewhere...


So, my hope is that female DRK AF armor is the same as male DRK AF armor. Revealing platemail is just patently absurd, even ignoring how demeaning it is. SE has been pretty awesome about this in the past... the majority of the time.

You can blame the fapperinos for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZanzhizExaverion

You can blame the fapperinos for this.

---

Fapperinos, lol! xD To be honest I don't really care if they make the female armor different for DK, as long as it looks cool, I'm fine with it.

In all honesty, AF2 will be just as great as AF1. Replaced straight away lol. I get where people are coming from but I also don't want a copy and paste for females.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FallenArisen0990

In all honesty, AF2 will be just as great as AF. Replaced straight away.

---

And yet glamoured to all the far off corners of Eorzea. Because it will be replaced with better gear quickly doesn't mean it will disappear from being used.

Women have it rough cause men are pigs...Funny and immature pigs...

http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...humorous-comic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZanzhizExaverion

You can blame the fapperinos for this.

---

Projection? More often than not, I find those making such accusations are the ones who's minds those thoughts cross. I mean really, it's insulting to players with pretty female avatars who prefer more feminine and/or revealing armor/costume when you reduce their avatar to little more than fantasy fodder for those so inclined. Honestly, this is a very tired line of 'reasoning'. It get's quite annoying everytime this topic comes up and anyone suggesting more feminine armor for female characters is told a) it's impractical, b) it breaks immersion and c) it's just for the "fapperinos" or whatever other stupidly ignorant term is being used.

First of all, the practicality of most of the elaborate armor in this game is non-existant, so using this argument is like pouring boiling water into a chocolate teapot. Pointless. Secondly, breaking the immersion? If you're still clinging to immersion then you must play with your eyes closed, bikini arkor, snowman tanks, etc abound, give it up, immersion was broken almost as soon as the game opened. Finally, the argument that it's only because people want to fantasize about their avatar in skimpy gear, etc...really? OK, why does that matter to you? Not gonna argue moral judgements on this, but if someone has an active fantasy life going on in their head, who's business is it, but theirs?

At the end of all of this, if any one still wants to argue practicality, I'll star pointing out every impraftical NPC armor/costume, and point out that such impracticality itself breaks the immersion some seem to crave.

Now, aside from all of that, the one thing the is missed in this discussion is that for any of the more heavily armored classes, the female armors are simply not very feminine. With the exception of the Dragon AF belly hole controversy of course. I'm not sure anyone is saying that all female armor must be sexy, or skimpy, but good god, can it at least be feminine? Playing though as a female tank from level 1, I hated the armor sets, especially the tin can variety. They are almost universally unisex, and actively diminish or erase any sense of gender from the avatar. Is it too much to ask that some, just a few, of the well designed and elaborate armor sets could be feminine for female avatars and masculine for males?

My avatar runs around in the bikini armor, sometimes I glamor a few things together to try to create a more feminine look, while retaining actual armor, but inthe end, it's still pretty generic because it's a combination of pieces that were not designed to go together, and in the case of some where made pretty bland in the first place.

What I would like to see, not for Dark Knight, but as a general DoW set is something more like this;
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/...Queencisna.jpg
Not exactly, of course, this is art for an armor set from another game. However, this armor is very clearly feminine without being any more impractical or immersion breaking that what Raubahn runs around in. Why can't we have armor for female avatars that is feminine? Why does it always have to be either bikini glamor or spiky tin can?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MageBlack

Women have it rough cause men are pigs...Funny and immature pigs...

http://static1.squarespace.com/stati...humorous-comic

---

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IYvabCA1Vq4/hqdefault.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Souljacker

They can make it feminine without making it impractical. No swordswoman in her right mind would step onto the battlefield with her belly exposed. You can still have an elegant design that looks good on a woman without cutting away half the equipment.

---

The Lionsmane Cuirass is a great example of this, imo. I actually have no idea what it looks like on men, but on women, it shows off a feminine figure without being skimpy. Of course, the part of the armor that covers the torso appears to be leather rather than plate, so it makes sense to be shaped the way it is. And, I still can't tell if the whorls along the arms/etc are supposed to be tattoos or just skin-ish colored armor with a cool design on it, so the bits that seem impractical at first could just be painted-on aesthetics, not actual exposed skin.

Just six more PvP ranks and it'll be my main PLD glamour ^_^

SE will likely continue with the current trend of Tank AF being practical for females, and seeing as how DRK is a tank... well, no need to worry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Projection? More often than not, I find those making such accusations are the ones who's minds those thoughts cross. I mean really, it's insulting to players with pretty female avatars who prefer more feminine and/or revealing armor/costume when you reduce their avatar to little more than fantasy fodder for those so inclined. Honestly, this is a very tired line of 'reasoning'. It get's quite annoying everytime this topic comes up and anyone suggesting more feminine armor for female characters is told a) it's impractical, b) it breaks immersion and c) it's just for the "fapperinos" or whatever other stupidly ignorant term is being used. . . . They [leveling tank gear] are almost universally unisex, and actively diminish or erase any sense of gender from the avatar. . . . Why can't we have armor for female avatars that is feminine? Why does it always have to be either bikini glamor or spiky tin can?

---

Completely agree with all of your post. As a straight female I don't feel any attraction whatsoever to other females, real or drawn, and it's infuriating to see anyone asking for more femininity, more revealing armor or other gender based differences in gear to be lumped with "fapperinos". To many people it's a matter of self expression and/or immersing yourself in the character and game.

The practicality argument is also ludicrous. Paladin AF armor has a crown to protect their head, which holds the most vital organ in the human body. Tanks might aswell be in their undies since they are clearly expected to be able to parry attacks. (Also shows how stupid the DRG belly issue really is considering they are not supposed to take hits.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evangela

One thing I like about JRPG is how women can look tough and beautiful at the same time.

and it's always like this from the beginning.

you don't need to make a big hole on your armor to be sexy. I think SE can get it right (the female dragoon AF is ridiculous though).

http://i.imgur.com/iBIEfwX.jpg

---

This looks cool, and cute to me.

I like gear to show my character's gender, especially since she's a lala, and they're pretty androgynous on their own (which I also like being kinda androgynous, just not all the time). I do agree that boob windows and tummy windows can be ridiculous, but I also do not object to having variation in gear by gender. I guess what's important to me is that there are options.

I think that the bard and scholar AF gender differences are nice, and tasteful, for example. While I don't have a problem with the dragoon belly window, I can see why people find it silly. I think there can be nuanced differences in the gear without turning the character into a sex object (but I think there's room for gear like that, too!). What I don't want is to be forced to dress like a nun or be forced to look like a gundam with nearly all of my gear (that said, the white mage nun AF looks adorable!).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niwashi

I don't think anyone (or at least not many) want the ability to look impractical removed. We just don't want to be forced into it by having it on AF gear. AF gear is supposed to define the look of the job we're playing. It's for use when we want that level of immersion, at least for our own characters. If other people don't want that immersion and would rather glamour their tank gear to look like a swimsuit, well, that's their business. But let people of either gender who play a dark knight and want to look like one be able to look like a dark knight. (And preferably, allow dragoons who want to to look like dragoons, without silly nonsensical holes in their armour, though it's a bit late for that.)

---

This a billion times over. AF is what is being discussed here, not the culling of provocative glamour options. Is it really so bad to just have the Job look like the job? I'm sure many will glamour the new dancer looking gear top with the rest of the outfit, that's fine no issue, it's no reason to lock female characters into cheerleader variants of AF .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alacran

This a billion times over. AF is what is being discussed here, not the culling of provocative glamour options. Is it really so bad to just have the Job look like the job? I'm sure many will glamour the new dancer looking gear top with the rest of the outfit, that's fine no issue, it's no reason to lock female characters into cheerleader variants of AF .

---

Nor is it any reason to lock female avatars into being mere copies of the quite masculine/macho AF either. If the AF gear is meant to be iconic gear, then I can see no reasonable argument against there being a greater emphasis to ensure that the look of the AF gear is maintained while at the same time actually accounting for differences in gender.

Oh, to your suggestion about glamoring the dancer like gear over unwanted AF. WHY? Why should that be necessary? Why force players with female avatars to use the glamor system in that way?

...and on that note, the utterly horrid Papal robes and hat that has been inflicted on White Mage will absolutely require glamoring to eradicate it. Honestly, what focus group were they using to come up with that, one based in the Vatican?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kosmos992k

Nor is it any reason to lock female avatars into being mere copies of the quite masculine/macho AF either. If the AF gear is meant to be iconic gear, then I can see no reasonable argument against there being a greater emphasis to ensure that the look of the AF gear is maintained while at the same time actually accounting for differences in gender.

---

It's worth noting that at least in FFT and FFTA the classic job outfits DO vary between gender and races. I happen to think that a lot of these designs are tasteful, and identifiable, even though some are very different based on gender. I would prefer that SE take this approach to our AF gear, but with more similarity between the gear for each gender than differences - which I think they got just right on a lot of the current AF.

http://img2.finalfantasyxiv.com/acci...084b5c69a5.png

In Final Fantasy III (JP), for the most part the whole party wore similar outfits. Except for summoner. Then Refia ended up in a ballgown, whereas the guys had pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsuga

It's worth noting that at least in FFT and FFTA the classic job outfits DO vary between gender and races. I happen to think that a lot of these designs are tasteful, and identifiable, even though some are very different based on gender. I would prefer that SE take this approach to our AF gear, but with more similarity between the gear for each gender than differences - which I think they got just right on a lot of the current AF.

http://img2.finalfantasyxiv.com/acci...084b5c69a5.png

---

Look at the Heavensward vanity gear thread. People will still complain that males can't wear the female versions and females not the male versions.

It's tough for developers to make decisions, like this. Half the people could want full covered armor, for females, while the other half likes the female versions of it. Unless you want to have two separate versions to buy, you can't really fault SE for making one choice or the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimiru_S

It's tough for developers to make decisions, like this. Half the people could want full covered armor, for females, while the other half likes the female versions of it. Unless you want to have two separate versions to buy, you can't really fault SE for making one choice or the other.

---

You mean, like...a unisex version and a female only version? Funny thing about that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samburi

Look at the Heavensward vanity gear thread. People will still complain that males can't wear the female versions and females not the male versions.

---

I don't see anything wrong with allowing people to wear both, but since I prefer to have my character's gender identifiable, I DO have a problem with people demanding that SE "restrict clothing designs to gender neutral, because I prefer it that way". It's okay to have the opinion that the more classic designs, or the male designs are superior to the female designs, but I happen to think that the female designs are often better than the male designs in both FFXIV and FFT.

I think that a happy medium for this problem (assuming SE is not interested or able to model each piece of gender specific gear for both genders) is some variation based on gender, but not enough to compromise the design and identity, which I think SE has done a fairly good job of, so far.

Honestly, IMO, what's the point of there being gender choices if there isn't a difference in the appearance of gear on the different genders.

Why not just make all chars genderless, and have gear for them. then no one can complain about gender inequalities.

Translation: "I have breasts and I want to use them."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seiji_Nakahara

Translation: "I have breasts and I want to use them."

---

/Slap

Bad Aeon, bad.

I'm personally for the difference. Either way though, it looks badass. So no complaints either way.

Removed by author.