Bikini Armor Battle Damage - Hypocrites and Sexy Art

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Ruin said:
Huh Dark Souls 3, Xcom 2, Beyond Good and Evil, Fallout 2.

To my shock they actually endorse some good games instead of the indie shit I expected.
Click to expand...

Not really a surprise, those games do feature mostly "realistic" female armor/clothing.
 
Thexenoclop said:
Alright guys and gals we got another redesign and another female armor bingo


The redesign is for nyx from the fire emblem series and the bingo for auriel from heroes of the storm http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/
Click to expand...
Alright, I know this will be autistic but: seriously they added a layer of gossamer to the arms? Why? It also looks like they extended the face covering too. Again, why? It's transparent and doesn't really cover anything. If anything both of those alterations would have a demonstrably negative impact on mobility and would give an enemy more to potentially grab on to, all whilst providing no benefit protection-wise (since it's fucking thin cloth). The changes to the the legs and chest just make it look like she's wearing a pair of spandex leggings and a sports bra. It makes the design just look so fucking dull. Not to mention if they were actually concerned about practicality that cape would go too.
 
Last edited:
Thexenoclop said:
Alright guys and gals we got another redesign and another female armor bingo


The redesign is for nyx from the fire emblem series and the bingo for auriel from heroes of the storm http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/
Click to expand...

I don't really care about the pants. I think harem pants are really cute and that kind of looks like what they were going for, so no issues there apart from how dull they look. They could do with some sort of pattern at the top or bottom or wherever of the pants, maybe something jagged to suit the rest of Nyx's outfit.

The bit that gets me is how they covered up Nyx's chest, even though she only had the tiniest amount of boob showing. I'd tell them there's nothing wrong with cleavage, but there would be absolutely no point in that as they seem eager to erase even the smallest sign of female sensuality.
 
EurocopterTigre said:
Alright, I know this will be autistic but: seriously they added a layer of gossamer to the arms? Why? It also looks like they extended the face covering too. Again, why? It's transparent and doesn't really cover anything. If anything both of those alterations would have a demonstrably negative impact on mobility and would give an enemy more to potentially grab on to, all whilst providing no benefit protection-wise (since it's fucking thin cloth). The changes to the the legs and chest just make it look like she's wearing a pair of spandex leggings and a sports bra. It makes the design just look so fucking dull. Not to mention if they were actually concerned about practicality that cape would go too.
Click to expand...

Nyx is a Dark Mage and can be promoted into a Sorcerer. Dark Mages/Sorcerers are foot soldiers and some of their attack animations include them twirling around, levitating and making pirouettes. So yeah, adding more fabric would quite hinder their movements and it'd be a bad move.

upload_2019-2-7_13-20-33.png


Also, FYI? This is how a male Dark Mage/Sorcerer dresses in Fates. With their pecs and abs on display and a cleavage that almost reaches their crotches. But since BABD and Co. say nothing about them... well, again, they're a bunch of hypocritical assholes.
 
Tanti-Fanti said:
"While we here at BABD believe that woman characters should be more than just eye-candy (and dead, from the way they’re usually dressed), we should probably remind people that women can also look hot while also being protected in battle. Most of the examples here are plate armor, but trust me, it’s possible with other types of armor as well."
Click to expand...

So what's with this obsession with realistic armor exactly? Unless you're playing some military simulation, any "protection" arguments go out the window.
Some of the earliest games just had characters basically fighting in underwear. One minute, games are "art", the next minute, they must follow the rules of realism? Just sounds like they are talking out their asses really.

50539-golden-axe-amiga-screenshot-meet-ax-battler.gif


33240-4-1363212521.jpg
 
Thexenoclop said:
Well looks like the next topic of sexulization is the metal gear series http://bikiniarmorbattledamage.tumblr.com/tagged/raiden
Click to expand...
And I quote "This, of course, willfully ignores the simple fact that not only so much more goes into sexualization than nudity (like framing, posing, expressions etc.)"

And yet they themselves don't seem to understand this. There are women who do indeed find Raiden and Conan sexy, and they don't need suggestive poses or lingerie thongs to do it. What women and men find sexy is not the same. Raiden wasn't put into his position to be sexy (at least I don't think so), but that doesn't make him less sexy than Quiet (he's still a pretty boy after all, and his good looks were intentional). You could even make the argument that Raiden's nakedness is cheeky snipe at fanservice in general.

The picture they use to illustrate their point actually further undermines their point; the woman on the right is only non-sexy because she was intentionally drawn to look ugly. If the woman on the right struck the same pose as the woman on the left and lacked the severed head , she would still be ugly, no matter what she was wearing or whether or not she had a head in her hand. If the woman on the left was drawn with a head in her hand and striking the same pose as the woman on the right with a scowl on her face, it would still be off-putting due to the violent nature of the picture itself, but the character would still be hot. Red Sonja is closer in personality to the woman on the right, but many still find her sexy. They are inadvertently admitting that they want to make females uglier to make them less sexualized.

Nudity isn't inherently sexual, but human beings, being sexual creatures, will sexualize another naked human being; its inherent to our DNA, and it generally takes a lot to dissuade us from doing that. Sexualization itself is in the eyes of the beholder; you could argue that both Quiet and Raiden were gratuitous and could of had their respective scenes removed, but what's the fun in that?
 
The Demon Pimp of Razgriz said:
And I quote "This, of course, willfully ignores the simple fact that not only so much more goes into sexualization than nudity (like framing, posing, expressions etc.)"

And yet they themselves don't seem to understand this. There are women who do indeed find Raiden and Conan sexy, and they don't need suggestive poses or lingerie thongs to do it. What women and men find sexy is not the same. Raiden wasn't put into his position to be sexy (at least I don't think so), but that doesn't make him less sexy than Quiet (he's still a pretty boy after all, and his good looks were intentional). You could even make the argument that Raiden's nakedness is cheeky snipe at fanservice in general.

The picture they use to illustrate their point actually further undermines their point; the woman on the right is only non-sexy because she was intentionally drawn to look ugly. If the woman on the right struck the same pose as the woman on the left and lacked the severed head , she would still be ugly, no matter what she was wearing or whether or not she had a head in her hand. If the woman on the left was drawn with a head in her hand and striking the same pose as the woman on the right with a scowl on her face, it would still be off-putting due to the violent nature of the picture itself, but the character would still be hot. Red Sonja is closer in personality to the woman on the right, but many still find her sexy. They are inadvertently admitting that they want to make females uglier to make them less sexualized.

Nudity isn't inherently sexual, but human beings, being sexual creatures, will sexualize another naked human being; its inherent to our DNA, and it generally takes a lot to dissuade us from doing that. Sexualization itself is in the eyes of the beholder; you could argue that both Quiet and Raiden were gratuitous and could of had their respective scenes removed, but what's the fun in that?
Click to expand...
​

I personally think that there is a push for me realistic armor in game these because it seems like people want things to be a certain way you nowadays you know,like people cant seem to respect a creator if they aren't doing exactly what they want
 
Last edited:
Medicated said:
So what's with this obsession with realistic armor exactly? Unless you're playing some military simulation, any "protection" arguments go out the window.
Some of the earliest games just had characters basically fighting in underwear. One minute, games are "art", the next minute, they must follow the rules of realism? Just sounds like they are talking out their asses really.

View attachment 659455

View attachment 659454
Click to expand...

The cover for the home version of this game (at least in europe/jap) was a thing of beauty:
This would trigger so many people in this day and age
2f402044217136ce4740b02c2f21db9a.jpg
 
Medicated said:
Just sounds like they are talking out their asses really.
Click to expand...
"Realism" is just a convenient excuse for them being 21st century prudes.

It's the same as when they say "realistic female bodies". It doesn't matter how many cosplay models are shown with the same or similar body type as these characters, it's not "realistic" unless the character is a land whale.

In these medieval fantasy games they demand "realistic" or "practical" armour but are suddenly silent when a woman doesn't get a slap for speaking out of turn.
 
You know im honestly curious about something related to BARD

I get that they want to design female characters to make look more "pratical"(seriously why does that even matter in a most games) but imo it only matters when you are going something akin to realistic fantasy,military or medieval setting also I really don't see what they are gaining from redesigning male characters to make them show some more skin,are they trying to offened someone or for something for them to drool over
 
Thexenoclop said:
You know im honestly curious about something related to BARD

I get that they want to design female characters to make look more "pratical"(seriously why does that even matter in a most games) but imo it only matters when you are going something akin to realistic fantasy,military or medieval setting also I really don't see what they are gaining from redesigning male characters to make them show some more skin,are they trying to offened someone or for something for them to drool over
Click to expand...
I'd say a bit of both, but really its for them to drool over.
 
Given that the creator of BABD is a female, how would things have been, had the creator been either a male, or a troon instead? Would the beliefs about "practical female character design" have been more ridiculous sounding, assuming that it is the same?
 
Thiletonomics said:
Given that the creator of BABD is a female, how would things have been, had the creator been either a male, or a troon instead? Would the beliefs about "practical female character design" have been more ridiculous sounding, assuming that it is the same?
Click to expand...
Just assumption but I imagine if she was a man, people in her audience would find her motives for making BABD to be more fishy. Female perverts tend to be laughed off instead of getting pointed out that they're a creep. I agree with the idea that she's only a prude because fictional women make her insecure, she's fine with male eye candy.

If she was a troon, it could go either way depending on which circles she's in. She could even be defended more because of it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom