Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Would people care about cosmetics in a first person only MMO?

13

Comments

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member RarePosts: 3,963
    Wizardry said:
    I do not want to support a developer who segregates it's community and assets into who pays more gets more.If i am not playing the EXACT same game,EXACT same assets as the next guy,i am out of that game so fast it's not funny.

    You're missing out on a lot of great games then.  People paying for cosmetics means you get more content in the future and cosmetics have no impact on actual gameplay.
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member RarePosts: 3,963
    And yes, people will buy cosmetics for FPS games, just not as much as they might in 3rd person games.
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 9,156
    edited February 4
    4507 said:
    How about just offer the option to switch perspective?
    Because any time that both perspectives are supported in a competitive game, third-person has a massive advantage due to its increased field of vision, which ends up forcing the people who actually like first-person to use third-person if they want to remain competitive.

    Look at PUBG: there is a very large portion of the playerbase that would like to be playing in first-person only, but due to the massive advantage conferred by third person in peeking around corners, through windows, over walls, looking around while prone, etc, they're forced to use third person at least some of the time to avoid being at a disadvantage.
    PUBG is an unfinished game missing a lot of features. A better example would be GTA 5 online, and they have server filters where you can set FPS only, TPS only, or both. Server filters like those have existed for many years.

    EDIT: if i remember correctly ARMA has the same filters.

    EDIT2: you are not OK with FPS fans being forced to play in third person but you are OK with TPS fans being forced to go First person? quite unfair. Server filters should be more standard in modern gaming.
    Post edited by rojoArcueid on

    image
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    edited February 4
    Loke666 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I don't think comments like this are based on any kind of rational basis.  In most cases, women fighting in combat is unrealistic.  Especially in hand to hand combat and with weapons like swords and bows.  There are a lot of unrealistic things about games.  You can't just pick the ones that bother and say these break it for me while saying the others are fine IMO.

    I don't really care that much how my character looks anymore.  In fact, the fewer items that are in a game for me to pick up and upgrade the better I like it usually.
    Women are generally less strong then men, yes. However, using a sword or bow is a skill, not raw strenght. A well trained warrior will beat someone far stronger but with less training. Yes, being stronger is an advantage with 2 equally skilled persons but so is being taller and more then a few of the toughest people was rather small.

    Women archers is not as unlike as you think. In fact did Robert the Bruce have a bunch of female archers at Bannockburn, or so say at least 2 different sources (and since more then a few scottish women at the time hunted small animals with bow for food that makes sense, the Scots needed anyone with any weapon skill when fighting one against 3.

    Bodicea was a good warrior with a spear and in fact is the only leader that actually destroyed London.

    The vikings had female warriors, both the sagas and archeology agree on that (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.23308/full).

    The reason we had so few female warriors is that we generally don't allow women to fight, now that they can't. Some strong induviduals have ignore these rules (Jean D'arc comes to mind but more then a few girls dressed up like men in various wars, especially in the American civil war and war for independance).

    Anyways, in a gameworld where religion and politics are different there is no reason a lot of warriors shouldn't be female. In our world that might have been rare during most periods but that doesn't mean it would be like that in another world with different religions and customs.

    The Vietnam war had a lot of female warriors, especially in the Viet Cong. One of Russias top tank aces from WW2 was a women, and they had 2 female fighter aces as well (12 respectively 11 victories).

    So I respectfully disagree.
    There are exceptions to every rule.  There are times when children fought in war as well.  That doesn't mean many female fighters in games makes sense.  Many bows required a lot of strength to use.  That is not taking into account that women had more important things to do like birthing children, raising kids, and taking care of their home.  I am not interested in discussing reality though.  My point was that this is fantasy and women or men wearing small amounts of clothing shouldn't matter.
    Post edited by Flyte27 on
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member RarePosts: 27,752
    Flyte27 said:

      That doesn't mean many female fighters in games makes sense. 
    Games have to make sense?

    Now explain to me how females cannot be as strong as male in a FANTASY game where dragon exists and humans can "cast" fireballs. 

    Just add some mumbo-jumbo about the "magic" of the land that equalizes the sexes .. problem solved. 
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    Flyte27 said:

      That doesn't mean many female fighters in games makes sense. 
    Games have to make sense?

    Now explain to me how females cannot be as strong as male in a FANTASY game where dragon exists and humans can "cast" fireballs. 

    Just add some mumbo-jumbo about the "magic" of the land that equalizes the sexes .. problem solved. 
    I don't think you read my post.  

    I was arguing exactly what you said, but based on that there is no reason that women or men can't wear skimpy outfits and still fight like they were wearing plate armor.  It's all unrealistic anyway.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member RarePosts: 27,752
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:

      That doesn't mean many female fighters in games makes sense. 
    Games have to make sense?

    Now explain to me how females cannot be as strong as male in a FANTASY game where dragon exists and humans can "cast" fireballs. 

    Just add some mumbo-jumbo about the "magic" of the land that equalizes the sexes .. problem solved. 
    I don't think you read my post.  

    I was arguing exactly what you said, but based on that there is no reason that women or men can't wear skimpy outfits and still fight like they were wearing plate armor.  It's all unrealistic anyway.

    Probably not .. but don't you like my "mumbo-jumbo" line? .. which after reading you newest post .. brings out your argument in a witty kind of way. 
  • MoiraeMoirae Member RarePosts: 3,284
    Of course they do. 
  • AllerleirauhAllerleirauh Member UncommonPosts: 446
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    Loke666
    "I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world". ~ C. S. Lewis
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Loke666 said:
    Loke666 said:
    I wouldn't generalize there but some people certainly do (including many devs who design gear). If you play a sorceress or something I don't have a problem with it but it is hard to take a paladin in chainmail bikini serious. ;)
    It's a blessed chainmail bikini!
    It might be awarded to her by the Gods themselves, we still see the words "bimbo" glowing over her head.4507 said:
    Actually, considering the maneuverability she would have compared to those that had to employ armour not so blessed, and potential distractions to exploit, it would be a rather clever choice.

    In ancient cultures there would be several divine entities that could go with this, such as those associated with beauty, fertility, or plain outright sexuality.

    The same could be done through magical enchantment for those that didn't have any particular connection to the gods.

    In a setting with moderately available magic this wouldn't be unfeasible, and for those where it is abundant, and thus likely less expensive, it could be fairly common.
    4507
  • AllerleirauhAllerleirauh Member UncommonPosts: 446
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    "I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world". ~ C. S. Lewis
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    Perhaps emotionally, but I could take a lot of physical abuse.
  • AllerleirauhAllerleirauh Member UncommonPosts: 446
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    Perhaps emotionally, but I could take a lot of physical abuse.
    Good!
    "I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world". ~ C. S. Lewis
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    Perhaps emotionally, but I could take a lot of physical abuse.
    Good!
    By the way that is scientific fact.  The reason women bruise and get injured more easily as a general rule is that they have more fat tissue and fat is more easily bruised.  It is not a shot at women to put them down.  It is simply hormonal.
  • AllerleirauhAllerleirauh Member UncommonPosts: 446
    edited February 4
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    Perhaps emotionally, but I could take a lot of physical abuse.
    Good!
    By the way that is scientific fact.  The reason women bruise and get injured more easily as a general rule is that they have more fat tissue and fat is more easily bruised.  It is not a shot at women to put them down.  It is simply hormonal.
    It's also a known fact that men are not as tough as they used to be. They are only a shell of the men in the past. Depending on age and occupation, today's men are not as tough as they used to be. So it's hard to compare a warrior or a laborer, to a guy that sits at his computer spewing crap all day. The differences in gender may not be so staggering.
    Post edited by Allerleirauh on
    "I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world". ~ C. S. Lewis
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Aren't you the guy that used to get bullied? Did you bruise easily? Just wondering. ;)
    Perhaps emotionally, but I could take a lot of physical abuse.
    Good!
    By the way that is scientific fact.  The reason women bruise and get injured more easily as a general rule is that they have more fat tissue and fat is more easily bruised.  It is not a shot at women to put them down.  It is simply hormonal.
    It's also a known fact that men are not as tough as they used to be. They are only a shell of the men in the past. Depending on age and occupation, today's men are not as tough as they used to be. So it's hard to compare a warrior or a laborer, to a guy that sits at his computer spewing crap all day. The differences in gender may not be so staggering.
    That is very true.  I know it as when I was growing up I was told to be tuff and ignore pain both emotionally and physically.  I don't think it was altogether healthy though.  When I was young male children also played a lot more sports and did a lot of physical activities. 

    I was one of the ones who started the transition to being more sit at home and stay on the computer all day.  This began in my teens playing video games and using computers.  It hit me most in my 20s when I was eating lots of junk food and not exercising at all.  Males today may be getting too much on the opposite side of being extremely soft and too much in touch with their emotions.  There should be a balance somewhere IMO.
  • IceAgeIceAge Member RarePosts: 2,073
    4507 said:
    In other words, would people care about cosmetics if they couldn't actually see them, but they knew that others could see them?
    Is like you are tuning ( outside-part ) your car. Of course people care :)

    Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
    Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!

  • 45074507 Member UncommonPosts: 302
    4507 said:
    How about just offer the option to switch perspective?
    Because any time that both perspectives are supported in a competitive game, third-person has a massive advantage due to its increased field of vision, which ends up forcing the people who actually like first-person to use third-person if they want to remain competitive.

    Look at PUBG: there is a very large portion of the playerbase that would like to be playing in first-person only, but due to the massive advantage conferred by third person in peeking around corners, through windows, over walls, looking around while prone, etc, they're forced to use third person at least some of the time to avoid being at a disadvantage.
    PUBG is an unfinished game missing a lot of features. A better example would be GTA 5 online, and they have server filters where you can set FPS only, TPS only, or both. Server filters like those have existed for many years.

    EDIT: if i remember correctly ARMA has the same filters.

    EDIT2: you are not OK with FPS fans being forced to play in third person but you are OK with TPS fans being forced to go First person? quite unfair. Server filters should be more standard in modern gaming.
    Umm... Okay. If your combat works well with both perspectives, then you can have segregated servers. But that's irrelevant to the topic at hand - you originally suggested that players be able to switch perspectives, which you can't do with segregated servers. Further, if segregated servers are used, it's essentially the same as having a first-person only game on the first-person server, so the original query still stands.

    As for 'forcing' people who prefer third-person to play such a game, how is that any different from 95% of modern MMORPGs forcing people who prefer first-person to play their third-person games?
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,417
    Loke666 said:
    It might be awarded to her by the Gods themselves, we still see the words "bimbo" glowing over her head.

    4507 said:
    Actually, considering the maneuverability she would have compared to those that had to employ armour not so blessed, and potential distractions to exploit, it would be a rather clever choice.

    In ancient cultures there would be several divine entities that could go with this, such as those associated with beauty, fertility, or plain outright sexuality.

    The same could be done through magical enchantment for those that didn't have any particular connection to the gods.

    In a setting with moderately available magic this wouldn't be unfeasible, and for those where it is abundant, and thus likely less expensive, it could be fairly common.
    First of all, an unarmored opponent against someone in plate have a very tiny chanse for survival even if the person in no armor have way more training. Talhoffer do show how someone with a 2 handed sword can defeat a full plate user  in ones of his guides (15th century) but it is still very hard.

    A dune buggy is way faster then a tank and still I rather sit in the tank then the buggy if they fight eachother.

    Now, with magic it is a bit different even though magic + plate would defeat magic + nothing. Still, even if the magic makes something skimpy as good as a plate one would think wearing something comfortable would beat a bikini, and that is assuming the magic also stops you freezing to death.

    The whole idea is silly and something someone who draw comics put on Red Sonja (the only novel I read about her had her wearing clothes). It got dusted off for the same D&D version that had the class "houri" in it as well. It is one of those silly 70s things we rather want to forget.

    Unpractical, cold, uncomfortable (I assume at least, please correct if you wore one and have a different opinion). 

    If you like women wearing it that is fine, don't try to bring any logic why it can be a feasible armor though, it is a feasible in combat as what Tim Curry wears in Rocky Horror Picture show.
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,417
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Actually, women also a have a far higher tolerance to pain which is an advantage. They also can survival longer in extreme cold (compared to western men).

    And most adventurers tend to be rich, they can afford to have someone taking care of the kids. In most time in history rich kids didn't see much of their actual parents. Still, being pregnant is not a good thing in combat but I assume a female Paladin could have a Wow of chasisty or take 9 months off now and then.

    Female warriors have certainly not been the norm but today both the Israeli and the Kurds have a rather impressing percentage of them anyways. 

    I'll give you that female warriors tend to be rarer in fantsy books then MMOs though but you can't set up restriction saying that some can play female while others can't, we all know what we think of genderlocked classes on this site.
    And some IPs have a far higher percentage of female warriors the others, Forgotten realms have plenty while GoT have far fewer.

    Besides, we need more female MMO players, not fewer. Forcing them to play guys would be stupid.

    Realistically can a women wear full plate and beat the snot out of me (an ex girlfriend proved that and she was shorter and weighted far less as well) so putting no or few female warriors would not make a game more realistic unless you make a historical MMO.
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,562
    Loke666 said:
    Flyte27 said:
    I find this subject funny because, in RL, I'm an archer. Not just in some video game. Yes, I am better than the guys, at least the ones that I competed against. Now, women did fight in war, whether you knew that they were women is another subject. 

    I remember reading that to prevent female gladiators; the men had to be scantily clad because women were known to participate in that as well.

    As far as the topic of this thread, yes, I would still care about cosmetics. Despite the fact that we tend to purchase cosmetics to show off.
    If this is directed at me I already said why it's unrealistic. 

    Birthing rates were higher due to higher death rates.  Women were busy both birthing children, taking care of them, and taking care of their household.

    Not all bows can be shot by women.  Note that most bows now are easier to use and require less strength.  If it was something like a longbow those were not easy to fire.

    I don't really want to get into the chemical side of things, but it's proven that women bruise easier and are mostly inferior when it comes to fighting.  Their only advantage is more flexibility due to having less muscle mass.  

    As I mentioned previously there were women fighters in the past, but it was a rare exception.  It wasn't a general rule.  

    As for personal competition in real life, I don't really know.  Maybe the guys are lazy and don't really care as much about archery as you do.  Most people can be fairly good at anything if they practice enough.

    Regardless I don't really care if there are women who can fight in games and do unrealistic things.  I was just using it as a generally illogical argument that clothing actually matters in a fantasy game at all in terms of it being realistic.  
    Actually, women also a have a far higher tolerance to pain which is an advantage. They also can survival longer in extreme cold (compared to western men).

    And most adventurers tend to be rich, they can afford to have someone taking care of the kids. In most time in history rich kids didn't see much of their actual parents. Still, being pregnant is not a good thing in combat but I assume a female Paladin could have a Wow of chasisty or take 9 months off now and then.

    Female warriors have certainly not been the norm but today both the Israeli and the Kurds have a rather impressing percentage of them anyways. 

    I'll give you that female warriors tend to be rarer in fantsy books then MMOs though but you can't set up restriction saying that some can play female while others can't, we all know what we think of genderlocked classes on this site.
    And some IPs have a far higher percentage of female warriors the others, Forgotten realms have plenty while GoT have far fewer.

    Besides, we need more female MMO players, not fewer. Forcing them to play guys would be stupid.

    Realistically can a women wear full plate and beat the snot out of me (an ex girlfriend proved that and she was shorter and weighted far less as well) so putting no or few female warriors would not make a game more realistic unless you make a historical MMO.

    I have heard the concept that women have a higher tolerance for pain, but is there any basis for this concept other than they give birth (which is very painful or can be). From all intents and purposes women, in general, live longer lives and healthier lives. This is because they have been allowed in most cases to show their emotions and act on their feelings. If something hurts they will likely not do it. A man will often ignore the pain because they are told to be tuff and hurt themselves. Most men are unhealthier and live shorter lifespans because they ignore their pain and torture themselves via a variety of different means. The funny thing is women want to join in the torture in the modern age because they feel deprived of the opportunity in some way.
  • tawesstawess Member RarePosts: 3,893
    4507 said:
    In other words, would people care about cosmetics if they couldn't actually see them, but they knew that others could see them?
    For the same reason we do not all dress in lined burlap sacks.... 

    As others have pointed out. 

    Tawess gaming

    Tawess soapbox

    This have been a good conversation

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member EpicPosts: 7,224
    "Real life" is first person... doesn't that mean you don't care about what clothes you are wearing? ;)
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 8700k (4.70ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z370 Aorus Ultra Gaming - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 4K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

Sign In or Register to comment.