Feedback talk:User/Joiry/Female Armor

"...and that the a large amount of the playerbase is young males" I think you nipped it in the bud there. Sex sells, and they want this game to make lots of money. I wouldn't expect equal armor. I am sure the girl armor will be skimpy but what about the guy armor? Just look at the guy paragon armor in Guild Wars. A belly shirt and a mini skirt? No thanks. FloppyJoe 03:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

You couldn't have pointed out the biggest flaw in the "Oh noes, theres one set of female armor that shows more than an ankle!" argument better. All of the unreasonable people complaining about the minority of showy female armor seem to overlook the wide variety of female armor that covers nearly everything versus the male Paragons and Ritualists who seem incapable of wearing any pants at all, unless they're Norn. I'd say two male professions who only get a maximum total of one pair of pants each makes up for the few female professions who have more than one armor set that doesn't have pants, even if all female professions have more than one armor set that does have pants. I'd like to see all of you anti-pixels argue against that one.

Classic RPG syndrome, In reality women are actually much tougher and stronger then men, so they require much less armor... -Talamare- feedback 04:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

You need a tell when you make jokes like that. There are people here who'd probably take that statement seriously. lol Teddy Dan, yo. 15:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind it. I just give it the benefit of the doubt by saying it's magic armor, with some of the sets it would have to be. If everything else is magical, why not that? I'd say Guild Wars is more balanced than most games though as far as male/female armor sets go, particularly the Warrior profession. Phlemhacker

If you want women with practical armor go play elder scrolls. personn5 04:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a wonderful idea. It’s true, the artwork is amazing, the existing armor is typically nicely meshed, and the concepts in general look wonderful. But if Guild Wars changes to allow more equality between the genders, is there really an argument against that? Who does it hurt to allow male avatars and female avatars to be on equal footing? It may also be true that Guild Wars, as a whole, is less guilty of armor inequality than other MMOs, but is that really a viable excuse to continue the way it has? If someone told me that female warriors would no longer have metal thongs (such as with Kurzick armor) while their male counterparts wore pants in the upcoming game, I certainly wouldn’t call that unreasonable. To claim that the armor is “magic” and therefore the women don’t need any protection begs the question of why the male armor is not similarly magical. Nobody is suggesting that armor in general should be less revealing, but maybe revealing armor should be revealing on both genders, while protective armor should be protective for all. Is that really so unreasonable? Is there a compelling reason why female avatars should be denied this? Zanyrestronaut 20:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll readily second the post above. When guild wars armor is taken as a whole, ignoring class, there is an amazing variety as to styles and amount of skin revealed. However, that variety and choice breaks down when you look at specific class-gender combinations. Elementalists are a particular concern; I can neither play a female with more than a square yard of fabric on her, nor a male that doesn't seem as if he's been stationed at an arctic research facility. It seems like it wouldn't be particularly hard to produce some sort of intermediate for both, or, give both access to the full run of clothedness. You did such a wonderful job with Monks and Ritualists, and I humbly request that you offer similarly diverse options to the rest of the classes. ATGGAATAA 21:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Ritualists' are not wonderful, some of them looks like oriental strippers. The preview is out there, female Eles are still unable getting something covering properly. It's hardly to change due to about every MMO has revealing female characters, as well as gw. They even pay attention on making breast more physical.--TeaCat._. 07:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

True, but a decent number of ritualist armors are classy, and covered. And yes, the female elementalist armor they are showing as the preview is deeply saddening. However, take a look at the warrior preview, and find some hope there. ATGGAATAA

In GW1, female Elementalists have Tyrian, Primeval, Norn, and Obsidian that all cover practically everything. Roughly 90% of all female Ranger armor covers everything. Same with female Monks, Necros, Mesmers, Dervishes, maybe half of female Assassin and Warrior armor. So, already, the majority of armor sets for the majority of professions in GW1 are well-covered. What the hell are you complaining about? No, don't change the armor system for GW2. There was more than enough variety in GW1, don't take that away from us in GW2. Teddy Dan, yo. 14:54, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I doubt I'll say anything new, but I wanted to voice my opinion as well. Please make the armor more equal in GW2! If you're going to objectify women, do it to men as well. If you're going to create classy, elegant armor for men, do the same for women. I'm not asking for you to get rid of cheesecake armor, just make more options for us women who don't want to look so slutty all the time. Thank you. Black Kitty 22:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Strange, all of the women I play with like wearing armor that doesn't make them look like angry butch dykes all the time. Well, some of them do like Kurz/Lux warrior armor, too. Male Assassin exotic armor leaves quite a bit of the body uncovered. There are male monk and necro armors that leave them half-naked. Male Rits and Paras are forced to wear skirts. Females are not the only ones who are uncomfortable with several armor models in GW1. However, you're clearly the noisiest. There are plenty of armor sets for every profession for those of you afraid to show a little pixel. Yes, I said pixel. That's what they are. Just pixels. If it's really so important to you then, by all means, encourage Anet to key up some large black trash bags with limb-holes for your convenience. It's just a game, people. It's bad enough there are people fussing over underwear. Can't we just focus on content that matters, like the skill or travel systems? Teddy Dan, yo. 09:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Well with a name like Black Kitty. Cough. Cough. I think you agree with me here.OptionalKid127 01:50, 27 Aug 2010 (UTC)

i'm a female player and will make a female character as my main and i want to look good, i don't want to look the same as the male characters. it's not sexist to have different armours for men and women, men and women are different and also tend to dress differently in most cultures this game is aimed at a mainly western audience and western women tend to show more flesh than men. people saying its objectifying women unless they dress men in the same way are missing the point, men in this game will also look their best but that means masculine styles. anyone who objects to women having such styles really needs to understand feminism, and not just assume they know what it's about (philosophy undergrad btw). Ealias 09:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Lord, everyone is getting so worked up over this. Yeah, I'm a chick. Yeah, I think the female armor can be rediculous, and I'd like each class to have options for the women to be covered normally. However, why is this turning into a women's rights argument? If women soldiers in real life were only allowed to wear metal thongs and a bra, then we'd have a problem. As long as the game offers options for female characters to dress modestly (and male characters to dress like man-whores XD), then who cares? Weindrasi 07:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)Weindrasi

Thank you last two posters! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.173.243.152 (talk) at 13:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC).

I agree with Weindrasi, I'm a girl too, I like having options for fully covered and less covered armor in varying styles of sexy to cute. The more options available, the more people can be pleased, like those who are more shy or reserved can have the more fully clothed and/or classy looking armors, and those who want to show off a bit more can use the armors with more interesting designs. What I'm unhappy about is that I can only craft 1 look for each type of material, whether its armor-smithing, tailoring, or leather-working. I'm glad the look changes with each material tier, but even just a second option would be appreciated, so we can make our girls the armor they need and want by having a choice between a more fantastic style and a more practical style with each material type. That would go a long way I think. Basically, we could use more appearance options for each armor stat arrangement. Currently, there are 7 choices for each level of armor, plus racial and whatnot. Make it 14 options, 2 looks for carrion, 2 looks for knight's, etc. then the more players you can possibly make happy. =) Tigrejita 18:45, 2 October 2012 (UTC)