“He knows how to design female armour because he spent years studying corsetry and lingerie.”
Me:
The scariest part of this is that so many of these concept artists who seem to “study” corsetry lingerie tend to overlook some basic details about the universal design principles:
Boobs are not excluded from physics, especially gravity
Lingerie is not generally held on by superglue
Women need to breathe and need internal organs
Different materials have different qualities, you can’t swap out silk or soft leather for steel in… sensitive areas
So yeah… horrifying as it is, studying corsetry and lingerie would actually be a step forward in many cases.
“He knows how to design female armour because he spent years studying corsetry and lingerie.”
Me:
The scariest part of this is that so many of these concept artists who seem to “study” corsetry lingerie tend to overlook some basic details about the universal design principles:
Boobs are not excluded from physics, especially gravity
Lingerie is not generally held on by superglue
Women need to breathe and need internal organs
Different materials have different qualities, you can’t swap out silk or soft leather for steel in… sensitive areas
So yeah… horrifying as it is, studying corsetry and lingerie would actually be a step forward in many cases.
– wincenworks
Posted on
Posted on
Posted on
just because it covers the tiddy doesn’t make it practical
Some Git
A good rule of thumb for armor design, if you asked me.
~Ozzie
Posted on
just because it covers the tiddy doesn’t make it practical
Some Git
A good rule of thumb for armor design, if you asked me.
Following on from our discussion of visual design – it’s important to remember that there’s always a lot of options and usually you’ll want to explore what options work best for you initial concept and experiment from there.
If you can’t remember seeing any designs that translate well, look for new interpretations that emphasize the priorities you want to focus on.
Glass cannons, as an example, are really defined by how they compare to the “standard” units around them.
(As well as engineering the video does touch on medical procedures, psychological experiments performed on animals and themes like kidnapping, murder and execution. Also some Nazi imagery and a very brief appearance of a homophobic slur.)
Round 4 sumitted:
Have you seen this? It’s an interesting lecture by Mike Hill about using functional, industrial principles and meaning in your designs to make a world more rich and believable. In the first part of the lecture, he talks about the difference between deeper satisfaction and pleasure buttons, with “The Last of Us” being an example of deeper layered design and “Candy Crush” being an example of instant pleasure button pushing. It’s funny how he stresses the importance to think about how things work and make them believable, since it also perfectly applies to bikini armor.
Bikini armor designs are nothing more than simple, instant pleasure designs. It’s a very simple, lazy form of gratification.To use his words, it’s short term, forgettable and contextless.
In contrast to that: believable, functional, deeper designs of female characters (and their armor) would bring much more depth to games and film and long term happiness and meaning.
I wonder how many bro-ncept artists are watching this lecture and think “yeah yeah I need to make that robot more believable” and then draw a girl in a bikini next to it though…
The video is quite long but definitely worth sitting through if you’re aspiring towards doing design of any sort.
A key point covered is that if you want people to get immersed and invested in your work then it needs to be internally consistent. You don’t need to be 100% realistic, but you need to consider the message behind design decisions and their relationship with your overall production.
Whether you consciously remember it or not doesn’t really effect the impact, it’s just really more about whether you were looking for it. You might not notice it, but your brain will.
