lifeofkj:

Isn’t it interesting how often the response to criticisms such as the armor bingo card boil down to “but I have to keep using these tired offensive  cliches because creativity”? Are they even listening to themselves? Why not take it as a challenge? “How can I create beautiful and original character designs without falling back on tropes that thousands and thousands of artists have used before me?” Now that would be creative.

Defending your “right” to use offensive tropes in character design (or writing, or whatever your creative endeavor of choice) isn’t “artistic integrity”. It’s laziness.

Yup. This^ Pretty much. Emphasis mine.

Whenever someone uses those arguments I’m all like:

image

The above reblog belongs with this one and this one, that’s why their mutual subject, creative freedom, gets its own tag now!

~Ozzie

Any thoughts on this new Impa? She’s been a decrepit and ancient advisor, fit and muscular bodyguard, dark skinned and swift magical warrior, chubby and joyful nanny, and now she carries a sword so big and heavy she could kill somebody by just dropping it on them. Half of the posts in Tumblr seem to be about wanting to get the game for Impa, and half complains about Shia, the new member of the evil sexy ladies of Zelda (seriously Veran, armor bra?)

Also in a previous ask:

“Boobplate Witch” version 3 actually. The original Boob Witch is Twinrova and the second to appear is Veran iirc. Vera comes with metal armor, boob window and midriff showing.

Impa

image

I feel that Impa is just begging for someone to write a thesis titled “Secondary characters, room for artistic exploration or lazy recycling of names?”

The Warriors of Hyrule incarnation is pretty badass looking, dressed pretty consistently with male characters in Zelda and I can see why people are itching to have her bust some moves on the battlefield:

imageimage

I mean we could discuss things like the open toed boots, or the eye on her boob – but overall her outfit is stylish without being ridiculous or heavily sexualized.  Since armor has traditionally not been a big thing in Zelda (Link usually runs around his normal clothes) the lack of it and the presence of fantasy fueled weapons is consistent with the narrative of the setting.

It’s also pretty cool that they gave her the big bruiser sword.

Twinrova

Honestly I am not that big a Zelda fan, so Twinrova and Veran didn’t even occur to me when I saw Shia – but they don’t really lessen the wtf value of Shia in any way.

image

The first and most obvious difference with Twinrova to me is that “Can I fap to this?” was probably not a design priority.  I mean yes, it’s a huge jump from what the sisters look like prior to combining  – but mostly it seems focused on projecting the idea that they’re no longer old – they’re now young and powerful and still utterly bizarre.

There is some genius creativity that went into this image and while it’s certainly playing on some sexualized characteristics (wasp waist, boob plate, etc) it’s not something that would make me hide it from children.

Veran

Oh yeah she has an armor bra, personally I find that headpiece more terrifying – it seems an accident waiting to happen:

image

However, like Veran’s boss – Twinrova, there’s a lot more actual creative design here – it looks less like lingerie armor more like couture gone mad.  There was also no reasonable expectation that you’d see Veran looking like this in the game, since well it was on the Gameboy Color:

image

So while it’s not good, and is frankly kind of weird – it’s still a fairly basic example of sexying up a villainess because she’s evil and looks like someone put some real effort into making look unique and recognizable even with the limited resolution and palette.

She also came back in 2001 and I haven’t seen any attempts to try to make her iconic in the Zelda franchise since.  She was also an antagonist who operated primarily through possession and shape-changing – so no real expectation of her wearing combat armor.

So while she’s definitely part of many problematic tropes, including villainess armor – it would be disingenuous to pretend that she’s a particularly bad or outrageous offender.

Shia/Cia

This is the main antagonist in a Zelda spinoff that is supposed to be entirely about fighting on battlefields full of soldiers, using cool weapons and combos and stuff.  Everything suggests this is how she will appear in game:

image

She’s strutting about in a gown, wearing a ball masque headpiece that has no eye-slits.  And this is what happens when I go to Nintendo’s page promoting the game:

image

And guess what! Shia/Cia is not on the “suitable for all ages” page for Warriors of Hyrule.   Also, I don’t read Japanese so I have to take a fan Wiki’s word on this translation, but this is what we’ve been told about the character:

Cia is a witch tasked with maintaining the balance of the Triforce. Although a good person at heart, she comes to harbor serious affections for Link which in turn becomes deep-seated jealousy directed towards Princess Zelda. Cia then becomes possessed by a dark force. This leads to her waging war on the kingdom alongside her companions Valga and Wizro.

Yes she was a good person but being jealous over Link has allowed her to be possessed with evil (women aren’t allowed to be evil just for themselves and are apparently prone to possession) who walks around in a costume Nintendo won’t show you (or at least English speaking audiences) on their own site.  Not even an attempt at creativity – for a game that’s to be released on a console that Nintendo says:

Wii U is a brand new home videogame console from Nintendo that fundamentally changes the relationship between you and your TV and how you, your friends and family all connect.

image

– wincenworks

ria-rha:

fandomfumblr asked:

So i’ve come across this blog of yours, and i can’t help but notice you seem to hold this ideal that showing skin is bad. I’m not saying there’s not a time and a place for everything, and i’d be quite warm to a game where someone in skimpy or silly armor got their just desserts. But i don’t see why you think these designs inherently wrong on such a level. Designers designed them for a reason. They had a vision of the character and made them a certain way. No “change” needs to be made.
You’re right, designers did design them that way for a reason: to be sexy. And that’s where a change needs to be made. When everyone is “sexy”, no one is. There needs to be more variety in female character designs.
You see, women are like onions. But not because they turn brown and start sprouting little white hairs if you leave them out in the sun too long: because they have layers (didn’t you see Shrek, geez). They’re also all different, though you wouldn’t guess so based on media representations of them. I’ll start accepting a designer’s vision for a sexy lady, the minute that stops being the only vision they ever have.*
*Also what we get isn’t always the original design as there’s sometimes pressure from editors or other outside influences to make the character “sexier”.
-Staci

Bolded for emphasis.

Funny how no-one who says “Designers had a vision of the character and made them a certain way.” ever notice that said vision is pretty much always the same.

As a designer myself I’m REALLY tired of this argument. Art and design does not exist in the vacuum.
An idea being the artist’s “vision” does not make it inherently good or creative, in fact the first ideas that come to a designers mind tend to be the most derivative and uninteresting.

On the other hand, as Staci notes, lots of designs RHA, BABD and related sites comment on aren’t actually a result of concept artist’s original idea, but a product of many revisions from the executives. And executives (unlike artists they hire) are the people whose “vision” is usually the farthest from creative.

No matter how you look at the “artist’s sacred vision” logic, it’s flawed and in no way justifies a cliched, unresearched, insonsistent design.

~Ozzie

What are your thoughts on magical girl anime/manga outfits? Not talking about shows such as Kill La Kill or magical girl shows for adult men, but ones such as Precure, Sailor Moon, or Tokyo Mew Mew. Do you believe these are excused due to either being created by women, or intended for a young girl audience?

I don’t believe that “created by women” or “made for female audience” is ever an excuse if the product is problematic, especially in terms of sexism.
After all, women sometimes work on the stuff we feature here (like the design of warrior princess Solange). And because those female creators internalized the harmful ideas about gender expectations, their designs aren’t inherently any better than those made by men.

As for mahou shoujo/magical girl anime and manga, they’re generally hand-waved by the “a wizard did it“ principle. The characters are magical girls and their powers usually oscillate on the edge of exaggeration, so their battle outfits aren’t expected to be exactly fully-protective armor.
There’s this popular argument that the whole point of magical girl genre is to empower little girls by weaponizing femininity: everything is designed around female appeal, so that the audience can see that a hero can be an epitome of girlishness while still beating the crap out of evil monsters.

Which of course is not an excuse for why some of those battle uniforms and transformation sequences tend to be… questionably fanservice-y.

It’s really a classic ‘childhood ruined’ moment when a little girl grows up and realizes just how absurdly short Sailor scout’s skirt were and that the sparkly transformations she admired so much were someone else’s fap fodder. Especially considering most magical girls are underage.

~Ozzie

itsbirds:

It really says something about fantasy art that the thing people seem to remark most on in my work is the fact the female armor I draw is ‘functional’  with out and sexy bits out there showing.  Something I just think of as “well you wouldn’t want to get stabbed in the navel… so lets put some studs and leather there” is so foreign to some that it sticks out. But, it really shouldn’t stick out. People shouldn’t even notice that. And that kind of pisses me off about the other artists out there. Look I am not saying every character has to be all covered up and armored, if it is a female/male rogue who uses her god given talents to subvert, distract, and get what s/he wants by all means  show some skin.. .but if it is a paladin, warrior, anything that needs to be heavily armored then put some damn good armor on them! And despite what some art directors think, a girl can look pretty damn hot in some nice, functional, armor with out her tits flopping about. And if you are an artist and the only way you can make a female attractive is by showing her ass or cleavage, you are a BAD ARTIST, go practice.

Bolded for emphasis.

It’s really a painful realization that bikini armors are so ingrained in the collective consciousness that actually protective female armor stands out as novelty.

Which also proves just how bullshitty the “skimpy costume design is creative” excuse is. If it was so, people would be more surprised by it than by costumes that do provide cover.
Yet here we are and no-one’s shocked by the sight of bikini armor anymore.

~Ozzie

shattered-earth:

I could do this all day 


She will fit into your favorite moba game very good character garanteed

Edit: Holy shit it’s a joke please stop tagging this as reference/helpful/wow so good please stop using this as reference please stop thinking this is your goal please stop holy crap holy cRAP

You need to seriously re-evaluate  yourself if you believe the incredibly narrow and offensive things in these gifs oMgGG

Everything about it is so painfully accurate, but the “Pick ≤ 3” part is my favorite one for the purposes of this blog.

~Ozzie

I love how pasties are the only essential chestware and how the actual high heels are not “necessary” just so long as her shoes maintain the same shape as if there were heels there.

– wincenworks

edit: Added the author’s later commentary, just to make it clear that no-one’s supposed to take this “tutorial” seriously. ~Ozzie