Sexy is not bad. Stripping is not bad. Wearing sexy boots is not bad. You know what is bad? Pandering is. Being a lazy designer at the cost of catching a wider audience is.
A bounty hunter who runs over rugged terrain does not need stripper boots, she needs something with treads and function that can *gasp* still be sexy. I can picture a hybrid boot design that is feminine but rugged, functional but badass.
You know what conveys things like “boosters” and “power” and “high jump”? Springs, coils, energy cells, treads, jets… you don’t have to be literal but you also might want to show, not tell, what a prop does.
High-Jump Stripper Boots! by stephlaberis
Very important quote from this article regarding Samus’s high heels, but it applies to character and costume design in general.
~Ozzie
I don’t think that costume, that a female character deliberately wears into battle and dangerous situations, provides enough protection to qualify as armor…
You know who you are
– wincenworks
Am I the only one who’s getting sick of the excuse of “That’s how the artists want to draw, so stop telling them what to do!” excuse when it comes to terrible bikini battle armour? It’s like these people expect all designs to be nothing down to personal preference, and yet never think about the bigger picture of just how many male artists are part of our culture that influence these decisions? Seriously, it’s a poor execuse and I’m sick of hearing ut.
We’re definitely with you there, friend! That’s why there’s the “art shouldn’t be censored!” rhetoric bingo square: cause “creative freedom” should not be a Get Out of Jail Free card of character design.
As femfreq puts it:
Yup, it’s all about the big picture of our media, not individual examples. Crying “artistic freedom” (or “stylization”, for that matter) to justify questionable design ignores seeking for the reason artist decided to make such choices.
Publishing this ask cause those points need to be iterated more.
~Ozzie
The other important thing that people should remember is that commercial art (such as covers, character designs, 3d models in games, etc) is not intended to be a purely artistic experience – it’s a product for consumption.
Artists will have to follow briefs that tell them kind of mood to give the work, what characters to put in it, what themes to put in – unlikely that an art director adding “Don’t put the female characters in ridiculous and hyper-sexualized costumes” would somehow break a professional artist’s will to create.
– wincenworks
Fetishizing ‘power’ in women characters – having them kicking ass and always being ready with a putdown – isn’t the same as writing them as human beings.
Jack Graham, in Stephen Moffat – A Case For The Prosecution, a guest post on Philip Sandifer’s blog (via linnealurks)
Not exactly BABD’s subject matter (costume design), but very much related. You can’t cry “But this character’s personality makes her WANT to be sexy and badass at the same time!” when being sexy and kicking ass are literally the only two things she’s designed around.
~Ozzie
Why I was never really sold on Bayonetta.
– wincenworks
Funcom’s “Mankini-Gate” double standard
pkudude99 submitted:
An interesting article over at Massively about the recent “Mankini” April Fool’s joke that Funcom put in, but then their upper management pulled: http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/04/10/chaos-theory-funcom-flubbed-it-with-the-secret-worlds-mankinig/
I think it was stupid of their management to do it, as does the article author. Why is this allowed for a woman:
But not this for a man:
There actually is a male version of that Egyptian outfit that shows quite a bit of skin too, but nothing like it does for the female version,but there are plenty of female-only outfits that are very scanty too. The worst of the lot is this one:
That’s why the April Fool’s joke worked so well — Funcom was poking fun at their own propensity for the double-standard. And that’s why I’m so upset with their management’s decision to pull the mankini outfit.
For grins, here’s a shot a blogger friend of mine took before they got yanked:
You’ll note the 3rd male in the shot is wearing a traditional speedo, and that’s been left in the game. I don’t see that it exposes any less skin than the mankini. I just don’t get it.
Well I suppose it was too much to hope that every executive in gaming would be as cool as Mark Long.
But really, after people have laughed and supported the joke is not the time to shut it down and try to pretend that it never happened.
Especially since the whole point of a mankini is that you can never unsee it.
– wincenworks
Apparently fans speculated it to be a copyright issue (but it’s highly unlikely)… Maybe Funcom wanted to be safe than sorry for not asking 20th Century Fox about official Borat licensing or something? ;P
~Ozzie
DM: Your arrow glances off her armor.
PC: What armor? This is a ‘medieval fantasy game’, her armor couldn’t possibly be more than a bikini!
DM: NOT WHEN I DM IT ISN’T
This happened shortly after this post: http://d4rke57mund.tumblr.com/post/54151497545/what-part-of-medieval-fantasy-role-playing-game
Dungeon Masters against ridiculous battle bikinis unite!
We have nothing to lose but the ridiculous battle bikinis!
– wincenworks
Zero Suit Samus’ Heels: Why it’s a Big Deal and Why You Should Care
So the thing I keep hearing is that Samus’s new Zero Suit design from SSB4 is okay because “they’re not actually high heels, they’re jet boots.”
Bullshit.
But before we get into that: why is it a big deal that Samus is wearing heels in the first place?
Great article regarding character and costume design of Samus Aran throughout the years. Things to learn from it:
- why slapping “jet boots” label on high heels doesn’t justify the heels
- what Samus’s appearance conveyed in the old Metroid games and what it does now
- why is Zero Suit worse than a two-piece skin revealing costume Samus used to have
- how the recent games betrayed Zero Suit’s original purpose
I highly recommend reading it whole!
~Ozzie
In addition, Shattered Earth did a great breakdown on the “Jet Boots” (Dr Evil air quotes there) and explored what they might have looked like if they were designed with purpose here.
– wincenworks
Repeat after me, kids:
There is no reason to design jet shoes as 4-inch heels.
There is no reason to design jet shoes as 4-inch heels.
There is no reason to design jet shoes as 4-inch heels.
- There is NO REASON to design jet shoes as 4-inch heels.
-
THERE IS NO REASON TO DESIGN JET SHOES AS 4-INCH HEELS.
Think for a moment before you jump in to argue that the heels are justified with the fire launchers inside.
Cause you’re making yourself look silly. Sillier than a 6’3’’ space bounty hunter running around in sky-high heels; and that’s saying something.
Those shoes could literally look like whatever and still serve the same function for the gameplay!
Also: their color scheme clashes awfully with the rest of zero suit.
~Ozzie
Also, briefly, let’s consider the visual language of the Metroid franchise and particularly the character Samus prior to the ugly heels event.
This is a jetpack (x):
These are space jump boots (x):
This is a missile attack (x):
These are the “Jet boots” (x):
One of these things is not like the other,
One of these things just doesn’t belong!
– wincenworks
edit: a reader left some commentary worth sharing:
sianea replied to your post: Repeat after me, kids:
Not to mention that those ain’t even boots, it looks like just attached heels. There’s nothing there that suggests to me that those are full shoes and not just some bits strapped onto her suit like some sort of bizarre addition.