For fans of C&C, BFME and Dune games, plus every game using one of the universes as its battleground.
I dreamt to check Archer Maiden ;) I've found that she's wearing not sexy panties, but her appearance recompensates bad underwear :P
Using Red Alert 3 Uprising Sample Arts ;)
lol xD
But why dont you just render the image?
How is this sexism? You want them to put a man in boxers too?
It is a woman
I want to show why EA did a mistake using such units
O.o
WTF? What sexism? They introduce a woman into a game, and they are sexists?
Maybe you'd like to forbid women to come to beach, too... or forbid men to let 'em.
It's not the presence of women; it's the lack of presence of clothes! They put a female infantry in, awesome. But she's blatantly sexualized! It's a real step back from the positive step they took with female artillery and air force pilots.
With commandos, it's not such a big deal; commandos are very explicitly living pin-up girls, and fit the atmosphere of the game. But the fact that regular infantry are treated in this way is... well, it's a little off-putting.
As I said... forbid women to come to beach. They "lack clothes" there, too.
Also, have you seen how Amazons are pictured? Why are you angered when EALA presents women such, but not when EVERYBODY ELSE does it?
Just look at Diablo II and an amazon there. You'll see. And not only there.
But of course, BLIZZARD isn't sexist. Of course!
I'm a pro-feminist. I'm upset when ANYBODY does this. I take steps to subvert and avoid it in my own work.
Also, there is a big difference between the a stroll on the beach and a combat situation. Soldiers wear thick, full-body fatigues and as much armour and webbing as they do for a reason. On the beach, if a woman wants to turn some heads she can totally wear some scandalous swimwear. However, I have a feeling the average female soldier is going to opt for protection over, you know, having her whatnot hanging out.
In other words, why aren't peacekeepers in their boxers? Answer that question, then mirror the same reasoning onto the Archer Maiden and see why it's so insane.
Feillyne: Are you an idiot? THIS IS WAR, there is no reason a female combatant should be unclothed or unarmored. To be fair though, Japs are perverts so I guess you can say in-universe Jap women are indoctrinated to live with the role of being oggled at. I mean, they field a psychic schoolgirl retaining her school uniform, and no, not because Yuriko insists wearing it, but as shown in the campaign they make thousands of Yurikos in a facility that manufactures thousands of the same uniforms too.
And Blizzard is silly too, the fact that you used another ******* to justify another idiot represents your lack of intelligence. That's like Charles Manson saying he shouldn't be persecuted because Hitler did it way more.
Wow, necroing a discussion from 2010. Congratulations. You will pay karmically for your insults anyway, just we all do, Japs are not the only pervs in the world, we always should look at our own mirrors before judging anyone. And if you still do judge, that means you haven't really looked there. And pff. "Your lack of intelligence" when you talk about someone eight years younger, barely past his teenage years. This is so rich and grand... (Nah, not even feeling insulted, but it's really funny!)
Pretending to be intelligent is one of the biggest jokes in the universe by the by. You cannot be omniscient and truly objective, and sadly, true, "perfect" intelligence would require total omniscience. To never be wrong is a perfectionist's pipe dream, and to be in total agreement with others is a conformist's mantra. Neither has much to do with intelligence. Intelligent people can very often disagree but still understand each other's views, that's all this is about.
Both men and women seem to be to blame for sex-ualisation and sex-imisation of women. It's sad. It always has been...
Mega Wrong
oh i get it! they're sexist because they make women wear underwear /sarcasm
WTF is sexist about this? because SHE is wearing WOMEN's underwear it makes EA sexist? well if thats true then your racist against the country of Africa...
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
He knows. A lack of armour can help people move. Armour shields, but also makes you a turtle and a sitting duck, easy to shoot or catch up with.
So it can be done both for an effect, and to benefit a warrior, which should be only partially armoured (somewhat protected, but moderately mobile).
Sure, but wouldn't a better armour selection be across the whole torso in overlapping sections, leaving the arms and legs free for maximum mobility? This armour is not going to protect you and will likely slow you down, because it doesn't cover ANYTHING vital, interferes with the movement of your shoulders, and adds a lot of weight to your legs.
Also, this is the Empire of the Rising Sun. They can make mecha, but not lightwieght mobile infantry armour?
Yeah, I see, this armour doesn't cover throat, doesn't cover hands to carry weapons or certainly NOT THE HEAD.
To be sincere to the very end, every part of the human body is vital... either to carry a weapon or to move or to keep the body weight in balance... but the most important part is the head, nevertheless.
So, do you see the head unprotected?
Wow. What a troll who rated down this comment. Look at the picture. Throat, hands, and the HEAD are all covered.
But every body part is vital, nevertheless.
And to your knowledge: I voted UP sketchbook's comments. So. Trolls are trolls, and I STAND FOR THE TRUTH, despite what you give me.
Red Alert 3 should be quite serious warfare game since 'candy' graphics. Half-naked women and war - it is a contrast.
But it is my opinion and you don't have to agree it ;) Why Rocket Angels have advanced armor but other infantry not? What is a suit what protects only <=20% of body?
In japan Less armor = More protection...
lol, that's right. following text is taken from "Rules of the Anime" article at ED (edited for safe reading):
take attention for Indecent Invulnerability rule.
O.o
You really mean:
"RA3 should be serious b/c it has cartoony graphics"
?
No, RA3 IS and SHOULD (RA1/RA2 tradition of more colours) be cartoony and humorous.
Not serious.
That's why she fits in the picture.
It's a more mobile armour.
eh, looks nice.
is this also the reason that javelin only wears jeans and undershirt while fighting tanks? :P
+ a helmet
This is mostly to open_sketchbook...
Okay look, if this were a high poly model I might agree with the pro-feminism rant you've so carelessly spiraled into, but I think you're missing the point.
The features of the character are over exaggerated and the armor is designed as such to tell that it is clearly female, not to extort the female figure as an form of sexual objectivity.
The model itself would be very tiny on screen and without a clearly recognizable silhouette the character may be mistaken as male or genderless. This is not good whenever a person is trying to tell a story. If their character cannot clearly identify with the player, then that person has failed as an artist.
Now even though your motives for argument might be different than mine, I can still agree with you on some points.
The overall design of the character needs work. There are some areas that could have been compensated for the sake of "gender fairness" and not so blatantly distinguished as blurry lingerie.
The fact of the matter is, "Don't make the game realistic; just make it believable."
So what is so difficult in making a full plated armour that gives her a female shape? (which is BS btw since a 'female' shape would have weakpoints, exactly THERE where it's ironic)
Seriously, a body as exposed as hers would be a good target practice for a Peacekeeper's shotgun, nothing else. Look at the picture again: her belly, and thus her vital organs too, are EXPOSED. No sane person would go with that into battle.
you are right, she got (heavy) armour on her legs but here stomach is completly unptrotected. The leg armour slows her down and a single buckshot will still rip out her guts