The Extent of the Skimpy Armor Effect in GW2

Let's face it, the objectification of women in video games is not going to end tomorrow. Perhaps it will never end. As long as there is an audience for scantily clad females, there will be scantily clad females.

 [Why? Boobs. That's why.] 

Now, I'm not promoting the complete eradication of anything that anyone finds to be objectifying women (or men). What I have a problem with is people outright denying the prevalence of objectified women (compared to men) in video games and geek culture in general, or that is a problem.

This has been a heatedly debated topic recently, especially in regard to Guild Wars 2, and whether it will follow the same tried formula to attract potential male players and possibly alienate female players, as Guild Wars 1 did to some extent. (Miku in Winds of Change? Her top is basically a bra over a fishnet vest.)

I did a very informal statistical analysis just recently, comparing male and female armors in the concept art that has been shown, as well as what's included in the Assets Kit. While skimpiness of armor did not end up being completely independent from the gender of (human/norn) characters, I do not think we have cause to worry yet, for two reasons:

1. Guild Wars 2, as the developers have said, is about having choice. People should have the option of having fully armored characters... and, well, not very well protected characters. Despite more skimpy armor for females, there is an abundance of armor sets for both genders which cover a reasonable amount of skin.

[Like this one... wait... ok maybe not this one...]

2. Guild Wars 2 isn't finished yet. We really don't have any caused to worry that in the final game everyone will be running around in bikinis! (Though some people would love that, I suppose.)

As you see, while there may be cause for well-intentioned concern, there's nothing to rage over... yet. (Not until they add an option for completely topless females, anyway). But there is something I, and probably others, find irksome that has to do with the differences between male and female armor.

When for the exact same set, the female version shows much more skin than the male or is excessively feminized, then I start feeling annoyed. Take it with a grain of salt, since I'm judging mostly from concept art, but these sets right here show exactly what I'm talking about:

[From the Guild Wars 2 Wiki]

Notice how, for all the changed armors, the change gives maximum attention to a certain part of the female anatomy? How disappointing would it be to see this awesome set of armor on a male character with this long coat and fluffy mantelet, only to find that the female version looks like it just stepped out of a stripper's wardrobe?

In my opinion, the armors I've linked to above should just become two separate sets, one with reasonable amount of exposed skin, the other less dressed, for those who prefer it. (Let the males show some skin too!)

I have one last extremely serious proposal, since I've been neglecting opponents of skimpy armor. Have the defense capability of the armor reflect how much skin is covered. Next time you see a bimbo in a bikini in PvP? You know what to do.

[Guess who's not winning this round?]

Why Guild Wars 1 should have been a single-player RPG

After getting GW: Factions, ragequitting because I was a n00b, getting back into GW1 because of GW2, and acquiring Prophecies and Nightfall, I have made the inevitable conclusion that Guild Wars would have been better as a single-player game. (Or at least, the PvE part of it. I've never ventured into GW1 PvP, nor do I ever intend to...)

[not pictured: multiple players]

The initial issue I had with Factions was that it was simply too hard for a n00b like me. By the time I joined Factions, it had been out for a while, and there wasn't an abundance of people. I had no time to be dedicated to a guild, and was an anti-social dumbass who couldn't find herself a party if her life depended on it. Unfortunately, I also wasn't skilled enough to solo the party with henchies. I ended up slowly losing interest, basically ragequitting. Gradually.

If Guild Wars had been a single-player game with, however, it would have been designed as such, with the difficulty scaling accordingly, and it would have been easy to implement an easy mode for people who generally suck at gaming but still want to play.

Now that I've gone back to playing GW, mainly to have some lore background for GW2, I realize that I don't even need to interact with other players at all. The missions, especially with heroes in Nightfall, are generally soloable, and it's great fun to explore Pre-Searing Ascalon by oneself. (I now actually understand what people mean when they refer to Pre-Searing Ascalon!)

[Pre-Searing Ascalon at its finest]

Well, now we've covered why GW1 could have been a single-player game... but how about why it should have been?

Y'see, most people have this false notion that Guild Wars 2 is going to be just like Guild Wars 1, because they think that Guild Wars 1 was an MMORPG, despite Arenanet having called it a CORPG. This is because GW1, while not officially an MMO, certainly made an impression on many people as a backwards, maze-like MMO of completely instanced, closed-off areas. Many people will not initially be able to get over that, because people in general hate change :D

If Guild Wars was a single-player RPG? Well, it would just be like adding an MMO to a well-established franchise such as Final Fantasy (eer... except not since the FF MMOs kind of sucked... but you get the point). It would be a clear change in genre, and people would realize "oh, it's an MMO now, so we can throw away preconceptions ingrained in us from the first game, because it's a totally different genre now." It's all in the mindset. 

Obviously, Guild Wars isn't and never will be a single-player RPG, but the prospect remains interesting. Will GW's reputation damage that of GW2? Will it have any impact on how GW2 is marketed or received? Only time will tell.