Exposure on Inquest Exo-Suit Outfit

[EdgarMTanaka.7291]

What annoyes me is that OP is posting a picture of his character in only her underwear. I would be pretty pissed of if someone posted a picture of me in my underwear boxers... I would be okay if someone posted a picture of me in my bathing clothes though.

[EpicName.4523]

Thank you OP! This ridiculous post made my day. I see there are wayyy bigger nerds than me!

[TWMagimay.9057]

> @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > @"TWMagimay.9057" said:

> > > @"Shikigami.4013" said:

> > > OP never said it was a "problem", only stated that he does not like it. That is what a discussion forum is for, stating your opinion, asking for other opinions, discuss.

> > > Also, the word "indecent" does not seem to refer to his own standards of decency, but to what he percieves as the game lore standard for Asura decency.

> > > Stop jumping on every little negative thing any person says, behave like adults and discuss in a discussion forum, instead of just trampling on other's opinions.

> > >

> > > Most thought out posts imo are by TWMagimay.9057, the swimsuit look of Asura underwear might indeed have just other historical/cultural reasons than everything that they cover being a taboo. Still, calling it "clickbait" in case he cannot prove the lore standard for Asuran indecency was inappropriate.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > He didn't just fail to prove a lore standard, he admitted he never had one to begin with. The phrase "indecent exposure" has a very clear meaning and the costume does not meet the requirements in any way, shape or form. Thus the title does not reflect the content of the topic and has a purposefully misleading phrase with strong (negative) connotations. What would you call it if not "clickbait"? Or was an exposed belly exactly what you expected to see when you clicked on this topic?

>

> Nonsense. His assumption is based on Asura underwear covering way more than other race's and he said so. And I expected a post about indecent exposure, which it is. The title says nothing about what standards the indecency is based on so if YOU expected more than the post, you assumed too much, nothing more to it.

> His assumption may be wrong, that still doesn't make this clickbait though.

 

Their choice in underwear is not a lore standard as there is no modesty reason given for it. As I've already said, there can be multiple reasons as to why they wear that instead of a bra(lol). Looking at the way this topic is going, I'd say I wasn't the only one expecting something different, like, say, a weird glitch or some odd clipping issue and not a " OMG, I can see parts of a belly, won't somebody think of the children?" post. What's more, for this to be considered " indecent exposure" there needs to be a standard set by which it is. Both you and OP have , so far, failed to provide one. Does that mean I can make a "GW2 supports botting" post and have screenshots of people who keep their chars at node farms? I mean, I don't need any sort of standard, just a flamboyant claim and you'll rush to explain how it's totally legit and not at all clickbait since that is my standard for botting and there's no need for anything to even remotely back-up my claim.

[Zedek.8932]

To be honest - while I think it looks a bit odd - it's actually quite fitting.

The design of the Asuran cultur and buildings often have this "nothing visible but still there's something" sort of thing going on, which implies technology in my eyes.

 

For example the steps and walkways are often just projections, but you can walk on it. Stones? Tiles? Nah, that's for Bookah. We Asura are so awesome, we don't even need full armor, becasue we can have protective clothes without actually having one. Some - I just talk out of my brain there and solely from the looks - highly developed Asuran protective energy field protects your body without any fabric or metal. That's innovation and future, because you can move easier. Probably not suitable for bigger areas, but... well, I just put a random thought into it. My Sneakthief Set for example has, judged from the looks, tempered chest plates/hardened leather to protect the torso. That's oldschool way of protective wear compared to that outfit.

 

Also, I kinda like the OPs Asura. The glasses fit her pretty well.

 

Excelsior.

[Biff.5312]

> @"Fat Disgrace.4275" said:

> What? Is that what all of the fuss is about? :s

 

90% of the 'fuss' is people bellowing that there is no issue. The OP was just expressing an opinion about an 'odd' design choice. It's people over-reacting who've made it a 'fuss'.

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> A lot of hostile responses for a non-provocative opinion piece. :P For those of you who are levelheaded enough to entertain a response, here's mine:

>

> If you compare the Inquest exo-suit to other asura female outfits (not counting the Halloween one that is anatomically incorrect for females) this one is the only outlier. From what I understand about asuran anatomy, this outfit doesn't make much sense assuming that they have modesty taboos around full-frontal chest exposure. Unlike human anatomy, the parts that asura would be concerned about are not just on the upper torso but all the way down to the midriff. This is why you see asura females wearing underwear that looks like a one-piece swimsuit unlike all of the other races. Charr females wear a simpler covering for their own midriff, but even their cloth cover is low enough to cover all of their relevant anatomy. On humans, midriff is fine. On other sentient species where their midriff contains anatomy that humans don't have—parts that they might have their own moral taboos around showing—this outfit might indeed, for their cultures, contain "indecent exposure."

 

I can understand this reasoning but would counter that nipples are not equivalent to breasts when discussing modesty of dress. Sure, Asura females may wear underwear that covers that location but we cannot attribute this to human females covering their breasts. For all we know, they cover that area more for an extra layer of protection from harmful radiation exposure in their labs. Males might want to protect the area that houses their sperm while the female may do so for their entire internal reproductive area.

[Athrenn.9468]

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > A lot of hostile responses for a non-provocative opinion piece. :P For those of you who are levelheaded enough to entertain a response, here's mine:

> >

> > If you compare the Inquest exo-suit to other asura female outfits (not counting the Halloween one that is anatomically incorrect for females) this one is the only outlier. From what I understand about asuran anatomy, this outfit doesn't make much sense assuming that they have modesty taboos around full-frontal chest exposure. Unlike human anatomy, the parts that asura would be concerned about are not just on the upper torso but all the way down to the midriff. This is why you see asura females wearing underwear that looks like a one-piece swimsuit unlike all of the other races. Charr females wear a simpler covering for their own midriff, but even their cloth cover is low enough to cover all of their relevant anatomy. On humans, midriff is fine. On other sentient species where their midriff contains anatomy that humans don't have—parts that they might have their own moral taboos around showing—this outfit might indeed, for their cultures, contain "indecent exposure."

>

> I can understand this reasoning but would counter that kitten are not equivalent to breasts when discussing modesty of dress. Sure, Asura females may wear underwear that covers that location but we cannot attribute this to human females covering their breasts. For all we know, they cover that area more for an extra layer of protection from harmful radiation exposure in their labs. Males might want to protect the area that houses their kitten while the female may do so for their entire internal reproductive area.

 

I'd say that's a fair argument. If the asura wore specially made undergarments to protect their reproductive areas from harmful radiation then you could argue that a force shield could fill the same role, thus removing the need for anything underneath. Even so, I also think that Eric Flannum's quote (which I copied into the OP) does show that they have parts which they might prefer to cover up for reasons besides protection. While we don't have any examples of what asura female modesty standards are in explicit terms, we do know that other species have their own unique standards:

 

From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

_Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

 

If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

> _Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

>

> If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

 

I don't follow.

 

The way I read that, the female Charr likely felt more relaxed in armor than casual clothes seemed to allude to preferring battle attire to lose clothing rather than feeling exposed. Kind of like being a workaholic at a beach feeling uncomfortable having excess free time, not at the prospect of wearing a swimsuit.

[Athrenn.9468]

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

> > _Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

> >

> > If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

>

> I don't follow.

>

> The way I read that, the female Charr likely felt more relaxed in armor than casual clothes seemed to allude to preferring battle attire to lose clothing rather than feeling exposed. Kind of like being a workaholic at a beach feeling uncomfortable having excess free time, not at the prospect of wearing a swimsuit.

 

The leather/rope clothing is what I was referring to. To Ember Doomforge the charr, the leather/rope 'harness' is what she feels comfortable wearing as opposed to going completely exposed. Dougal the human assumes that the charr must consider such an outfit as 'modest' whereas, on a human, the amount of exposure would be scandalous. What I was trying to convey is that we do have examples of how other species in the Guild Wars universe have different standards of modesty from humans, but standards nonetheless.

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > > @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > > From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

> > > _Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

> > >

> > > If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

> >

> > I don't follow.

> >

> > The way I read that, the female Charr likely felt more relaxed in armor than casual clothes seemed to allude to preferring battle attire to lose clothing rather than feeling exposed. Kind of like being a workaholic at a beach feeling uncomfortable having excess free time, not at the prospect of wearing a swimsuit.

>

> The leather/rope clothing is what I was referring to. To Ember Doomforge the charr, the leather/rope 'harness' is what she feels comfortable wearing as opposed to going completely exposed. Dougal the human assumes that the charr must consider such an outfit as 'modest' whereas, on a human, the amount of exposure would be scandalous. What I was trying to convey is that we do have examples of how other species in the Guild Wars universe have different standards of modesty from humans, but standards nonetheless.

 

I suppose it depends how you read it, then. I still do not see it that way. Unless we heard what her reasoning was, her wearing anything could be something other than modesty. It could have been out of politeness as having nothing on may make humans around her uncomfortable, or simply that the act of wearing nothing could be a social cue to express willingness to mate (as their scent would may give biological cues but not actual consent).

 

Even in human society, modesty of attire is subject to the environment. So far, I've only read athropomorphized reasons why this consideration would exist for these races. It would be much easier to solidify the argument if shame or modesty was solidly expressed, otherwise we're still speculating here.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > > @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > > A lot of hostile responses for a non-provocative opinion piece. :P For those of you who are levelheaded enough to entertain a response, here's mine:

> > >

> > > If you compare the Inquest exo-suit to other asura female outfits (not counting the Halloween one that is anatomically incorrect for females) this one is the only outlier. From what I understand about asuran anatomy, this outfit doesn't make much sense assuming that they have modesty taboos around full-frontal chest exposure. Unlike human anatomy, the parts that asura would be concerned about are not just on the upper torso but all the way down to the midriff. This is why you see asura females wearing underwear that looks like a one-piece swimsuit unlike all of the other races. Charr females wear a simpler covering for their own midriff, but even their cloth cover is low enough to cover all of their relevant anatomy. On humans, midriff is fine. On other sentient species where their midriff contains anatomy that humans don't have—parts that they might have their own moral taboos around showing—this outfit might indeed, for their cultures, contain "indecent exposure."

> >

> > I can understand this reasoning but would counter that kitten are not equivalent to breasts when discussing modesty of dress. Sure, Asura females may wear underwear that covers that location but we cannot attribute this to human females covering their breasts. For all we know, they cover that area more for an extra layer of protection from harmful radiation exposure in their labs. Males might want to protect the area that houses their kitten while the female may do so for their entire internal reproductive area.

>

> I'd say that's a fair argument. If the asura wore specially made undergarments to protect their reproductive areas from harmful radiation then you could argue that a force shield could fill the same role, thus removing the need for anything underneath. Even so, I also think that Eric Flannum's quote (which I copied into the OP) does show that they have parts which they might prefer to cover up for reasons besides protection. While we don't have any examples of what asura female modesty standards are in explicit terms, we do know that other species have their own unique standards:

>

> From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

> _Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

>

> If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

 

That's great and all, so, can you provide something lore-centric to demonstrate that this is actually indecent exposure for Asura? Because until I see something canon that states that it is, I'm going to continue to have flashbacks to the BSN, and what happened to Mass Effect Andromeda due to all the "offended" people. Believe, the conspiracy theories on youtube don't even come close to covering the absolute shitstorm that was the BSN about any bit of exposed skin, in some cases, even the face.

 

I'll never get over the "trauma" of reading all about how primitive cultures all wore full plate mail into battle, according to the BSN, mind you, because we all know there were no wars fought until after full plate was invented, right? Some people will never be happy until you can barely see the eyes on characters in video games, and posts like the one that opened this thread are the start down a long, scary road of "you can't wear anything on your toon that I deem inappropriate". Seriously, it was that bad even on the swtor forums for a while, and, ironically enough, the armor for an Assassin tank was essentially a bath robe. Seriously, they tank in light armor, so tell me, how much more protection is a piece of cotton compared to a bare midriff?

 

Anyway, I digress, do you have anything from the canon lore that supports the OP's claim of "indecent exposure", or is this thread supposed to be dismissed as pure hyperbole from someone that's offended by seeing a small amount of skin that is, ironically, probably better protected in the outfit they're complaining about than in their usual robes?

 

[Biff.5312]

Now that I've seen the outfit I can't imagine why anyone would want it anyway. It looks way too sci-fi for the setting we play in. Like something out of Buck Rogers.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > > @"Athrenn.9468" said:

> > > A lot of hostile responses for a non-provocative opinion piece. :P For those of you who are levelheaded enough to entertain a response, here's mine:

> > >

> > > If you compare the Inquest exo-suit to other asura female outfits (not counting the Halloween one that is anatomically incorrect for females) this one is the only outlier. From what I understand about asuran anatomy, this outfit doesn't make much sense assuming that they have modesty taboos around full-frontal chest exposure. Unlike human anatomy, the parts that asura would be concerned about are not just on the upper torso but all the way down to the midriff. This is why you see asura females wearing underwear that looks like a one-piece swimsuit unlike all of the other races. Charr females wear a simpler covering for their own midriff, but even their cloth cover is low enough to cover all of their relevant anatomy. On humans, midriff is fine. On other sentient species where their midriff contains anatomy that humans don't have—parts that they might have their own moral taboos around showing—this outfit might indeed, for their cultures, contain "indecent exposure."

> >

> > I can understand this reasoning but would counter that kitten are not equivalent to breasts when discussing modesty of dress. Sure, Asura females may wear underwear that covers that location but we cannot attribute this to human females covering their breasts. For all we know, they cover that area more for an extra layer of protection from harmful radiation exposure in their labs. Males might want to protect the area that houses their kitten while the female may do so for their entire internal reproductive area.

>

> I'd say that's a fair argument. If the asura wore specially made undergarments to protect their reproductive areas from harmful radiation then you could argue that a force shield could fill the same role, thus removing the need for anything underneath. Even so, I also think that Eric Flannum's quote (which I copied into the OP) does show that they have parts which they might prefer to cover up for reasons besides protection. While we don't have any examples of what asura female modesty standards are in explicit terms, we do know that other species have their own unique standards:

>

> From the novel, Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon (pp. 127-128):

> _Doomforge moved into the room and cast her eye over the ruins of the meal. She had taken off her armor and now wore just a set of simple rope and leather clothes that Dougal could only describe as a harness. Dougal supposed that with all her fur she didn’t need clothes for warmth, only charr standards of modesty. It covered just enough of her to manage that, although on a human it would have been considered scandalous. Despite her casual attire, she seemed far less relaxed than she had been in her armor._

>

> If charr females have modesty taboos around what is considered 'too much' exposure despite their natural layer of fur then it's not a huge logical stretch to say that asura might have their own undefined standards—undefined to us because they have yet to be revealed, not to the asura who are aware of their own culture.

 

If it is available in game and Asura can equip it, it is by definition available to the Asura by lore. If some Asurans wear it without modesty... well then you have an example of an Asuran female with no modesty.