Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 150

Thread: Why female soldiers

  1. #101
    EEEEeeek!

    But yeah, as long as they're tastefully put in the game, and frown and scowl just like their male brethren, I'd love for female soldiers to be put in the game.

  2. #102
    Moderator Gauddlike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    5,593
    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkZombie View Post
    I assume you are refering to the recent Hollywood version of U571.
    I'm sure there are plenty of movies around with edited history so it doesn't get in the way of a good story.
    No matter which country they are made in, just most aren't so blatant or about such well known events
    Devil's Advocate and forum moderator

  3. #103
    Squaddie poulwrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    77
    Have to agree with Moonshine Fox. Political correctness, screw that.

  4. #104

    political correctness

    Quote Originally Posted by Jean-Luc View Post
    I don't think anyone even mentioned that reason.
    No need to mention that, is there? It is quite obvious the only possible reason as it doesn't make sense in that 70s setting except in some very exotic cases. Furthermore, from what I read about creating new models in 2D, it's a massive amount of extra work for zero tangible benefit.

    Then again this is apparently a moot point as female models will make it into the final game after a public vote in which they scored worse than many other options. The 'winners' of said vote get to be stretch goals with sometimes ridiculous price tags. So although being set in an old fashioned scenario, the game already has some very modern quotas, it seems.

  5. #105
    Moderator Gauddlike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    5,593
    Actually that isn't quite correct.
    Female soldiers won't make it into the game in the way they were originally put forward.
    That is still too expensive to do unless other features were to be cut.
    Instead they will appear in a limited (and cheaper) way by sharing ground sprites (which are the expensive bit) with male soldiers.
    The idea being that the armour is so bulky anyway that the differences would be difficult to spot at the scale the game runs at.
    Doing it this way means that the cost is significantly reduced and should cause no conflict with other features.
    Feedback from this forum was generally that they (and I) were not in favour of female soldiers taking money away from other features due to the costs of spritesheet generation, but they were generally in favour if it could be done with less expense.
    Goldhawk decided that they could do that and have gone for it.

    The vote you refer to was not to decide what should be core features of the game but what should be taken from the 'nice to have if money allows' pile and used as stretch goals to mark funding milestones.
    They do not "get to be stretch goals" despite the vote as you suggest.
    The 'price tags' used are also not precise costs for each feature, they are milestones that give a bonus when reached.
    Devil's Advocate and forum moderator

  6. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by Gauddlike View Post
    Actually that isn't quite correct.
    Female soldiers won't make it into the game in the way they were originally put forward.
    That is still too expensive to do unless other features were to be cut.
    Instead they will appear in a limited (and cheaper) way by sharing ground sprites (which are the expensive bit) with male soldiers.
    The idea being that the armour is so bulky anyway that the differences would be difficult to spot at the scale the game runs at.
    Doing it this way means that the cost is significantly reduced and should cause no conflict with other features.
    Feedback from this forum was generally that they (and I) were not in favour of female soldiers taking money away from other features due to the costs of spritesheet generation, but they were generally in favour if it could be done with less expense.
    Goldhawk decided that they could do that and have gone for it.

    The vote you refer to was not to decide what should be core features of the game but what should be taken from the 'nice to have if money allows' pile and used as stretch goals to mark funding milestones.
    They do not "get to be stretch goals" despite the vote as you suggest.
    The 'price tags' used are also not precise costs for each feature, they are milestones that give a bonus when reached.
    Well, if this female 'light' version is really only a bunch of pictures I don't mind that much. Aside from the basic uniform you're probably right about there not being much of a difference in the way they look. We'll have to see about that.

    As for that vote: That's semantics, isn't it? There was a vote about some optional stuff being included, money permitting. Female models among them, as well as indoor missions. They were all nice to have but once it was decided to include someting, it was basically a core feature. Only suddenly one 'nice to have' feature gets promoted ahead of all the others despite getting less votes, therefore being in the core game no matter how much money the kickstarter would raise. It even says so in the kickstarter notes.
    Now, if this is achieved by only a couple of pictures then it isn't much of an issue, but still the point remains.
    Female soldiers are in despite the majority of people want something different while the options that more people voted for have to be bought via kickstarter.

    Also Yes, I realize that the cost of those stretchgoals are probably not the exact monetary costs of implementing the according feature. But in the end there should be some semblance between the reached goals and the included features.

  7. #107
    Captain oracle1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    280

    Spoiler

    This will show the development of the armour fra Basic armour to the Colossus. The graphics is reduced to in game size.

    This is a real spoiler - if you do not want to spoil the surprise for when the game is released do NOT open the spoiler.

    This is pictures from the game that has been removed from the early (version 8) of the game.



    Again - this is not a joke spoiler (as the one in off-topic) - do not open if you prefer to wait!

  8. #108
    Moderator Gauddlike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    5,593
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonatus View Post
    As for that vote: That's semantics, isn't it?
    No I don't believe it is.
    I think that the female soldiers were voted much lower because of the view that they would cost so much that other, more attractive, features would be left out.
    Once that objection was removed then it was moved from the nice to have list to being a workable feature.

    The point was that the feedback on the female soldiers made the team aware WHY people hadn't voted for it and also that the majority of people who were discussing it were either for it because it should be there or against it because of cost.
    The balance between those was to try and introduce it for minimal cost.

    That is the point in 'nice to have if costs permit'.
    Costs did permit so it made it in, not in the original expensive form (which was the reason it wasn't already in) but in a less expensive one.
    If someone could come up with an inexpensive way to add one of the higher goals then they would also more than likely make it as well.

    A nice to have feature that costs next to nothing is far more likely to be in than a more popular one that costs way more.
    Devil's Advocate and forum moderator

  9. #109
    Commander TrashMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    1,276
    Meh...I'm not missing them. Fits with the game settings (1970). Heck, even today you won't be finding many women at the front lines, it's mostly support roles.
    And you won't find them AT ALL in Spec Ops units (which is what xenonauts are). And I suspect you never will given the redicolously high selection criteria.

  10. #110
    WishfullThinker Gorlom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,074
    Quote Originally Posted by TrashMan View Post
    Meh...I'm not missing them. Fits with the game settings (1970). Heck, even today you won't be finding many women at the front lines, it's mostly support roles.
    And you won't find them AT ALL in Spec Ops units (which is what xenonauts are). And I suspect you never will given the redicolously high selection criteria.
    But.. but... Hollywood taught me differently!



Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •