Female armor in video games

[Ilosar]

I think ME3 will improve on that aspect, actually. Liara is not supposed to wear heavy combat armor since she isin't a soldier at all and can protect herself with biotics, plus that armor outfit isin't that revealing. Jack at least gets a shirt, and Ashley can wear armor (albeit people are still complaining, but well, BSN). I hope Miranda doesn't come back in space bulletproof skin-tight spandex, however. Bioware in general is pretty good about this, if armor is revealing it is so for both gender (like the leather in Origins)

And I of course agree with the article. While gender differenciation is important in art, some are just taking it way too damn far. Skyrim is actually pretty good about this, most armor covers the body and is only different at the chest level for obvious reasons, and even the revealing female armor is equally as revealing for males. Unlike most JRPGs, Fire Emblem is also generally good at this too. Armor is rather form-fitting in general but the women supposed to fight at the front lines wear almost as much plate as the men. Of course you also have 12 years old girls going to battle in what amounts to a girl scout outfit, but that the hell, it's Japan.

The people which make those kind "art" with armor, weapons, equipment etc. are usually not engineers. They only look at real life equipment as reference.

There's a difference between artistic liberties and going into battle wearing a bra and a thong. The women don't need to be fully encased in full plate from head to toe, but at least make it look like she could be taken with a minimal amount of seriousness by anybody not busy drooling all over her.

As for Bioshock Infinite, I don't think that's a blatant example. Elizabeth does have a rather prominent cleavage, but corsets are relatively appropriate period dresses.

A bad example I would add is Batman Arkham City. The game is all kinds of awesome of course, but every single named female character save one displays prominent cleavage, has that ridicoulous hip sway I associate with sex workers more than anything, and wears little clothing overall . In the middle of winter. There are prisoners wearing coats outside complaining about the cold. Yet Catwoman has no problem with a catsuit unzipped to almost her navel. Yeah yeah, I know, you don't exactly expect modesty from comic book-inspired design, but at least be consistent guys.

I could name others I guess, but at this point my post would take a couple hundred pages.

 

[Walpknut]

But those characters get taken down rather easily, Harley gets Taken Down in a Cut scene in Arkham Asylum and Poison Ivy is only dangerous because of her monster plants, nto even the Joker with his dirty suit has enough protection to withstand mroe than a few hits.

 

[TorontoReign]

But those characters get taken down rather easily, Harley gets Taken Down in a Cut scene in Arkham Asylum and Poison Ivy is only dangerous because of her monster plants, nto even the Joker with his dirty suit has enough protection to withstand mroe than a few hits.

I love how all the inmates constantly call Catwoman a bitch. You hear it so much that it begins to sound like "Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.."

 

[Atomkilla]

I think ME3 will improve on that aspect, actually. Liara is not supposed to wear heavy combat armor since she isin't a soldier at all and can protect herself with biotics, plus that armor outfit isin't that revealing. Jack at least gets a shirt, and Ashley can wear armor (albeit people are still complaining, but well, BSN). I hope Miranda doesn't come back in space bulletproof skin-tight spandex, however.

Didn't know about Jack. Well that's good.
Hopefully, it will be better than ME2, more like ME.

Bioware in general is pretty good about this, if armor is revealing it is so for both gender (like the leather in Origins)

With all the flaws they have, I have to agree to this. Origins especially.
Aside from a maybe over the top bosom size, and perhaps some breastplates, DAO had great armors, both male and female.
Can't say the same for the sequel, though.

 

[Crni Vuk]

There's a difference between artistic liberties and going into battle wearing a bra and a thong. The women don't need to be fully encased in full plate from head to toe, but at least make it look like she could be taken with a minimal amount of seriousness by anybody not busy drooling all over her.

Except if this is excatly what you want to achieve.

Thats why I am talking about it from the artistic side. I am not saying it is "correct" or "great". But it is another form of opinion. And it seems enough players like it that way. Or at least those which gave the order to make those armor.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Except if this is excatly what you want to achieve.

Thats why I am talking about it from the artistic side. I am not saying it is "correct" or "great". But it is another form of opinion. And it seems enough players like it that way. Or at least those which gave the order to make those armor.

Except that, making ridiculous armor is neither the only nor the best way to achieve that. It's not so tough, for example, to make feminine-looking armor that's not stupid, or (if the format allows which an RPG certainly does) give the female characters sexy out-of-combat outfits.

C'mon, if some Japanese H-game designers can do it, then certainly regular game designers can do it too. http://gi261.photobucket.com/groups/ii76/41AWTJH55H/wp01_1600x1200.jpg

 

[Crni Vuk]

Except that, making ridiculous armor is neither the only nor the best way to achieve that. It's not so tough, for example, to make feminine-looking armor that's not stupid, or (if the format allows which an RPG certainly does) give the female characters sexy out-of-combat outfits.

Ridiculous to who ? You ? Me ?

We are talking about "art" here. Not logic. Or "realism" even.

I say it again. If all follow always the same principle then you will have very very similar styles and armor in the end for many games/images out there. And I personaly dont want that.

I am not saying that because of this everything feels great. Some imagines are bland or feel outright silly. But certain characters HAVE to look that way. Sometimes things are done on purpose.

Take red Sonja. You have her looking the way she does because that is what people expect from her. She is not Jean D'arc or the fighting queen of England. She is a fucking barbarian-amazon-what-ever-warrior.

The choice of the artist to give here this kind of look was (probably) on purpose.

I mean do we complain as well now about the design by Royo for Julie in FAKK 2 ?

*
Another art about FAKK 2

She is supposed to look like that. Realism or even "logic" has to take a back seat here. I mean when watching Evangelion or Ghost in the Shell I sure do not complain about the robots being completely unrealistic either because any design which is using "legs" is not going to work from an engineering point of view. Or would be complain about "Steam punk" equipment being ridiculous because obviously the technology is out of this world ?

HELL YEAH GIVE ME REALIZM BABY!

Again arguing about "functionality" in settings with undead dragons, wizards, plasma weapons and and such is a bit ... anal isnt it ? - I am not saying people are wrong. SOME settings are not coherent with their own rules I would not want to see dragons and wizards suddenly in mass effect or a girl with Red Sonja like armor. But sometimes it feels like people compare apples and oranges.

C'mon, if some Japanese H-game designers can do it, then certainly regular game designers can do it too. http://gi261.photobucket.com/groups/ii76/41AWTJH55H/wp01_1600x1200.jpg

It does not look "less" ridiculous to me then lets say most of the other "female" armor out there.

See that is where it is more about "taste" then "functionality" here. Because I doubt that is the target of most settings or artists when they come up with some armor for their characters. Except that is what you want to achieve. Cameron was very concerned about the functionality about the robot for Terminator 1. And you can see that. It gives the movie some quality. But Do I have to use the same for everything else ? Star Wars for example ? Or Lord of the Rings ? Has Saurons armor to be "believable" for his character and the setting ? Yes. Has it to be "practical" ? No.

*Edit
To say this. I am looking at this purely from the view of an artist. And while "realism" and "verisimilitude" are always important I do not let it come in the way of my creativity. It is far more important to stay true to your setting. Except you are trying to make realistic art like for a simulation painting a real life unit for example or doing art which has to work next to a real life unit. It all depends on what your target is in the end. This isnt a black or white scenario and your personal taste matters much.

 

[Tagaziel]

She is supposed to look like that. Realism or even "logic" has to take a back seat here. I mean when watching Evangelion or Ghost in the Shell I sure do not complain about the robots being completely unrealistic either because any design which is using "legs" is not going to work from an engineering point of view. Or would be complain about "Steam punk" equipment being ridiculous because obviously the technology is out of this world ?

You do realize that the two anime titles you are citing are the more down-to-earth titles, right? Ghost in the Shell is generally plausible with the technology it introduces, while Evangelions aren't robots, but actual living beings.

As for your legs argument, Mother Nature called. She doesn't like you being ungrateful for her engineering work on your legs.

Again arguing about "functionality" in settings with undead dragons, wizards, plasma weapons and and such is a bit ... anal isnt it ? - I am not saying people are wrong. SOME settings are not coherent with their own rules I would not want to see dragons and wizards suddenly in mass effect or a girl with Red Sonja like armor. But sometimes it feels like people compare apples and oranges.

You do realise that this is one of the fallacious arguments often used to explain the more stupid design choices in Fo3 et al, right?

 

[Ilosar]

She is supposed to look like that. Realism or even "logic" has to take a back seat here. I mean when watching Evangelion or Ghost in the Shell I sure do not complain about the robots being completely unrealistic either because any design which is using "legs" is not going to work from an engineering point of view. Or would be complain about "Steam punk" equipment being ridiculous because obviously the technology is out of this world ?

Except that giant robots are part artistic liberty, part Rule of Cool, and most of all fit into their respective settings. The pictures you provided have no other goal than making the target audience buy the product because of boobies. There's no other reason, I can't rationalize it any other way, and at this point it's not art it's a way to attract more customers and nothing more. There's no creativity here. There are ways to convey the ''barbarian woman'' look without a literal scalemail bikini and thong. Look up Princess Xena for a great example of feminine armor that makes sense. And of a female protagonist that does not solely exist to show off her assets at every turn.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Except that giant robots are part artistic liberty, part Rule of Cool, and most of all fit into their respective settings. The pictures you provided have no other goal than making the target audience buy the product because of boobies. There's no other reason, I can't rationalize it any other way, and at this point it's not art it's a way to attract more customers and nothing more.

lets assume for a moment it is that way. Because no one can actually look in the head of the artist. Though one could always ask I guess.

But what is "wrong" with doing it that way only for the coolness or selling point ? Those characters are made with a certain target audience in mind.

Complaining about that would be like complaining about that Fallout 1 was made as game with the 50s future in mind and not like Mass Effect gone post apoc. or some generic star-wars-cylon-wars clone setting.

Also why are giant robots suddenly "artistic" and "females in sexy" armor not ?

Guys do you realize how much of it is actually preference ? And not if it is suddenly more believable or not.

As for your legs argument, Mother Nature called. She doesn't like you being ungrateful for her engineering work on your legs.

the question was about why tanks have wheels/tracks today and not "legs" like a mecha as we see them quite often in Ghost in the Shell or similar animes. Because those are not practical in any sense if you konw what is important for tanks today when it comes to engineering or the qualities a tank needs to protect its crews.


Maybe in 100 years this designs might be possible. Who knows. But with our current knowledge in engineering and technology the wheels and tracks have proven it self as very reliable and usefull construction. Hence any if not most mecha designs as we see them in shows/comics like Ghost in the Shell would not work the way they do in our world. A combat vehicle like an APC with 6 or 8 wheels is much more reliable under combat conditions then a robot with 4 or 6 legs. Again those are proved designs from countless fights and wars. If we take a prototype vehicle like the E-100 or Maus as example which have a weight of more then 100 tons then it has shown that they are only capable to move around because of the use of tracks.

The German E-100 prototype (of which only a chasis was completed till the end of the second world war) with a weight of around 120-140 tons.

Super heavy tank "Maus" miece with a weight of aprox 188 metric tons!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg9Ro32xPOI&feature=related[/youtube]

jagdtiger (Tank hunter) with 79 tons (aprox)
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHp3nCkPjb4[/youtube]

All WW2 designs. Extremly heavy. And slow. Technology and materials have improved over time so far that today vehicles in the range of 60 tons are capable of doing those kind of "moves". And they all keept the design of tracks/wheels.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj75U7TkBBY&feature=related[/youtube]

Other tanks from WW2 like the Tiger 1 for example are quite mobile platforms for their time even with a weight of 50 tons (aprox) because the tracks and wheels allow a very good support of the weight on flat terrain. Legs would not work the same way if we use the same materials even with the quality of today which are designed to protect you from shells which are fired with a muzzle velocity of 1800 meters per second. Maybe if we can start to finally design tanks with the weight of a usual car but offering the same protection like the Leopard 2 or M1 abrams tanks things might be very different. But as long we have still to deal with armor in the weight of 60 tons (Leopard 2, M1A4 Abrams etc,) we will not see any viable "mecha" for the military in the role of tanks in a long time as the principles engineers discovered 50 years ago are still relevant today. The balance between firepower, protection and mobility. All those 3 have to be keept in mind. You cant just squeze a 200mm gun on a chasis (the brits did tests with a 183mm gun on the Centurion!) without sacrificing some qualities in the process.

This design like used in Ghost in the Shell if realized with the specifications and engineering of a usual main battle tank in mind as we know them today has so many weak spots and flaws that it is not even funny anymore.

Lets assume it has a weight of aprox. 40-50 tons (which is relatively light for a main battle tank) then it could probably not walk around on any other terrain except concrete as the legs are not doing a good job of supporting the weight not to mention the stress to the rest of the hardware like the gears, joints etc. would be quite extreme. As soon the ground would be even just a bit more soft then usual it would start to sink in. The other issue are the many "flat" angles on the front, rear and sides which would give any anti tank gun used today a very nice chance to penetrate. A 120mm amore pearcing shell like fired from the Leopard 2s Rheinmetall L55 120mm smoothbore has a muzzle velocity of 1750 m/s. To compare it. A Cargotrain at 100km/h with 19 tons has a kynetic energy of 19 megajoule. The Leopard 2 gun creates 13 Megajoule on the muzzle. The size of the vehicle makes it also an easy target. The turret alone is the biggest weak spot. Tanks today feature very advanced turrets which are almost as big like the tank itself because the profile of the tank itself (the hull) is very low. There is a difference in western tanks (Leopard 2, LClerc, Arbams) compared to Russian tanks which have an automatic loader and are even smaller then western tanks for the cost of "protection" - the amunition for example is stored directly in the turret which is increasing the risk of explosions in the case of penetrations. Tanks like the Leopard lack the auto-loader but feature a sepperate armored cabine for the amuntion so the explosion is directed away from the crew compartment. Mercava tanks (Israel) go even a step further and have the engine designed in the front of the tank adding more to the protection in the case of penetrations to the front as the shell has now not only to penetrate the front armor but the engine as well.

So. As one can see here. Any design as used in most games/cartoons/movies is extremly impracticall regarding usual tanks.

Now mother nature might be the perfect engineer. But she had some few million years to work on her designs. And I doubt that she had to keep in mind that her "design" (a spider for example) had to be hit by shells with the power of a cargo train AND to survive the hit. Also anything with the weight of 20 or 30 tons has pretty much dissapeared from her drawing board. Except for the one or other sea creature maybe. Designs with legs are simply not made to support any ridiculous amount of weight. - No Elephants are not ridiculous. 7. 5 tons isnt that much compared to a Dinasour with the weight of 30 or even 40 tons.

Tanks so far are only 100 years old. Give those designers/engineers a bit more time

- Thats why I said that realism should not get in the way of creativity when creating art.

You do realise that this is one of the fallacious arguments often used to explain the more stupid design choices in Fo3 et al, right?

Why. Did you thought the artistic side of Fallout 3 was that much "anti Fallout ?" I thought many people and even quite a few die-hard-Fallout 1-lovers agreed that from the artistic side and design Fallout 3 was "good" and that Bethesdas concept artist did a good job most of the time.

Gameplay and writting/quest design are a whole different topic. Would you not agree ?

 

[Tagaziel]

<snip>

Mechas aren't supposed to behave like tanks. If you actually *watched* Ghost in the Shell, you'd know that eg. Tachikomas are supposed to offer superior mobility and firepower, rather than being bullet sponges. The entire point of a mecha is to have superior maneuverability, rather than be a slow-moving metal box with guns.

Why. Did you thought the artistic side of Fallout 3 was that much "anti Fallout ?" I thought many people and even quite a few die-hard-Fallout 1-lovers agreed that from the artistic side and design Fallout 3 was "good" and that Bethesdas concept artist did a good job most of the time.

Gameplay and writting/quest design are a whole different topic. Would you not agree ?

The "it doesn't matter if it's unrealistic, because Fallout has deathclaws/plasma guns/laser guns/FEV/giant scorpions" argument.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

C'mon, if some Japanese H-game designers can do it, then certainly regular game designers can do it too. http://gi261.photobucket.com/groups/ii76/41AWTJH55H/wp01_1600x1200.jpg

Actually H-Games benefit far more from what the guy in the article was talking about with showing less until the big reveal (in ME's case, you saw nothing there). You get more of a reaction going from total cover to no cover than from a thong to nothing.

The pictures you provided have no other goal than making the target audience buy the product because of boobies.

Why can giant robots be artistic liberty and rule of cool but scantaly clad women not? Obviously it's a shallow sales tactic but isn't that okay if the market isn't soley made up of that and if it's consistant in the setting? Let's not forget that most fantasy setting with said armor also have magical armor.

I agree that we need more games with more believable art design in general but I also agree with Crni that I don't want every setting to look the same.

There are ways to convey the ''barbarian woman'' look without a literal scalemail bikini and thong.

Yeah but she's from the Conan comic and he only wears a loincloth. It fits the style of the setting, regardless of whether it makes a lot of sense from a combat perspective.

Mechas aren't supposed to behave like tanks. If you actually *watched* Ghost in the Shell, you'd know that eg. Tachikomas are supposed to offer superior mobility and firepower, rather than being bullet sponges. The entire point of a mecha is to have superior maneuverability, rather than be a slow-moving metal box with guns.

Ghost in the Shell isn't a good example of that for the most part (episode 2 of Stand Alone Complex does have a tank with a similar design to the Tachikomas) but Mobil Suit Gundam certainly is, even more so if you're looking at the more Power Ranger series like Gundam Wing.

 

[Sabirah]

If you guys would want more women in you're hobbies than there needs to be some serious quality control regarding how women are presented. I'm not saying ban all skimpy outfits, but I am saying that when 100% of what women wear in games more resembles Deepika Paodukone's getup in dum maaro dum than functional dress there is an issue. Hell, one of the reason I never play 1 on 1 games like mortal combat and the like is because all the women n there dress like prostitutes and that kind of unsettles me.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I agree that we need more games with more believable art design in general but I also agree with Crni that I don't want every setting to look the same.

Thank you someone got my point

Mechas aren't supposed to behave like tanks. If you actually *watched* Ghost in the Shell, you'd know that eg. Tachikomas are supposed to offer superior mobility and firepower, rather than being bullet sponges. The entire point of a mecha is to have superior maneuverability, rather than be a slow-moving metal box with guns.

Yes and I already covered that part up why it is not going to work if we use OUR standards in engineering and technology for a mecha - otherwise we would have already such tanks because it definitely is not a problem of a design that cant be used already. Hence why the designs in Ghost in the Shell do not work in our world. They however make perfect sense for the anime because it is an separate world and the design has only to make sense there and not anywhere else. But the point I wanted to make was only to show that you actually can bring down ANY artistic design regardless of quality if you see it only from the "realistic" side. Or if it has to be plausible all the time. I have the feling that some argue more with their own taste in mind and not because of quality - as that is a whole different story.

The "it doesn't matter if it's unrealistic, because Fallout has deathclaws/plasma guns/laser guns/FEV/giant scorpions" argument.

Just that this is not what I am talking about.

I will try to explain it again. We are comparing 2 (or more) separate worlds and designs not if something fits to one setting. - Talking death claws are a matter for the Fallout world for example.

This is how it feels for me.

What I am saying:

What people respond:

It is like comparing the technology and design of Alien/Aliens with Star Wars and arguing the Alien design is inherently superior because it feels more realistic then laser swords, "force power" and the ship designs in Star Wars.

Something which makes sense in Star Wars has not to fit any other setting then "Star Wars" itself. So it is not important for its quality if it is as plausible like the drop ship or the pulse weapons in Aliens. Both settings have from the design alone equal qualities in my eyes. For the movie Alien Ridley Scott has spend much time to find artists which had the skill to come up with "authentic" designs. For example to design a ship interior which makes sense and feels extremely realistic where you could imagine a crew living several months together like on a usual ship. The whole movie is focused around the ship and the characters which occupy it. So it had to feel very plausible. They for example came up with signs and stickers in the design of usual street signs which show a floating man. Something you would never really find that way in a Star Wars movie simply because it has no meaning to the setting as its more or less a space-tale which has more from a tall story. A completely different form of entertainment.

This is why I don't see why it is a problem to have a character like in FAKK2 or Red Sonja being drawn and designed with esthetics/erotic in mind instead of verisimilitude. That is what I heave other settings for. It would be like demanding the Elder Scrolls to play like a Fallout game because one "loves" the Fallout world more for its gritty feeling and the focus on choices and consequences then on open world game play.

 

[Courier]

I think Cracked.com pretty much sums up how I feel here:

Again, I have no problem with putting sex or sexuality in entertainment. Sex is part of life, so it should naturally be part of our movies and TV shows and games. But these are the digital equivalent of inflatable sex dolls. It's embarrassing and insulting, not because I'm a staunch feminist, but because I don't like the assumption it's making about me (that I'm an emotionally stunted, sexually frustrated teenage male).

Read more: 5 Reasons It's Still Not Cool to Admit You're a Gamer | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article_1857...-cool-to-admit-youre-gamer.html#ixzz1gvWw5MTb

 

[Makagulfazel]

DUDE - that is exactly how I feel. When I was a teenager, I remember the crazy looks I got from the female cashier when I purchased Dungeon Keeper 2. I didn't buy it because I wanted to play out some naughty fantasies about masochist sex, as the cover would suggest. I bought it because it's a good fuggin' RTS.
It's insulting to me that companies feel the need to attach huge boobs or skimpy clothes to get my sale. I imagine they've done the market research and that it works, so I just assume that it is the art directors appealing to my less cerebral peers. I'm free to be proven wrong, though.

EDIT:
My parents almost wouldn't buy Fallout 2 for me, also.

It's just dumb. Not very cool to talk about pimping out your wife when there are much more important features to represent.

EDIT:
Wrong picture - here's the box(not CD) art.

Same idea.

 

[Atomkilla]

I tend to agree with Courier and Maka here.
Interesting article.

I've never had issues with buying games that had violent/sexual content in them, or getting them from my parents, and they had no issues about it too (mostly because they were ignorant at a time, but that's different matter). However I often felt stupid with buying gaming magazines, so I quit that for many reasons a while ago.
Recently, I've seen a cover of a popular gaming magazine that I used to buy which was very good, but went south after about 2 years of publishing. The cover was featuring Deus Ex Human Revolution, and the caption in big, white letters read: "DEUS EX, BETTER THAN SEX".
The thought of those articles being written by 30-year-olds for 17-years-old was a bit unsettling.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Hell, one of the reason I never play 1 on 1 games like mortal combat and the like is because all the women n there dress like prostitutes and that kind of unsettles me.

Mortal Kombat is a great example of a game which intentionally tries to be the gorn of video games, so it's not really a good example. It's rediculous, it knows it and it revels in it. It's an exception, not the rule and I think that if you are going to be that ridiculous, it's good for the product to have some self deprecating humor.

Again, I have no problem with putting sex or sexuality in entertainment. Sex is part of life, so it should naturally be part of our movies and TV shows and games. But these are the digital equivalent of inflatable sex dolls. It's embarrassing and insulting, not because I'm a staunch feminist, but because I don't like the assumption it's making about me (that I'm an emotionally stunted, sexually frustrated teenage male).

I think that this highlights the real problem which is that there aren't many games which deal with sexuality in a mature fashion. If there were I think it would be easier to dismiss the games that don't, not that it would go away any more than it has in any other medium. That said, I think that there is an exaggerated focus on how prevalent it is in games and I would agree that marketers are demeaning in assuming that sticking a scantily clad woman on the cover is going to get my cash. I care about the gameplay far more than the wrapper. I've definitely been in the situation where I'm buying a great game but feel uncomfortable because the cover is over sexualized. And that really highlights where it's the biggest problem, in advertising, because it really does make gaming look more chauvinistic than it is.

I also think that it's hard to take his points seriously when he's on a crusade and the only counterpoint mentioned was Bioshock in regards to good writing. Even though I agree with his underlying points, it's a poorly written article.

 

[Walpknut]

I care about the gameplay far more than the wrapper. I've definitely been in the situation where I'm buying a great game but feel uncomfortable because the cover is over sexualized.

Hahaha, I bought Catherine online because of that.

 

[Buxbaum666]

Except that giant robots are part artistic liberty, part Rule of Cool, and most of all fit into their respective settings. The pictures you provided have no other goal than making the target audience buy the product because of boobies. There's no other reason, I can't rationalize it any other way, and at this point it's not art it's a way to attract more customers and nothing more. There's no creativity here. There are ways to convey the ''barbarian woman'' look without a literal scalemail bikini and thong. Look up Princess Xena for a great example of feminine armor that makes sense. And of a female protagonist that does not solely exist to show off her assets at every turn.

Really, that's the example you're going with?

YOU CAN'T TOUCH ME, I'm wearing my steel bra of protection, motherfuckers!

OH HAI

Damn you, steel bra of protection, why hast thou forsaken me?

Told ya so. The Leatherstrip 3000 totally would've saved your cheap ass, Xena.

Fuck this, I'm outta here. Time for some hot lesbian Amazon action.