Girls looking more like girls

I notice in the character creator that the only thing changed by switching sex's is the "chest area" (you know what I mean). Some types of clothing hide that fact, and with some people it may be hard to tell wether they have a girl or boy character. Maybe there should be other girl characteristics, like slightly skinnier legs and arms, and things like that.

 

The waist gets a little smaller too, making the hips look wider. Plus the hair options generally look "girly" so I think it's okay. It's kinda hard to get too detailed since the resolution and image size is a bit small.

 

I'm fairly certain I read somewhere that some armors will differ by gender.
Others, they just are going to hide your gender. That's what they do, because they protect you.
in all honesty I don't think these suggestions will happen except MAYBE, BIG MAYBE as optional

 

reducing some of those parts, eg arms, at such low resolution is like chopping half of it off. there will be other characteristics (i assume) like voice that will be effected by gender

 

They're fine as it is. The team worked with their current resolution and this is as much as they're able to do without creating "slenderwomen".
And to go on with what Relinies said, Armours are made to fit the sprite's current stand point, the Devs are not going to go revamp the entire system based on a new design.

 

I don't see what you are on about.

Yeah, because that totally looks like a male character.

 

They look alright to me, female to me, girly to me. But maybe it's just a matter of opinion.

 

Yes, I believe it would be a good idea to make more differences between males and females. While it's not really that big of an issue, some slight differences (for example different stances - Gentleman for Men and Lady for women and etc.) could work well. In addition to some gender-specific appearance customisation options.

 

Why not just add these options in and make them available for everyone?

If I happen to want to play an effeminate male or masculine female character, all the better.

 

Then what's the difference between males and females? Make all the characters one gender, defined by appearance and be done with it '

 

Sure, I've got no problem with that.

 

Cross-dressing.

 

If anything, I actually think we should have the opposite. Add the option to give either gender different body types. I couldn't help but feel disappointed that each gender could only have certain hair styles and the one body type.

I want to make an androgynous character or something. Maybe a badass tomboy.

The whole idea that girls have to look 'like girls' and boys have to look 'like boys' is ridiculous and kinda sexist. Gender roles a social construct, and a bothersome one at that.

And I just hope to god starbound doesn't deal with female armours the same way terraria did (just make it skimpier and therefor impractical).

And I just hope to god starbound doesn't deal with female armour the same way terraria did.

 

Oh God. Not this again. That's what genders are for. To make some REASONABLE limitations on the character you choose. Unfortunately for you, we live in a world that has genders, we're not all hermaphrodites, so it makes sense that the game reflects that. Men are better at math. Women are better at languages. You can't change that. It's nature. Make everything as equal as you want, you can't hide from the fact that males and females are born different. While there can be some exceptions, those are rare and not beneficial most of the time survival-wise.

There's a reason most games have genders.

Well then, I suppose the world we live in "is kinda sexist". Gender roles appeared through natural evolution. Women are more important reproduction-wise, thus in stone-age they were protected by men and didn't go hunting, where there's a greater risk of being killed. Men are needed less in that regard. Thus Men became good hunters, while women became good at taking care of things in the camp.

Now, in the modern times, such things would be irrelevant. But through ages of such social construction which was beneficial for survival, men and women each adapted to their roles physically and mentally as well, not to mention that it became part of human culture and courtship habits. Which means that in order to draw a female, a man has to be more or less masculine (I'm not talking about a muscle mountain or the stupid "macho" image, I'm talking that he has to be able to take care of the female and do the things that require more force and so forth, because it's still beneficial for survival. Imagine a pregnant woman carrying heavy wooden planks. Do you think that's beneficial for the continuation of the species? To risk the child? It is not, thus men have to be reasonably masculine. The same goes with women being feminine. At least slightly so. To let men do these dangerous things. Men are naturally more resilient, and the chance of them being crippled reproduction-wise is also lower. Thus when looking at survival and simple family welfare, it's logical that men should be more or less masculine and women more or less feminine).

So as you can see, reasonable equality is good, but thoughtless equality ignoring the advantages of each gender is stupid.

Did you know how thoughtless equality between the rich and poor ended? Socialism was born. You might not understand the horror of that. Hitler's politics were socialist. Stalin's comunism and soviet russia were socialism. Jacobin dictatorship of the 1792-1794 in France was socialism.

Thoughtless and radical equality is idiocity at it's finest. Everything should be equal only as much as it's reasonable, accepting the differences between social groups, genders, religions and etc. because while each is different, each has something good in it's own way.

Well, you see, women have a slightly different body shape, thus I suppose for them to wear the same armour as men would be pretty uncomfortable. I'm not saying they should wear bikini-armour mind you, that's just as stupid as radical equality. The differences between male and female armour should be reasonable.

 

Have you ever read the short story Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut Jr.? It takes the idea of equality and beats it into a pulp by going to the extreme. It's an excellent read. Your post just reminded me of the story.

 

This just voiced everything I was about to say in this thread.

 

While I agree on the fact that biological sex was important in earlier stages in human evolution, I don't think that it is important now. However, to be quite honest I don't think gender equality and those such historical events are comparable. Transgender people exist, and that really doesn't seem to throw countries into chaos or anything...

Simply stating that because something has a place in human culture, that does not mean it should stay or is beneficial. Look at religion - not all religious people are bad, but it is a cause for a large amount of conflict.

In all, absolute equality does pose problems, so does inequality. But seriously, we're going off track and getting a bit serious here.

Either way, I'm just happy with a game giving me the ability to have my character have long hair if it's a boy, or short hair if it's a girl. Some women have fairly masculine body types, and some men have fairly feminine body types. I don't see how that's harmful.

I mean, look at florans! They don't have a gender, but do have different body types, and all their hairstyles and clothing options are unrestricted. This is simply about opening the opportunities in a videogame to have more freedom with my character. I'm not trying to begin a radical movement.

PS. Men are actually not better at math - this is often assumed because in many countries and throughout history women were considered inferior and therefor denied schooling, and still often are. Studies show that girls and boys do equally well. Actually this poses a great example to explain why cultural gender stereotypes of modern times can be harmful - researchers find that due to these social ideas, when girls are told they can't do better at math (which isn't true), it hurts their schooling.

 

Seeing as the only difference between boy and girl in-game is a couple of pixels, I really don't see why this is such a big deal. If it bugs you that much, wait a few weeks post release until a texture pack mod is released, then make the girls look like boys, or vice versa, or whatever. Yeesh. Bring bad politics into a good game and you get an atrocious experience.

 

Sorry, if I did seem to open room for a political debate in my original post, that was not my intention.

Really, I just wanted to make my point that I think that the female characters already look very feminine and doing much more as the op says would be a bit silly.

I really sincerely apologies if anyone took it another way.

 

Do you know the percent of transgender people? An exception is one thing. Making that exception global, however, can have an entirely different result. I'll give you a different example:
Homosexuals exist in our society, causing some slight chaos and dissatisfaction for some perhaps, but not doing much harm otherwise. Now, imagine they were the majority. What do you think would happen then?
What I mean to say is that if something is true for an exception, it might not stay true if made the majority.

I didn't say that it should stay just because it's a part of our culture. I gave a bunch of reasons. Gender differences are actually beneficial for one thing. And, being one of the main founding stones of our culture, it is part of what defines humans. Losing something like that would... Well, I suppose we would be more like ants then. If you've ever read "the once and future king" by T. H. White, think of the scene with the anthill.

...

Men can have long hair, or women short... That's not what was suggested. What I'm against is making no gender at all, people all being hermaphrodites like worms or snails. I make my own characters with LOTR or caveman style long-hair usually. But making them genderless... That's just wrong.

You're mixing everything up. Some races might not have a gender (even though florans do have something that takes it's place). But some must have a gender. Humans are one of such races. You make things so they would make sense. Plants having no gender makes sense. Humans having no gender, however, does not make sense neither story-wise nor in any other way.

No, they are. I was referring to biological brain activity - facts and numbers. Not some social mumbo-jumbo full of holes for interpretation. It was proved in a lab, when measuring brain activity using sensors, that the part of the brain responsible for logical calculations is more active for men, while the part of the brain responsible for language is more active for women. It's not about schooling. Women can be just as good as men in maths, but that's rare. The same way, it is much more likely that women will be better at social interactions.

I'm not sure what "studies" are you talking about, but I've never heard of them.
You can find a ton of what I'm talking about. Just scroll down and look at the video:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/men-women-different-brains.htm
Or read this one, it might be a bit harder if you don't study biology and physics, but it's a bit more clear if you do:
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/how-male-female-brains-differ

Plus I can add from my own experience that among winners in math and physics contests, probably 70% or more are males.
(I just took the first links that came up, because I'm kind of busy and don't have time to search for something better. Please excuse me for that.)

By the way, thank you for the link.