Practically all the NPCs in this series, man or woman, are ugly as sin so I have no idea how you could interpret it that way. I'm honestly amazed anyone remembers that part of Dark Souls 2 at all.
OP: Who else dressed up this NPC as a sex doll? Wasn't that weird?
Everyone else: ...?
"What was that about?"
She asks you for clothes to wear because she just has rags. You can then give her clothes. It's actually answered in the link you posted. I don't think you know what 'Objectified' means.
It's a strange way to interpret a forgettable part of a forgettable video game and it makes it seem like you're either begging for controversy or are just weird yourself. Don't know what else to tell you.I'm questioning why the feature exists, and some posters agree it's a strange and pointless inclusion. What are you trying to paint me as a pervert for here exactly?
There are games out there whose whole gameplay is literally just you dressing up a virtual girl (or a doll, whatever, they are not real human beings) with various clothes. Nothing wrong with a fashion simulator.
Yes she is a dress-up doll, and? Play Style Savvy, it's literally dress-up doll - the game, and it's awesome.Except you can continue to dress her up even after. She stays your dress-up doll for the remainder of the game.
I'm questioning why the feature exists, and some posters agree it's a strange and pointless inclusion. What are you trying to paint me as a pervert for here exactly?
.
I think it's more a remnant of a possibly cancelled feature where you could equip your summons with the equipment that you want than anything else.
It is basically impossible for a girl to look attractive in Souls or Bloodborne thanks to the engines From uses and their chosen art-styles, so she isn't really a waifu.
Granted, Shanalotte was cute, but mostly thanks to fanart.
That's really all I saw the feature as too now that I've been reminded of it. The OP seems to be trying too hard to stir up some controversy with their very flimsy interpretation.I mainly used her as a mannequin to display cool armor that wasn't viable to use.
This is clearly one molehill that has yet to reach its potential as a mountain.
Serious response though: I never saw this as any sort of objectification or waifu-ism. I just saw it as a unique element they threw into the game for fun, to help the player feel like they have more influence on Majula and the people who gather there. Looking back through her dialog I really don't see anything that leads you the player on, its not like she's flirty or even responds differently depending on the armor you choose. And you are can't change her clothes later so most people wouldn't have had things like the sorceress' set the first time they meet here, so I'd assume most people gave her pretty modestly designed armor.
i haven't played dark souls 2, but from the description it sounds more like the develper put that to give you chance to retrieve the armor you gave her if you thought you might need that,while stillnot allowing you to leave her naked..so you just exchange the armor you equip on her.
but as i said, haven't played the game so i might been msinterpreting the context.
Oh no, you can change her clothes as many times as you want. Only you do not get back what you gave to her previously. That's what made it so weird in the first place.
I just gave her this thing, plus some knight armor (don't remember which set). Honestly forgot about that character until I popped in here.
Yeah more important than the OP's bizarre thread premise Majula is truly the best part of Dark Souls 2.Gave her my first extra stuff I guess but don't really remember speaking to her again.
No souls hub will ever beat Majula though!
38 posts, took longer than i expected.Well Dark Souls 2 sucks so that's pretty much the answer to anything about DS2
Isn't that what Code Vein is for?I read the title as "It's time Dark Souls lets us dress up a waifu" and I was like heck yeah! I'm disappointed, OP.
Waifu Souls would make big moneyI read the title as "It's time Dark Souls lets us dress up a waifu" and I was like heck yeah! I'm disappointed, OP.
Unlike yours, that's a reasonable post that offers a possible explanation for the topic's question, but was also made after your own. The smug attitude doesn't suit your posts.