That's part of what Jon is here to do. It's not really a matter of if, more like when. Though it'd be silly to assume that modders will dent their budget since their budget is their budget - if they're not using it for one thing, they're certainly going to use it for something else.

Sagittary: I have noticed that you have a tendency to misunderstand/represent what I say.

Firstly, if you go back to my very first post, you will see that I did, in fact, base my argument firmly on the precedent of the RPG genre (rather than reality). Go back and take a look.

Next, it was others who criticized my RPG argument by saying that Elemental is a strategy game rather than an RPG. A fair point, which I refuted by referring to attention to detail. At least some of us think the game would be better with these aesthetic changes, and that is all the point we are trying to make.

If you look back, you will also see that I NEVER referred to a "chain-mail bikini", as you suggest I was attempting to "defend". That is OBVIOUSLY ridiculous, and that is in fact why the person who did bring it up did so.

Lastly, you mistake my comment about modders and the SD budget. My comment is simply stating that modders having access to modeling tools (and using them to make armors, etc) will eliminate the need for SD to spend as much $$$ on that as they otherwise would. It is not to say that doing so will magically alter their budget in any way, shape, or form. In fact, it is my expectation that they would put that money into something else for the game, not just reduce what they spend on it.

I read most of those links.

Honestly it left me kind of going, "Uh, okay." Certainly more thinking about how the world works and questioning assumptions is a good thing. I suppose that article was aimed at the whole "but that's how it historicaly is" line of thought in this thread... but aside from that, it's a break from the blatent objectification of women that happens in most other games aimed at a male audience. Honestly, I suspect I (and perhaps the others too) made the historical points unciontiously to back up what I felt was a respectful egalitarian thing to do. So what if you don't see that they're women? You designed the unit, you pushed the build button, and as a consequence you are aware that there are women in your army.

So sure it doesn't have to match with history. But at the same time, the way both male and female units look so alike when they're suited up just symbolicaly shows how similar both genders are, even given all the physical/psychological differences.

Really I am getting tired of fights over gender. Honestly I think the fights over gender cause as much of a devide between men and women as traditional patriarchal thinking does. It's essentialy the same mechanism as race: As long as we are aware of the differences as dividing us, they will still. The difference is you can't really get rid of gender differences.

The differences mean that men and women will never be equal in potential capability, because our brains and bodies are just wired differently. There has been research to back this up (Not to say that women can't do well at traditional male jobs/hobbies or vice versa, but our gender inclines us towards certain ways of acting and thinking). The best thing that I can think of for people to do is just try and get comfortable with who and what they are.

Back to the game: I have heard that women like to be able to recognised as women and not just short men. That makes sense. But at the same time, I think from an ethical point of view, there are times to do that and times not to. I don't really think it is healthy to for a guy to, for instance, dress up all his female soldiers in chainmale bikinies, or perhaps even full curve-hugging platemale (I suspect it could be different for a women). Really I am starting to think the only time it definatly good for men and women to recognise eachother as the opposite gender is in personal relationships, whether romantic, family, or friendships.

Anyways. Some thoughts.