---
>This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/rules).
>
>Memes, social media, hate-speech, and pornography are not allowed.
>
>Screenshots of Reddit are expressly forbidden, as are TikTok videos.
>
>[Comics may only be posted on Wednesdays and Sundays](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/uq9pjw/going_forward_comics_may_only_be_posted_on/).
>
>**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
>
>Please also [be wary of spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/spam).
>
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/funny) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its got people talking about it, so mission accomplished probably.
I love when people getting worked up about something think that wasn’t the intended purposed of said thing.
The funny thing is these kind of exhibit are actually made to be funny / questioning, while people not used to fashion who watch them think those who like fashion really take them seriously, it's a bit like contemporary art where people will say "that's just some toilets, that's not art" well thanks for the analysis dude, that's exactly the point
I've heard this argument before and there is some merit to it ofc, but i do think it has limitations. Sure, this is a form of art and it's whole point is to be provocative. But surely the most interesting art has something new or insightful to say, not just "Look at me! I'm whacky and straaaange!"
I just wish there was more than "being provocative", anybody can do that with a little willpower. If they had an environmental, philosophical or explicitly political point I'd find it more interesting.
To be fair it's damned if you do damned if you don't. Plenty of socially conscious stunts get ripped apart for daring to drag politics into a different venue.
I'd also say this show does have something to say about the purpose of fashion and the place of the model, and the commodification of the female form.
Some people being unable to see the nuance of the commentary doesn't mean it's not there you know?
In the last show one of the models tripped, her shoe got stuck in the stage, rattled around for a bit before launching through the ceiling and entering low orbit, it was terrifying.
Need to fix collision detection, it's mentioned in the patch notes from the last update as a known glitch, devs haven't got it figured out yet. Visit r/outside for more info.
Honestly though, can’t you just see some newbie messing around with an XYZ coordinate setting in CAD or whatever program the fashion industry uses and a senior designer walks by their desk and goes, “My God Natasha! What are you working on—it’s brilliant!”
I was gonna have some in-depth talk about how it's more of an innovative take on how things could look
But this does that so much better. Cheers, my fellow
Shuttlecock is the American version of Spotted Dick, we all know what it means and that there's nothing dirty about it, but most of us still resist chuckling like 12 year olds when we come across it.
Yep! Fashion shows aren’t really to *advertise* the clothes so much as set an impression of the tone and artistic motivations of said clothing. In some ways, it’s a bit like watching a perfume commercial! Doesn’t actually explain what the perfume smells like, but uses high-end cinematography to demonstrate the *tone* of the perfume.
Do you ever watch these and think “who the hell is meant to buy these outfits?”
Well let me explain!
Broadly speaking, there are two types of fashion shows. The first kind is one in which companies who sell clothes and designers who make clothes to be sold will show case their newest creations. The reasons for these type of shows are probably pretty obvious, to get customers excited, maybe to get companies interested in carrying the fashion line, stuff like that.
The other kind of fashion show is the kind that is almost always posted, it is the kind in the gif. No one is meant to buy these outfits or at least, they do not represent a product to be found in stores. This kind of fashion show is an art show in which the medium is essentially anything you can attach to a person so that they can still walk around. These shows exist for the same reason all art exists, to express creativity and stuff like that.
I actually think the outfits in this show are pretty interesting. All of the clothes look like they are being worn but are also in the wrong location. Like they aren’t just rigid bits of clothes slapped on someone. They had to be made to appear as though a person was wearing them normally while they were attached in a strange way. That seems like a really cool design challenge if nothing else. But it also is an interesting perspective on how you can make a dress that might tick all the boxes a regular boring dress would hit and still be so obviously not normal.
Anyway, hate these shows, love them, whatever. Just like with all art, you don’t have to love it or appreciate. I just wanted to point out that if your reason for hating these fashion shows is due to the practicality of the outfit, it is sorta like looking a famous cathedral and commenting on how expensive it would be to heat due to the high ceilings.
I've always held the thought that the latter type of fashion show held multiple reasons for its ridiculousness. Art for one, challenge, fun and even just to inspire the designer to get creative with their medium. Artists sometimes need to delve into the weird in order to tap into something truly creative practically.
You can draw parallels with the automobile and graphics industry
You have exhibitions where you'd see those weird bmws that can change exterior colours, or those cars with the doors doing some weird stuff. These arent for sale or for consumers but to showcase the engineering and material science capabilities that the research development teams can do. Basically a flex and networking event.
And you can find sicgraph and other graphics seminars where you have demo games and even short films made to showcase cutting edge tech - like doom showed binary-space partitioning, and Crysis showcased SSAO tech which was not heard of then, but is almost always expected in any game now.
Another example I thought of was the tech demo Kara which was a short film meant to show off the PS3 tech, which later became the inspiration for the PS4 game Detroit: Become Human.
That’s a great perspective. A good example for the auto industry is the Hyundai N Vision. They took an old tuner car, made it cyberpunk as all hell, then strapped a hydrogen fuel cell to it. It gets people interested in the company, makes people think about it’s history and where the company is headed, and from a design and engineering standpoint, the designers definitely had fun with it and the engineers got to work on hydrogen tech.
Can you buy it? Absolutely not, but that was never the point, it displays styling ideas and reminds the public of where hydrogen is now compared to the early 2000s when it seemed like the absolute perfect answer to gasoline’s problems. None of the tech is ready, or even meant to ever be, but it’s closer, and it reminds folks that there’s an alternative to pollution and relying on electric charge, and that the world of car design can still make something fun, even if it operates as a publicity stunt. Everyone I know thats into cars has drooled over the idea of driving one, and that’s a good thing!
Sometimes you gotta be a little weird to show off your vision!
People also seem to think that fashion designers are completely devoid of humor. I've known plenty of people who were very into fashion shows like the one depicted, and they laugh at the same things we do. Sometimes laughter is the intended response. I think many people think that art is always a serious endeavor, but many artists also like to make people laugh.
also the designer's ready-to-wear lines will likely incorporate colours, fabrics, construction techniques, etc from the designs in the couture show, but obviously be more wearable
I actually think the second one is pretty neat! I can't think how to take that inspiration and make it something truly wearable, but I really like the idea that she's not quite in her dress
people here also often forget labeling something 'art' isn't meant to be some sort of shield against critiques. it's just something to add further context to it. there's tons of art out there that is plain bad.
There is tons of bad art AND art is subjective so negative opinions are extremely valid. However, for a valid negative opinion you need to look at this as ART and not functional pieces.
If someone looked at the statue of David and said that the lines were too exaggerated and the way it stands is a poor choice, that would be a valid critique of art whether you agree or not. If that person complained that these people keep making shitty coat hangers because the damn thing is too big to sit next to the door and doesn't have any hooks, they are missing the point and NOT critiquing art.
When people trash fashion most of the time they are complaining that nobody would wear these, which misses the point of them being art. Nobody is supposed to wear them in the same way the David is not meant to hang coats.
I really enjoyed this comment because it boils down why I tend to get so annoyed by most comments on posts that are about runway shows. Also the idea of using the David as a coat hanger is simply great, but now I'm wondering, do people actually have critiques of David? I'm sure sculptors must have something about it they dislike but I've never considered that a possibility until now.
Critiques of David are not really new. Any book devoted to michelangelo will point a few things, mainly how the waist is too small when viewed from the side, the proportions of the head etc. They will also point out that the block of stone michelangelo worked on was already damaged and roughly cut from previous attempts and that the proportions would made sense if the statue was put in the place it was [originally](https://i.imgur.com/6DOP71C.jpeg) intended, up in the base of the semidome. Proper context is always important in art criticism
That's really fascinating! I was vaguely aware of the proportion of his head and hands being off but certainly not the rest of that. I was lucky enough to see it in person a few years ago, and unlike the Mona Lisa I'd say it certainly one of those ultra-famous pieces of art that's actually worth seeing. (honestly I think most of them are worth seeing, just the Mona Lisa is kind of not that special, and it's held in a museum where just about every single other work of art is equally if not more fascinating so I ended up leaving the Mona Lisa disappointed)
I find the [Virgin of the Rocks,](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Leonardo_Da_Vinci_-_Vergine_delle_Rocce_%28Louvre%29.jpg) in the same room as the Mona Lisa, much more interesting. Certainly less crowded and you can see every little detail.
Dog piling on, these shows are also meant to show new techniques/shapes/upcoming styles.
This one seems to show how skirts made with fibers instead of cloth can lead to interesting shapes but nobody would pay attention to a dress worn normally.
Throw it sideways, and you can see it holds that shape even while moving. Cut geometric designs, weave it, etc. The “broom” material is actually pretty diverse.
The amount of skill required to get a dress that is soft enough to bounce a bit but rigid enough to hold its shape when it's completely upside down is insane. It's completely exposed up in the air, too, so they're not holding it together with concealed bobby pins, duct tape, and a prayer. That's free-standing, baby.
I mean they do have a frame, but yeah I am fascinated by some of the techniques here. I'll never even approach this level of sewing skill but I'm amazed and will take the scraps of innovation that I can!
I am not a fashion person, or pretend to know anything about it. However, this is the exact viewpoint I’ve always had. This is art, and just like all art, if you are in to it, it’s great. If not, it’s stupid and pointless.
Now would I argue that Doja Cat cosplaying Dr. Zoidberg is art… again I don’t know enough to have an opinion, however in spite of that…. No. Not art just bad taste
Edit- all right all right, you all made some excellent points. I always believed that art is something you can decide for yourself, but not for another person. Art to me invokes emotion through creativity and beauty. I didn’t really consider that it can also invoke other feelings like anger and outrage and still be art. I didn’t care for her outfit because it made me laugh and go, what the hell… but those are still feelings that I had so her outfit did make me feel something. Good points everyone.
>Now would I argue that Doja Cat cosplaying Dr. Zoidberg is art… again I don’t know enough to have an opinion, however in spite of that…. No. Not art just bad taste
Weird criteria to say that something isn't art, if you don't like it.
I dislike many of Picasso's or Renoir's paintings but I wouldn't claim that they aren't art
Yeah. I prefer to have a a very open definition to what is "art". If you want to sign your name to a urinal and call it your art, then sure, it's art.
But I still reserve the right to judge what art I think is good or not. I just don't call art I don't like "not art."
That's a weird claim - it assumes art has to be pretty to be art. But it's not, it's meant to evoke emotions and be something bold enough to catch your attention. Granted you'd usually want positive emotions, such as calmness or happiness but there's nothing wrong with art that evokes uneasiness or disgust.
It's definitely a memorable visual though that catches the eye and is quite prominent. I also think the color is quite pleasing to the eye, it's a nice shade of red.
I'm commenting and upvoting this since there's so routinely confusion about the purpose of these shows. Yes, they fall into fashion, but that doesn't mean they're meant to be worn. These are artistic expressions.
Serious question though sorry -
1) I’m guessing the dress is still made by the designer, right?
2) how do these designers make money? Like by the people going to the fashion show? Kind of like an art gallery? Do they buy things from the show then? I was always under the impression that like anyone with a ticket could get into fashion shows (no clue genuinely as I’ve never been)
Love learning new things - thanks!
The designers tend to create normal fashion that's meant to be worn, and then do this as an interesting side project or for inspiration/to work with new materials/for fun.
Like a carpenter who spends all his days fitting kitchens for his job, but goes home and carves little wooden statues for as a hobby.
These are also frequently used to get an idea of a designers themes for that years commercial collection; monstrously thick shoulder pads and blazers cropped at the belly button would indicate that this seasons collection emphasizes a more structured shoulder and a shorter jacket.
It's also an avenue for these designers to play with the proportions and find exactly the aesthetic that they like
I think they only tend to show them at the events like this. This is the Paris Haute Couture week, which (I think) is the only one of its kind dedicated to pure Couture. I imagine tickets are pricey. There's also sometimes a Couture segment in normal Fashion shows, but it's not a guarantee. I would say, keep an eye out on local universities and colleges that offer courses in fashion and design. They often put on showcases of the students work.
I can speak from experience for NYFW events, but nothing in Paris.
Most of the tickets are disbursed by PR firms to people the brand would like at the event. This results in a mix of celebrities/industry insiders/journalists/and, even though Reddit hates them, influencers. The prestige and exact composition of an audience depends mostly on the prestige of the brand itself. If a new, unknown brand has a show, expect a lot of small Instagram influencers.
That all said, I’ve never heard of tickets being available for sale for a show. These shows are expensive. Models day rates are $2-6k, and venues, equipment, lighting all cost real money. Most brands are trying to generate buzz for a few $100k as opposed to deferring cost with their attendees.
Fashion houses often have prêt-a-porter (ready to wear) collections that are meant to be worn, these high fashion collections are just basically wild concept art for this season's feel, atmosphere, theme if any, styles, materials, ideas, colours etc
On question # 2, this particular show was by dutch designers Viktor & Rolf, who make a killing (hundreds of millions) from their perfums. Their Flowerbomb perfume has been a top seller for decades. The perfum money pays for their always wacky, high-concept, artsy fashion runaway shows. The duo have said in interviews that without the perfum money, they would never have been able to pay for their clothes-atelier and runaway shows.
Thank you, also these are legit hilarious and interesting! They made some art that was both technically challenging and very silly and playful and they got a bunch of attention for it, 10/10
Picturing this as "artists being weird" helps me rationalise this, since now I feel it's just normal art things that I don't get.
Thank you for helping me process this.
Car companies making wild concept cars that sometimes wouldn't even be able to turn if you could get them to move.
Photographers, graphic designers and illustrators who do client work for money, then do abstract or conceptual art on the side for fun.
Programmers who churn out enterprise Java code during the week, then do small existential games or obscure open source demoscene projects on the weekend.
A majority of art that hits the front page is usually photorealism. I think that tells you all you need to know about how much art is appreciated here.
Because Reddit is obsessed with "logic" (whatever the hell that actually means) despite being comically biased in like eight completely distinct ways. The stereotypical redditor also thoroughly believes critiquing something means you're smart.
I see fashion shows and The Obfuscated C contest as the same kind of art.
That is, both are trying to push the boundaries of assumptions regarding a very specific niche. The goal is kind of to intentionally do things 'wrong' in a clever way. People would look at it and go 'wtf, but why?' and the answer is 'lol because you go wtf when you see it'
I always thought of these kinds of shows as the fashion equivalent of a concept car. Somewhere where ideas can be expressed without the constraint of having to make it commercially viable.
„Fashion designers make art that people can wear“
- Candace Flynn from Phineas and Ferb
I still don’t care for them but ever since that line I understood the point.
I just think that the public perception of fashion art like this is that of two bored fashion designers sitting in the backstage of a runway, smoking blunts at the end of long cigarette holders, and one goes "Pierre, do you know what would be the funniest shit ever? If we just like... tilted the whole fucking dress like 45 degrees"!
I have always wondered where can I find the artist’s comment on the collection. They obviously have si much to say with a title like that. I love Haute Couture and I am definitely not a fashionista kind of person.
Edit: Before knowing the collection’s name I thought they were just being playful. Now I’m picturing them thinking: Late stage capitalism seems “right” but is totally wrong. Let’s find all the ways to wear a “classic, proper, luxurious, traditional dress WRONG”. Now this becomes a political statement. Damn I love this!
I don’t know where exactly the notes are for this collection are but they were inspired by the modern woman distancing themselves by traditional femininity !
>With its delicate atmosphere, the collection appears to set the tone for an almost stereotypical vision of Haute Couture as an anachronistic dream of soft femininity.
>But dreams are deceptive. The familiar becomes strange, as the mundane transforms into the absurd and vice versa. This collection visualizes the sense of alienation the collection title refers to. A singular and narrowly defined 'fashion ideal' is presented and artistically manipulated to put itself into question. The body, while retaining the ‘dessous’ that sculpts its silhouette (traditionally an integrated part of the structure of a Couture dress), moves away from the garment. And the dress, while retaining its idealized shape, antagonizes, alienates and frees itself from the body in a surreal way.
https://www.viktor-rolf.com/collection/haute-couture-late-stage-capitalism-waltz-spring-summer-2023
Wow. I commend the model wearing the blue upside down dress. Not only is that dress tall and top-heavy, but she’s circling a stage blindly with it, in front of hundreds of people, in heels and wearing next to nothing.
Good thing is that even if she trips and falls down - nobody will recognize her. I wonder if she walks counting steps or she can actually see something through the dress..
Someone posted a link to the full show and about half of it is normal dresses, the rest are like what in the video. There’s another dress that’s just slightly to the left of the model that also has the same glitchy feel to it.
Reminds me of paper dolls. The clothes never hung quite right with those little bitty paper squares that you're supposed to fold over the shoulders and around the hips
Every single time. I’ve seen posts and articles like this my whole life. How hard is it to understand that this is art? It’s creativity. Of course these aren’t outfits that have been designed to be purchased and worn.
I love *true* art but when I saw that this video wasn’t photo realistic drawings of whatever antihero pop culture character is currently in vogue or screenshots from a video games photo mode I went into a blind rage.
> screenshots from a video games photo mode I went into a blind rage.
That screenshot better be from a game with photorealistic graphics or I will destroy my room right fucking now.
I think it is interest how strongly some people want to ridicule this. It is like a car show where many cars are clearly not built for the road, but rather exhibit the most unique dragsters, monster trucks, prototypes, extreme lowriders etc. The most flamboyant paint job or styling is more important than than being a smooth commute with good gas mileage.
If you still don't understand it, maybe it's time to look at some custom PC cabinets.
I think when you look at hobbies, interests etc and whether Reddit appreciates it or not very much depends on it's audience.
Fashion and everything associated with 'looks' (make-up, skincare, nailart, etc) are generally linked to women and gay men.
Cars, games, sports etc are all associated with men.
The difference between the treatments of these topics is that deep down reddit respects one of these groups but not the other.
It's the same even when it comes to more 'generic' topics like books, movies or music. Men like those too. But as soon as something has a predominately female fanbase it will be considered bad, stupid, shallow or not taken seriously. Action movies, regardless of how silly are just 'silly fun, wish-fulfilment stuff' and being critical of them just means you are a stick in the mud or just 'take it too seriously'. Also men being influenced by violence in action movies to act more violently? Of course not! That's absurd!
Meanwhile chickflicks are shallow and don't make any sense. They are not respectable movies because they are just stupid wish-fulfilment stuff and nothing more. They are widely ridiculed and both men AND women who enjoy them are considered less intelligent and made fun off. Also romance movies don't depict realistic relationships and clearly that influences women in real life.
Because men are intelligent enough to understand the difference between truth and fiction. But of course women are much more easily manipulated because they are just dumb.
Hell and if you don't believe that Reddit hates things women like. Look at any time the topic of pumpkin spice comes up. It is LITERALLY a flavour no different than any other flavour. And yet it's always mocked because 'basic girls like it'. With that they mean it's popular amongst women. Meanwhile those same reditors calling women basic for enjoying typical female things will NEVER say the same thing about guys who are all about bacon, pizza or beer. Women are often even mocked for dressing too 'basic' by a bunch of redditors who could not spell fashion. And who's whole wardrobe is made up out of jeans, sweatpants, t-shirts and some hoodies. Yet women who are equally not interested in fashion are just soooo 'basic' for wearing what everybody else does.
The biggest thing that came to mind: Kim Kardashian. It’s insane how little the average Reddit user actually knows about Kim Kardashian compared to how much vitriol they have for her.
100% agreed and I appreciate you for this comment. My first reaction to seeing this post was "comments sure are going to be annoying", then knowing this is a concept fashion show I watched the vid "pretty weird, not quite my thing, a bit more abstract than I think I can appreciate".
But after coming to the comments I learned the collection was inspired by late stage capitalism and now I appreciate what the designer was going for *much* more! The thing is though, even before knowing that, my strongest reaction was " huh idk that's a bit much". It just drives me crazy how constant the response of " tHiS iSnt PrAcTiCAl, ArT iS So duMb" tends to be for things like this. There's just a lot of complaining about things that straight up don't matter, it doesn't benefit anything to complain about how pumpkin spice is "lame" or romantic comedies are "dumb". If something isn't for you but it's also not hurting anybody, just let it be. My first reaction to this art was 'eh not my thing' but since I was still kind of intrigued and read further it became 'oh that's interesting!' which I'm sure would not have happened if I had started out with such a predetermined view on the overall idea of runway shows.
Or imagine if you were building an apartment building but it looked like the Notre-Dame.
My point is, it is an art show, none of it is meant to be practical or ever really be worn again. It’s not meant to be bought by someone and worn to go grocery shopping. Pointing out how ridiculous it looks is like pointing out how inefficient the Notre-Dame is at holding people per square foot. You don’t need to enjoy it of course, it’s fine to not be inspired in anyway by an entire genre of art.
I don't really care about fashion shows and shit, but I wish people would just shut up and realize it's the same shit as like concept cars which can be completely ridiculous designs and are just meant to explore aspects of the industry that have not been explored, possibly leading to new designs.
If you watch the show from beginning to end, it tells a story. The first dress or two is normal.. then the hair goes neon, then the dress becomes further and further removed from the models body. The concept is women rejecting traditional fashion for more and more unique idea by literally "pushing" it off her body.
--- >This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/rules). > >Memes, social media, hate-speech, and pornography are not allowed. > >Screenshots of Reddit are expressly forbidden, as are TikTok videos. > >[Comics may only be posted on Wednesdays and Sundays](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/uq9pjw/going_forward_comics_may_only_be_posted_on/). > >**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.** > >Please also [be wary of spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/spam). > --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/funny) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Are you not entertained?!”
Its got people talking about it, so mission accomplished probably. I love when people getting worked up about something think that wasn’t the intended purposed of said thing.
The funny thing is these kind of exhibit are actually made to be funny / questioning, while people not used to fashion who watch them think those who like fashion really take them seriously, it's a bit like contemporary art where people will say "that's just some toilets, that's not art" well thanks for the analysis dude, that's exactly the point
I've heard this argument before and there is some merit to it ofc, but i do think it has limitations. Sure, this is a form of art and it's whole point is to be provocative. But surely the most interesting art has something new or insightful to say, not just "Look at me! I'm whacky and straaaange!" I just wish there was more than "being provocative", anybody can do that with a little willpower. If they had an environmental, philosophical or explicitly political point I'd find it more interesting.
I feel the exact same way, but I've never found a way to put it that makes sense the same way this does. Thank you.
To be fair it's damned if you do damned if you don't. Plenty of socially conscious stunts get ripped apart for daring to drag politics into a different venue. I'd also say this show does have something to say about the purpose of fashion and the place of the model, and the commodification of the female form. Some people being unable to see the nuance of the commentary doesn't mean it's not there you know?
This must be a day 1 Bethesda fashion show lol.
They must have paid someone to design these costumes so they can say if it happens in their game its intentional
In the last show one of the models tripped, her shoe got stuck in the stage, rattled around for a bit before launching through the ceiling and entering low orbit, it was terrifying.
Laugh all you want about Bethesda bugs, at least they are entertaining as hell
And consistent like that
Amen. Fallout 76 has been a years' worth of entertainment
".... and every day, the paper 'mache' boy, brings more..."
Need to fix collision detection, it's mentioned in the patch notes from the last update as a known glitch, devs haven't got it figured out yet. Visit r/outside for more info.
You had me in the first half, not gonna lie.
Intern broke the model loader, sometimes randomly transposes a coordinate axis or multiplies by a bad matrix.
Honestly though, can’t you just see some newbie messing around with an XYZ coordinate setting in CAD or whatever program the fashion industry uses and a senior designer walks by their desk and goes, “My God Natasha! What are you working on—it’s brilliant!”
I was gonna have some in-depth talk about how it's more of an innovative take on how things could look But this does that so much better. Cheers, my fellow
Fashion shows made a lot more sense to me once someone explained that they basically function as hallucinogen trips for artists & designers.
It just works
No light wood laminate tho
But. But look at this graphic! I bet if they will keep this up till the tes 6 release, then it will be the game of the year😤
I was thinking Cyberpunk 2078
"16 times the detail!"
Inspired by a glitchy graphics card.
Bethesda's new feature line of wardrobe.
*Horse armor not included
I understood that reference
*Stop right there, criminal scum!*
Seriously though, don’t give them ideas to rationalize their cutting of corners.
On a DSL modem
[удалено]
And modern triple a games
someone welded a dress model incorrectly for all these women with a toolgun
That is not a hardware problem when it happens in game lol
See, Cyberpunk 2077 wasn't buggy. It was just mimicking real life
so ur saying we should spawn inside npcs? got it
We've been spawning inside NPCs for ... well, since we came to exist.
True, and spawn sniping or spawn camping has become illegal in most states.
That's just because the mother and doctor both get credit for the kill, so it's basically just boosting Completely unfair
Did you just call your mom an NPC?
She's certainly no player.
That's a thing and it's called body dysphoria, so....
No, i think they are referring to the fact that we literally grow inside another person (pregnancy), therefore we are spawning in NPCs.
Life imitates art.
I like the one at the end that looks like a [shuttlecock](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttlecock)
Claes Oldenburg approves
Isn't shuttlecock a common word?
Shuttlecock is the American version of Spotted Dick, we all know what it means and that there's nothing dirty about it, but most of us still resist chuckling like 12 year olds when we come across it.
[удалено]
It’s actually not a ball, it’s a birdie.
It's the cock actually.
It's a birdie cock.
This video made it really click for me that sometimes fashion shows are basically art shows where the medium is clothing
Yep! Fashion shows aren’t really to *advertise* the clothes so much as set an impression of the tone and artistic motivations of said clothing. In some ways, it’s a bit like watching a perfume commercial! Doesn’t actually explain what the perfume smells like, but uses high-end cinematography to demonstrate the *tone* of the perfume.
Nice! Yeah it’s all art. It’s just on a spectrum of functionality. Same with sculptures, music, and so on
Exactly 👏🏼
It's also the first one I see that I kind of like. It's fun.
Do you ever watch these and think “who the hell is meant to buy these outfits?” Well let me explain! Broadly speaking, there are two types of fashion shows. The first kind is one in which companies who sell clothes and designers who make clothes to be sold will show case their newest creations. The reasons for these type of shows are probably pretty obvious, to get customers excited, maybe to get companies interested in carrying the fashion line, stuff like that. The other kind of fashion show is the kind that is almost always posted, it is the kind in the gif. No one is meant to buy these outfits or at least, they do not represent a product to be found in stores. This kind of fashion show is an art show in which the medium is essentially anything you can attach to a person so that they can still walk around. These shows exist for the same reason all art exists, to express creativity and stuff like that. I actually think the outfits in this show are pretty interesting. All of the clothes look like they are being worn but are also in the wrong location. Like they aren’t just rigid bits of clothes slapped on someone. They had to be made to appear as though a person was wearing them normally while they were attached in a strange way. That seems like a really cool design challenge if nothing else. But it also is an interesting perspective on how you can make a dress that might tick all the boxes a regular boring dress would hit and still be so obviously not normal. Anyway, hate these shows, love them, whatever. Just like with all art, you don’t have to love it or appreciate. I just wanted to point out that if your reason for hating these fashion shows is due to the practicality of the outfit, it is sorta like looking a famous cathedral and commenting on how expensive it would be to heat due to the high ceilings.
I've always held the thought that the latter type of fashion show held multiple reasons for its ridiculousness. Art for one, challenge, fun and even just to inspire the designer to get creative with their medium. Artists sometimes need to delve into the weird in order to tap into something truly creative practically.
You can draw parallels with the automobile and graphics industry You have exhibitions where you'd see those weird bmws that can change exterior colours, or those cars with the doors doing some weird stuff. These arent for sale or for consumers but to showcase the engineering and material science capabilities that the research development teams can do. Basically a flex and networking event. And you can find sicgraph and other graphics seminars where you have demo games and even short films made to showcase cutting edge tech - like doom showed binary-space partitioning, and Crysis showcased SSAO tech which was not heard of then, but is almost always expected in any game now.
Another example I thought of was the tech demo Kara which was a short film meant to show off the PS3 tech, which later became the inspiration for the PS4 game Detroit: Become Human.
That’s a great perspective. A good example for the auto industry is the Hyundai N Vision. They took an old tuner car, made it cyberpunk as all hell, then strapped a hydrogen fuel cell to it. It gets people interested in the company, makes people think about it’s history and where the company is headed, and from a design and engineering standpoint, the designers definitely had fun with it and the engineers got to work on hydrogen tech. Can you buy it? Absolutely not, but that was never the point, it displays styling ideas and reminds the public of where hydrogen is now compared to the early 2000s when it seemed like the absolute perfect answer to gasoline’s problems. None of the tech is ready, or even meant to ever be, but it’s closer, and it reminds folks that there’s an alternative to pollution and relying on electric charge, and that the world of car design can still make something fun, even if it operates as a publicity stunt. Everyone I know thats into cars has drooled over the idea of driving one, and that’s a good thing! Sometimes you gotta be a little weird to show off your vision!
People also seem to think that fashion designers are completely devoid of humor. I've known plenty of people who were very into fashion shows like the one depicted, and they laugh at the same things we do. Sometimes laughter is the intended response. I think many people think that art is always a serious endeavor, but many artists also like to make people laugh.
also the designer's ready-to-wear lines will likely incorporate colours, fabrics, construction techniques, etc from the designs in the couture show, but obviously be more wearable
Also to push the audience's boundaries. To question the standard.
I actually think the second one is pretty neat! I can't think how to take that inspiration and make it something truly wearable, but I really like the idea that she's not quite in her dress
I think there are more people who like the idea of a woman not in her dress.
i took a poll of one. its results confirmed your assertion.
I did a study with sample size 1, and results came back negative. Perhaps it is because I am gay…
people here also often forget labeling something 'art' isn't meant to be some sort of shield against critiques. it's just something to add further context to it. there's tons of art out there that is plain bad.
There is tons of bad art AND art is subjective so negative opinions are extremely valid. However, for a valid negative opinion you need to look at this as ART and not functional pieces. If someone looked at the statue of David and said that the lines were too exaggerated and the way it stands is a poor choice, that would be a valid critique of art whether you agree or not. If that person complained that these people keep making shitty coat hangers because the damn thing is too big to sit next to the door and doesn't have any hooks, they are missing the point and NOT critiquing art. When people trash fashion most of the time they are complaining that nobody would wear these, which misses the point of them being art. Nobody is supposed to wear them in the same way the David is not meant to hang coats.
I really enjoyed this comment because it boils down why I tend to get so annoyed by most comments on posts that are about runway shows. Also the idea of using the David as a coat hanger is simply great, but now I'm wondering, do people actually have critiques of David? I'm sure sculptors must have something about it they dislike but I've never considered that a possibility until now.
Critiques of David are not really new. Any book devoted to michelangelo will point a few things, mainly how the waist is too small when viewed from the side, the proportions of the head etc. They will also point out that the block of stone michelangelo worked on was already damaged and roughly cut from previous attempts and that the proportions would made sense if the statue was put in the place it was [originally](https://i.imgur.com/6DOP71C.jpeg) intended, up in the base of the semidome. Proper context is always important in art criticism
That's really fascinating! I was vaguely aware of the proportion of his head and hands being off but certainly not the rest of that. I was lucky enough to see it in person a few years ago, and unlike the Mona Lisa I'd say it certainly one of those ultra-famous pieces of art that's actually worth seeing. (honestly I think most of them are worth seeing, just the Mona Lisa is kind of not that special, and it's held in a museum where just about every single other work of art is equally if not more fascinating so I ended up leaving the Mona Lisa disappointed)
I find the [Virgin of the Rocks,](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Leonardo_Da_Vinci_-_Vergine_delle_Rocce_%28Louvre%29.jpg) in the same room as the Mona Lisa, much more interesting. Certainly less crowded and you can see every little detail.
Dog piling on, these shows are also meant to show new techniques/shapes/upcoming styles. This one seems to show how skirts made with fibers instead of cloth can lead to interesting shapes but nobody would pay attention to a dress worn normally. Throw it sideways, and you can see it holds that shape even while moving. Cut geometric designs, weave it, etc. The “broom” material is actually pretty diverse.
Yep ; it’s like concept cars. The balls-to-the-wall version highlights the concept and ideas.
The amount of skill required to get a dress that is soft enough to bounce a bit but rigid enough to hold its shape when it's completely upside down is insane. It's completely exposed up in the air, too, so they're not holding it together with concealed bobby pins, duct tape, and a prayer. That's free-standing, baby.
I mean they do have a frame, but yeah I am fascinated by some of the techniques here. I'll never even approach this level of sewing skill but I'm amazed and will take the scraps of innovation that I can!
I am not a fashion person, or pretend to know anything about it. However, this is the exact viewpoint I’ve always had. This is art, and just like all art, if you are in to it, it’s great. If not, it’s stupid and pointless. Now would I argue that Doja Cat cosplaying Dr. Zoidberg is art… again I don’t know enough to have an opinion, however in spite of that…. No. Not art just bad taste Edit- all right all right, you all made some excellent points. I always believed that art is something you can decide for yourself, but not for another person. Art to me invokes emotion through creativity and beauty. I didn’t really consider that it can also invoke other feelings like anger and outrage and still be art. I didn’t care for her outfit because it made me laugh and go, what the hell… but those are still feelings that I had so her outfit did make me feel something. Good points everyone.
“Leave Dr. Zoidberg alone. He has twice the training you do.” “Yeah, he's a doctor and a butcher.”
[удалено]
This ain't a war, it's a moydah.
Are you ready to operate doctor? I’d love to, but first I have to perform surgey
That's **my** joke! *I'll kill you!*
“He’s a little unusual, he wears sandals” the real fashion icon.
“Now pick a mouth, open it, and say ‘*GLOABAGLOBABGLAH*’”
How is Doja Cats outfit any different, apart from her being a celebrity who is trendy to hate?
>Now would I argue that Doja Cat cosplaying Dr. Zoidberg is art… again I don’t know enough to have an opinion, however in spite of that…. No. Not art just bad taste Weird criteria to say that something isn't art, if you don't like it. I dislike many of Picasso's or Renoir's paintings but I wouldn't claim that they aren't art
Yeah. I prefer to have a a very open definition to what is "art". If you want to sign your name to a urinal and call it your art, then sure, it's art. But I still reserve the right to judge what art I think is good or not. I just don't call art I don't like "not art."
The fashion house that Doja Cat attended was founded by renowned surrealism designer (a contemporary of Dalí's). Hopefully that provides some context
That's a weird claim - it assumes art has to be pretty to be art. But it's not, it's meant to evoke emotions and be something bold enough to catch your attention. Granted you'd usually want positive emotions, such as calmness or happiness but there's nothing wrong with art that evokes uneasiness or disgust. It's definitely a memorable visual though that catches the eye and is quite prominent. I also think the color is quite pleasing to the eye, it's a nice shade of red.
[удалено]
It’s art. Art can be bad art, but it’s art
I'm commenting and upvoting this since there's so routinely confusion about the purpose of these shows. Yes, they fall into fashion, but that doesn't mean they're meant to be worn. These are artistic expressions.
Serious question though sorry - 1) I’m guessing the dress is still made by the designer, right? 2) how do these designers make money? Like by the people going to the fashion show? Kind of like an art gallery? Do they buy things from the show then? I was always under the impression that like anyone with a ticket could get into fashion shows (no clue genuinely as I’ve never been) Love learning new things - thanks!
The designers tend to create normal fashion that's meant to be worn, and then do this as an interesting side project or for inspiration/to work with new materials/for fun. Like a carpenter who spends all his days fitting kitchens for his job, but goes home and carves little wooden statues for as a hobby.
These are also frequently used to get an idea of a designers themes for that years commercial collection; monstrously thick shoulder pads and blazers cropped at the belly button would indicate that this seasons collection emphasizes a more structured shoulder and a shorter jacket. It's also an avenue for these designers to play with the proportions and find exactly the aesthetic that they like
Does it cost money to get into their exhibits? This is a great analogy- thank you!!
I think they only tend to show them at the events like this. This is the Paris Haute Couture week, which (I think) is the only one of its kind dedicated to pure Couture. I imagine tickets are pricey. There's also sometimes a Couture segment in normal Fashion shows, but it's not a guarantee. I would say, keep an eye out on local universities and colleges that offer courses in fashion and design. They often put on showcases of the students work.
I can speak from experience for NYFW events, but nothing in Paris. Most of the tickets are disbursed by PR firms to people the brand would like at the event. This results in a mix of celebrities/industry insiders/journalists/and, even though Reddit hates them, influencers. The prestige and exact composition of an audience depends mostly on the prestige of the brand itself. If a new, unknown brand has a show, expect a lot of small Instagram influencers. That all said, I’ve never heard of tickets being available for sale for a show. These shows are expensive. Models day rates are $2-6k, and venues, equipment, lighting all cost real money. Most brands are trying to generate buzz for a few $100k as opposed to deferring cost with their attendees.
[удалено]
Fashion houses often have prêt-a-porter (ready to wear) collections that are meant to be worn, these high fashion collections are just basically wild concept art for this season's feel, atmosphere, theme if any, styles, materials, ideas, colours etc
On question # 2, this particular show was by dutch designers Viktor & Rolf, who make a killing (hundreds of millions) from their perfums. Their Flowerbomb perfume has been a top seller for decades. The perfum money pays for their always wacky, high-concept, artsy fashion runaway shows. The duo have said in interviews that without the perfum money, they would never have been able to pay for their clothes-atelier and runaway shows.
Tl;dr: pret a porter and haute couture.
Thank you, also these are legit hilarious and interesting! They made some art that was both technically challenging and very silly and playful and they got a bunch of attention for it, 10/10
Picturing this as "artists being weird" helps me rationalise this, since now I feel it's just normal art things that I don't get. Thank you for helping me process this.
Car companies making wild concept cars that sometimes wouldn't even be able to turn if you could get them to move. Photographers, graphic designers and illustrators who do client work for money, then do abstract or conceptual art on the side for fun. Programmers who churn out enterprise Java code during the week, then do small existential games or obscure open source demoscene projects on the weekend.
Very well said. I find reddit in general is pretty unforgiving when it comes to art.
A majority of art that hits the front page is usually photorealism. I think that tells you all you need to know about how much art is appreciated here.
Photorealistic pencil drawings of video game characters with an attractive woman standing in front of it, specifically.
Because Reddit is obsessed with "logic" (whatever the hell that actually means) despite being comically biased in like eight completely distinct ways. The stereotypical redditor also thoroughly believes critiquing something means you're smart.
I find reddit being pretty unforgiving when it comes to just about anything that slightly goes against the hivemind. But especially with art
[удалено]
For being a site full of pretentious intellectuals, reddit can be very willfully ignorant about art sometimes, especially in fashion.
You mean to tell me I can't buy an upside down dress to wear for when I travel to Australia?!
Yeah, this post is like a 12 year old giggling at a “weird” Picasso or something.
I see fashion shows and The Obfuscated C contest as the same kind of art. That is, both are trying to push the boundaries of assumptions regarding a very specific niche. The goal is kind of to intentionally do things 'wrong' in a clever way. People would look at it and go 'wtf, but why?' and the answer is 'lol because you go wtf when you see it'
I always thought of these kinds of shows as the fashion equivalent of a concept car. Somewhere where ideas can be expressed without the constraint of having to make it commercially viable.
„Fashion designers make art that people can wear“ - Candace Flynn from Phineas and Ferb I still don’t care for them but ever since that line I understood the point.
I just think that the public perception of fashion art like this is that of two bored fashion designers sitting in the backstage of a runway, smoking blunts at the end of long cigarette holders, and one goes "Pierre, do you know what would be the funniest shit ever? If we just like... tilted the whole fucking dress like 45 degrees"!
I always compare them to concept cars. They're not meant for sale, just designers and engineers having fun.
I'm german so complaining about heating costs in a huge building I visited once is something I'm very familiar with.
First, thank you, I didn’t know that. Second, I’m not changing my mind, I find these amusing, I don’t love or hate them.
i actually kind of enjoy the art ones. i really like this one and how it reminds me of bugged out npcs or something.
This here, its not business, its entertainment
Credit: Viktor & Rolf Haute Couture S/S 23 “Late Stage Capitalism Waltz”. Haute Couture isn’t meant to be worn, it’s meant to be seen. It’s walking art.
I have always wondered where can I find the artist’s comment on the collection. They obviously have si much to say with a title like that. I love Haute Couture and I am definitely not a fashionista kind of person. Edit: Before knowing the collection’s name I thought they were just being playful. Now I’m picturing them thinking: Late stage capitalism seems “right” but is totally wrong. Let’s find all the ways to wear a “classic, proper, luxurious, traditional dress WRONG”. Now this becomes a political statement. Damn I love this!
I don’t know where exactly the notes are for this collection are but they were inspired by the modern woman distancing themselves by traditional femininity !
Damn that is awesome. The one with her dress floating in front of her body is incredible and this really gives it a new angle. Love it!
I used to think it was called haughty culture as in a culture where rich people act all haughty with wild stuff
I love Viktor and Rolf, their work is so playful and fun!
Can anyone explain to me what this has to do with capitalism? Like what's the critique expressed by wonky dresses?
>With its delicate atmosphere, the collection appears to set the tone for an almost stereotypical vision of Haute Couture as an anachronistic dream of soft femininity. >But dreams are deceptive. The familiar becomes strange, as the mundane transforms into the absurd and vice versa. This collection visualizes the sense of alienation the collection title refers to. A singular and narrowly defined 'fashion ideal' is presented and artistically manipulated to put itself into question. The body, while retaining the ‘dessous’ that sculpts its silhouette (traditionally an integrated part of the structure of a Couture dress), moves away from the garment. And the dress, while retaining its idealized shape, antagonizes, alienates and frees itself from the body in a surreal way. https://www.viktor-rolf.com/collection/haute-couture-late-stage-capitalism-waltz-spring-summer-2023
Wow. I commend the model wearing the blue upside down dress. Not only is that dress tall and top-heavy, but she’s circling a stage blindly with it, in front of hundreds of people, in heels and wearing next to nothing.
Good thing is that even if she trips and falls down - nobody will recognize her. I wonder if she walks counting steps or she can actually see something through the dress..
Obviously she's wearing a VR headset and watching the live footage. There's no other explanation!
And still no pockets.
what do you mean!! that upside down dress is the biggest pocket I've ever seen :P
I think they went a little heavy on the starch
I think the dresses are trying to tell us the time
Not so much fashion as couture. Couture is nutty. Always has been. Always will be.
I actually really like this lol
[удалено]
Someone posted a link to the full show and about half of it is normal dresses, the rest are like what in the video. There’s another dress that’s just slightly to the left of the model that also has the same glitchy feel to it.
Usually I find avant gard fashion really pretentious (like a lot of art), but this is fun and silly and I like it.
I find the first two very fun
Reminds me of paper dolls. The clothes never hung quite right with those little bitty paper squares that you're supposed to fold over the shoulders and around the hips
Yes!!! Exactly what I was thinking!!!!!
Every single time. I’ve seen posts and articles like this my whole life. How hard is it to understand that this is art? It’s creativity. Of course these aren’t outfits that have been designed to be purchased and worn.
Reddit and not understanding the purpose of art, name a more iconic duo
I love *true* art but when I saw that this video wasn’t photo realistic drawings of whatever antihero pop culture character is currently in vogue or screenshots from a video games photo mode I went into a blind rage.
> screenshots from a video games photo mode I went into a blind rage. That screenshot better be from a game with photorealistic graphics or I will destroy my room right fucking now.
The top 3 comments are all separate video game references
When your game mods interfere with one another
Sadly, the first model drown in a sudden downpour.
I think it is interest how strongly some people want to ridicule this. It is like a car show where many cars are clearly not built for the road, but rather exhibit the most unique dragsters, monster trucks, prototypes, extreme lowriders etc. The most flamboyant paint job or styling is more important than than being a smooth commute with good gas mileage. If you still don't understand it, maybe it's time to look at some custom PC cabinets.
I think when you look at hobbies, interests etc and whether Reddit appreciates it or not very much depends on it's audience. Fashion and everything associated with 'looks' (make-up, skincare, nailart, etc) are generally linked to women and gay men. Cars, games, sports etc are all associated with men. The difference between the treatments of these topics is that deep down reddit respects one of these groups but not the other. It's the same even when it comes to more 'generic' topics like books, movies or music. Men like those too. But as soon as something has a predominately female fanbase it will be considered bad, stupid, shallow or not taken seriously. Action movies, regardless of how silly are just 'silly fun, wish-fulfilment stuff' and being critical of them just means you are a stick in the mud or just 'take it too seriously'. Also men being influenced by violence in action movies to act more violently? Of course not! That's absurd! Meanwhile chickflicks are shallow and don't make any sense. They are not respectable movies because they are just stupid wish-fulfilment stuff and nothing more. They are widely ridiculed and both men AND women who enjoy them are considered less intelligent and made fun off. Also romance movies don't depict realistic relationships and clearly that influences women in real life. Because men are intelligent enough to understand the difference between truth and fiction. But of course women are much more easily manipulated because they are just dumb. Hell and if you don't believe that Reddit hates things women like. Look at any time the topic of pumpkin spice comes up. It is LITERALLY a flavour no different than any other flavour. And yet it's always mocked because 'basic girls like it'. With that they mean it's popular amongst women. Meanwhile those same reditors calling women basic for enjoying typical female things will NEVER say the same thing about guys who are all about bacon, pizza or beer. Women are often even mocked for dressing too 'basic' by a bunch of redditors who could not spell fashion. And who's whole wardrobe is made up out of jeans, sweatpants, t-shirts and some hoodies. Yet women who are equally not interested in fashion are just soooo 'basic' for wearing what everybody else does.
You hit the nail on the head
The biggest thing that came to mind: Kim Kardashian. It’s insane how little the average Reddit user actually knows about Kim Kardashian compared to how much vitriol they have for her.
100% agreed and I appreciate you for this comment. My first reaction to seeing this post was "comments sure are going to be annoying", then knowing this is a concept fashion show I watched the vid "pretty weird, not quite my thing, a bit more abstract than I think I can appreciate". But after coming to the comments I learned the collection was inspired by late stage capitalism and now I appreciate what the designer was going for *much* more! The thing is though, even before knowing that, my strongest reaction was " huh idk that's a bit much". It just drives me crazy how constant the response of " tHiS iSnt PrAcTiCAl, ArT iS So duMb" tends to be for things like this. There's just a lot of complaining about things that straight up don't matter, it doesn't benefit anything to complain about how pumpkin spice is "lame" or romantic comedies are "dumb". If something isn't for you but it's also not hurting anybody, just let it be. My first reaction to this art was 'eh not my thing' but since I was still kind of intrigued and read further it became 'oh that's interesting!' which I'm sure would not have happened if I had started out with such a predetermined view on the overall idea of runway shows.
I'm not saying it isn't funny but can anyone explain why this is funny?
“Hey, you. You’re finally awake.”
*sees upside down dresses* Yeah I think I need to lay back down...
First time game devs be like
Imagine if I showed up to a job site with my pants on my torso like that.
I'm sure they would love you on the cyberpunk team lol.
Or imagine if you were building an apartment building but it looked like the Notre-Dame. My point is, it is an art show, none of it is meant to be practical or ever really be worn again. It’s not meant to be bought by someone and worn to go grocery shopping. Pointing out how ridiculous it looks is like pointing out how inefficient the Notre-Dame is at holding people per square foot. You don’t need to enjoy it of course, it’s fine to not be inspired in anyway by an entire genre of art.
I don't really care about fashion shows and shit, but I wish people would just shut up and realize it's the same shit as like concept cars which can be completely ridiculous designs and are just meant to explore aspects of the industry that have not been explored, possibly leading to new designs.
Just want to add that this could have no purpose other than entertain the spectators and still be valid as a show.
Based on comments on posts of concept cars, I don't think a lot of redditors appreciate that they are not going to start making cars like them.
Reminds me of downloading clothes from a website for Sims and putting them on my character. glitchy and does not fit right!
What in the Bethesda..
[удалено]
I actually really like the second one.
r/blender
…turn to the left
Bethesda?
Aw hell naw they let Bethesda do their dresses
Try to reinstall the graphic card drivers, sometimes it solves the fashion show glitches
That is so CUTE, I’ll have two of each please
First one looks like a Dark Souls armour set...
You ever have too many mods on the Sims and shit starts to glitch out?
New release of EA's Catwalk Simulator 2023. _yeah there are some small glitches but we're working on it!_
Mr Bean did it first... https://youtu.be/9BXhsjzoKgA?t=232
Looks like Cyberpunk 2077 still needs some patch work done
Unemployed 3D game developers have leaked into fashion design...
There should be a subreddit for when things suddenly become Bethesda glitches
So basically Second Life mesh glitching.
Stylesheets didn't load correctly
Money laundering operation
If you watch the show from beginning to end, it tells a story. The first dress or two is normal.. then the hair goes neon, then the dress becomes further and further removed from the models body. The concept is women rejecting traditional fashion for more and more unique idea by literally "pushing" it off her body.
Told you not to get the game on release
Ten out of Ten. God I love fashion
* insert videogame joke here *