Saw this post a while back and apparently it's super unrealistic, or at least really, really impractical. Now I know nothing about armor myself, but a lot of people who commented on that post back there said that it would not function well if used in actual battle. Which is why I ask, is there a medieval armor expert on FS who is willing to enlighten us? :3
Its a hell of a lot more functional than a metal bikini that exposes all vital organs. It's also pretty historically accurate. Its plate mail so it moves but still protects.
However, it doesn't cover the sides whatsoever, leaving them wide open for some of the most common attacks.
Due to the overall lack of defense apart from the front and (presumably) the back, this is more likely to be dress or traveling armor or for torments duels designed to provide some defense while leaving high mobility. This could be "light" armor, but even that would have more leather (hardened) or a chain shirt and possibly pants. Although it is not a sexualisation, it is still largely impracticable. If you don't believe me, simply imagine this with all the cloth parts removed.
Not an expert but have had some experience with various armors and classic sword fights (not video games), but don't take my word as gospel.
One reason I think video game designers do such outlandish designs when it comes to female armor, is that in general, the only thing that would change would be the size of the armor depending on how large or small you are. If a women were to wear armor, she wouldn't look all that different from a man wearing armor. Art assets would have basically a copy and paste job to do when it came to making different kinds of armor for the sexes.
Given that Celtic men would go I to battle naked, people who know nothing about history should stop making statements about things that they don't know anything about. This is about something that 'feels' like it should be wrong, but in May cases, most armor was minimal for movement. The heavy plate armor of western Europe was only used for a short period of time, and was largely ceremonial.
They even had huge parade swords to wave around, but I doubt those were used in combat frequently. There were ceremonial gear and kit, but most armor did cover and protect superbly well. It wasn't until firearms became a staple of warfare that armor was discarded due to detrimental defense compared to the power of gunpowder.
Due to the overall lack of defense apart from the front and (presumably) the back, this is more likely to be dress or traveling armor or for torments duels designed to provide some defense while leaving high mobility. This could be "light" armor, but even that would have more leather (hardened) or a chain shirt and possibly pants. Although it is not a sexualisation, it is still largely impracticable. If you don't believe me, simply imagine this with all the cloth parts removed.
Not an expert but have had some experience with various armors and classic sword fights (not video games), but don't take my word as gospel.