Two things for me really. Cost and soft kit. I love the look of Gothic armour. If I was ever to get a full harness of plate, it would be Gothic. But good Gothic armour is well out of my budget. Secondly, while I love the armour, I don't share the same fondness for men's clothing of the era. Before and after, I can find clothing I like, appropriate to the station of a person who would be in fitted cap-a-pie armour, but during the heyday of Gothic plate, not so much.

I have an awful lot to say about the subject - but I have a sword to fix. For most of the 15th c., it seems that (the surviving) German armour was made of highly refined wrought iron, but no steel (so far), so corrugating the stuff was a good way to make it more rigid. I have a saying that, until the German smiths were making tempered steel armour, smart Germans wore Italian. Italian armour is just about NEVER done right, because the information to make it properly is not available, and smiths have not been able to properly interpret the photographic evidence they usually work from. I have handled more than most of both styles, and I will say flat-out that while I prefer the 'gothic' style for its visual impact, the Italian stuff is built on a better understanding of ergonomics. To quote one of the major Scandinavian sword makers (ran into him in John Waller's office at the Royal Armouries, and forgot his name! :blush: ), 'Italian armour is subtle'. Amen. By contrast, German 15th c. armour can be downright bizarre, and the approach seems often to be that if you use enough lames with sliding rivets, you will eventually get an acceptable range of motion. By contrast, the classic mid 15th c. Italian heavy cavalry harness is a marvel of ergonomic sophistication combined with simplicity of design resulting in increased production speed. They know how to do more with fewer lames. An unadorned 'gothic' armour is much easier for the modern smith to make work properly than an Italian heavy cavalry armour.