241 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

KLUME777 wrote...


In medieval times, warrior equivelants would be the sword and shield, claymore, armoured 'tank' type.


Rogue equivelents would be archers, light armoured, 'martial arts', cut throats. Light weight warriors.

There all warriors. In DAO the tanks are called warriors, and the light armored are called 'rogues'.

Fail.

For an archer, strength is even more important than for a meelee warrior because sill doesn´t help using your bow (it helps hitting your target, but it won´t enable you to actually pull the string back if you lack the strength to do so).

[Tirigon]

Eorion_Moonwing wrote...

Tirigon wrote...


Well, actually elves look like humans, only with pointy ears, more slim and infinitely more beautiful.

I wish only one game would ever get this right......

Lotro elves-yes. Because they were meant to look like beautiful humans with leaf shaped ears. Iw you surch them try lotro-based game like lorto online or soon to be released War of the North (www.gamer.ru/system/attached_images/images/000/214/541/original/e3_SS_02.jpg) . But elves exist before the lotro and they were inhuman. Beautiful but strangely, alien beautiful. 

Don´t lecture me about elves, I know more about them than youB)


Anyways, I would love to play a LotR-game - if there was a decent one. Sadly, the movies are not nearly as good as the novel, and the games are a disgrace even to the movies:sick:

[KLUME777]

Tirigon wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...


In medieval times, warrior equivelants would be the sword and shield, claymore, armoured 'tank' type.


Rogue equivelents would be archers, light armoured, 'martial arts', cut throats. Light weight warriors.

There all warriors. In DAO the tanks are called warriors, and the light armored are called 'rogues'.

Fail.

For an archer, strength is even more important than for a meelee warrior because sill doesn´t help using your bow (it helps hitting your target, but it won´t enable you to actually pull the string back if you lack the strength to do so).

And thats why i said before that rogues should have really strong arms.

I never said rogues should be weak, i said they shouldnt be really bulk and massive like a tank. They should be athletic, lithe. Theyre still strong.

[Shepard Lives]

Okay, that is concept art and this means it is not to be trusted (anyone remember my post in the Qunari thread?), but I will say this.



The qunari male is nicely designed. Sure he looks like he eats steroids three times a day, but I think that's exactly what BW was going for.



The qunari female is smoking hot. More muscle definition (but not more bulk) would be nice, though.



The humans look nice, I suppose, aside from the female's odd legs and misshapen ribcage.



And as a huge DAO elf fan... those elves are ugly as sin. Seriously. They look jarringly alien, and not elven at all. Especially the female, which seems to have kept the "skinny human" concept from DAO but only after discarding everything pleasant about it. Also why in the world are her breast just as big as the human's? We may be horny bastards, Bioware, but we're not idiots (okay, maybe some of us are, but still.) Those elves are revolting. Okay, /rant.



The dwarf male is... comical, to say the least. I can't take him seriously. I mean look at his face.

The female is considerably attractive for a dwarf, but it's clearly because her face has a very human design. Still, nice body, I'd certainly tap that. Don't know about a full-fledged romance, though. Dwarven females kind of clash with my romantic ideal of videogame woman. Let's leave it at that, because it' really hard to explain and I don't feel like getting into debates.



TL;DR: I mostly approve of this concept art aside from the eleves which are abominable.

[KLUME777]

shepard_lives wrote...

Okay, that is concept art and this means it is not to be trusted (anyone remember my post in the Qunari thread?), but I will say this.

The qunari male is nicely designed. Sure he looks like he eats steroids three times a day, but I think that's exactly what BW was going for.

The qunari female is smoking hot. More muscle definition (but not more bulk) would be nice, though.

The humans look nice, I suppose, aside from the female's odd legs and misshapen ribcage.

And as a huge DAO elf fan... those elves are ugly as sin. Seriously. They look jarringly alien, and not elven at all. Especially the female, which seems to have kept the "skinny human" concept from DAO but only after discarding everything pleasant about it. Also why in the world are her breast just as big as the human's? We may be horny bastards, Bioware, but we're not idiots (okay, maybe some of us are, but still.) Those elves are revolting. Okay, /rant.

The dwarf male is... comical, to say the least. I can't take him seriously. I mean look at his face.
The female is considerably attractive for a dwarf, but it's clearly because her face has a very human design. Still, nice body, I'd certainly tap that. Don't know about a full-fledged romance, though. Dwarven females kind of clash with my romantic ideal of videogame woman. Let's leave it at that, because it' really hard to explain and I don't feel like getting into debates.

TL;DR: I mostly approve of this concept art aside from the eleves which are abominable.

Yeah i know its conept art, but that human female ( and the dwarf i suppose) is fugly.

[SithLordExarKun]

KLUME777 wrote...


No, im saying if you wanna be the best of the best, you need the genetics.

That depends on best in what. If you meam winning the Mr olympia in IFBB pro bodybuilding, then yes, you need the genes.

To be the best fighter, no you don't, you need to be the most skillful, and your size is something you can overcome by eating right and training in the gym. And yet again ill ask you a question you aren't smart enough to answer, what is "genetically" required to become a master of fighting? Or the best?

Genetics don't dictate the success of your skills as a warrior/fighter. Get this fact into that numbskull of yours.


EDIT, By the way, cute way of changing your argument everytime it gets debunked, from needing the genes to become a warrior, and then to needing the genes to be a master, now its needing the genes to be the best of the best.

No wonder you're likely a 98lbs weakling or a 300lb phat boi sitting on a couch making excuses about needing the genes to accomplish anything when you can simply make the best of what you have.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 14 août 2010 - 04:54 .

[Cyansomnia]

I like the qunari designs, but I'm not big on the elves. Their ears bother me. I'll take a more traditional elf ear, thanks.

[Oblivious]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...


No, im saying if you wanna be the best of the best, you need the genetics.

That depends on best in what. If you meam winning the Mr olympia in IFBB pro bodybuilding, then yes, you need the genes.

To be the best fighter, no you don't, you need to be the most skillful, and your size is something you can overcome by eating right and training in the gym. And yet again ill ask you a question you aren't smart enough to answer, what is "genetically" required to become a master of fighting? Or the best?

Genetics don't dictate the success of your skills as a warrior/fighter. Get this fact into that numbskull of yours.


EDIT, By the way, cute way of changing your argument everytime it gets debunked, from needing the genes to become a warrior, and then to needing the genes to be a master, now its needing the genes to be the best of the best.

No wonder you're likely a 98lbs weakling or a 300lb phat boi sitting on a couch making excuses about needing the genes to accomplish anything when you can simply make the best of what you have.

Hate it when people put ad-homs but w/e its not my conversation. To be a good fighter, however, you do need good genes.

No matter how hard you train nor how long things like vision, hearing, and natural aggression won't increase. Other things like hand-eye coordination, endurance, pain tolerance, or reaction speed you can train but they will be pretty weak when compared to somebody who was born with a natural talent in it. The only things that separate the cream of the crop and trash is willpower and skill. Even then, willpower is up to the individual while the most skilled genetic jewel is still superior to the most skilled Average Joe.

Just for the sake of pretending like my post has something to do with Dragon Age take Alistair for example: the son of an elven mage warden and a line of kings and lords making him the most genetically superior person in the game. He is then trained from the age of 10 in discipline, fighting techniques, skills even the greatest warrior doesn't know (like defending against magic) and despite all that Alistair is still inferior to your Warden when it comes to willpower which makes your Warden the superior.

P.S: Don't take my last paragraph seriously, it's just a pathetic (VERY pathetic) and flawed (VERY flawed) attempt to relate my post to Dragon Age

[In Exile]

The thing with genetics is that it is not absolute. Talent is a barrier that hard work will not overcome, but talent is not the ultimate determinant of anything. There are a lot of talented individuals that do not amount to the very best purely in absence of effort.

[Tirigon]

Oblivious wrote...

No matter how hard you train nor how long things like vision, hearing, and natural aggression won't increase. Other things like hand-eye coordination, endurance, pain tolerance, or reaction speed you can train but they will be pretty weak when compared to somebody who was born with a natural talent in it. The only things that separate the cream of the crop and trash is willpower and skill. Even then, willpower is up to the individual while the most skilled genetic jewel is still superior to the most skilled Average Joe.

Just for the sake of pretending like my post has something to do with Dragon Age take Alistair for example: the son of an elven mage warden and a line of kings and lords making him the most genetically superior person in the game. He is then trained from the age of 10 in discipline, fighting techniques, skills even the greatest warrior doesn't know (like defending against magic) and despite all that Alistair is still inferior to your Warden when it comes to willpower which makes your Warden the superior.

P.S: Don't take my last paragraph seriously, it's just a pathetic (VERY pathetic) and flawed (VERY flawed) attempt to relate my post to Dragon Age

Don´t take anything serious, the rest is just as flawed. Genes are overrated. Sure it is helpful but it´s not decisive (unless you have a really hard gene defect like being born without hands, in which case you won´t be a good warrior.... However, in Video games there are no gene defects but only perfectly-built athletic people, so it really doesn´t matter for DA2).

[KLUME777]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...


No, im saying if you wanna be the best of the best, you need the genetics.

That depends on best in what. If you meam winning the Mr olympia in IFBB pro bodybuilding, then yes, you need the genes.

To be the best fighter, no you don't, you need to be the most skillful, and your size is something you can overcome by eating right and training in the gym. And yet again ill ask you a question you aren't smart enough to answer, what is "genetically" required to become a master of fighting? Or the best?

Genetics don't dictate the success of your skills as a warrior/fighter. Get this fact into that numbskull of yours.


EDIT, By the way, cute way of changing your argument everytime it gets debunked, from needing the genes to become a warrior, and then to needing the genes to be a master, now its needing the genes to be the best of the best.

No wonder you're likely a 98lbs weakling or a 300lb phat boi sitting on a couch making excuses about needing the genes to accomplish anything when you can simply make the best of what you have.

Actually im 15 (in 4 days!), 50 pounds, Im pretty slim, tall and athletic, im Australian. I never ever train to run, yet i always come in the top three in running races in sports carnivals, school P.E. because im taller than everyone else and my legs just carry more distance than everyone else. Thats a genetic trait for a runner, and someone who doesnt have that will have to train very hard to be as good.

I have no doubt id make a good fighter if i trained for 18 years, but id never be as good as peope born naturally big and tough, if they trained 18 years. However if i trained, id be much better as a rogue (rogue is just a name but what they do is real, like archery, stealth etc.) And btw, absolute master, and best of the best is one and the same.

Modifié par KLUME777, 15 août 2010 - 03:17 .

[FleurDeSable]

KLUME777 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...


In medieval times, warrior equivelants would be the sword and shield, claymore, armoured 'tank' type.


Rogue equivelents would be archers, light armoured, 'martial arts', cut throats. Light weight warriors.

There all warriors. In DAO the tanks are called warriors, and the light armored are called 'rogues'.

Fail.

For an archer, strength is even more important than for a meelee warrior because sill doesn´t help using your bow (it helps hitting your target, but it won´t enable you to actually pull the string back if you lack the strength to do so).

And thats why i said before that rogues should have really strong arms.

I never said rogues should be weak, i said they shouldnt be really bulk and massive like a tank. They should be athletic, lithe. Theyre still strong.

Actually, if you want to have a realistically muscled archer, all their bulk is going to be in the back and shoulders, which do the real work of drawing the bow and maintaining full draw, not the arms. So they'd actually look a lot more like you'd expect a tank to appear, in that someone who has been trained in archery since youth/for an extended period of time (especially with a traditional longbow and others of that ilk) will have a very powerful, often quite broad, muscular back and shoulders.

In addition to that, the longer the draw length of the archer (this is related to, among other things, arm length, which correlates to height), the more power they can get out of the bow, and thus the more damage they can do. Therefore, an archer that has that 'genetic advantage' people seem to be getting their knickers in a twist about should be big and broad-shouldered. However, the best archer I know is about 5 foot 8, has a short draw length, and is slender to the point of scrawniness. So it goes to show that even if one doesn't have a build which is 'genetically advantageous', mastery in combat depends on much more than that.

[SithLordExarKun]

Oblivious wrote...

Hate it when people put ad-homs but w/e its not my conversation. To be a good fighter, however, you do need good genes.

And what exactly makes up this "genes"?

Oblivious wrote...
No matter how hard you train nor how long things like vision, hearing, and natural aggression won't increase. Other things like hand-eye coordination, endurance, pain tolerance, or reaction speed you can train but they will be pretty weak when compared to somebody who was born with a natural talent in it. The only things that separate the cream of the crop and trash is willpower and skill. Even then, willpower is up to the individual while the most skilled genetic jewel is still superior to the most skilled Average Joe.

You make a valid point, but that is simply one aspect of being a good fighter. As for aggression goes, it doesn't necessarily mean it tips the scale of battle, i have seen many aggresive brawlers getting their asses handed to them by calmer individuals. Vision obviously is genetic, but speed reaction is a much more vital asset in determining losing or winning a fight.

Anyways thats besides the point, the other forum member was insiting you needed to be built like a bodybuilder to be a warrior and then keeps changing his arguments.

KLUME777 wrote...


Actually im 15 (in 4 days!), 50
pounds, Im pretty slim, tall and athletic, im Australian. I never ever
train to run, yet i always come in the top three in running races in
sports carnivals, school P.E. because im taller than everyone else and
my legs just carry more distance than everyone else. Thats a genetic
trait for a runner, and someone who doesnt have that will have to train very hard to be as good.

Yes and i beat Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Mr olympia 9 times in a row without ever lifting a weight.   
Just because you say something, doesn't make it true. And do you really
expect me to believe you weigh a mere 50lbs? You wouldn't even be able
to walk let alone run, especially if you're someone thats claiming to be
tall.

KLUME777 wrote...
I have no doubt id
make a good fighter if i trained for 18 years, but id never be as good
as peope born naturally big and tough, if they trained 18 years. However
if i trained, id be much better as a rogue (rogue is just a name but
what they do is real, like archery, stealth etc.) And btw, absolute master, and best of the best is one and the same.

Sheesh, you have a very narrow and stupid view on things, first off,
"archers" in real life aren't "rogues", there aren't any "rogue classes"
in real life.  Secondly, being bigger doesn't mean being a better the
fighter, the more heavily muscled you are, the less flexible you become
when compared to a smaller more agile fighter.

I already
mentioned that i personally witnessed in thailand, 140lbs Muay thai
fighters taking out 260lbs caucasian bodybuilders. Size means ****
really unless you got the skills to back you up and even then if you're
too large, the smaller more agile fighter is going to get you smacked.

[Vandrayke]

Tirigon wrote...

KLUME777 wrote...


In medieval times, warrior equivelants would be the sword and shield, claymore, armoured 'tank' type.


Rogue equivelents would be archers, light armoured, 'martial arts', cut throats. Light weight warriors.

There all warriors. In DAO the tanks are called warriors, and the light armored are called 'rogues'.

Fail.

For an archer, strength is even more important than for a meelee warrior because sill doesn´t help using your bow (it helps hitting your target, but it won´t enable you to actually pull the string back if you lack the strength to do so).

I remember reading something about how longbow users were trained from such a young age that by the time they died, their bones were warped because of the repeated use of the specific muscle development it took to fire a longbow.

Having said that, I don't want characters in the game to look at all realistic.  Make the dudes look tough and the girls look hot and athletic and call it a day.  
  

[uuuhcantthinkofaname]

Why not just have body sliders.



Everyone is happy.

[Vandrayke]

uuuhcantthinkofaname wrote...

Why not just have body sliders.

Everyone is happy.

That would help the PC situation but I want it all when it comes to NPCs  I want fat NPCs, old NPCs, tall NPCs, and short NPCs.  I want the hot female NPCs to really stand out from the other ones, which they would if there were a bunch of ugly dumpy female NPCs in the game, for contrast purposes.  I also want the tough guy NPCs to look more badass by having a lot of weak looking NPCs.  Contrast makes my day