934 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerevar-as]

Do you think LotR would have been a success if everybody was in normal clothing and fought as in a videogame? They limited that to Legolas, an elf, and even there the oliphant kill had mixed reactions. I give this example because DA seemed to take more from LotR or ASoF&I than 300. Maybe now is the other way round, but it´s a risk they are taking, especially if changes affect gameplay and not just looks.

[Sir JK]

You know... my position is that the path the devs currently are taking (in terms of visual appearance of outfits that is) is relatively realistic and I'm defending it against some people who don't agree, so I'm fairly content in that regard (though I agree... if the devs ever face a choice between realism and fun. Fun should be prioritzed. I'm hoping they won't have to though)



I'm a little cloven between being indifferent and hating the movie with a passion (though my last statement was a joke) from what I hear the comic is not much better. As for realistic armour and combat making it better. *shrug*. Can't say really. I don't think there would be anything making it better in my eyes anyways.

I do, however, believe that realism in combat and equipment can be used to make something fun. I'm not sure how, but I have no doubts that if done well people would enjoy it. That it in itself does not affect wether something is enjoyable or not.

[Xewaka]

I think the term used shouldn't be "realism", but rather, "consistency". It has been stablished that mages, unless specifically trained, lack the ability to wear anything heavier than clothes. It has been stablished that roguish characters have the skill, training, and endurance needed to use light protective gear (boiled or studded leather armor). It has been stablished that warriors receive focused training in armored combat.

Deviating from the standard stablished in the own setting just for giggles is somewhat jarring.

[Matchy Pointy]

I love 300 for what it is, though I hate for peolple to think it's a historicly correct version of the events.

[AlexXIV]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Do you think LotR would have been a success if everybody was in normal clothing and fought as in a videogame? They limited that to Legolas, an elf, and even there the oliphant kill had mixed reactions. I give this example because DA seemed to take more from LotR or ASoF&I than 300. Maybe now is the other way round, but it´s a risk they are taking, especially if changes affect gameplay and not just looks.

Well you can do better combat scenes in a movie than in a video game. So this comparision is a bit unfair. My mere point is that people's desire for realism in either a game or movie is limited. I am sure even in LotR there are a lot of things one could nit-pick on. I also prefer certain things and dislike others, but I know for sure I'd be in a minority.

Or take for example Miranda's outfit in ME2. Felt a bit stupid for my shepard to wear all this armor next to this girl wearing a skin-tight bodysuit and high heels. Or take Jack's outfit. But people liked it. It is just a majority thing. I don't have any numbers to back anything up. But I doubt Bioware isn't aware of what we are talking about here. The point is merely they made a choice. They have to live with it, and so do we. This discussion would only have a point if either their concept proved wrong (measured in sales) or if you could change anything by discussing this. It is far too late to change DA2 and if their decisions prove wrong they gonna change back anyway. So we are only talking about things that for once don't change anything, and also are well known to Bioware most likely.

[Nohvarr]

Xewaka wrote...

I think the term used shouldn't be "realism", but rather, "consistency". It has been stablished that mages, unless specifically trained, lack the ability to wear anything heavier than clothes.

Tower trained mages sure, but you and your sister were not trained in a mages tower. We don't know how they were trained. It's well within the realm of possibility that Hawk & Bethany's training could've included the use of light armor.

[Sir JK]

Could someone provide me with a link for that? All I know is that they mechanically can't. If there is a in-setting reason they don't wear armour I'd love to know.



And Xewaka. I still think realism is the appropriate term. Many arguments are after all in the name of realism (but some are for consistency indeed) and I think it's certainly possibly to think of a setting as realistic buth with exceptions (magic would be one of those exceptions)

[AlexXIV]

Nohvarr wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

I think the term used shouldn't be "realism", but rather, "consistency". It has been stablished that mages, unless specifically trained, lack the ability to wear anything heavier than clothes.

Tower trained mages sure, but you and your sister were not trained in a mages tower. We don't know how they were trained. It's well within the realm of possibility that Hawk & Bethany's training could've included the use of light armor.

Well only thing established was that you need strength to wear armor. So mages could use armor if they were strong enough. Also robes benefit mages with mage specific stats which other armor doesn't. So basically the reasons for wearing robes is for once, benefits for magic and that you woudln't want to raise your strength to 42 instead of investing in magic/willpower. Also heavy armor provoked aggro which is not really a plausible aspect either. Why would anyone in their right mind prefer to target the tank first instead of a mage or archer?

[Matchy Pointy]

AlexXIV wrote...

Nohvarr wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

I think the term used shouldn't be "realism", but rather, "consistency". It has been stablished that mages, unless specifically trained, lack the ability to wear anything heavier than clothes.

Tower trained mages sure, but you and your sister were not trained in a mages tower. We don't know how they were trained. It's well within the realm of possibility that Hawk & Bethany's training could've included the use of light armor.

Well only thing established was that you need strength to wear armor. So mages could use armor if they were strong enough. Also robes benefit mages with mage specific stats which other armor doesn't. So basically the reasons for wearing robes is for once, benefits for magic and that you woudln't want to raise your strength to 42 instead of investing in magic/willpower. Also heavy armor provoked aggro which is not really a plausible aspect either. Why would anyone in their right mind prefer to target the tank first instead of a mage or archer?

I solved that puzzle when the game came out, the enemies all think "Shiny!" and are therefor drawn to heavy, shiny armour:whistle:.

Modifié par Matchy Pointy, 01 décembre 2010 - 11:51 .

[Sir JK]

We're fighting magpies in DA:O? I suppose that does explain all the odd loot in the deep roads...

[Lasien]

Shiiiiiiiny!...


Anyway, in reality, only the very wealthy could afford full armour. Everyone else had to make do with leather and cloth. And since everyone is fussing about Aveline, if you look at her outfit, most of it is leather, and allows for easy movement. Plus, she is built like a "brick house", then she would look like a man in heavy armour.

And does anyone really want that?

Modifié par Lasien, 01 décembre 2010 - 12:50 .

[Rykoth]

Whats wrong with fighting naked? Conan the Barbarian and Red Sonja both fight near naked all the time, and they come out okay in their respective world.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Rykoth wrote...

Whats wrong with fighting naked? Conan the Barbarian and Red Sonja both fight near naked all the time, and they come out okay in their respective world.

Some people are so prudish in their thoughts of what people should be wearing even in games, that even just seeing bare thighs and biceps is too much and the character should be fully covered from head to toe in some garment, preferably something that should be able to protect them from a potential attack that they can't for some reason understand could be dodged just as easily (to some degree probably more so) if the character was wearing cloth items.

I really don't understand the fuss about Isabella not wearing 'pants'. Really does baffle me as to why people make such comments about that. As for her not wearing armor and taking less damage from a hit than what Aveline in full armor would take. If anyone making such a claim can prove it, fair dues, but considering the fact I doubt such proof exists (because the game isn't even out yet) then people shouldn't jump to such baseless assumptions.

Besides I imagine Isabella would be able to follow the '5 rules of Dodgeball' (Dodge, Duck, Dip, Dive and... Dodge ) in her cloth gear than a fully armored Aveline, but then Aveline of course will have her armor and shield to compensate for that.

[Matchy Pointy]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...
I really don't understand the fuss about Isabella not wearing 'pants'. Really does baffle me as to why people make such comments about that. As for her not wearing armor and taking less damage from a hit than what Aveline in full armor would take. If anyone making such a claim can prove it, fair dues, but considering the fact I doubt such proof exists (because the game isn't even out yet) then people shouldn't jump to such baseless assumptions.

As I've said before, I'm fully with you about the pants, unless it's really cold, pants ahve no advantage over no pants, and is purely a cultural thing. And believe me, plenty of cultures go/have gone without pants...

[crimzontearz]

Aermas, it depends on the system. If Isabela is taking less damage because high Dex = damage % reduction then we are good, but on a general point of view I agree with you armor should soak damagethe same way for everyone. God this is why I hate the D20 influence

[Xewaka]

Rykoth wrote...

Whats wrong with fighting naked? Conan the Barbarian and Red Sonja both fight near naked all the time, and they come out okay in their respective world.

As a matter of fact, when Howard wrote the original short stories, Conan usually wore whatever armor fit the job (mostly brigandine and chaimail, if I remember correctly). But armor got in the way of overeager comic artists.

[Sir JK]

Ulrich. That armour would somehow be restrictive is a myth (it is based on unfitted armour. Proper armour is customized for you specifically so it won't be in your way). Anything that limits your ability not to get hit is a death-sentence in melee. So armour should not interfere with dodging.



Other than that I fully agree with you.

[Maria Caliban]

Sir JK wrote...

Could someone provide me with a link for that? All I know is that they mechanically can't. If there is a in-setting reason they don't wear armour I'd love to know.

Are you talking about a change in DA 2? Because in DA:O, a mage could wear robes, light armor, medium armor... all they needed was high enough strength.

[Matchy Pointy]

Sir JK wrote...

Ulrich. That armour would somehow be restrictive is a myth (it is based on unfitted armour. Proper armour is customized for you specifically so it won't be in your way). Anything that limits your ability not to get hit is a death-sentence in melee. So armour should not interfere with dodging.

Other than that I fully agree with you.

Fitted armour is indeed a very good piece to wear, with minimal effect on mobility (it does depend slightly on how advanced armour it is though, most people just haf to use what they could though, and that is notalways a good idea). In the realistic department though, it would be very difficult to get form fitting amour from finding in from fallen foes or in chests like usual, or just buying it from teh store. Being that the story span over 10 years though, you could well get several inbetween where you play.

[crimzontearz]

or battle aura.....

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Well to be fair the abilities you are talking about were at the end of the talent trees in DAO.  Warriors or rogues who wanted to fight with a longsword in each hand had to work for it.  Most likely they wouldn't be able to do it until the higher levels, unless they specifically built their characters to do that.  In which case they're neglecting other useful skills.  Fighting armorless could be done right away.  It takes less dexterity and intelligence.   

This is ultimately irrelevant. I could say prior to Mass Effect 2, Miranda has trained her body at dodging gun fire to the point where she doesn't need to rely on combat armor, but I doubt you'd take that as a valid argument. This is little different. Whether a warrior/rogue is level 1 or level 15, the fact that one is dual wielding long swords or firing triple arrows (or any number of impossible stunts) still creates a problem of 'realism'. I confess that I myself don't have an extended knowledge of bow/arrow physics. Is it even physically possible for someone to effectively employ such a technique "LOTR style"?

But seriously, this is likely an example of really not having enough information to judge.  I mean, we have a few screenshots, and that's it.  This is likely a fear of an extension of ME 2 into the game.  I mean, how much eyerolling are we gonna get if Isabella ends up dressing like Miranda and Bethany like Samara and Varric like Thane (oh, wait )?  I know that's my fear.

The problem is that what you are pointing out is a subjective criticism. I prefer personalized outfits. Who wins?

As far as 'eyerolling' goes, I could point out to you how a mage wearing nothing but cloth is miraculously not cleaved in half when hit with a two handed axe. Or any number of issues which crop up. In the end, you can't point out to me how what you want is 'more realistic' than what I want. Was it realistic when Riordan jumped off a high tower onto the flying archdemon and cut a gash in his wing for example?

Hell, Iakus you're a dnd 3.5 veteran let's take this argument further back. How realistic is the Monk class? Monks go into battle without any armor relying entirely on movement and their bare hands. Do you say that if fighting an armored opponent that a monk should be unable to damage him because he is using his bare hands, all in the name of realism?  

We make all sorts of allowances for impossibilities in RPGs. Canderous joins your party wearing a shirt. Dawn Star/Silk Fox came into your party wearing basic cloth. Most fantasy settings are unrealistic, even lacking internal consistency in favor of artistic license. It's simply part of the genre.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 décembre 2010 - 02:13 .

[Nerivant]

Il Divo wrote...
As far as 'eyerolling' goes, I could point out to you how a mage wearing nothing but cloth is miraculously not cleaved in half when hit with a two handed axe.

 How realistic is the Monk class? Monks go into battle without any armor relying entirely on movement and their bare hands.

We make all sorts of allowances for impossibilities in RPGs.

Magic.

Also answered by magic.

Because of maaaaaaaagiiiiiiiic.

[Il Divo]

Nerivant wrote...

Magic.

Also answered by magic.

Because of maaaaaaaagiiiiiiiic.

This guy gets it.

[upsettingshorts]

I'm willing to believe a lot of what fiction tells me is possible and probable within its own universe. Case in point the martial arts in Equilibrium:

Gun Kata is a fictional gun-fighting martial art discipline that is a significant part of the film. It is based upon the premise that, given the positions of the participants in a gun battle, the trajectories of fire are statistically predictable. By pure memorization of the positions, one can fire at the most likely location of an enemy without aiming at him in the traditional sense of pointing a gun at a specific target. By the same token, the trajectories of incoming fire are also statistically predictable, so by assuming the appropriate stance, one can keep one's body clear of the most likely way of enemy bullets.

The Gun Kata shown in Equilibrium is a hybrid mix of Kurt Wimmer's own style of Gun Kata (which he invented in his backyard)[2] and the martial arts style of the choreographer. They disagreed on the appropriate form of Gun Kata, with Kurt Wimmer advocating a smoother, flowing style and the choreographer supporting a more rigid style. Much of the Gun Kata seen in the film is based on the choreographer's style.[3] Kurt Wimmer's Gun Kata is dispersed sparsely throughout the movie, most notably in the introductory scene with the silhouetted man, played by Wimmer himself, practicing with dual pistols.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 01 décembre 2010 - 02:14 .

[Xewaka]

DnD Monks are broken. When the biggest damage dice is rolled with bare hands, you know all pretense of coherency has been thrown out of the window.