1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Russalka]

crimzontearz wrote...
you haven't?

look at how you are explaining some of these issues! Isabela has borderline precognitive abilities and is stashing armor under her skin tight shirt.....Jack has a redendant shield generator that fires up when she is unconscious...come on! Or even better "it makes no sense but it speaks for her being a survivor".

You are just justfying everything for the sake of it. I may not find their outfits too ugly to bring those character along but I surely find them goddamn too ridiculous (in a practical sense) for me to want to bring those characters along.

I think you are forgetting that the way I play and the way I explain things in my playthrough is my right.

And to criticise something as personal as that is... well, there are plenty of interesting words for that.

Modifié par Russalka, 13 décembre 2010 - 08:59 .

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

I can tell you that plate is NOT overly heavy & that it is articulated as to not hinder your flexibility.

Just a small point, I might have mentioned this before, but the reason you find yourself explaining to people that armour is not the hinderance we've been led to believe is because many systems that contain armour use that particular falsehood as a balancing mechanism, part of the offence/defence dichotomy. It's not so much an attempt to factor in the reality as it is a part of the wholey unrealistic system.

This system has been so prevelant that reality is unrealistic to the extent that if you were to make it explicit in your game that there was no weight/movement concern with armour, far, far more people would think it flawed than would recognise it as truth.

And so in approaching a game system, even if the maker doesn't need it as part of the balance, it makes far more sense to ues the cultural shorthand than to have explain the facts of the matter. This is why guns with silencers make that zipping noise in films, if you were to change that, you'd have to explain, in setting the actual case, which is a horriblly clumsy, fourth wall head trauma inducing thing to have to do.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:03 .

[Ryzaki]

Ah. But see the fixed outfits allows you to play how you want but takes away our choice.

I'd be fine with unique character outfits that could be upgraded, along with being able to place the characters in generic armo (generic in this simply means armor the PC can use too that's not exclusive for plot reasons). 

That way people who don't want to bother changing outfits don't have to and those of us that want to play "dollhouse" can.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:04 .

[Piecake]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Just a small point, I might have mentioned this before, but the reason you find yourself explaining to people that armour is not the hinderance we've been led to believe is because many systems that contain armour use that particular falsehood as a balancing mechanism, part of the offence/defence dichotomy. It's not so much an attempt to factor in the reality as it is a part of the wholey unrealistic system.

This system has been so prevelant that reality is unrealistic to the extent that if you were to make it explicit in your game that there was no weight/movement concern with armour, far, far more people would think it flawed than would recognise it as truth.

And so in approaching a game system, even if the maker doesn't need it as part of the balance, it makes far more sense to ues the cultural shorthand than to have explain the facts of the matter. This is why guns with silencers make that zipping noise in films, if you were to change that, you'd have to explain, in setting the actual case, which is a horriblly clumsy, fourth wall head trauma inducing thing to have to do.

You mean silencers dont actually make that cool zipping sound?  *heart crushed*

[upsettingshorts]

Here's the problem: One side of the argument wants to have their cake. The other side of the argument wants to eat it.



The compromise that pleases both is not really a reasonable demand to make of Bioware.

[Russalka]

It is too late to make demands anyway.

[0x30A88]

Hawke: Wear this armor please?
Companion: No, I can't.
H: Why not, it's superior to the one you wear and you are strong enough
C: It's the maker's (Bioware's) will.
H: What?
C: It's like the bow rejecting a warrior's hand, it's the maker's will.

Knwoing what the community want is nice for a company, for it is us who is going to play the game. Doing the opposite however, is just stupid.

You can give us the possibillity to have their unique clothing, or change.
Give us the cake, and let us decide whether to eat it, not thrust it down our throats.

And to the pro-deprival-of-customisation people, it's not like we all want a dumbed down game where there's just button mashing and let the game handle the equipment for all, but Hawke.

Modifié par Gisle Aune, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:13 .

[Xewaka]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

I can tell you that plate is NOT overly heavy & that it is articulated as to not hinder your flexibility.

Just a small point, I might have mentioned this before, but the reason you find yourself explaining to people that armour is not the hinderance we've been led to believe is because many systems that contain armour use that particular falsehood as a balancing mechanism, part of the offence/defence dichotomy. It's not so much an attempt to factor in the reality as it is a part of the wholey unrealistic system.

This system has been so prevelant that reality is unrealistic to the extent that if you were to make it explicit in your game that there was no weight/movement concern with armour, far, far more people would think it flawed than would recognise it as truth.

And so in approaching a game system, even if the maker doesn't need it as part of the balance, it makes far more sense to ues the cultural shorthand than to have explain the facts of the matter. This is why guns with silencers make that zipping noise in films, if you were to change that, you'd have to explain, in setting the actual case, which is a horriblly clumsy, fourth wall head trauma inducing thing to have to do.

Indeed. This is why, when I ask for the need of armor for Isabela, I mention a padded waistcoat and a wide-brimmed hat. It still conveys grace and dexterity while being an adequate real-life based outfit for a duelist.
And wide-brimmed hats are awesome. Pirate hat works as well.

Modifié par Xewaka, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:10 .

[Piecake]

Ryzaki wrote...


I'd be fine with unique character outfits that could be upgraded, along with being able to place the characters in generic armo (generic in this simply means armor the PC can use too that's not exclusive for plot reasons). 

the developers have said that that means a lot more work though since we are getting unique body types in DA2, which means that they'd have to tailor that generic armour to every companion. 

Modifié par Piecake, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:12 .

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Here's the problem: One side of the argument wants to have their cake. The other side of the argument wants to eat it.

I really hate that analogy. I'm absolutely positive it's supposed to be used ironically.

Not that I don't use it myself, I just have a little wince when typing it.

[Ryzaki]

It was a wish guys. You don't have to crush my hopes.

And honestly fixed armor usually sucks in WRPGs at least in JRPGs I find most outfits to be decent looking. BW's armor tends to be fugly as all hell.

DAO was mostly about me finding the decent looking armor and placing that on my companions. (Though once Morriopened her mouth she kept her iconic look because she either had to GTFO or was warming her hands at camp).

I mean look at Jack, ugly nipple belt and her tattoos...either my resolution is off or her tattoos look like smudges (on her chest, arms, and lower belly). The black top looks elasticy and ugly too.

Miranda's oufit is pretty meh and the black one makes her look like a- nevermind.

Jacob's is ridculous. I do not want to see his manpackage or his ass thank you very much.

Grunt's would be finebut why is is his arm exposed? (Same with Zaeed and Thane at least makes *some* sense because he's an assassin/ninja) Legion has a hole...(where you can see several cords. I hope those aren't important Legion), Samara looks like a berry and her chest has a giant "AIM HERE" sign to me.

>_> I'm not even going to bother continuing.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:16 .

[Xewaka]

Ryzaki wrote...

Grunt's would be finebut why is is his arm exposed?

Just imagine it's a flesh colored skinthight sleeve. It's done wonders to what little sanity I have left.

[crimzontearz]

 

 

 

Russalka wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
you haven't?

look at how you are explaining some of these issues! Isabela has borderline precognitive abilities and is stashing armor under her skin tight shirt.....Jack has a redendant shield generator that fires up when she is unconscious...come on! Or even better "it makes no sense but it speaks for her being a survivor".

You are just justfying everything for the sake of it. I may not find their outfits too ugly to bring those character along but I surely find them goddamn too ridiculous (in a practical sense) for me to want to bring those characters along.

I think you are forgetting that the way I play and the way I explain things in my playthrough is my right.

And to criticise something as personal as that is... well, there are plenty of interesting words for that.

[Ryzaki]

Xewaka wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Grunt's would be finebut why is is his arm exposed?

Just imagine it's a flesh colored skinthight sleeve. It's done wonders to what little sanity I have left.

I suppose.

The irony is that Grunt, not only wears more armor than most of the squad but is actually one of the only members of Shep's squad who would stand a ghost of a chance without armor under heavy fire.
Edit: *looks at above post* My eyes! 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:20 .

[crimzontearz]

son of a **** I did it again

[nightcobra]

the white screen strikes again

[Russalka]

I can write in it. How interesting.

[nightcobra]

crimzontearz wrote...

son of a **** I did it again

did you quote xewaka again by any chance?

[crimzontearz]

no. Russalka this time and it was Maria the first time.

anyway what I was saying Russalka is that yes your personal explanations are your right but the moment you use them to argue against the qualms someone has with particular design decisions then it is THEIR right to argue back and pick at those explanations if they disagree.

[upsettingshorts]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Here's the problem: One side of the argument wants to have their cake. The other side of the argument wants to eat it.

I really hate that analogy. I'm absolutely positive it's supposed to be used ironically.

Not that I don't use it myself, I just have a little wince when typing it.

I always took it to mean this:

Lets say you have a cake.  It's sitting on your plate.  
Then you eat the cake.  The plate is empty.  You no longer have the cake, because you ate it.

Having your cake and eating it too strikes me as either impossible - you can't have a cake you ate because... you ate it - or asking for two cakes.  Which strikes me as unreasonable, hence the analogy.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:26 .

[Dudalizer]

I am all for unique outfits as long as each companion has at least several outifts of their own. If they need to add someone via DLC then so be it, but I would prefer it that my companions don't spend ten years wearing the same outfit. Oh, and the outfits need to be at least semi practical for battle. I thought that Jack in ME2 looked ridiculous wearing those straps.

[biomag]

Just to answer 3 post directed to mine:



1. Matchy Pointy: The Greeks reduced the amount of armor as time went on. They often considered it to provide just motivation boost, but not being effective and it slowed the troops down. See the development of hoplites from heavy bronze armor to more lighter armored and mobile troops using longer spears.



2. Mlaar: Armor has nothing to do with being elite or not. Do you think that assassins like ninja's were known for heavy armor? Or that they were pure rank and file? Depending on a task an armor can help or not. Serving on ship I doubt many would put on a heavy plate or chain.



3. crimzontearz : Roman armor wasn't among the big reason why they won the wars. There were many, many more factors. Roman's pilas or gladius as weapons had for sure a bigger impact, as well as the Roman nation being drilled to serve in a disciplined army contrary to the Gauls. So I really can't take your argument serious.

[Ryzaki]

???

I never understood that analogy and I always found it odd when used.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:29 .

[Piecake]

Ryzaki wrote...

???

I never understood that analogy and I always found it odd when used.

I always thought of it as eating your cake and then still having the cake after you eat it. 

I dont care if that isnt what it actually means since it just makes sense to me

edit: Well, i guess shorts explained it better than me.  Boo

Modifié par Piecake, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:33 .

[upsettingshorts]

Ryzaki wrote...


Having the cake then eating it is a good thing last I checked. Now if you want *more* cake then you run into an issue but the analogy itself is just off.

What if you just like looking at the cake?  So maybe you want one cake to eat, and another one to look at.

But back to the issue at hand. 

Some people like unique outfits.
Some people like to swap outfits.

The answer of, "Just make a lot of swappable outfits" strikes me as approaching the problem of the cake in the same way.  The question is one of choice, having a cake or eating it, or having armors that do not change versus ones that do.  When you solve the problem by saying, "MORE CAKE" you're trying to solve the problem by trying to get rid of the problem.  While that might be simple if you live in a bakery and it's easy to make yourself another cake, it's another thing entirely to simply ask it of someone else who has time and resources to consider.  I mean, do you know what Bioware would have to cut from the game in order to devote sufficient time to have enough custom outfits to satisfy a majority? I sure don't.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:35 .