1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Heh sure its exageration but its not far off, I've seen very few people actually actively cheer companions looking the same for the whole game as a good thing in a CRPG.

Company I used to work for did a dummy street survey to show clients that the way in which you ask questions is crucial to the excercise. My favourite question on it was "Have you ever felt like killing your spouse?"

Of course more people complained than said they were pleased. The positives were abstract, pervasive and subjective while the negative had a very clear, tangable consequence, while dislike is a much stronger motivator for comment.

As a data set it's utterly horrible and you can no more claim that the response was overwhelmingly negative based on forum responses than I can claim that 42% of married people are homicidal.

[PsychoBlonde]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's because youre fixated on the price, not what it purchases, because to you it is purchasing nothing. 

Actually, I expect to like it this way better than I liked the mixed up armor in Origins, but I'll give up a LOT of "customization" and paper-doll-playing-around on my companions so that they don't spend 90% of the game either looking like fashion victims or wearing sub-optimal gear just because it MATCHES.

I can still screw around with swapping out gear on my PC--and bemoaning the fact that none of the armor looks good and I wish I could wear those boots of haste, but they're like, lime green.

God I hope they fixed the shelf-o-boob on the heavy chain armor.  

[Xewaka]

Ryzaki wrote...

Really though I'd be willing to stake my cat on a part of the reasoning for static outfits being that it's cheaper, faster and more efficient.

Only because they decided graphics needed an update (which I disagree with. Then again most of my favourite games look ten years old, so I might be biased); otherwise, keeping the actual model would be faster and more efficient.
So they work less in their added work because they decided to work more.

[Demx]

So about those fixed outfits:

Are they interchangeable amongst the character restriction?

Or are they restricted to specific armor sets?

[Ryzaki]

Xewaka wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Really though I'd be willing to stake my cat on a part of the reasoning for static outfits being that it's cheaper, faster and more efficient.

Only because they decided graphics needed an update (which I disagree with. Then again most of my favourite games look ten years old, so I might be biased); otherwise, keeping the actual model would be faster and more efficient.
So they work less in their added work because they decided to work more.

It's not just you. The character faces especially have me cringing about how hard they hit uncanny valley. I much preferred DAOs graphics. 

And frankly I hope to god that developer diary wasn't the textures they're going to be using in DA2 PC version I mean DAO didn't have the bestest graphics ever but they were decent. DA2's look horrible.

Really though I'm not overly fond of the whole artisic revamp. The only thing I've seen that I liked was Flemeth.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:54 .

[Xewaka]

Siradix wrote...

So about those fixed outfits:
Are they interchangeable amongst the character restriction?
Or are they restricted to specific armor sets?

On companions: The looks only changes if the story says so (see: Aveline getting armor after reaching Kirkwall).
Statistical bonii can be configured via runes.
There's no armor slot per se on companions. Rather, it's a fixed slot per companion.

Hawke's armor has the same slots and options than in DA:O.

[PsychoBlonde]

Erm, Siradix that doesn't make any sense. This thread is discussing the fact that the companions will have a "set" armor/clothing appearance. We're not yet sure whether there will be restrictions on what suits the PC can wear based on class, but the PC's armor will be identical to Origins.



The NPC's will have (at most) 2-3 "outfits" which will be customizable stat-wise, but other NPC's can't wear their outfit and neither can Hawke.

[Ryzaki]

Though I wonder how many different armors do Hawke get in this case? I mean if they're going to bite of ME2's outfit system we might as well been able to dye Hawke's armor. They ripped off everything else. >_>

[Xewaka]

Ryzaki wrote...

Though I wonder how many different armors do Hawke get in this case? I mean if they're going to bite of ME2's outfit system we might as well been able to dye Hawke's armor. They ripped off everything else. >_>

Hot pink Hawke. Do eet nao.

[PsychoBlonde]

Ryzaki wrote...

It's not just you. The character faces especially have me cringing about how hard they hit uncanny valley. I much preferred DAOs graphics.

People use this term WAYY too much.  The Uncanny Valley effect is a result of INCREASING realism resulting in DECREASED empathy in a certain narrow band of realism values.  So by calling "uncanny valley", you basically said "wow, the faces are more realistic than they were, but still not perfect".

I didn't like the pointy angular faces of Origins that much and I'm pretty happy with the improvements in DAII that I've seen thus far.  They look more like people and less like plastic, which makes me happy.

[Ryzaki]

Xewaka wrote...


Hot pink Hawke. Do eet nao.

Yes. I want my Hawke to look fabulous! [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]


@PsychoBlonde: 
Edit: Yes of course I totally don't know what Uncanny Valley is. Totally!

Modifié par Ryzaki, 15 décembre 2010 - 12:03 .

[upsettingshorts]

LA Noire has built a bridge over the uncanny valley. Or at least, it looks like it will.

[HighMoon]

"Uncanny valley" is one of those terms, along with "Mary Sue", which I have a basic understanding of but have never been completely certain because people's definitions for them seem to change so much.

[Demx]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Erm, Siradix that doesn't make any sense. This thread is discussing the fact that the companions will have a "set" armor/clothing appearance. We're not yet sure whether there will be restrictions on what suits the PC can wear based on class, but the PC's armor will be identical to Origins.

The NPC's will have (at most) 2-3 "outfits" which will be customizable stat-wise, but other NPC's can't wear their outfit and neither can Hawke.

I wasn't talking about Hawke, I was confused as to how the companion armor is being delt with in DA2.

Modifié par Siradix, 15 décembre 2010 - 12:04 .

[PsychoBlonde]

Ryzaki wrote...
Yeah they are. You point? You really think I don't know what that phrase means? 

It hits UV to me. 

I'm not saying it doesn't.  I'm saying it's a pointless and overused criticism because it means nothing.  I haven't seen models in video games good enough to hit UV for me, yet--I have to go to movies with ultra-realistic CGI before I can find models that are actually good enough I get that disjointed "is that real?  It SEEMS real . . . wait, no it's not!  UGH!" moment.

Personally I think the push for photo-realism in games is misguided.  I'd like to see some actual useful criticisms of game models that don't amount to "it's not photo-realistic yet".  Well, duh.

[Ryzaki]

Golden-Rose wrote...

"Uncanny valley" is one of those terms, along with "Mary Sue", which I have a basic understanding of but have never been completely certain because people's definitions for them seem to change so much.

I always saw UV to mean it's more realistic than usual but not quite there. In the attempt to be more realistic it becomes repulsive and strange instead.

Which is practically 90% of human characters in the ME series to me.

And really I do't know what is with the chins but it seems to be a constant for DA2 humans. And it's really odd looking and unappealing.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 15 décembre 2010 - 12:07 .

[Ryzaki]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LA Noire has built a bridge over the uncanny valley. Or at least, it looks like it will.

Who's LA Noire?

[Xewaka]

Graphs solve everything.

[Ziggeh]

Xewaka wrote...

Only because they decided graphics needed an update (which I disagree with. Then again most of my favourite games look ten years old, so I might be biased);

I'm ambivalent about much of the graphical update, but I see the model changes as a major step forward, and one I assume was a large factor in the outfit changes. Without it, I don't think I'd be terribly happy with any characters looks, and so for me, while I understand I might find a character stuck in gear I dislike the look of, at least there's an actual chance they might look ok.

[upsettingshorts]

Ryzaki wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LA Noire has built a bridge over the uncanny valley. Or at least, it looks like it will.

Who's LA Noire?

http://www.rockstargames.com/lanoire/

If you Google LA Noire and uncanny valley you'll get dozens of pages, as well.

[Ryzaki]

@Xewaka: I lol'd at where Zombie was.

[PsychoBlonde]

Golden-Rose wrote...

"Uncanny valley" is one of those terms, along with "Mary Sue", which I have a basic understanding of but have never been completely certain because people's definitions for them seem to change so much.

I can't say on Mary Sue but the "Uncanny Valley" effect has ONE correct definition because it is based on ONE study done (I believe it was on robotics) that indicates there is this odd dip in perceived empathy right between "close to realistic-looking" and "really realistic-looking" where something fake (CGI, animitronic face, etc.) will suddenly creep people out because they can't initially identify why it doesn't look "real" to them.

It doesn't *describe* anything specific, it's just people trying to appear smart by throwing out the latest bit of popular psycho-babble.

[DMC12]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

DMC12 wrote...

What? Is there a source for this? I was skeptical at first about companion outfits, but I was also under the impression that their "upgraded" companion outfits were typical of their class or maybe even prestige class. That's a bit BS if it's true.

I think Brock is talking about Rogue Hawke, not companions.

Well I meant rogue Hawke too, I should have been a little more specific.

When the devs talked about DA2's classes, they mentioned that the classes were going to be more distinct than in Origins. Thus removing the DW warrior was one of the changes to make it this way (for the record, the DW was inferior to the other warrior types, and anyone who says otherwise is delusional).

Now having a rogue with heavy armor is seemingly blurring the lines between classes again like in Origins. The biggest offender being an Arcane Warrior-Blood Mage. That class wrecks anything except bosses. Why worry about dividing up your skills between strength, constitution, dexterity, cunning, and wisdom, when you can just dump everything in magic and wisdom, throw up a miasma, and laugh while your enemies flail at you feebly? All while having the benefits of heavy armor, a high damage sword (maybe a shield too), and of course your magic buffs.

So that's what I'm skeptical about. I want some distinction and not some ultimate class that shoves the others to a place where the sun don't shine. Of course I might sing a different tune if you had consequences for wearing that heavy armor. Maybe it's just sacrificing some skills to wear it or being unable to perform certain actions a la KOTOR.

[Ryzaki]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LA Noire has built a bridge over the uncanny valley. Or at least, it looks like it will.

Who's LA Noire?

http://www.rockstargames.com/lanoire/

If you Google LA Noire and uncanny valley you'll get dozens of pages, as well.

It's not for PC?!?

Why? Rockstar? Why?

[Atakuma]

Ryzaki wrote...


It's not for PC?!?

Why? Rockstar? Why?

when is the last time Rockstar did anything for the PC, that wasn't some lazy port?