495 réponses à ce sujet

[wyvvern]

Pwnsaur opined:

Yea, ok....I AM in love with my own rhetoric.. you got me
there. But that's only because I write opinion pieces for  a living. I
CERTAINLY wasn't 'surrendering' however. The fact is, my interpretation
of the word is exactly right... It's sad when people see a game
developer use a term like streamlining and believe they are innovating
or improving the game. It's industry lingo for simplifying, and either
you can read between the lines or you can't. Because of what I do for a
living, I am literally paid to interpret BS and I do it very, very well.
Streamlining masquerading as innovation is just one such example of BS.

Begin pedant mode:

Improper use of ellipses. Correct usage is, of course, to indicate omitted words. Not to 'trail off.'
Appeal to authority logic fail. "I write opinion pieces..."

This is what I would love to see also. Simple and well put, thank you

Usage of a smiley sans approptiate period to terminate your sentence.

I could care less how you 'see' it being used by others..

Appalling use of "I could care less" as opposed to the correct "I could not care less." For that alone I'd fire you. The double period is a nice bonus.

It's not my fault that you take your literary cues from the context in which your peers use them.

This is of course the only way to understand English or any other language. To discern the proper meaning of the use of a word or phrase from that wonderous thing called context. Language is not, as you appear to be arguing, binary. Otherwise there would never be misunderstandings.

Your debating tactics are impeccable, really they are...

This is a run-on sentence, of the type commonly called a 'comma splice.' I suggest the use of a semi-colon here.

I will reiterate my longstanding and yet constantly overlooked statement being;

However this usage of a semi-colon is incorrect. You should have used a colon. An em dash would also have been effective. It depends which style manual you prefer.

No more fighting.. pls..

I'll assume 'pls' is standard usage in your universe. Ellipses, even when used informally to indicate an elision in a sentence contain three periods -- not two.

I could continue, but really why bother?

This may have something to do with my masters degree in English, or the
fact that my college aptitude in english puts me in the top 1% in the
country.

Please learn to capitalize the word 'English.' Also please recall that it is 'master's degree' and not 'masters degree.'

I'm not in the habit of correcting other people's forum postings. However, given your .sig claiming a genius-level IQ, the moniker 'literary genius,' and your penchant for throwing around the fact that you write for a living it was impossible to resist.

Welcome to the forums! Do enjoy your stay.

(edit to clean up formatting.)

Modifié par wyvvern, 28 décembre 2010 - 07:14 .

[Pwnsaur]

HAHAHAHAHA! This has gone into astronomically preposterous levels of absurdity. I REALLY...I mean REALLY don't want to argue this anymore... BioWare is substituting the word streamlining for simplifying, which...I equate with watering down. That's it! That's all! Endlessly spamming the word 'rhetoric' like a Fox News pundit in order to invalidate my argument is pretty weak. They are watering down this game. THEY ARE WATERING DOWN THIS GAME. They are using streamlining as a substitute for this term. How much more clear can I be? The reason I put 'streamlining (watering down)' is because I was decoding the nuance of this term in reference to DA2's static outfit shift.

[Kail Ashton]

This was whiney topical about 4 months ago, you should check your cry baby fan news sources and stay up to date on all the latest hillariously over reacting hissy fits by 95% of the forum users (see the above raving lunatic above this post for example)

Modifié par Kail Ashton, 28 décembre 2010 - 06:57 .

[wwwwowwww]

wyvvern wrote...

Pwnsaur opined:

Yea, ok....I AM in love with my own rhetoric.. you got me
there. But that's only because I write opinion pieces for  a living. I
CERTAINLY wasn't 'surrendering' however. The fact is, my interpretation
of the word is exactly right... It's sad when people see a game
developer use a term like streamlining and believe they are innovating
or improving the game. It's industry lingo for simplifying, and either
you can read between the lines or you can't. Because of what I do for a
living, I am literally paid to interpret BS and I do it very, very well.
Streamlining masquerading as innovation is just one such example of BS.

Begin pendant mode:

Improper use of ellipses. Correct usage is, of course, to indicate omitted words. Not to 'trail off.'
Appeal to authority logic fail. "I write opinion pieces..."

This is what I would love to see also. Simple and well put, thank you

Usage of a smiley sans approptiate period to terminate your sentence.

I could care less how you 'see' it being used by others..

Appalling use of "I could care less" as opposed to the correct "I could not care less." For that alone I'd fire you. The double period is a nice bonus.

It's not my fault that you take your literary cues from the context in which your peers use them.

This is of course the only way to understand English or any other language. To discern the proper meaning of the use of a word or phrase from that wonderous thing called context. Language is not, as you appear to be arguing, binary. Otherwise there would never be misunderstandings.

Your debating tactics are impeccable, really they are...

This is a run-on sentence, of the type commonly called a 'comma splice.' I suggest the use of a semi-colon here.

I will reiterate my longstanding and yet constantly overlooked statement being;

However this usage of a semi-colon is incorrect. You should have used a colon. An em dash would also have been effective. It depends which style manual you prefer.

No more fighting.. pls..

I'll assume 'pls' is standard usage in your universe. Ellipses, even when used informally to indicate an elision in a sentence contain three periods -- not two.

I could continue, but really why bother?

This may have something to do with my masters degree in English, or the
fact that my college aptitude in english puts me in the top 1% in the
country.

Please learn to capitalize the word 'English.' Also please recall that it is 'master's degree' and not 'masters degree.'

I'm not in the habit of correcting other people's forum postings. However, given your .sig claiming both a genius-level IQ, the moniker 'literary genius,' and your penchant for throwing around the fact that you write for a living it was impossible to resist.

Welcome to the forums! Do enjoy your stay.

Where I'm from we call this a virtual **tch slap:whistle:

[PrinceOfFallout13]

Pwnsaur wrote...

HAHAHAHAHA! This has gone into astronomically preposterous levels of absurdity. I REALLY...I mean REALLY don't want to argue this anymore... BioWare is substituting the word streamlining for simplifying, which...I equate with watering down. That's it! That's all! Endlessly spamming the word 'rhetoric' like a Fox News pundit in order to invalidate my argument is pretty weak. They are watering down this game. THEY ARE WATERING DOWN THIS GAME. They are using streamlining as a substitute for this term. How much more clear can I be? The reason I put 'streamlining (watering down)' is because I was decoding the nuance of this term in reference to DA2's static outfit shift.

so because bioware decided to make companion have static armors you say they watered down the game? are you seriously saying that? the core game is still intact they improved the skills tree by a lot better than dao making skills and talents actual usefull instead of picking 3 crappy ones to get the one you want (example mage talents) so no you are wrong the gameplay seems smoother more fast paced thats it, it still has the same mechanics and tactical aproach so your "watered down" comment has no leverage

[Pwnsaur]

wyvvern wrote...

Pwnsaur opined:

Yea, ok....I AM in love with my own rhetoric.. you got me
there. But that's only because I write opinion pieces for  a living. I
CERTAINLY wasn't 'surrendering' however. The fact is, my interpretation
of the word is exactly right... It's sad when people see a game
developer use a term like streamlining and believe they are innovating
or improving the game. It's industry lingo for simplifying, and either
you can read between the lines or you can't. Because of what I do for a
living, I am literally paid to interpret BS and I do it very, very well.
Streamlining masquerading as innovation is just one such example of BS.

Begin pendant mode:

Improper use of ellipses. Correct usage is, of course, to indicate omitted words. Not to 'trail off.'
Appeal to authority logic fail. "I write opinion pieces..."

This is what I would love to see also. Simple and well put, thank you

Usage of a smiley sans approptiate period to terminate your sentence.

I could care less how you 'see' it being used by others..

Appalling use of "I could care less" as opposed to the correct "I could not care less." For that alone I'd fire you. The double period is a nice bonus.

It's not my fault that you take your literary cues from the context in which your peers use them.

This is of course the only way to understand English or any other language. To discern the proper meaning of the use of a word or phrase from that wonderous thing called context. Language is not, as you appear to be arguing, binary. Otherwise there would never be misunderstandings.

Your debating tactics are impeccable, really they are...

This is a run-on sentence, of the type commonly called a 'comma splice.' I suggest the use of a semi-colon here.

I will reiterate my longstanding and yet constantly overlooked statement being;

However this usage of a semi-colon is incorrect. You should have used a colon. An em dash would also have been effective. It depends which style manual you prefer.

No more fighting.. pls..

I'll assume 'pls' is standard usage in your universe. Ellipses, even when used informally to indicate an elision in a sentence contain three periods -- not two.

I could continue, but really why bother?

This may have something to do with my masters degree in English, or the
fact that my college aptitude in english puts me in the top 1% in the
country.

Please learn to capitalize the word 'English.' Also please recall that it is 'master's degree' and not 'masters degree.'

I'm not in the habit of correcting other people's forum postings. However, given your .sig claiming both a genius-level IQ, the moniker 'literary genius,' and your penchant for throwing around the fact that you write for a living it was impossible to resist.

Welcome to the forums! Do enjoy your stay.

Wonderful! You seem to be of the mindset that I write as if I am publishing my posts instead of quickly jotting down riposte to the droves of posts being fired my way. Here are some facts for you..

I am a member of Mensa
I have a Master's in English from Western
I am currently writing opinion pieces for a publication that I will not divulge here

And yes.. I will be continue to write casually and candidly because this is a forum about VIDEO GAMES. I am not proof reading my 'work' here moron. Thanks for taking all that time to prop up your ego, that's a very empassioned display of your insecurity. You didn't get the tip-off when I was using smiley faces? You come on here and start editing my post as if this is a thesis and you're my instructor? Do you have any awareness as to the environment in which you are posturing? Your self absorbtion and self righteousness reek of self hatred... I am very sorry for you. Did my display of an obscenely prodigious vocabulary incense your fragile ego enough that your needless diatribe felt warranted at all? Even given the cirumstances? It's a freaking GAMING forum... wow.... 

You. Are. F******. Pathetic.

Modifié par Pwnsaur, 28 décembre 2010 - 07:31 .

[TheMadCat]

In Exile wrote...

I think we do. Anything short of actual realism is just BS to me, a way to make combat unelegant and uninteresting while retaining all the undesirable features of RPG combat.

Don't see how that has to equate to combat being unelegant and uninteresting. I think that would describe Origins system and that hardly made any attempts at realism.

If we are going for realism, we ought to actually simulate realism. So long as we introduce wish fullfilment (i.e. 4 people constantly defeating teams of 8+ without any casualties) then we've broken realism.

Except it's impossible for a game to simulate realism, even simulations. Games such as ArmA 2, Original Operation Flashpoint, any of the dozens of flight sims, they all make tradeoffs because technology can't recreate every possible effect and outcome. This is why I said you can't strive for complete realism, it's impossible even if that's the developer seeks.

Again - the closer you are, the less force the arrow has.

Depends on the angle, a flat angle is going to have the most force about a foot from the bow. This arrow was clocked at about 140mph using an arrow equiped on a longbow. So you had the speed and force of a compound (Little less then double the speed of a longbow, which I believe clocks in around 100mph due to the sheer size of the arrows) and the penetrating power of a longbow and it barely penetrated.

Low grade iron plate, the kind that you'd find in medieval tech, can be penetrated by bodkin arrows (the arrow tip). As metalurgy evolves and you get steel plate, plate is no longer penetrated by arrows, but can still deal blunt damage (like a warhammer would, which can be every bit as deadly).

That looks like they're using steel. Do they comment on the kind of bodkin they used? I don't have the sound on so I can't comment further.

Steel bodkin, steel armor. Don't see an arrow on a flat trajectory piercing iron either at 50 though, just to tough. Arrows pretty much lost effectiveness once plate started to appear in greater numbers, both iron and steel. Crossbows were really the only thing capable of penetrating it until firearms.

It doesn't look like DA:O has that kind of metalurgy available, though.

Don't they have armor called Steel Plate in the game?

But it's completely arbitrary if you're willing to compromise. You're saying we should have some amount of totally unrealistic stuff in, just the amount of you're comfortable with. Why is your perspective here any better than any other person that wants to put the line either further along or less along?

It's not, never proclaimed it was. I thought we were expressing personal opinions in this thread?

Put another way: why is your take on where the point should be any better than mine?

Again, it's not nor have I proclaimed it to be. I've just stated why I personally disagree with you and the direction I'd like to see the game head. Neither of our opinions are actually superior to one another.

Not really. So long as hits don't absolutely cripple you, it's just fake. The in-between area isn't any less unrealistic for me, and equally aesthetically displeasing. So I'm advocating for something that is more aesthetically pleasing, since the only realistic alternative I'm happy with is simulation.

How is restricting the player from customizing armor for example aesthetically pleasing though? What if one of your companions has hidious looking armour in your eyes, while you can change it in origins you're locked out here? How is that the optimal solution?

Modifié par TheMadCat, 28 décembre 2010 - 07:19 .

[AlanC9]

errant_knight wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

In general, streamlining something is good design. It has connotations of sleekness and efficiency.

I wouldn't use it as a synonym for 'watered-down.' To water something down suggests adding something lesser to dilute the experience.

I'm thinking 'gutted' works.

Sure. If you mean "gutted", say "gutted."

[Addai]

IrishSpectre257 wrote...

I would rather have a unique looking party member, than a party member that you can customize, but will always look generic. I kept Morrigan's original robes on her the entire game, and when I found unique looking armor, I gave it to a party member I thought it looked good on, regardless of stats.

And there you demonstrate that both are possible in the same game, and they aren't possible in DA2, so we're getting less of something we used to have.  Streamlining is thus marketing BS for "less for your money."  But I've had this discussion before.

[AlanC9]

Pwnsaur wrote...

HAHAHAHAHA! This has gone into astronomically preposterous levels of absurdity. I REALLY...I mean REALLY don't want to argue this anymore... BioWare is substituting the word streamlining for simplifying, which...I equate with watering down. That's it! That's all! Endlessly spamming the word 'rhetoric' like a Fox News pundit in order to invalidate my argument is pretty weak. They are watering down this game. THEY ARE WATERING DOWN THIS GAME. They are using streamlining as a substitute for this term. How much more clear can I be? The reason I put 'streamlining (watering down)' is because I was decoding the nuance of this term in reference to DA2's static outfit shift.

Dude.... your job is writing articles to convince people to believe stuff?

Where do you work? I need to send in my resume.

[In Exile]

This topic has taken a turn for the hilarious. Mad Cat, I promise I will reply to you shortly, but I just needed to point out the absurdity of the thread. I'm ashamed of myself for having taken this seriously. 

[Pwnsaur]

AlanC9 wrote...

Pwnsaur wrote...

HAHAHAHAHA! This has gone into astronomically preposterous levels of absurdity. I REALLY...I mean REALLY don't want to argue this anymore... BioWare is substituting the word streamlining for simplifying, which...I equate with watering down. That's it! That's all! Endlessly spamming the word 'rhetoric' like a Fox News pundit in order to invalidate my argument is pretty weak. They are watering down this game. THEY ARE WATERING DOWN THIS GAME. They are using streamlining as a substitute for this term. How much more clear can I be? The reason I put 'streamlining (watering down)' is because I was decoding the nuance of this term in reference to DA2's static outfit shift.

Dude.... your job is writing articles to convince people to believe stuff?

Where do you work? I need to send in my resume.

It's a sweet gig, but not an easy one to get I assure you   Most everything you read is considered an opinion piece these days actually... If you have interest, go for it

Modifié par Pwnsaur, 28 décembre 2010 - 07:37 .

[AlanC9]

I shorthanded my explanation before, but I guess that didn't work...

Pwnsaur wrote...
Wonderful! You seem to be of the mindset that I write as if I am publishing my posts instead of quickly jotting down riposte to the droves of posts being fired my way. Here are some facts for you..

I am a member of Mensa
I have a Master's in English from Western
I am currently writing opinion pieces for a publication that I will not divulge here

And yes.. I will be continue to write casually and candidly because this is a forum about VIDEO GAMES. I am not proof reading my 'work' here moron. Thanks for taking all that time to prop up your ego, that's a very empassioned display of your insecurity

Talking about your credentials never works. Nor should it. Either your argument works, or it does not.  I hate playing the logical fallacy card, but it just doesn't prove anything.

Even if people were impressed by credentials, a Master's in English from Western doesn't cut it. I'm not quite sure what would do the trick. Maybe a doctorate from an Ivy? U. of Chicago? I've never seen it work anywhere, though, with any level of credential.

But by all means, keep writing casually. You're entertaining.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 décembre 2010 - 07:48 .

[In Exile]

TheMadCat wrote...
Don't see how that has to equate to combat being unelegant and uninteresting. I think that would describe Origins system and that hardly made any attempts at realism. 

Origins tried for the faux sort of realism. Do you visit TV tropes? I think the unrealistic realism applies here.

The armour, the hacking motions - none of it looks like real combat would, but it tries to be toned down and mechanical, which is what people think realistic combat looks like.

I think the over-the-top, acrobatic, sword twirling combat is aesthetically great. As we move away from that...

Except it's impossible for a game to simulate realism, even simulations. Games such as ArmA 2, Original Operation Flashpoint, any of the dozens of flight sims, they all make tradeoffs because technology can't recreate every possible effect and outcome. This is why I said you can't strive for complete realism, it's impossible even if that's the developer seeks. 

Oh, I'm aware of the limitation. But Operation Flashpoint is a great example. For all the flaws that game had, it treats injuries realistically, particularly with the fact that a single bullet wound can be crippling for the rest of the mission.

Depends on the angle, a flat angle is going to have the most force about a foot from the bow. This arrow was clocked at about 140mph using an arrow equiped on a longbow. So you had the speed and force of a compound (Little less then double the speed of a longbow, which I believe clocks in around 100mph due to the sheer size of the arrows) and the penetrating power of a longbow and it barely penetrated. 

From what I read, medieval lonbows had significant more pull than modern longbows. But you could very well be right. Weaponry is a hobby, not something I studied academically, so my sources could all be wrong.

Steel bodkin, steel armor. Don't see an arrow on a flat trajectory piercing iron either at 50 though, just too tough. Arrows pretty much lost effectiveness once plate started to appear in greater numbers, both iron and steel. Crossbows were really the only thing capable of penetrating it until firearms. 

Steel plate, certainly. Iron, as far as I read, could still be penetrated, so it didn't displace arrows significantly.

Of course, plate was expensive and was not widespread as far as I know, so we need to take that into account in terms of it's actual impact on combat.

Don't they have armor called Steel Plate in the game?

They also have veridium plate available. I think their materials fall firmly on the BS side of the scale.

I meant that relative to their technological level (early medieval, looks like) it doesn't seem like steel would have been so widespread as to have been available for any but the richest nobles.

It's not, never proclaimed it was. I thought we were expressing personal opinions in this thread?

Oh, my mistake. I thought we stepped into the "this is what an RPG should be" debate. I apologize.

I've actually forgotten what it's like to have a curteous discussion here.

Again, it's not nor have I proclaimed it to be. I've just stated why I personally disagree with you and the direction I'd like to see the game head. Neither of our opinions are actually superior to one another. 

Yeah, I re-read, it's my bad. Was prickly like a p

How is restricting the player from customizing armor for example aesthetically pleasing though? What if one of your companions has hidious looking armour in your eyes, while you can change it in origins you're locked out here? How is that the optimal solution?

Ugly but unique > decent but generic. I would rather a character have something I don't like (take your pick from Miranda to Jack) over looking identical (i.e. all humans in ME1). That's just preference.

Aesthetic is just a matter of taste. Personally, I'd like visually upgrading armour as you go through the game while maintaining a unique look, but I can appreciate that might be hard technologically.

[Pwnsaur]

AlanC9 wrote...

I shorthanded my explanation before, but I guess that didn't work...

Pwnsaur wrote...
Wonderful! You seem to be of the mindset that I write as if I am publishing my posts instead of quickly jotting down riposte to the droves of posts being fired my way. Here are some facts for you..

I am a member of Mensa
I have a Master's in English from Western
I am currently writing opinion pieces for a publication that I will not divulge here

And yes.. I will be continue to write casually and candidly because this is a forum about VIDEO GAMES. I am not proof reading my 'work' here moron. Thanks for taking all that time to prop up your ego, that's a very empassioned display of your insecurity

Talking about your credentials never works. Nor should it. Either your argument works, or it does not.

Even if people were impressed by credentials, a Master's in English from Western doesn't cut it. I'm not quite sure what would do the trick. Maybe a doctorate from an Ivy? U. of Chicago? I've never seen it work anywhere, though, with any level of credential.

But by all means, keep writing casually. You're entertaining.

I never had an argument per se... I did however, have an opinion. I prefer companion outfits to be customized. That's really all I got. The sidetracking was due to the needless argument concerning semantics... And Western? It was close, and I have a GF.. had to sacrifice. Ah well...

This entire debacle has weakened my constitution..   

[AlanC9]

Pwnsaur wrote...

I never had an argument per se... I did however, have an opinion. I prefer companion outfits to be customized. That's really all I got. The sidetracking was due to the needless argument concerning semantics... And Western? It was close, and I have a GF.. had to sacrifice. Ah well...

This entire debacle has weakened my constitution..   

No, you didn't have an argument.

The weird thing is that you actually understand the problem. The problem isn't that you have an opinion, it's that you didn't just express that opinion as just an opinion.

When a forum debate blows up, it's usually because someone expressed his personal preferences as How Games Ought To Be, or What Smart People Like in Games. Then someone smart who doesn't share those preferences reads the post, and we end up with you vs. In Exile.

Though you and In Exile actually hit a derivative of this, since it was about language rather than even game design per se. (FWIW, as an editor -- we all have our day jobs here -- I would have AQd most of what you posted).

[Pwnsaur]

Not that I really want to drag this horrible night terror on any further, I feel I need to address a few things. I DID express my opinion as just that. An opinion. Read my first post. This thing started when Exile corrected my usage of streamlined. I took issue and then we trailed off into a semantic-laden argument between two people, not just me. You seem to be singling me out as the sole proprietor of this whole thing.

I don't know what AQ means, but I'm sure you're trying to take a shot at me.. Like I said before, I can't understand how anyone could see this as an appropriate atmosphere to critique grammatical inadequacies. If I knew there would be editors popping up in every corner to provide substantive editing I would have never registered. I get that enough at work, and I sure as hell don't need it when I'm posting on a f****** BioWare forum. My god...

Modifié par Pwnsaur, 28 décembre 2010 - 08:41 .

[AlanC9]

I had a sudden need to talk about something substantive before signing off....

Addai67 wrote...

IrishSpectre257 wrote...

I would rather have a unique looking party member, than a party member that you can customize, but will always look generic. I kept Morrigan's original robes on her the entire game, and when I found unique looking armor, I gave it to a party member I thought it looked good on, regardless of stats.

And there you demonstrate that both are possible in the same game, and they aren't possible in DA2, so we're getting less of something we used to have.  Streamlining is thus marketing BS for "less for your money."  But I've had this discussion before.

That argument only works if the stuff that is streamlined out was actually valuable to you. I pay taxes so people take away garbage from my house. That means there's less stuff here than I used to have, but I haven't lost any utility because they're taking that stuff away.

Sure, you're getting less for your money with DA2. But I'm not. If all other factors were equal, I'd gain from resources being redirected from something I'm uninterested in to other things that I might be interested in.

[Pwnsaur]

Addai67 wrote...

IrishSpectre257 wrote...

I would rather have a unique looking party member, than a party member that you can customize, but will always look generic. I kept Morrigan's original robes on her the entire game, and when I found unique looking armor, I gave it to a party member I thought it looked good on, regardless of stats.

And there you demonstrate that both are possible in the same game, and they aren't possible in DA2, so we're getting less of something we used to have.  Streamlining is thus marketing BS for "less for your money."  But I've had this discussion before.

I agree whole-heartedly..

[AlanC9]

Pwnsaur wrote...
Not that I really want to drag this horrible night terror on any further, I feel I need to address a few things. I DID express my opinion as just that. An opinion. Read my first post. This thing started when Exile corrected my usage of streamlined. I took issue and then we trailed off into a semantic-laden argument between two people, not just me. You seem to be singling me out as the sole proprietor of this whole thing.

Hmm... since In Exile's right on the substance, I may have avoided questioning whether he was dragging us into the weeds needlessly. As you're probably not aware, I generally agree with him about stuff,.

I don't know what AQ means, but I'm sure you're trying to take a shot at me..

Author Query. Maybe your editors use a different term? As an editor, it's my job to help the author drag himself into the mud, but only if that's really where he wants to go.

[soteria]

I'm glad I read this thread. AlanC9, I have to say you're in fine form this morning.

Sharn01 wrote...

I will point out her necklace once again, gold weighs approximately 2.45 times as much as steel, and her necklance appears to be at least an inch thick in screenshots, I would estimate she is toting a good 30 to 40 pounds around just her neck impeding her balance with as much weight as a suite of chain armor but very poorly distributed.

It is, after all, readily apparent to any observer that her jewelry is solid gold, not an alloy, and not gold veneer on wood or tin as is often done with jewelry. I didn't notice this fact at first, but after reading your post I wondered why I hadn't seen it earlier.

wwwwowwww wrote...

You know I've always been bothered by this 2 ring rule, I think it's so silly personally

Other than game balance (the real and best reason), the normal explanation I've seen is that putting that many magical items so close together is dangerous to the wearer and/or causes magical interference.

Pwnsaur wrote...

...If I knew there would be editors popping up in every corner to provide substantive editing I would have never registered...

You should have thought that through before you claimed to be a professional writer with a master's in English. As a writing professional, you should know that you are seen and judged by what and how you write. If you're going to claim to be an expert on writing, you ought to ensure that you write like one if you expect anyone to believe you--or care.

[Pwnsaur]

AlanC9 wrote...

Pwnsaur wrote...
Not that I really want to drag this horrible night terror on any further, I feel I need to address a few things. I DID express my opinion as just that. An opinion. Read my first post. This thing started when Exile corrected my usage of streamlined. I took issue and then we trailed off into a semantic-laden argument between two people, not just me. You seem to be singling me out as the sole proprietor of this whole thing.

Hmm... since In Exile's right on the substance, I may have avoided questioning whether he was dragging us into the weeds needlessly. As you're probably not aware, I generally agree with him about stuff,.

I don't know what AQ means, but I'm sure you're trying to take a shot at me..

Author Query. Maybe your editors use a different term? As an editor, it's my job to help the author drag himself into the mud, but only if that's really where he wants to go.

He was right? He perceived the term 'streamlining' to be an innovative step towards 'Improving appearance or efficiency,' and I (in this situation) perceived it as a slick term coined in place of 'simplifying' for obvious reasons. I hardly see either side as right, but seeing as you indicate a bias towards author I will attribute your statement as a manifestation of that bias.

 

[wwwwowwww]

soteria wrote...

wwwwowwww wrote...
You know I've always been bothered by this 2 ring rule, I think it's so silly personally

Other than game balance (the real and best reason), the normal explanation I've seen is that putting that many magical items so close together is dangerous to the wearer and/or causes magical interference.

Yet it's ok to wear magic armor that covers your body, with magic glove, magic boots, a magic helmet, carrying magic weapons on your back, wearing a magic amulet and a magic belt, but more than 1 ring on each hand is dangerous? lol

I could see not allowing similar type rings to be worn together on the same hand (barely)

[Pwnsaur]

soteria wrote...

Pwnsaur wrote...
...If I knew there would be editors popping up in every corner to provide substantive editing I would have never registered...

You should have thought that through before you claimed to be a professional writer with a master's in English. As a writing professional, you should know that you are seen and judged by what and how you write. If you're going to claim to be an expert on writing, you ought to ensure that you write like one if you expect anyone to believe you--or care.

The only thing that I 'know,' is that some people on this forum have inordinately fragile egos and suffer from either severe insecurities or the need to exhibit the highest level of petty behavior. I could really give two s**** as to whether or not anyone thinks I am a competent writer. I am a better writer than most, and it does illicit an emotional response from people who feel threatened by it. Your attacks are all the proof I need to substantiate my point.

I am done with this thread...

Modifié par Pwnsaur, 28 décembre 2010 - 09:41 .

[Schneidend]

TJPags wrote...

Oh for the love of . . . .

Fine.  Isabela is the be all and end all of swordsmanship  . . .excuse me, dagger-woman-ship.  She fears no blade.  Her thong and daggers are all the protection she needs.  Armor?  Who needs it?  Not Isabela!  If she can't evade your clumsy attack, she will parry your dull blade with one wondrous dagger, while stabbing you in the eye with the other.  Your armor is no match for her thong . . .errr, cleavage . . .err, daggers.

You do remember that she was wearing leather armor in Origins, right?

I honestly can't believe that you think it's normal, acceptable, practical, or in any way advantageous NOT to wear armor in a swordfight.  But so be it.

Look, I'm not suggesting Isabela is untouchable, but she's a pirate, a duelist, a Rogue, etc. None of these things mandate armor. If she is hit directly she's in trouble, but so is an armored warrior who gets crushed under a boulder thrown by an ogre. Armor is not the answer to all the dangers of combat, and as I've pointed out on multiple occasions it can even be a liability. So, it's a matter of personal preference and risk vs. reward. Isabela, retconned for DA2, has chosen not to wear armor, which makes sense based on her occupation and fighting style. Nobody wears plate mail in a fencing match, English privateers didn't wear any kind of armor, the Musketeers didn't wear armor (because guns and cannons existed, but in Thedas, magic, cannons, and accurately thrown boulders exist). The precedent has been set for not wearing armor while stabbing people.

I'm not attempting to make a case for "lol armor is dumb" or that light, agile weapon styles are the greatest thing since sliced bread. LOOK at my portrait, my Dragon Age character is a guy with a huge weapon wearing the heaviest armor he can find. What I am making a case against is this idea that because armor protects you from some things, it's a universally good idea to wear it regardless of whether you even know how. What I AM making a case for is that not wearing armor makes complete sense for Isabela's character.

At this point you're just being hyperbolic, and it makes you look foolish.