397 réponses à ce sujet

[magicwins]

Cobrawar will buy this game. And return. And rant some more.



Other people make living complicated.

[Nerevar-as]

Follow Me on Twitter wrote...

 I personally really like the changes playing through the DAO gave me a nostalgic feeling, played through the city elf orgin first playthrough and really felt like i was playing neverwinter nights lol.

Which is a good thing Dragon age should look distinct you should be able to see something from the game and instantly know its dragon age and not neverwinter nights or something.

(Not that nwn is horrible, its one of my favorite game series )

Dated graphics aside, I don´t know if distinct looks would work that way. Does a casual gamer (who are the actual targets of that) know? I can´t tell apart shooters unless there´s a really iconic part of the series (Master Chief, Alma,...) on screen. DA2 art style doesn´t seem that different to me to make a difference. 

[Follow Me on Twitter]

YoziMaiden wrote...

Follow Me on Twitter wrote...

I really like the Draenei, just wait till they give us blood elves maybe in the Dark Crusade expansion. -crosses fingers-

Single Draenei female seeks blacksmith with grinding wheel to take care
of me and my gorgeous hooves.

How can people be upset about having female draenei's added to dragon age? This can only be a good thing:unsure:

Modifié par Follow Me on Twitter, 04 janvier 2011 - 06:46 .

[YoziMaiden]

I did start playing Alliance because of the Draenei...

[Follow Me on Twitter]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Follow Me on Twitter wrote...

 I personally really like the changes playing through the DAO gave me a nostalgic feeling, played through the city elf orgin first playthrough and really felt like i was playing neverwinter nights lol.

Which is a good thing Dragon age should look distinct you should be able to see something from the game and instantly know its dragon age and not neverwinter nights or something.

(Not that nwn is horrible, its one of my favorite game series )

Dated graphics aside, I don´t know if distinct looks would work that way. Does a casual gamer (who are the actual targets of that) know? I can´t tell apart shooters unless there´s a really iconic part of the series (Master Chief, Alma,...) on screen. DA2 art style doesn´t seem that different to me to make a difference. 

You have a point someone just picking up the game is not really going to be able to tell the two apart i just feel the games art team is going the right direction TRYING to give the game a different art style then DAO.

I'm pretty sure there were alot of neverwinter nights fans that picked up the game and felt that this game was just way too similar to neverwinter nights i half expected a githyanki to appear midgame. Lol or maybe thats just me idk just voicing my opinion on how i think the redesigns are a good thing.

[Magnum Opus]

Morroian wrote...

Magnum Opus wrote...

That's where all this retconning breaks things for me.  I can't recognize these elements any more, and that breaks the story.  Considering the story is the main draw of Bioware games for me, that's not a particularly good thing.

How can it break the story when you haven't played it yet? As has been said on other threads other game franchises have graphic makeovers, comics do it all the time.

The story lies in the continuity of the world as much as it does in the personalities of the characters and the events through which those characters move. 

It's true, individually each game loses nothing by these changes.  Within DA2, taken as a self-contained entity, I'm sure Isabela will be a wonderful character.  It's just that Isabela isn't to unique  DA2 alone.  She's in Origins as well, but right now she's unrecognizable as that character because of all the changes to her look.

I see it more as lost potential than anything, really.    As I said, I like Flemeth's new look.  I think the new-look  qunari are pretty darned bad@ss.  And Isabela... well, she needs pants.  But she looks good, too.  Distinctive.  It's just that (aside from Flemeth), the new look Darkspawn/Isabela/Qunari were unrecognizable as what they were supposed to be, and that means that all of the groundwork laid in Origins is essentially going to waste.  Within DA2, I'm sure each of these elements will be fleshed out well enough.  It's just that they could have been somewhat... more.... if they'd made them recognizable.

The value of recurring characters and places is that they're already recognizable.  You can build upon what came before, give it a sense of being not bound to one single game, and make it more real than what could be done in one game alone, because the player will have already met that person or been in that village.  That's what's going to be missing from DA2; the characters are there, but they're there in name only (from what I can tell at this point; rather important caveat, there).  I'm going to have to "meet" Isabela all over again... and Bioware's writing is going to have to overcome the sense of "she's just a literary device" that they instilled by revisioning her to the point of unrecognizablity, if they want me to feel anything for the character as a character.

It just seems like a bit of a wasted opportunity, truth be told, starting from scratch with characters that have already been defined.  But that's the extent of my gripe.  Within DA2, I'm sure it'll all be excellent, just as it was within DA:O

Modifié par Magnum Opus, 04 janvier 2011 - 11:03 .

[Morroian]

Magnum Opus wrote...

The story lies in the continuity of the world as much as it does in the personalities of the characters and the events through which those characters move. 

That continuity comes largely through the writing, at least it does for me.

Magnum Opus wrote...

It's true, individually each game loses nothing by these changes.  Within DA2, taken as a self-contained entity, I'm sure Isabela will be a wonderful character.  It's just that Isabela isn't to unique  DA2 alone.  She's in Origins as well, but right now she's unrecognizable as that character because of all the changes to her look.

She's such a minor character in DAO that I fail to see that it matters much. If it was Alistair, Morrigan or Leli I might object more I guess.

Magnum Opus wrote...

It just seems like a bit of a wasted opportunity, truth be told, starting from scratch with characters that have already been defined.  

Like I said in terms of characterisation and writing I'm sure she will be the same character from DAO and recognisable in those terms, just fleshed out more.

[Dhiro]

SufferingTormentDarkness wrote...

Seriously i thought she was killed?

Maybe you just suck at killing people.

[Jimmy Fury]

Magnum Opus wrote...
I see it more as lost potential than anything, really.    As I said, I like Flemeth's new look.  I think the new-look  qunari are pretty darned bad@ss.  And Isabela... well, she needs pants.  But she looks good, too.  Distinctive.  It's just that (aside from Flemeth), the new look Darkspawn/Isabela/Qunari were unrecognizable as what they were supposed to be, and that means that all of the groundwork laid in Origins is essentially going to waste.  Within DA2, I'm sure each of these elements will be fleshed out well enough.  It's just that they could have been somewhat... more.... if they'd made them recognizable.

The highlighted line is where I think many people err in their problem with the visual changes. If you look at the original concept art for Origins, none of the characters ended up looking how they were "supposed" to look.  Sten and Zevran especially came out looking absolutely nothing like their concept art.
However, compare their concept art with the new Qunari and with Fenris... much more similarity. Heck I wouldn't be surprised in the least if Fenris was actually designed based on the old Zevran concept art.

Point being, it's entirely possible that this new look is what the devs wanted for the universe all along, meaning it's not a departure from "what they were supposed to be" but a realization of it.

And recognizability is subjective. Many people recognized the darkspawn, Flemeth, and Isabella from the first released shots well before Bioware confirmed anything. There were entire threads dedicated to speculation about whether "Dragon Lady" was the god baby or Flemeth. So the fact that you didn't reconize them doesn't mean nobody recognized them. I certainly knew what the new darkspawn were before the devs ever confirmed it. They just looked like updated darkspawn to me... Same with Isabella.  The first pics looked like a spanish/italian/romani pirate = Antivan Pirate = Isabella is the only one I knew of.
Also, must keep in mind that DAO Isabella was "generic female NPC #13" or whatever. She wasn't special or unique because she wasn't really important to the story.

-oh ew wow edited because dark blue highlighting is a terrible idea... -

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 05 janvier 2011 - 12:03 .

[Xewaka]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Xewaka wrote...
However, this is not the work of a single artist, but a team of them. Therefore, some more consistency is expected, as everything has to fit a certain mold to keep artistic integrity in the project. So an artist swap doesn't cause as much change in a videogame as in a comic book, as the art direction still has to fit with all the other artists.
-snippitysnip-
You might notice that when you actually have to "tear" something rather than simply cut it with a knife into a mouth-filling piece, the teeth you actually use for that tearing are the canines. You know, the fang-shaped ones?
Human mouth is funny that way, it has teeth for cutting -useful with vegetable-, teeth for rending -useful with fibrous food such as meat, and teeth for chewing -useful to ease digestion. Omnivore diet requires versatility like that. However, a full carnivore diet requires more empashis on the canines, and less on the incisives, as it will be
tearing flesh and muscle more usually than cutting grass.

...and?
I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused. Are you trying to agree with me or debate with me?
Because, for starters, I don't see what the first bit before the snip has to do with anything. Between the fact that Comics are also the work of an artistic team, the fact that I (again) mentioned how they can change during a single issue, and how I said nothing about changing VG artists over the course of a single project.... I'm not really sure what your point is.
Secondly, I never asked which teeth rend flesh. I only stated that human teeth, such as those displayed on the new hurlocks, are capable of rending flesh. I know which ones do what. That changes nothing about what I said...

Unless I am mistaken, the art team of a comic consists of penciller, inker, colorer and worder (that's not the proper term, but I can't recall its name in english, sorry), tops. That's four people. And the penciler determines the whole look of the art. However, you have about a dozen and a half people working at the art rendition of a videogame. The point I tried to made is that consistency is less expected on a medium where one or two persons have the say on practically all the art, compared to a team of twelve to twenty people. That is why I indicate that art consistency is more expected from videogames, and such massive switchs in style from game to game (in such a short period of time between them) are jarring. Specially when the change is for the worse.
About the teeth thing: Look at a dog's mouth. You'll notice the canines are much more developed, and the incisives are smaller. You'll also notice its premolars much more pointy in nature. Dogs are carnivores. The point I tried to made is that human teeth do not fit in a carnivore species.

Modifié par Xewaka, 05 janvier 2011 - 12:09 .

[Brockololly]

Jimmy Fury wrote...
Point being, it's entirely possible that this new look is what the devs wanted for the universe all along, meaning it's not a departure from "what they were supposed to be" but a realization of it.

Maybe, but if thats the case, the devs should try and balance what they originally wanted things to look like with how they actually looked in Origins going forward. If they knew all along that the Qunari had horns and that Sten was an outlier, why not lay the foundation for that  in Origins?

Jimmy Fury wrote...
And recognizability is subjective. Many people recognized the darkspawn, Flemeth, and Isabella from the first released shots well before Bioware confirmed anything. There were entire threads dedicated to speculation about whether "Dragon Lady" was the god baby or Flemeth. So the fact that you didn't reconize them doesn't mean nobody recognized them.

Right, but for returning characters or old creatures/places, you shouldn't need to guess as to who or what they're supposed to be. Flemeth I'm willing to give a pass given her uber-shapeshifting prowess, but the darkspawn, sure you might infer they are darkspawn. But are they awakened darkspawn? Considering they share the same coif as the Awakened ones in Awakening? Obviously not, but it doesn't help that BioWare lifted that visual cue from Awakening. If no one had told me that the new Qunari were Qunari, I'd have thought they were a new race. In Origins they're described as golden skinned giants decked out in glittering armor with cannon technology, not savage looking gargoyle faced, shirtless beast monsters with warpaint all over.

You shouldn't have to speculate at all on recognizing established people/places/things from Origins. Barring some plot related change, recognition  should be immediate.

Jimmy Fury wrote...
I certainly knew what the new darkspawn were before the devs ever confirmed it. They just looked like updated darkspawn to me... Same with Isabella.  The first pics looked like a spanish/italian/romani pirate = Antivan Pirate = Isabella is the only one I knew of.
Also, must keep in mind that DAO Isabella was "generic female NPC #13" or whatever. She wasn't special or unique because she wasn't really important to the story.

Well, she did have a unique face morph though. My issue with Isabela is that fine, she changed into more unique clothes but face wise, she looks absolutely nothing like her Origins version. Nothing at all, besides the dark skin color.

But like you said, it doesn't bother me too much seeing as Isabela was a minor NPC, but I'm very curious how old companions from Origins or more major NPCs will look. My litmus test is that you should be able to readily ID them based on their face alone, not their outifts. If you need to see Morrigan's robes to recognize that Hot Rod Samurai Morrigan is still supposed to be Morrigan from Origins, then thats a fail in terms of recognizability and any sense of visual continuity.

[Ziggeh]

Brockololly wrote...

If they knew all along that the Qunari had horns and that Sten was an outlier, why not lay the foundation for that  in Origins?

I guess they couldn't say whether the changes would take place as the decisions hadn't been made at that point.

[Dhiro]

@Brockololly



Isabela was changed so much because she had a pretty generic face model. The other characters, not so much, then I guess they'll be more faithful, appearence-wise.

[Xewaka]

Ziggeh wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

If they knew all along that the Qunari had horns and that Sten was an outlier, why not lay the foundation for that  in Origins?

I guess they couldn't say whether the changes would take place as the decisions hadn't been made at that point.

I remember they had to gut Sten's horns due to problems with helmets. However, I don't remember any reference to horned Qunari in the codex in Origins.

[Ziggeh]

Xewaka wrote...

I remember they had to gut Sten's horns due to problems with helmets. However, I don't remember any reference to horned Qunari in the codex in Origins.

Left it open in case it never got fixed?

[Xewaka]

Ziggeh wrote...
Left it open in case it never got fixed?

It's not as if they haven't already messed up the Qunari countering preestablished canon. I mean, they're supposed to be technologically superior, wearing full steel armor and wielding superior firepower. Yet for DA.2 they've been turned into chaste -they wear tight leather pants - celtic berserkers.

Modifié par Xewaka, 05 janvier 2011 - 01:03 .

[upsettingshorts]

Brockololly wrote...

Right, but for returning characters or old creatures/places, you shouldn't need to guess as to who or what they're supposed to be.

That's why they'll tell you who they are. 

They told me George Lazenby was James Bond.  I watched On Her Majesty's Secret Service.  Decided I liked Sean Connery better despite the fact OHMSS was a good movie.  Both Lazenby and Connery are Bond.  I have a preference.  That's all there is to it. 

[Atakuma]

The codex entries are not supposed to be taken as gospel.

[Xewaka]

Atakuma wrote...
The codex entries are not supposed to be taken as gospel.

Yet they're the closest there is to an stablished canon for the game setting.

[IRMcGhee]

But they're in-universe, so aren't necessarily completely accurate. Aztecs thought Spanish cavalrymen were centaurs at first, god knows what they'd have made of a race of giants with cannons.

Modifié par IRMcGhee, 05 janvier 2011 - 01:22 .

[Magnum Opus]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Magnum Opus wrote...
I see it more as lost potential than anything, really.    As I said, I like Flemeth's new look.  I think the new-look  qunari are pretty darned bad@ss.  And Isabela... well, she needs pants.  But she looks good, too.  Distinctive.  It's just that (aside from Flemeth), the new look Darkspawn/Isabela/Qunari were unrecognizable as what they were supposed to be[/u][u], and that means that all of the groundwork laid in Origins is essentially going to waste.  Within DA2, I'm sure each of these elements will be fleshed out well enough.  It's just that they could have been somewhat... more.... if they'd made them recognizable.

The highlighted line is where I think many people err in their problem with the visual changes. If you look at the original concept art for Origins, none of the characters ended up looking how they were "supposed" to look.  Sten and Zevran especially came out looking absolutely nothing like their concept art.
However, compare their concept art with the new Qunari and with Fenris... much more similarity. Heck I wouldn't be surprised in the least if Fenris was actually designed based on the old Zevran concept art.

Point being, it's entirely possible that this new look is what the devs wanted for the universe all along, meaning it's not a departure from "what they were supposed to be" but a realization of it.

Whether Origins' representation of Isabela was what they were after or not, the point is that that was the interpretation we got.  And that this new one looks nothing like it.  I could have phrased that highlighted part better, though:  was not referring to the original artist's rendering of "Isabela", but the version we got in the first game.

And there's no way I should have to delve into supplementary material to figure out what a character looks like, not with the graphical fidelity of a game like Dragon Age Origins.

The first pics looked like a spanish/italian/romani pirate = Antivan Pirate = Isabella is the only one I knew of

I could accept this line of argument if Spanish/italian/romani pirate == Antivan Pirate == Isabela  == only such pirate in the DA universe.  However, that picture could have been of ANY antivan pirate woman.  Could have been a brand spankin' new character for all we knew; didn't have to be someone we were already familiar with.  Bioware has been known to introduce new charracters before on occasion, after all.

Will have to agree with you, on one point, though:  Blue highlighting?  Bad idea.  This current blue only burns the retinas a bit with my current colour scheme; can only assume the original dark blue was worse.

[Dave of Canada]

Xewaka wrote...

Atakuma wrote...
The codex entries are not supposed to be taken as gospel.

Yet they're the closest there is to an stablished canon for the game setting.

But they are written from the player's perspective and rumors / news (s)he finds and hears.

[Jimmy Fury]

Xewaka wrote...
Unless I am mistaken, the art team of a comic consists of penciller, inker, colorer and worder (that's not the proper term, but I can't recall its name in english, sorry), tops. That's four people. And the penciler determines the whole look of the art. However, you have about a dozen and a half people working at the art rendition of a videogame. The point I tried to made is that consistency is less expected on a medium where one or two persons have the say on practically all the art, compared to a team of twelve to twenty people. That is why I indicate that art consistency is more expected from videogames, and such massive switchs in style from game to game (in such a short period of time between them) are jarring. Specially when the change is for the worse.
About the teeth thing: Look at a dog's mouth. You'll notice the canines are much more developed, and the incisives are smaller. You'll also notice its premolars much more pointy in nature. Dogs are carnivores. The point I tried to made is that human teeth do not fit in a carnivore species.

1: You are not mistaken that the art team of a comic typically consists of at least four people (letterer, btw, is the fourth). Where you are mistaken is that the entirety of the visual style is determined solely by the penciler. Art can change dramatically based on the inker and colorer. So much so that the penicler's work may not be recognizable to even their own fans. The pencils set the stage yes and often the penciler can get a new team if he or she really doesn't like the ones they are working with...
Much like an artistic director on a game. He or she, in this case he, is in charge and determines the look. Not the individual artists on the team.  Thus the consistency of the art is primarily up to the art director the same as a comic's art is primarily up to the penicler. Both, incidentally, still have to answer to higher ups who can over rule their desires.
Mind you that all remains entirely pointless since i was just asking a simple question directed to those who don't care about the art change... which clearly doesn't include you.

2: Again, I know full well which teeth do what. I'm well aware of the difference between the teeth of carnivores, omnivores, and herbivores.
That still doesn't change what I said. Human teeth can rend flesh. The new hurlocks have human teeth. Therefore their teeth can still rend flesh.
However, I can go a step further now that you have clarified your point. Your premise is true but your argument is not sound. Darkspawn aren't carnivores. They're... well there isn't a word actually. They don't need to eat. Gaider has said so himself. Darkspawn can eat, but they don't need to. Typically they chomp on their dead enemies for psychological effect, nothing more.

Further more, since darkspawn are... I suppose mutation is the closest analogue given that they're a fictional fantasy creature... mutations of other species, there is no evolutionary cause for their teeth to ever adapt to anything. Humans, dwarves, elves, and Qunari are all omnivores. With no need to eat there is no evolutionary reason for darkspawn to have carnivorous teeth... There's no need for them to have teeth at all actually so they're a remnant of the genetic "ancestor" even though that ancestor is only one generation removed....

[Brockololly]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Right, but for returning characters or old creatures/places, you shouldn't need to guess as to who or what they're supposed to be.

That's why they'll tell you who they are. 

They told me George Lazenby was James Bond.  I watched On Her Majesty's Secret Service.  Decided I liked Sean Connery better despite the fact OHMSS was a good movie.  Both Lazenby and Connery are Bond.  I have a preference.  That's all there is to it. 

I don't think Bond is a very good analogy in this case since there is hardly any sort of continuity between Bond movies. Certainly not any kind of continuity of the type BioWare is seemingly trying to do with DA.

Half of the appeal for me in having a sequel which supposedly keeps continuity and has cameos and characters from prior games appearing is that you'll be able to recognize the old characters again. Maybe they change their look with the passage of time or events, but taking a Morrigan or Alistair and having them only identifiable by their "witch" clothes or "King/Warden" armor or having the game scream out to tell you "OH HEY LOOK ! Its Morrigan even though it doesn't look at all like the Morrigan you knew from Origins and she had radical reconstructive facial surgery!!" isn't exactly conducive to building any sense of continuity in the world.

I'm not a huge fan of the new art style from what I've seen of it, but the make or break aspect will be how major Origins companions/NPCs, locales look in it.

[upsettingshorts]

Brockololly wrote...

Half of the appeal for me in having a sequel which supposedly keeps continuity and has cameos and characters from prior games appearing is that you'll be able to recognize the old characters again.

I just view narrative continuity as important, and visual continuity as unimportant.  If Morrigan still acts like Morrigan, I don't care what she looks like*, just to pick one example.

*I might prefer one look over the other, but that's different.