244 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaduggar]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A designer can make a gun with the barrel on the other end and tell me it's a sensible and usefull weapon in his world. But he really shouldn't expect me to take his world or him seriously anymore after that.

You are alternating the core mechanics of the gun.
This does not compare and therefore is not what this thread is about.

Such an argument is irrelevant and fallacious.

A sword of whatever dimensions would mostly be impractical in reality due to its weight (for all I know); in DA2, however, the combat is much more exaggerated than reality--just as backflips are now a tactical battle move, weight will factor into (most likely) very little.

Doesn't it stand to reason that the sword could still be efficient in this world? 

Modifié par Jaduggar, 10 février 2011 - 03:39 .

[Yrkoon]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Saibh wrote...

MoogleNut wrote...

Or it could be so big and awesome because Varric is y'know, exagerating?
Just sayin'

Exaggeration is not the answer to everything. Swords appear to be the same size--or slightly larger than DAO two-handed swords.

That said.

You see this guy?



It's a bit taller than he is. I don't know his height. But there are other images a few pages back whether the swords are of comparable size.

The sword is taller than he is. Now compare this:



It's taller than she is by a tiny margin. Bearing in mind that she is both shorter than the male models and bending her knees.

Scale has 3 dimensions. Length is only one of them.

Width and Depth are the 2 others.

Spit out your argument now.  is it your contention that the sword we're looking at could be  fatter and wider than  Lady Hawke, and therefore,  the  very CLEAR  cut and paste scaling in the picture  above is not accurate?

Yeah, whatever.    Your argument fizzled and died the moment it was pointed out that Lady Hawkes sword is no bigger than any of the 2-h swords in Origins.  So now you're trying to put up  the 3d argument, while assuming that the rest of us wouldn't be able to understand  the nature  of 3 dimensional images... or be able to cite them in DA:O  *and* DA:2.  (yes, DA2.  would you like to see video of Male Hawke wielding a 2 handed sword in DA2?).

Modifié par Yrkoon, 10 février 2011 - 05:01 .

[tmp7704]

Yrkoon wrote...

Yeah, whatever.    Your argument fizzled and died the moment it was pointed out that Lady Hawkes sword is no bigger than any of the 2-h swords in Origins.

You'd have a point if his argument was that swords in Origins were accurately sized and DA2 was somehow different in this regard. But it's not, as evidenced by the first post he made:

"Bioware continues to be incapable of getting scale right...."

[Sylvius the Mad]

Saibh wrote...

Also, Sylvius: People keep complaining about the visual consistency between DAO and DAII...they decide to keep something consistent, and people still complain.

Given the other changes, clearly BioWare doesn't care about visual consistency.  As such, it can't reasonably be used as justification for this decision.

They don't need to justify anything to you.

They went to the trouble of doing it last time.  We asked why the swords were so big, and they gave us a very clear explanation.  That explanation no longer applies.

Either there's a reason they're hiding from us, or they're making decisions with no justification at all (which seems highly unlikely).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 10 février 2011 - 05:25 .

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Also, Sylvius: People keep complaining about the visual consistency between DAO and DAII...they decide to keep something consistent, and people still complain.

Given the other changes, clearly BioWare doesn't care about visual consistency.  As such, it can't reasonably be used as justification for this decision.

They don't need to justify anything to you.

They went to the trouble of doing it last time.  We asked why the swords were so big, and they gave us a very clear explanation.  That explanation no longer applies.

Either there's a reason they're hiding from us, or they're making decisions with no justification at all (which seems highly unlikely).

I've read enough of your posts to know that I probably don't want to ask why it's so important to you, but I will give you what I think is likely to be BioWare's justification: that's just the way they like it. I know that that's not good enough for you, and that's okay. But I really don't think that it goes any deeper than that, and continuing to worry yourself into a tizzy about it isn't likely to do anything productive.

[Yrkoon]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Yeah, whatever.    Your argument fizzled and died the moment it was pointed out that Lady Hawkes sword is no bigger than any of the 2-h swords in Origins.

You'd have a point if his argument was that swords in Origins were accurately sized and DA2 was somehow different in this regard. But it's not, as evidenced by the first post he made:

"Bioware continues to be incapable of getting scale right...."

Oh, I would have directly refuted that point of his about wrong scaling.  Except that  he's already been shown  pictures of real world 2-handed swords that are  Exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. ones. in. Dragon Age, and thus  didn't need me to remind him that he doesn't know squat about what 2-handed swords are supposed to look like.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 10 février 2011 - 05:33 .

[ALVIG824]

well this thread grew.........



and i probably should have said this earlier but i never had a problem with the length of the blade, but it was the pommel that bothered me. its like 2 feet long. which is ridiculous even for a sword that size. a little over 1 foot would have done. (i apologize in advance to the metric people)

[tmp7704]

Yrkoon wrote...

Oh, I would have directly refuted that point of his about wrong scaling.  Except that  he's already been shown  pictures of real world 2-handed swords that are  Exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. ones. in. Dragon Age, and thus  didn't need me to remind him that he doesn't know squat about what 2-handed swords are supposed to look like.

But as discussed later in this very thread, by posting these pictures his intention was to show that some of the dimensions of DA models were off, when compared to it. The models and the real specimen are of comparable length indeed, but this makes it one roughly accurate dimension out of three. As such, the statement of scale being wrong is correct -- if someone made model of a car with correct length but 2-3x wider and taller, you wouldn't argue it's exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. original... would you?

[1varangian]

Yrkoon wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Yeah, whatever.    Your argument fizzled and died the moment it was pointed out that Lady Hawkes sword is no bigger than any of the 2-h swords in Origins.

You'd have a point if his argument was that swords in Origins were accurately sized and DA2 was somehow different in this regard. But it's not, as evidenced by the first post he made:

"Bioware continues to be incapable of getting scale right...."

Oh, I would have directly refuted that point of his about wrong scaling.  Except that  he's already been shown  pictures of real world 2-handed swords that are  Exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. ones. in. Dragon Age, and thus  didn't need me to remind him that he doesn't know squat about what 2-handed swords are supposed to look like.

Any picture of a real sword just reminds you that the hilts aren't as thick as the baseball bats stuck on the DA2 blades. There's more to the scale than just length.

[mesmerizedish]

1varangian wrote...

...

Any picture of a real sword just reminds you that the hilts aren't as thick as the baseball bats stuck on the DA2 blades. There's more to the scale than just length.

Have you ever done any 3D modeling? It's just easier to work with things when they're a little thicker. Easier to show off the textures, easier to actually design the texture to begin with, etc. It just looks better.

[ALVIG824]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote....

Have you ever done any 3D modeling? It's just easier to work with things when they're a little thicker. Easier to show off the textures, easier to actually design the texture to begin with, etc. It just looks better.

dis is true

[Yrkoon]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Oh, I would have directly refuted that point of his about wrong scaling.  Except that  he's already been shown  pictures of real world 2-handed swords that are  Exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. ones. in. Dragon Age, and thus  didn't need me to remind him that he doesn't know squat about what 2-handed swords are supposed to look like.

But as discussed later in this very thread, by posting these pictures his intention was to show that some of the dimensions of DA models were off, when compared to it. The models and the real specimen are of comparable length indeed, but this makes it one roughly accurate dimension out of three. As such, the statement of scale being wrong is correct -- if someone made model of a car with correct length but 2-3x wider and taller, you wouldn't argue it's exactly. the. same. scale. as. the. original... would you?

Which is why I offered to show him video.

Edit:  and why can't we just  turn  around  and use his own scaling argument against him?  He's accusing DA of using wrong scaling.... and he's basing this judgement on  a 2d still frame.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 10 février 2011 - 05:54 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Have you ever done any 3D modeling? It's just easier to work with things when they're a little thicker. Easier to show off the textures, easier to actually design the texture to begin with, etc. It just looks better.

And yet, there's a variety of mods for DAO that replaces the weapons with smaller and thinner models.  And they look good.

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I've read enough of your posts to know that I probably don't want to ask why it's so important to you, but I will give you what I think is likely to be BioWare's justification: that's just the way they like it. I know that that's not good enough for you, and that's okay. But I really don't think that it goes any deeper than that, and continuing to worry yourself into a tizzy about it isn't likely to do anything productive.

If they'd told me that the first time, we wouldn't be having this conversation now.  I'd have accepted it as a design choice, and probably thought less of them for having made it.

But that's not what they said.  They explained that the made the weapons bigger to solve a problem.  That was defensible.  I didn't think less of them for that, because I understood the problem they were trying to solve and I saw why this solution was a good one (it wasn't the solution I'd have chosen, but the solution I'd have chosen wouldn't have been popular).

To decide now to make the weapons big, even without the camera problem, they would need to decide that the smaller weapons that caused the design problem in the first game were somehow no longer desireable.

I'd like to know how that happened.  They might tell me that they just reused some models and built new ones based on the DAO models to save production costs, and that would be a fine answer.  I'd accept that.

[Last Darkness]

People people please, have we all forgotten. Its not the size of the sword that matters, its how you use it !

[ALVIG824]

ok ok guys i thinks its time to calm down. its just a big sword nothing be afraid of unless its swung at you. i only asked because it looks big next to femhawke it loos fine on a male hawke, and the same seems to apply to most two-handers. just chill.

[tmp7704]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Have you ever done any 3D modeling? It's just easier to work with things when they're a little thicker.

Scaling dimensions is pretty basic operation as far as that goes.

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
And yet, there's a variety of mods for DAO that replaces the weapons with smaller and thinner models.  And they look good.

Addonay is a damn good modeller. I never said it was impossible, just harder.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
If they'd told me that the first time, we wouldn't be having this conversation now.  I'd have accepted it as a design choice, and probably thought less of them for having made it.

But that's not what they said.  They explained that the made the weapons bigger to solve a problem.  That was defensible.  I didn't think less of them for that, because I understood the problem they were trying to solve and I saw why this solution was a good one (it wasn't the solution I'd have chosen, but the solution I'd have chosen wouldn't have been popular).

To decide now to make the weapons big, even without the camera problem, they would need to decide that the smaller weapons that caused the design problem in the first game were somehow no longer desireable.

I'd like to know how that happened.  They might tell me that they just reused some models and built new ones based on the DAO models to save production costs, and that would be a fine answer.  I'd accept that.

Out of curiosity (because I didn't pay much attention to these forums when I was playing Origins), what WAS the problem that this was intended to address?

And I still maintain that it's just arbitrary decision-making, though it's very plausible that they just re-used the Origins models. Either way, I don't think it's high-up on the devs' list of things they feel like explaining to the fans

[TheMadCat]

Saibh wrote...

MoogleNut wrote...

Or it could be so big and awesome because Varric is y'know, exagerating?
Just sayin'

Exaggeration is not the answer to everything. Swords appear to be the same size--or slightly larger than DAO two-handed swords.

That said.

You see this guy?



It's a bit taller than he is. I don't know his height. But there are other images a few pages back whether the swords are of comparable size.

The sword is taller than he is. Now compare this:



It's taller than she is by a tiny margin. Bearing in mind that she is both shorter than the male models and bending her knees.

That's a prop or decoration, not an actual sword that would be used for combat. First off guards were never designed that wide, it's impractical as it imbalances the weapon and is excessive in it's roles of protecting the hands (Which is unnecessary for that style of sword seeing as they should have a hand above the guard) and prevent the users hands from sliding up the blade. The second is the grip which is way to long, again creating an imbalance in the weapon, the longest grips were at most 8 or 9 inches, that if he's my height looks like it's approaching 2 feet., imagine trying to swing that sword with one hand under the guard and the other on the ricasso, the pommel be smashing into your sides. Third is the ricasso, it also looks a bit long, those thing's usually weren't much longer then what was necessary to grip because it also allowed a spot for an opponent to grab.

So yeah, that looks more like a weapon that a collector had made. The longest great swords were about 5 feet in total length.

[Yrkoon]

ALVIG824 wrote...

ok ok guys i thinks its time to calm down. its just a big sword nothing be afraid of unless its swung at you..

Oh no no NO, mon ami.  the sword looks too big in that picture, therefore, we should not buy DA2.

http://social.biowar...index/5969804/5

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I will not be buying the game until that is eihter fixed or a mod comes out that fixes the horrible scale. I'm a patient man and can wait.

But I do fear the so-called "awesome" vision and style of DA2. I don't see it.

Call me a pessimist if you will.

And we should fear the art direction.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 10 février 2011 - 06:02 .

[mesmerizedish]

TheMadCat wrote...

That's a prop or decoration, not an actual sword that would be used for combat. First off guards were never designed that wide, it's impractical as it imbalances the weapon and is excessive in it's roles of protecting the hands (Which is unnecessary for that style of sword seeing as they should have a hand above the guard) and prevent the users hands from sliding up the blade. The second is the grip which is way to long, again creating an imbalance in the weapon, the longest grips were at most 8 or 9 inches, that if he's my height looks like it's approaching 2 feet., imagine trying to swing that sword with one hand under the guard and the other on the ricasso, the pommel be smashing into your sides. Third is the ricasso, it also looks a bit long, those thing's usually weren't much longer then what was necessary to grip because it also allowed a spot for an opponent to grab.

So yeah, that looks more like a weapon that a collector had made. The longest great swords were about 5 feet in total length.

Nothing screams FANTASY like a bona fide Scottish clay- wait, that's randomly placed apostrophes. Big swords in fantasy (games, art, books... any medium is going to exhibit the same trends) are cool. That's just the way it is. It's exactly like magic. I'm NOT saying that a wizard made the swords both big AND practical. I'm saying that magic and ginormous swords are two of the many, many, many things that fantasy has that don't exist or are impractical in the real world.

In the end it's about style and flair, like wuxia. It's not about realism at all.

[DA Trap Star]

Saibh wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Just checked. Overall size, yes, the greatswords in Origins are roughly the same as the one that lady hawke is wielding in the video. But the pommels were much shorter in Origins.

By a little, yeah.

Only thing I have a issue with is the pommel size, it looks completely fake the way she's holding it.

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

Well they try to make weapon look pretty, so player would be pleased to find new and powerful and even prettier weapons, and truth to tell, lady Hawke's sword is't that bad (aside from the fact that it does't have blunt ricasso). As long as they do not go for Cloud Strife, it's allright.

It's animations and speed at which Hawke swings that bothers me.

[ALVIG824]

DA Trap Star wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Just checked. Overall size, yes, the greatswords in Origins are roughly the same as the one that lady hawke is wielding in the video. But the pommels were much shorter in Origins.

By a little, yeah.

Only thing I have a issue with is the pommel size, it looks completely fake the way she's holding it.

shouldn't we be comparing this the summer sword instead?

[TheMadCat]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

That's a prop or decoration, not an actual sword that would be used for combat. First off guards were never designed that wide, it's impractical as it imbalances the weapon and is excessive in it's roles of protecting the hands (Which is unnecessary for that style of sword seeing as they should have a hand above the guard) and prevent the users hands from sliding up the blade. The second is the grip which is way to long, again creating an imbalance in the weapon, the longest grips were at most 8 or 9 inches, that if he's my height looks like it's approaching 2 feet., imagine trying to swing that sword with one hand under the guard and the other on the ricasso, the pommel be smashing into your sides. Third is the ricasso, it also looks a bit long, those thing's usually weren't much longer then what was necessary to grip because it also allowed a spot for an opponent to grab.

So yeah, that looks more like a weapon that a collector had made. The longest great swords were about 5 feet in total length.

Nothing screams FANTASY like a bona fide Scottish clay- wait, that's randomly placed apostrophes. Big swords in fantasy (games, art, books... any medium is going to exhibit the same trends) are cool. That's just the way it is. It's exactly like magic. I'm NOT saying that a wizard made the swords both big AND practical. I'm saying that magic and ginormous swords are two of the many, many, many things that fantasy has that don't exist or are impractical in the real world.

In the end it's about style and flair, like wuxia. It's not about realism at all.

And I'm fine with that reasoning (Even though I don't agree with it). What I'm not fine with is people saying "Oh but look, it is based on real weaponry" when it's simply not. It's fantasy, just use that argument rather then pulling up props and decorations in a vain attempt to appease the realism addicts like myself.