Aller au contenu

Photo

the really huge sword in the DA2 first 2 mins video


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
244 réponses à ce sujet

#201
Yrkoon

Yrkoon
  • Members
  • 4 764 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Eating is part of the setting, not a gameplay mechanic.

The fact that it's part of the setting does not mandate that it must exist in fantasy.  (your claim)

And while this fact has been pointed out to you....5. times. already., don't let it deter your argument.

Fantasy can have realistic elements.  Exactly zero people have argued otherwise on this thread.  But contrary to your claim, a fantasy does not require them.  Do I have to write this in crayon  for you to understand it?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 16 février 2011 - 10:52 .


#202
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Yrkoon wrote...
Then I'll wait till the weekend.  Until then, you're talking out of your ass about measurements you ADMIT you don't  even have.



Ahem...
There's nothing dishonest about my debating.
The swords are VISIBLY
too big to the naked eye
...and that one Lady Hawke is carrying is one of
the smaller swords.
You've seen the monster Carver is carrying?


#203
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Jaduggar wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Really? Everything is pretty muhc to scael - humans, body parts, buildings - everything EXCEPT the damn weapons. How the hall does that "fit". It stands out like a clown on an buisness meeting.


First, let's stop with the exaggerations. They are almost always a bad thing to do--nothing but propaganda for bystanders.

Secondly, that's a very good argument, but the game does have some issues with dimensions and scale: you mention body parts, I respond with breasts. They are overdone, impractical, and exist only as a extraneous variable in reality. The heavier armor that we've seen should crush Hawke. Cups are nearly the size of heads.


What about breasts? Lady Hawke seesm to have normal breasts when wearing clothes.
The only strange model seems to be the nekkid one, but that may not even be the final one, and we haven't seen it fully. (not to mention that breasts can be flattned by clothing)

But again, if hte artist made another mistake with boob size, how does that negate the other scale mistake?


Everything can be debated. EVERYTHING. Everything has merits or flaw...EVERYTHING.
No exceptions.


P = P


Normal scaled weapons are more realistic than overscaled weapons. That is basic logic and it's not to be contested. A normal sword is more real and believable whan a barn-sized swrod, which in turn is more believable than a planet-sized sword.

You might say "oversized swords are awesome", but that's not realy a plus since normal sized swrods are awesome too. Normal-sized swords have an initate advantage over over-sized ones. Hence, they are by definition ebtter sicne they have more pros and less cons.

#204
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Yrkoon wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Eating is part of the setting, not a gameplay mechanic.

The fact that it's part of the setting does not mandate that it must exist in fantasy.  (your claim)

And while this fact has been pointed out to you....5. times. already., don't let it deter your argument.

Fantasy can have realistic elements.  Exactly zero people have argued otherwise on this thread.  But contrary to your claim, a fantasy does not require them.  Do I have to write this in crayon  for you to understand it?


Eating? Technicly no.. but that's only ONE element. Your'e completey focused on arguing one element that you forget that wile fantasy setting X many not have realistic element #1256, it will have realistic element #2456.

Fantasy is never completely divorced from reality. Well..good fantasy anyway.

Do I need to draw that to yOU?

#205
Yrkoon

Yrkoon
  • Members
  • 4 764 messages
We'll try this again.

Fantasy can have realistic elements in it... but fantasy does not HAVE to have realistic elements in it. Do you understand the suble difference here? Yes or no?

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Fantasy is never completely divorced from reality.

So you disagree with the  Dictionary definition of Fantasy.  LOL  well what can we say?  I'm really not interested in debating  Lotion Soronnar's personal definition of Fantasy.  I'll stick to the commonly accepted definition instead.  Thanks.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 17 février 2011 - 11:31 .


#206
Yrkoon

Yrkoon
  • Members
  • 4 764 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
Then I'll wait till the weekend.  Until then, you're talking out of your ass about measurements you ADMIT you don't  even have.



Ahem...
There's nothing dishonest about my debating.
The swords are VISIBLY
too big to the naked eye
...and that one Lady Hawke is carrying is one of
the smaller swords.
You've seen the monster Carver is carrying?


Still waiting for those measurements  you're operating with.    Because as you, yourself were so quick to point out a few pages ago,  Reality is in 3d,  But  here you're forming your entire argument on a 2d screenshot.   So... Get to it.


Of course, this aspect of the debate is utterly pointless anyway.  Who's to say  how big a standard greatsword is supposed to be in the world of Thedas?

But I do find the superficial nature of your argument quite telling nonetheless.  Here you are complaining endlessly  about the so-called "unrealistic" size of Lady Hawke's greatsword, and yet we've not heard a PEEP from you about the   even MORE unrealistic things she can do with that sword.    Seems silly to complain about tiny little details and then completely ignore the  giant Bull in the  proverbial china shop here, wouldn't you say?  But then again, no one here is claiming that you've got a valid argument anyway, so I guess we can look past that.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 17 février 2011 - 12:51 .


#207
Jaduggar

Jaduggar
  • Members
  • 187 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

What about breasts? Lady Hawke seesm to have normal breasts when wearing clothes.
The only strange model seems to be the nekkid one, but that may not even be the final one, and we haven't seen it fully. (not to mention that breasts can be flattned by clothing)

But again, if hte artist made another mistake with boob size, how does that negate the other scale mistake?


Design choices, not mistakes. Just as it is with heavy armor. They are all inconvenient the same way as the sword in question.
You say the design is to have everything to scale except for the weapons, but clearly that is not the case.

Normal scaled weapons are more realistic than overscaled weapons. That is basic logic and it's not to be contested. A normal sword is more real and believable whan a barn-sized swrod, which in turn is more believable than a planet-sized sword.

You might say "oversized swords are awesome", but that's not realy a plus since normal sized swrods are awesome too. Normal-sized swords have an initate advantage over over-sized ones. Hence, they are by definition ebtter sicne they have more pros and less cons.


So there are a ton of things that are not debatable? (To be honest, I thought that was going to be harder for me to prove)
The quantity of Pros and Cons outweigh the quality of the Pros and Cons?

Also, this is not a debate on which weapons are more awesome.
Personally, I dislike the giant swords, they're just not my thing.
What we're arguing is whether or not the scale of the weapon is acceptable for the game.

Modifié par Jaduggar, 17 février 2011 - 02:50 .


#208
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Jaduggar wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

What about breasts? Lady Hawke seesm to have normal breasts when wearing clothes.
The only strange model seems to be the nekkid one, but that may not even be the final one, and we haven't seen it fully. (not to mention that breasts can be flattned by clothing)

But again, if hte artist made another mistake with boob size, how does that negate the other scale mistake?


Design choices, not mistakes. Just as it is with heavy armor. They are all inconvenient the same way as the sword in question.
You say the design is to have everything to scale except for the weapons, but clearly that is not the case.


"It's a feature, not a bug".

If it's a desing choice, ******'s a bad one, with some things sticking out like a sour thumb.


Normal scaled weapons are more realistic than overscaled weapons. That is basic logic and it's not to be contested. A normal sword is more real and believable whan a barn-sized swrod, which in turn is more believable than a planet-sized sword.

You might say "oversized swords are awesome", but that's not realy a plus since normal sized swrods are awesome too. Normal-sized swords have an initate advantage over over-sized ones. Hence, they are by definition ebtter sicne they have more pros and less cons.


So there are a ton of things that are not debatable? (To be honest, I thought that was going to be harder for me to prove)
The quantity of Pros and Cons outweigh the quality of the Pros and Cons?

Also, this is not a debate on which weapons are more awesome.
Personally, I dislike the giant swords, they're just not my thing.
What we're arguing is whether or not the scale of the weapon is acceptable for the game.


"awesomeness" is the same pro and it's overly subjective.

And if you go that way - no, the scael of the weapon is NOT acceptable, since it stands out from the rest AND it defies the serious tone and atmosphere of the setting.

#209
Jaduggar

Jaduggar
  • Members
  • 187 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

"awesomeness" is the same pro and it's overly subjective.

And if you go that way - no, the scael of the weapon is NOT acceptable, since it stands out from the rest AND it defies the serious tone and atmosphere of the setting.


I'm not sure what you're talking about with that first part, sorry.

What do you mean, "it stands out from the rest?"
I thought I just finished arguing the outlandish scale in terms of DA2 aesthetic.

#210
Naqey

Naqey
  • Members
  • 273 messages
www.thearma.org/essays/100_0982.JPG

This 2 handed sword is larger than a man. Lady Hawke is a female. Just saying

#211
Oloos

Oloos
  • Members
  • 175 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
since it stands out from the rest AND it defies the serious tone and atmosphere of the setting.


*Check screens of Isabela's "attributes", of new darkspawns, of new elves and check out again the swords shapes & sizes. Search for something "serious looking" in it.*

Everything seems perfectly in the same general design idea for me. :lol:

#212
Alodar

Alodar
  • Members
  • 674 messages
But the size of weapon they are using is historically accurate.



Alodar Posted Image

#213
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Yrkoon wrote...

Still waiting for those measurements  you're operating with.    Because as you, yourself were so quick to point out a few pages ago,  Reality is in 3d,  But  here you're forming your entire argument on a 2d screenshot.   So... Get to it.


One can see Lady Hawke and Carver in action...I took a good look at both of hteir swords. Definately too big. And lady Hawke sword is even smaller than Carvers.

B.t.w., I find this amusing.
Me: "The sky is blue."
You: "I demand photographic proof!"
Me: "Just look up."
You: "No! get me a picture!!

I may not get you an image. Just because I know it will bother you.:P


But I do find the superficial nature of your argument quite telling nonetheless.  Here you are complaining endlessly  about the so-called "unrealistic" size of Lady Hawke's greatsword, and yet we've not heard a PEEP from you about the   even MORE unrealistic things she can do with that sword.    Seems silly to complain about tiny little details and then completely ignore the  giant Bull in the  proverbial china shop here, wouldn't you say?  But then again, no one here is claiming that you've got a valid argument anyway, so I guess we can look past that.


Call me back when you read my posts.
In this very thread I specificy said I didn't like the overblown combat either, but there's another thread for complaining about that. This thread isn't that big...

so before throwing laughable accusation at me, you should at least check your facts.^_^

And then you talk about the validity of MY arguments...HAhahaha:D

#214
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Naqey wrote...

www.thearma.org/essays/100_0982.JPG

This 2 handed sword is larger than a man. Lady Hawke is a female. Just saying


Ahem..scale has 3 dimensions. Volume = length*widht*breadth. And volume = mass. that page even has a nice little mathematical explanation in the large red box, with examples.
And the sword in that image is likely a ceremonial weapon,  never meant for combat.

I subming this image as clear evidence:
media.photobucket.com/image/dragon%20age%202%20Carver/IndigoVolfe/Rise21.jpg
That sword is WAAAY to big. It's visible from space.

#215
Jaduggar

Jaduggar
  • Members
  • 187 messages
I don't know how anyone could argue that the dimensions of the sword are within the norm of our own.
It's clearly too wide in comparison.

EDIT: I hope I haven't been forgotten

Modifié par Jaduggar, 17 février 2011 - 08:18 .


#216
Yrkoon

Yrkoon
  • Members
  • 4 764 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

babble babble


Ok ok OK!    You win the internet

DA2 is not worth getting because Lady Hawke's sword is x inches longer, wider and deeper than the sword  our ancestors used to use in the middle ages.

Moreover, DA2 is a failure for not encorporating  enough realism.

Mea Culpa.  The developers of this game should be  imprisoned for violating the sacred laws of  HOW THINGS SHOULD BE.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 18 février 2011 - 02:34 .


#217
Yrkoon

Yrkoon
  • Members
  • 4 764 messages

Alodar wrote...

But the size of weapon they are using is historically accurate.



Alodar Posted Image

Yep.

Oops.

#218
Deebe

Deebe
  • Members
  • 285 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ahem..scale has 3 dimensions. Volume = length*widht*breadth. And volume = mass. that page even has a nice little mathematical explanation in the large red box, with examples.
And the sword in that image is likely a ceremonial weapon,  never meant for combat.

I subming this image as clear evidence:
media.photobucket.com/image/dragon%20age%202%20Carver/IndigoVolfe/Rise21.jpg
That sword is WAAAY to big. It's visible from space.


Yea I think any normal person would have trouble lifting that monster let alone swinging it
http://www.dragonage...file.php?id=777
here is a link to Adonnay's weapon replacer mod for origins, which adds better and more realistic looking swords. Hopefully someone will take the time to create a mod like this or import this one into Da2

#219
Ziggeh

Ziggeh
  • Members
  • 4 360 messages

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Your'e completey focused on arguing one element that you forget that wile fantasy setting X many not have realistic element #1256, it will have realistic element #2456.

Fantasy is never completely divorced from reality. Well..good fantasy anyway.

There's quite a difference between "everyday" elements of reality and those to which we're only really exposed to within fiction.

Things like gravity and containing recognisable humans are important for maintaining an audiences connection, but the scale of weapons is outside of most peoples frame of reference and is much more flexible. Swords just aren't a common household object these days.

Further to this, because our (read: the vast majority of people) definition of what a sword looks like is derived from fictional representations, what consitutes a "real" sword likely differs from actual swords used in actual combat by actual people from actual history. There is a fine and long tradition of exaggerating the scale of a warriors girth, for the purposes of increasing their threatening nature and yes, good old phallic symbolism. This results in Reality is Unrealistic.

This results, ironically in a sort of arms race, where if you want the weapons you're designing to look decidedly menacing, you increase the scale, but because people are so used to oversized weapons, you really having to give that boat a good old shove.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 18 février 2011 - 03:53 .


#220
XX-Pyro

XX-Pyro
  • Members
  • 1 165 messages
Why can people use magic that's not realistic, energy can not possibly be manipulated like that /facepalm



That's what I'm getting out of this greatsword argument, one of the dumber ones I've read on this forum recently (and THAT'S saying something).

#221
Alodar

Alodar
  • Members
  • 674 messages

Deebe wrote...


Yea I think any normal person would have trouble lifting that monster let alone swinging it


No.  My apologies for interjecting reality in your rants but here is an excellent article on the weight of medieval swords.

____________________________________________________________________________________

A 40-Pound Sword?
By C. Jarko

One of the most outrageous (and wildly incorrect) statements made about Medieval swords is that they were heavy and weighed as much as 40 pounds.  While the fact that this statement even came once from a respected scholar and expert on Medieval warfare is surprising, it's not at all an uncommon claim. Let's take a look at just how large a sword would have to be to weigh that much or anywhere close to it.


Simple Science (with a little algebra thrown in): How do we know Medieval swords weren't 40 pounds (or for that matter, even 15 or 20 pounds)?  The answer is density.  Density is a way of expressing how much an object (of a certain size and of a given material) weighs.  The size of the object is expressed in terms of its volume.  Volume is the size of an object as measured by its length, width and thickness (or height) and is expressed in cubic inches.  Written as a mathematical equation, it looks like this: 

V = L x W x H. 

One cubic inch is one inch long by one inch wide by one inch thick. Forthe purpose of this discussion, we can use a simple three-dimensional rectangle to represent our sword.  Let's pick a typical longsword with an overall length of 48 inches and a general width of 2 inches (the widest part of the blade).  We'll get to the height later. Swords were made of carbon steel, which has a known density of roughly 0.284 pounds per cubic inch (lbs/per cubic inch).  If we know how much weight we have (in this case "40" pounds), we can figure out how many cubic inches the object would have:

40 pounds divided by 0.284 (the density of steel) = 140.85 cubic inches (the volume or "V" of a 40 pound sword).

Our sword is 48 inches long, 2 inches wide and "H" inches thick, thus: V =48 x 2 x H.  Using our volume of 140.85, we can solve for H for which we get:

140.85 = 48 x 2 x H
140.85 = 96 x H
H= 1.47 inches (140.85 divided by 96)

This means our steel sword is 48 inches long, 2 inches wide and 1.47 inches thick along its entire length.  This would definitely be a blunt object and not a sharp cutting instrument like a sword.
Just for fun, let's see what we get when we say a sword (again 48 inches long and 2 inches wide) weighs 15 pounds or 10 pounds:

15 pounds divided by 0.284 (the density of steel) = 52.82 cubic inches (the volume "V" of a 15 pound sword).
Using our volume of 52.82, we can solve for H:

52.82 = 48 x 2 x H
52.82 = 96 x H
H = 0.55 inches (52.82 divided by 96)
That's over half an inch thick, still a blunt object.  Let's try one more time for 10 pounds.
10 pounds divided by 0.284 (the density of steel) = 35.21 cubic inches (the volume "V" of a 15 pound sword).
Again, we can solve for H:

35.21 = 48 x 2 x H
35.21 = 96 x H
H = 0.37 inches 

That's almost three eighths of an inch thick.  If you look at three eighths of an inch on a ruler, you'll see we are now starting to get "sword-like" but we're still not there. If we do the math using the thickness of a real sword (say an average 1/8th inch thick across a roughly 48" by 2" rectangle) it turns out such it weighs a reasonable 3.408 pounds. Which, when you take into account things like differential cross-section, distal taper, edge bevel and overall taper of the blade geometry, as well as the weight of the pommel and cross, then an average weight of 2.5 - 3.5 pounds works out just about right. So, the next time  When someone says "a longsword weighs 15 pounds", you can reply, "Oh, like this?" as you hand them 15 pounds of a half-inch thick steel slab four feet long and two inches wide. There's nothing like holding the truth in your hands.

The next time you're arguing with someone who refuses to budge off their claim that swords were very heavy and unwieldy, you can tell them: "Hey, you do the math!"
________________________________________________________________________________________

So not only are the DA swords historically acurate in size for two handed swords they would weigh approxiamately five pounds.


Alodar :)

#222
Gabriel S.

Gabriel S.
  • Members
  • 982 messages

Alodar wrote...

Deebe wrote...


Yea I think any normal person would have trouble lifting that monster let alone swinging it


No.  My apologies for interjecting reality in your rants but here is an excellent article on the weight of medieval swords.

*snip*

So not only are the DA swords historically acurate in size for two handed swords they would weigh approximately five pounds.


Alodar :)



Did you do the math? I'd like to see your numbers. All of them.

And I don't mean on this

Posted Image

but on this

Posted Image

or this

Posted Image
Posted Image

Modifié par Gabriel Stelinski, 18 février 2011 - 11:50 .


#223
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

Alodar wrote...

*SNIP*
So not only are the DA swords historically acurate in size for two handed swords they would weigh approxiamately five pounds.


Alodar :)


Do you realsie the thing you quoted proves exactly the OPPOSITE of what you think?:D

#224
Nezahoo

Nezahoo
  • Members
  • 143 messages
oh come on, Bioware already nerfed Betseys breasts because of to many complain about there size.. Dam men.

#225
Lotion Soronarr

Lotion Soronarr
  • Members
  • 14 481 messages

XX-Pyro wrote...

Why can people use magic that's not realistic, energy can not possibly be manipulated like that /facepalm


Magic is by default not "real", as there is no coutnerpart in the Real World.
Swords are real. They existed and still exist.

Hence why magic gets a free pass, and swords don't. One has no expectations of magic, nor any real image of what it "should" look like.


Ziggeh wrote...
There's quite a difference between "everyday"
elements of reality and those to which we're only really exposed to
within fiction.

Things like gravity and containing recognisable
humans are important for maintaining an audiences connection, but the
scale of weapons is outside of most peoples frame of reference and is
much more flexible. Swords just aren't a common household object these
days.

Further to this, because our (read: the vast majority of
people) definition of what a sword looks like is derived from fictional
representations, what consitutes a "real" sword likely differs from
actual swords used in actual combat by actual people from actual
history. There is a fine and long tradition of exaggerating the scale of
a warriors girth, for the purposes of increasing their threatening
nature and yes, good old phallic symbolism. This results in Reality is
Unrealistic.

This results, ironically in a sort of arms race,
where if you want the weapons you're designing to look decidedly
menacing, you increase the scale, but because people are so used to
oversized weapons, you really having to give that boat a good old shove.


Partially true.
True in the way that media and lack of true knowledge does distort peoples perception of reality. There are plenty of people who honestly belive plate armor is so heavy you can't get up and katanas can slice trough everything. Stupid people..
Anyway, most people do have basic common sense..they know how heavy steel is and they can tell when something is overblown/oversized. In my case, my knowledge of swords only increases
the narm efect.


Personally, I consider medisa/stories that overblow things (like every warrior being a triangle made of muscles) somewhat ****ty, since tehy feel they have to resort to such primitive methods to get a point across. A good writer/filmamker can make a character feel threatenting without ever resorting to such petty tricks. But I digress again..

I don't buy the "arms race" The arms race doesn't work. Not all designs are equally good in every role.
In a serious game/movie, you should use a serious design.
A cartoony design belongs in a cartoony game. Design should match the tone. A simpson-style drama will not work well. Why do you think that anime isn't so wide spread? Of course, reasons like abysmal distribution and most poeple being uninformed about it (knowing only kiddy anime) are there, but most people just can't get over the deisgn. The character/outfit design looks too weird/off, the story has too many plot holes...

Of course, you can mix around as they will be people who will like that (there will always be people who like something), but for the majority it won't work.
On a subvconcious level, most of us know when something is off.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 18 février 2011 - 12:51 .