539 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvianus]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I will say though that they had good facial animations. I watched my brother replaying Origins, and the improvement is quite significant.

On their own, facial animations do not do much for me however.

Oh for the animations ( so facial too ), I agree.

Hawk is more alive, more intense. The cutscenes are much better too. Just the imprecision of the faces that makes me cringe.

Because they do not want to change the style, I hope they will do everything to make us love it by the strength and attractiveness of their talents.

I'm not sure that's a priority for them that said, but as in other sectors, there is good news, well, I'm less upset.

But If they could improve in this area, they're welcome.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 28 août 2011 - 08:57 .

[Zjarcal]

Sylvianus wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

warden's face is much more accurate, with a real relief, we see the contours of his cheekbones, their width and height. We see the apple joggle, and the ravages of time on his face.

Look at the throat of each.

Indeed. DA2 faces do not look good to me.

Thanks, you saved me. I thought I was the only one who have eyes. 

I have eyes... shocking. 

I can agree that the faces look more detailed overall in DAO, but having seen some widly different screenshots in DA2, I truly believe the lighting plays a big role. What you said about skin that looks too smooth in DA2 is true, but again, when those same smooth faces are portrayed in a different lighting, there are certain details that come to life that weren't visible before.

[Hel]

In Dragon Age 2 the faces look to smooth, while in DA it looks like they were covered in a thin sheen of oil or plastic. I prefer DA2's faces myself because the features are more angular compared to the faces in DA, which were more round or puddy shaped.

As for showing a character's age, I think DA2 still does this quite well. You'll notice that Flemeth, Leandra and Elthina all have signs of old age plastered across their faces. Sure, they aren't as pronounced as in DA, but even my grandmother doesn't look as wrinkly as half the NPC's in Origins or Awakening. 

Here's an image of Meredith that displays some telltale signs of weariness at the edges of her eyes. The details are there, you just have to pay enough attention when playing the game to actually notice them.

Modifié par Helekanalaith, 28 août 2011 - 09:16 .

[Sylvianus]

Zjarcal wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

warden's face is much more accurate, with a real relief, we see the contours of his cheekbones, their width and height. We see the apple joggle, and the ravages of time on his face.

Look at the throat of each.

Indeed. DA2 faces do not look good to me.

Thanks, you saved me. I thought I was the only one who have eyes. 

1- I have eyes... shocking. 

2- I can agree that the faces look more detailed overall in DAO, but having seen some widly different screenshots in DA2, I truly believe the lighting plays a big role. What you said about skin that looks too smooth in DA2 is true, but again, when those same smooth faces are portrayed in a different lighting, there are certain details that come to life that weren't visible before.

1- Oops ! :whistle:

2 - Oh, maybe, you're probably right. Personally, I don't know what did it. I saw just what I saw and I was disappointed. If you already know the problem, it's really cool, it means that technically, we should already be able to fix it. That's s just what I want.

Edit : Now that I think, with Sebastian, ( smooth face ) there are sometimes some details that seemed to appear, on his face, yes. But indeed, the lighting effects might truly play a role.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 28 août 2011 - 09:20 .

[Cyberfrog81]

Chris Priestly wrote...

We do need to show more art for DAII, especially the areas. We did (I think) a good job in Legacy of showing new art, creatures and areas. This will continue in future story based DLC as well. Hopefully, you'll like what you see.

Legacy may be a small step forward, but for me it was still too little, too late. It didn't change my views on DA2.

I could give points for trying, but that would be condescending. Legacy doesn't convince me that future DA products will be any good / that I should be interested in future story based DLC.


For art style DAO vs DA2, I love the new Qunari. But some of the elves are kind of horrifying, while the Darkspawn are not (worse than that, they are almost comical).

[Dariuszp]

Chris Priestly wrote...

And I disagree. While the art for DAO was good, it was not distinctive. DA II had a distinctive style.

To illustrate, think of cosplay. For DAO pretty much the only cosplay we had was Morrigan. The reason being, she was pretty much the only defineable character. The man, unless you happen to look like Alistair or whomever, were just guys in suits of armor. They could have been DAO, they could have been LotR. Hard to say. Now we get Isabelas and Aveines and Flemeths, but we also get Hawkes, Varrics, Fenrises... Fenri... a bunch of Fenris.

YOU may not like it as much, and that always comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but the art was changed to make it destinct from other fantasy games, and it accomplished that very well.

You know. I'm a webdeveloper. I'm working for a guy who want a social website that have some his ideas included. Few days ago he decided that he will make a "facebook wall". You know. List of ours and your friends activities.
But then he decide that yours activities will not display on that "wall". He decided to put it into user profile. Only from user profile you can post activity.

I asked him "WHY ?". Now it's harder for user. NOONE who was testing this site (common folks, no real tester) did find where they can post activity. If they are talking under activity, they must move from one page to another to track discussions that are his or someone else. Everything is worst for user and have no point.
So I ask - WHY you want it like this ? What is the reason for this ?

He answered - because NOW it not look like Facebook or Google+. I asked - that the only reason ? He answered YES.

So Chris, what I think is that when you make ANY changes in art, game-play, mechanics etc. Ask yourself - how this is better ? And is it better than previous version of this thing ? It's nice to have your own unique art style as long as it is better.
For me and other folks that I read here, that unique character styles is bad. It's bad because I think that Fenris look silly for example.
And I can't change that. Isabella from the start is wearing sailor uniform. Problem is - when I run in full plate - she still is using sailor uniform. That look silly. You literally send people to fight with bunch of enemies and they wear only clothes etc.

Darkspawns were dark, ugly, evil and scary. When I first met big one in the tower I was thinking - WOW!. Thast one tough son of the... Problem is that in DA II this feeling disappear. More to that - it disappear in awakening. Darskawns in DA II look just like clowns in they eye of the color-blind.

And there is huge problem with art design. In DA:O everything was dark. Loot of shadows, lights etc. Also there was loot of details. Graphic was old but it did look very nice. Even now when I replay DA:O - I think that art design was nice. I love armors for example. They have so much detail that it's pleasure to look at them. I would buy crate of beer to whoever made them.
In DA II everything is bright and "shiny" and "cartoonish". And because of that - poor quality graphic just show. Especially textures. It's just look bad in every way.
It didn't improve at all. More to that - it got worst. Loot of details that we saw in DA:O are missing. That tiny stuff here and there. In the city, in the village etc.

In my opinion. You made a changes just to make changes. It was just to get "unique style" while it's not better any bit. It's worst.

Modifié par Dariuszp, 28 août 2011 - 09:43 .

[Morroian]

Savber100 wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The NPCs may have needed more work in general but Hawke and the companions looked fine IMHO with great facial animation. Flemeth was presented that way for a reason. I've started playing Deus EX HR and the character design and look is clearly inferior. 

What?!

Actually he (or is it she?) is right. 

He.

Savber100 wrote...

Graphically, DX:HR is kinda bad even compared to DA2. 

Exactly. This is not to say I don't like DE, I do, a lot.

GodWood wrote...

But AESTHETICALLY-speaking, DX: HR looks amazing and is the only reason why it looks better than DA2 overall.. 

I like the aesthetic of both games.

[Savber100]

Morroian wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The NPCs may have needed more work in general but Hawke and the companions looked fine IMHO with great facial animation. Flemeth was presented that way for a reason. I've started playing Deus EX HR and the character design and look is clearly inferior. 

What?!

Actually he (or is it she?) is right. 

He.

Savber100 wrote...

Graphically, DX:HR is kinda bad even compared to DA2. 

Exactly. This is not to say I don't like DE, I do, a lot.

GodWood wrote...

But AESTHETICALLY-speaking, DX: HR looks amazing and is the only reason why it looks better than DA2 overall.. 

I like the aesthetic of both games.

Heh.. sorry about that. 

I have a tendency to assume gender from profile pictures. 

Anyways, I strongly believe that people really need to start differentiating graphics and aesthetics. 

Graphics + aesthetics are essential for a beautiful game. 

But Aesthetics > Graphics (e.g. Most Source Engine games, Baldur's Gate 2 etc) These type of games tend to look great even years after release.)

Look at COD4 when it first came out in 2007... Now look at it now in comparison to BF3. 

Look at Team Fortress 2 when it first came out in 2007... Now look at it now even after all these years. 

I'm willing to bet that had DA2 kept the dark tones and grittier style/aethestics of DA:O, many of us won't be complaining now. 

Modifié par Savber100, 28 août 2011 - 10:13 .

[RussianSpy27]

Chris Priestly wrote...

And I disagree. While the art for DAO was good, it was not distinctive. DA II had a distinctive style.

To illustrate, think of cosplay. For DAO pretty much the only cosplay we had was Morrigan. The reason being, she was pretty much the only defineable character. The man, unless you happen to look like Alistair or whomever, were just guys in suits of armor. They could have been DAO, they could have been LotR. Hard to say. Now we get Isabelas and Aveines and Flemeths, but we also get Hawkes, Varrics, Fenrises... Fenri... a bunch of Fenris.

YOU may not like it as much, and that always comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but the art was changed to make it destinct from other fantasy games, and it accomplished that very well.

Hi Chris,

Distinctive does not always suggest popular or more marketable. And as for LOTR, I don't understand the "fear" of having some sort of similar appearence to LOTR characters. LOTR is common ansector of the medeivil western fantasy. There is no shame for BioWare or any other gaming/film company to be ashamed of that. DAO and its style sold very well. 

Also, David Gaider provided descriptions of characters, races and locations in his books and beats me but I find DA:O's rendition much closer to what he had in the book than otherwise (e.g. darkspawn).


~RS
PS: I'm prepared for a possible humiliation in the unlikely event that Mr. Gaider gives me a Stone Cold stunner by saying that he disagrees

[Sabariel]

rak72 wrote...

Alistair looking spiffy in his Warden garb in DAO:


Not so spiffy in DA2:


concept art for King Alistair in DA2:


King Alistair by Schratty

The dog staff is disgusting!  I saw that David G wanted ser pounce a lot in the game, and the best the art department would do for him would be a staff will a cat skull.  He declined that offer.

I still cry every time I see the difference between DAO and DA2 Alistair. Good lord, man, what have they done to you!!

[standardpack]

Chris Priestly wrote...

And I disagree. While the art for DAO was good, it was not distinctive. DA II had a distinctive style.

To illustrate, think of cosplay. For DAO pretty much the only cosplay we had was Morrigan. The reason being, she was pretty much the only defineable character. The man, unless you happen to look like Alistair or whomever, were just guys in suits of armor. They could have been DAO, they could have been LotR. Hard to say. Now we get Isabelas and Aveines and Flemeths, but we also get Hawkes, Varrics, Fenrises... Fenri... a bunch of Fenris.

YOU may not like it as much, and that always comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but the art was changed to make it destinct from other fantasy games, and it accomplished that very well.

I'm confused... you're saying that DA II's at style is better based on the number of cosplayers vs Origins?  In that sense, Origins would have more cosplayers as well if the companions had their own armor/cloths like Morrigan did.  In DA2 Companions always had the same armor on and was different to what everyone else was wearing.  And I'm pretty sure I've seen plenty of Leliana cosplayers in her Sacred Ashes Trailer outfit.

[NedPepper]

RussianSpy27 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

And I disagree. While the art for DAO was good, it was not distinctive. DA II had a distinctive style.

To illustrate, think of cosplay. For DAO pretty much the only cosplay we had was Morrigan. The reason being, she was pretty much the only defineable character. The man, unless you happen to look like Alistair or whomever, were just guys in suits of armor. They could have been DAO, they could have been LotR. Hard to say. Now we get Isabelas and Aveines and Flemeths, but we also get Hawkes, Varrics, Fenrises... Fenri... a bunch of Fenris.

YOU may not like it as much, and that always comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but the art was changed to make it destinct from other fantasy games, and it accomplished that very well.

Hi Chris,

Distinctive does not always suggest popular or more marketable. And as for LOTR, I don't understand the "fear" of having some sort of similar appearence to LOTR characters. LOTR is common ansector of the medeivil western fantasy. There is no shame for BioWare or any other gaming/film company to be ashamed of that. DAO and its style sold very well. 

Also, David Gaider provided descriptions of characters, races and locations in his books and beats me but I find DA:O's rendition much closer to what he had in the book than otherwise (e.g. darkspawn).


~RS
PS: I'm prepared for a possible humiliation in the unlikely event that Mr. Gaider gives me a Stone Cold stunner by saying that he disagrees

Both Flemeth(her majestic garb) and the elves (large alien eyes) are described as looking as they do in DA2 in Gaider's books.  Only the Darkspawn descriptions are different.

[Sylvianus]

Both Flemeth(her majestic garb) and the elves (large alien eyes) are described as looking as they do in DA2 in Gaider's books.  Only the Darkspawn descriptions are different.

Excuse me, what description are you talking about ? If you talk about the stolen throne, that's not true. Flemeth is described like that of dao.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 29 août 2011 - 12:27 .

[Jestina]

DA2's art style just plain sucks. Darkspawn and Elves are particularly awful. Treasure drops look like runny dog poo. Character customization is bad(recycled from Origins with some awfulness thrown in. The menu system is too bland and resemble something from Mass Effect more than DA. It looks like a bad mix up of classic fantasy and anime overall.

[Alexander1136]

Dragon Age: Origins
http://www.mobygames...-main-menus.jpg
http://oyster.ignimg...t-01_normal.jpg
http://i.neoseeker.c...ptart_vn7EA.jpg
Dragon Age 2
http://www.gamingnex...fwpp18563/1.jpg
http://www.gamereact...age_217604b.jpg
http://images4.fanpo...52-1200-744.jpg

   This is my last two cents on the topic now that I have given time to cool down and think. The Origins artwork is infact distinctive, they just need to add more detail and richer textures to the graphics themselves. The Dragon Age 2 art is also distinctive but as with all artwork their are people who dislike it (myself as one of them) i don't understand why they can't find a  happy medium between the two styles as they seem to be doing with everything else with dragon age 3. a lil bit country and a lil bit rock and roll (south park refrence dont ask) I was just a little angry when I read a recent article stating that they were going to keep the styles the same. If they do I would please ask that they take there time to make sure cameo characters faces are not utterly butchered. the point of cameo is like a lilttle treat for fans who have been here awhile and well its kind of a slap in the face when they butcher the faces.(or when there are plot flag and/or import bugs)

[cocla]

I actually liked the art change for DA2... for the most part.

Loved the Qunari change (although they need more face variation like humans/elves/dwarves), also liked the elf FACE change, although the body proportions need work (the body is too 'narrow' and the necks too long.)

HATED the new darkspawn look, they really need to go back more to what they used to look like.

Otherwise I liked it, and once I finish Legacy I plan on doing a through game review to go in the feedback thread.

[Elhanan]

I thought I read that increased lighting helped restore the cameos. Not a Techie, but seems that if this is the glitch, that it may be fixed.

Personally, the only one that looked off to me was Zev due to new Elves, and Leliana seemed to be even better.

[rak72]

Elhanan wrote...

I thought I read that increased lighting helped restore the cameos. Not a Techie, but seems that if this is the glitch, that it may be fixed.

Personally, the only one that looked off to me was Zev due to new Elves, and Leliana seemed to be even better.

As far as Alistair, the better lighting helps, but he is still a butter face

Edit:
speaking of butter face

Modifié par rak72, 29 août 2011 - 02:01 .

[Taritu]

Chris Priestly wrote...

And I disagree. While the art for DAO was good, it was not distinctive. DA II had a distinctive style.

To illustrate, think of cosplay. For DAO pretty much the only cosplay we had was Morrigan. The reason being, she was pretty much the only defineable character. The man, unless you happen to look like Alistair or whomever, were just guys in suits of armor. They could have been DAO, they could have been LotR. Hard to say. Now we get Isabelas and Aveines and Flemeths, but we also get Hawkes, Varrics, Fenrises... Fenri... a bunch of Fenris.

YOU may not like it as much, and that always comes down to "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but the art was changed to make it destinct from other fantasy games, and it accomplished that very well.

Distinctive is not a synonym for good.  With all due respect, the new art style, is distinctively bad.

[Rocket_Man77]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Rocket_Man77 wrote...

I didn't really mind the art style for DA: II, but we didn't really get a good tour of the new style considering all the environments were recycled so much. Show us some snowy areas, and more of the deep roads, and then we can see the power of the new style. DA: II just didn't show off lots of locales as DA: Origins. I definitely think character graphics have improved, but I just can't give an opinion on the environmental graphics.

This I do agree with. We do need to show more art for DAII, especially the areas. We did (I think) a good job in Legacy of showing new art, creatures and areas. This will continue in future story based DLC as well. Hopefully, you'll like what you see.

end game DLC would be appreciated. I still have 2 profiles I will do Legacy on (gonna mix it up a bit, so I can see different outcomes). After those two profiles are done with, DA II will be shelved until more DLC comes out. Lucky for me I'm already replaying ME II and will later replay DA:O. thank goodness for games with great replay value.

[TEWR]

rak72 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

I thought I read that increased lighting helped restore the cameos. Not a Techie, but seems that if this is the glitch, that it may be fixed.

Personally, the only one that looked off to me was Zev due to new Elves, and Leliana seemed to be even better.

As far as Alistair, the better lighting helps, but he is still a butter face

Edit:
speaking of butter face

Technically they'd be a buthis face since they haven't changed their genders (as far as I know ). But that's not as catchy, so we'll stick with butterface.

[Sabariel]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

rak72 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

I thought I read that increased lighting helped restore the cameos. Not a Techie, but seems that if this is the glitch, that it may be fixed.

Personally, the only one that looked off to me was Zev due to new Elves, and Leliana seemed to be even better.

As far as Alistair, the better lighting helps, but he is still a butter face

Edit:
speaking of butter face

Technically they'd be a buthis face since they haven't changed their genders (as far as I know ). But that's not as catchy, so we'll stick with butterface.

My friend calls 'em "wtface"

[TEWR]

I'm using that from now on.

[Sabariel]

...I've just realized what the DA2 elves remind me of:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[Elhanan]

I think Teagan looks fine for a man that was covered in Darkspawn blood and political mud for the past few years. And being around Isolde for so long must have also taken a toll, of course.