124 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

ipgd wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Hypocrite much?

There is a difference between using a term facetiously and a word that is used deliberated, repeatedly, and unironically without relation to its actual definition as a substitute for "anything I don't like".

As far as I know, people have yet to start parroting my posts in every thread on the board and replacing any semblance of a cohesive argument with "dog's breakfast" as a meaningless shorthand. I have also yet to go into a multiple-page argument where I try to defend how DAO's body model anatomy is literally a dog's breakfast.

It is not my problem that you choose to not understand of simply can't understand because I chose to not make it my problem in which case if you actually want to understand but can't then it is your problem.

But in your case it's more like I'm talking to a brick wall and if do so a million different ways doesn't mean the brick wall is any more likley to understand you.

What.

If you really have no desire to communicate clearly in interest of having a productive argument stop participating in arguments.

~hands ipgd a shovel... Feel free to keep digging. I assume you have noticed most of people in here at the moment are in an argument with you, is it everyone else or do you think for one moment your the one causing arguments. Could it possibly due to fact your going around saying other peoples use of specific words, or descriptions are just not good enough for "only" you or when you say that there are opinions but yours is right and other peoples are wrong or the fact your being hypocritical in your replies. Seems to me your bickering for the sake of it, maybe your bored, maybe your just arrogant or maybe suffer from selective reading and hearing.

Either way I'm done bickering with you.

[seraphymon]

ipgd wrote...

You are wrong because you have failed to present any sort of convincing evidence to support your arguments. You have made comparisons that should be demonstrable but have not yet managed to do so. I have no reason to believe your arguments because they are unpersuasive and not built upon any sort of facts, just parroting and a weak "it's my opinion so it's sacred" defense.

Not all arguments are opinions. Opinions can also be wrong

 
All i did was explain my reasons as to why i view it as cartoony. That fact that you dont accept it is not my problem and doesnt make me wrong. Also Opinions are not right or wrong. Thats what opinions are.

Just because you have a viewpoint does not mean your viewpoint is correct. I do not accept your viewpoint because your viewpoint is wrong. DAO's body models are factually anatomically innacurate, whether you're comparing it to a medical standard or an idealized artistic one. They are missing entire muscles, the ones that are there don't connect attach to the bones in the right places, the proportions are innacurate, and all of those problems are only amplified when you get to the female models (which share the same rig as the male models, which is incredibly problematic, because women do not have the same skeletal structure as men) or the elf/dwarf models (which are awkwardly resized from the human models).

You could say you like DAO's body models better, which I would still think is ridiculous, but the assertion that they are more anatomically accurate than DA2's models is a factually verifiable statement and demonstrably wrong. That is not an opinion.

correct or inccorect doesnt matter. Its my viewpoint. The same way you have yours. Saying mine is wrong doesnt make it wrong. Only to you because it goes against yours. You are no judge and your statements arent law. your posting of a fantasy dwarf is no different than an elf as they arent really real. There is a common standard of them being portrayed in games, but its almost the same as elves. Same for humans in a way. There is no real standard for them in a game when it comes to certain features. just cause you say they are inaccurate is an opinion not a fact. the proportions can be how they want and that does not make then any less inproportional than DA2, as that is also unrealistic. The same way someone can argue that people arent supposed to have E.T. hands in DA2. To me DAO has characters that are more anatomically correct in terms of comparing to real life versus any fantasy. Where as DA2 leans more to fantasy with its artstyle. Difference being there are more variatiions and unique body models from character to character.

The fact that your in an argument with plenty of people in this topic and acting childish in your remarks about opinions speaks for itself. I also dont plan to argue or reply any further to you, because there is just no point.

Modifié par seraphymon, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:18 .

[Dragoonlordz]

TeamRyan wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Talking to a brick wall a million different ways doesn't mean the brick wall is any more likley to understand you.

Circular arguments, and personal attacks won't help that brick wall to be understood any clearer either.

If someone does not wish to listen, you talking and explaining till your blue in the face changes nothing.

It's the child way of doing things...

a) Hello
eh?
a) I said hello
what?
a) do you understand me?
hmm?

-------

was fun today I pretended to not understand someone
c) oh and how did it go
worked like a charm
c) well did you understand?
ofcourse, but if I admitted it I couldn't have my fun or prove my point
c) ah I see so you was being an arse for a reason
yes.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:15 .

[Dormiglione]

ipgd wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I can but I won't, because I have the freedom to choose how I view and voice a situation and have no intention of being policed into using words only acceptable to someone else because of their own lack of understanding how the art style in something can remind you of and give you the feeling of something else.

Then explain to me the commonalities between Dragon Age 2's art style and cartoons, because I have studied art for basically my entire life and I don't see anything that relates to actual cartoons. Besides that other people have recently started using the word "cartoon" to describe what they do not like about DA2, and you are repeating those complaints without actually understanding them.

If you want to insist on deliberately obfuscating your statements by describing them with terms that have absolutely nothing to do with the problems you actually have, be my guest, but it still makes your arguments incredibly specious and sort of out of place in any sort of rational context.

Now that is very interesting. I never studied art but i am also associating parts of the grafic style used in DA2 with the look of cartoons.

The facial expression in the cutscene are not cartoons, they feel absolute realistic. I remember the face of Meredith or Aveline when she was angry or she was surprised, the facial expressions in the cutscene look fantastic, very realistic in my opinion.

But the darkspawn in the prologue where Hawke's family escapes from Lothering have the same cartoony look like Skeletor in the HE MAN cartoons.
The Ogre that kills Bethany/Carver seems to me like it was made of plastic.
The elven Na'vi or slightly feline sterile look they have. 
Armors and Weapons that seems to be cut out of metal with a laser beam, no scratch on the Armors, Suits and weapons. Everything seems to be brand new and remains in that state.

I dont know if its the lack of details on the clothes, the armors, the environments  that reminds more a  cartoon like style or if it is something else.

But im very curious about your opinion and explanation about the grafic style of DA2. How do you feel about the grafic style in DA2? How would you describe it and where would you position the art style of DA2?

Modifié par Dormiglione, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:32 .

[ipgd]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

~hands ipgd a shovel... Feel free to keep digging. I assume you have noticed most of people in here at the moment are in an argument with you, is it everyone else or do you think for one moment your the one causing arguments.

Uh, yes, I am aware I started this argument. I started it because it is something I want to discuss.

Could it possibly due to fact your going around saying other peoples use of specific words, or descriptions are just not good enough for "only" you

Make sense please.

when you say that there are opinions but yours is right and other peoples are wrong

Not all opinions are equally valid. Not all opinions are subjective. Some opinions are bad and some are explicitly wrong.

You could have an opinion that the moon landing was a hoax. This is not a subjective issue. The moon landing cannot both have happened and be a hoax -- it has to be one of the other. Either the person who believes the moon landing really happened is right or the person who believes the moon landing is a hoax is right. One of those people's opinions has to be wrong for the other to be correct. The person who is wrong has an opinion that is objectively inferior to the person who is right.

Whether or not DA2's art style has similarities to cartoon aesthetics is a true or false statement. It either does or does not have similarities. As anybody has yet to draw any substantive comparisons between DA2 and cartoons, I have no reason to believe that this is a true statement. "It just does" is not a persuasive argument. "It's my opinion so you should respect it" is not a persuasive argument.

or the fact your being hypocritical in your replies.

Examples.

Seems to me your bickering for the sake of it, maybe your bored, maybe your just arrogant or maybe suffer from selective reading and hearing.

I am bickering because I am sick of the memetic plague afflicting the BSN that compels people to redefine words to mean "anything I don't like". Just describing what you think is not that difficult, and if you do not have the capacity to argue without boiling your opinions down to a single buzzword you have no place in a rational argument.

Either way I'm done bickering with you.

People like to say that, but they always seem to keep replying anyway. Can you be the exception !!??! Can you rise to the challenge and actually not reply to my posts after saying you're leaving ?!!??!?!

Modifié par ipgd, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:28 .

[mesmerizedish]

ipgd is right.

You can't just start inventing new terms and new definitions and then blame the listener for failing to comprehend your issue. You have a problem with DAII's art style. That's totally fine! Now tell us what it is, without adjectives. If you can do that, it'll be a start toward being able to actually have a discussion instead of just waving your arms around like a child with Downs syndrome*.




*See what I did there? That's because I'm a beast.

[esper]

As a person who has seen a lot of cartoons and a read of lot and graphic novel, I must say that I cannot see where the cartoony term comes from. The grahipic seems very 'game-like' to me which is not something I am surprised at.
Is it because the non-human look less human now? Does that really makes it cartony in some people eyes?
The only thing who could give me a little flash to cartoons is the qunari's very, very bright red body paint, but I do not mind that as I expect that the tecknologily advanced qunari easily can make a body paint in such a colour. I am also expecting very bright colours from the Orlesian because they care about fashion and properly have created clothes with colours as well.
Does fantasy really have to be brown and earth coloured for some of you to say that it is realistic?

[ipgd]

seraphymon wrote...

All i did was explain my reasons as to why i view it as cartoony. That fact that you dont accept it is not my problem and doesnt make me wrong. Also Opinions are not right or wrong. Thats what opinions are.

That is not what opinions are. See moon landing analogy. Some statements are demonstrably true or false. "I like DAO's art style better than DA2's" is a subjective opinion; "DAO's body models are more anatomically accurate than DA2's" is not a subjective opinion. That is a true or false statement. Either they are, or they are not. They cannot both be more accurate and less accurate, so our opinions are not inherently equal by virtue of being opinions.

correct or inccorect doesnt matter. Its my viewpoint. The same way you have yours. Saying mine is wrong doesnt make it wrong. Only to you because it goes against yours. You are no judge and your statements arent law.

What makes your opinion wrong is that it is in direct contradiction to reality.

your posting of a fantasy dwarf is no different than an elf as they arent really real. There is a common standard of them being portrayed in games, but its almost the same as elves.

The human models are just as innacurate as the dwarf and elf models.

Same for humans in a way. There is no real standard for them in a game when it comes to certain features. just cause you say they are inaccurate is an opinion not a fact.

What are you trying to argue? You cannot make an argument on whether or not the body models are more realistic and then say that realism doesn't matter. You are directly contradicting your own argument.

the proportions can be how they want and that does not make then any less inproportional than DA2, as that is also unrealistic.

Compared to both the medical standard and the idealized artistic standard, DA2's body models are more realisitc than DAO's. This is a fact because there are actual standards of anatomical proportion, and DA2's are factually closer to those standards than DAO's.

Let's have a specific example. Go look at the pectoralis muscle. Go look at the DAO body models. See where it attaches to the humerus on a real person? See how it doesn't attach to the humerus at all on the DAO models?

The same way someone can argue that people arent supposed to have E.T. hands in DA2. To me DAO has characters that are more anatomically correct in terms of comparing to real life versus any fantasy. Where as DA2 leans more to fantasy with its artstyle. Difference being
there are more variatiions and unique body models from character to
character.

They do not. You do not actually know anything about anatomy.

The fact that your in an argument with plenty of people in this topic and acting childish in your remarks about opinions speaks for itself. I also dont plan to argue or reply any further to you, because there is just no point.

Gosh, two people announcing they are ~*done with me*~ now !!! LET'S SEE IF YOU CAN BOTH KEEP THIS UP.

Modifié par ipgd, 17 septembre 2011 - 06:42 .

[Kidd]

ipgd, a translation for you. "Cartoony" means "stylised", "not simply a lower resolution version of looking like a true-to-world photograph" when spoken in this manner, I believe.

There are oh so many ways to present stylised graphics though, and I find it sad so many seem to think realistic is the only way to go or immersion goes out the window. I like all of these shots, and they all look distinct from each other and they're all stylised, and I've cried to more than one of these games cause they were so touching;





None of these games have photorealistic graphics, but they're all of quite distinct styles. How is that not good? ^^;

[Brockololly]

ipgd wrote...
Let's have a specific example. Go look at the pectoralis muscle. Go look at the DAO body models. See where it attaches to the humerus on a real person? See how it doesn't attach to the humerus at all on the DAO models?

I have no idea what is going on with the shoulders and neck and arm of this elf. It may be an animation issue but I'd be hard pressed to say that it is at all anatomically sound what is going on in this picture. Regardless of whether you're a fantasy elf or something else entirely, something is very wrong here.

[twincast]

kinda reminds me of Jar Jar Binks (>_<)

[seraphymon]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

ipgd is right.

You can't just start inventing new terms and new definitions and then blame the listener for failing to comprehend your issue. You have a problem with DAII's art style. That's totally fine! Now tell us what it is, without adjectives. If you can do that, it'll be a start toward being able to actually have a discussion instead of just waving your arms around like a child with Downs syndrome*.




*See what I did there? That's because I'm a beast.

Except reasons have been given. To me when someone says cartoony, i grasp the concept immediatly, or at least i know where the person is coming from. To me cartoony of course isnt anime or cartoon exactly, but that it is headed in that direction. As explained even comparing just the humans aspect DA2 looks unrealistic in comparison to DAO, with hair that looks like it was made out of pudy and very cartoonish. It has that shiny quality that i see in most cartoons. The builds are also more unrealistic the way some proportions are done and can only happen usually in a game, cartoon fantasy setting. It only gets worse when looking at the darkspawn and elfs. and even the armor.

One armor comes to mind is Zevrons. As he wears that green generic style we see in Origins. Yet in DA2 all the belts and buckles and padding on it are such poor quality, when compared to how lively it looked in DAO.

Same with the way fire is shown here. it just looks like fire from cartoons that i watch. Not that DAO was realistic in this case, but it didnt look cartoonish to me in DAO.

[Dragoonlordz]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

ipgd is right.

You can't just start inventing new terms and new definitions...

The words and terms exist, none were "invented" in this thread.

and then blame the listener for failing to comprehend your issue.

Here and then here, finally here. If other people can understand it which others have stated they do in here, then the problem lays not with the explanation but with the specific other person who can't grasp it's meaning.

You have a problem with DAII's art style. That's totally fine! Now tell us what it is, without adjectives. If you can do that, it'll be a start toward being able to actually have a discussion instead of just waving your arms around like a child with Downs syndrome*.

*See what I did there? That's because I'm a beast.

He used those same level of adjectives in his responses as did yourself by calling yourself a beast. The only difference is his and/or your disdain for certain other adjectives being used relating to something you or he likes.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 17 septembre 2011 - 07:03 .

[Faded_Jeans]

I'll buy the DLC just because it has Codex in it.

[willholt]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Aye, the new art style is cartoony alright, despite the pointless protestations of our anatomical aficionado. That said, mark me down as one who really does appreciate the design of Tallis (I do hope her introduction marks a move in the direction of less donkey looking Elves).

Agreed! ... The more I look at how they've done Tallis, the more I like it. Let's hope it's a sign that they are moving the design of the elves (at least somewhat) away from the DA2 look.

Now, if they can start improving the in-game lighting... well, then we're getting somewhere.

[ipgd]

Brockololly wrote...

I have no idea what is going on with the shoulders and neck and arm of this elf. It may be an animation issue but I'd be hard pressed to say that it is at all anatomically sound what is going on in this picture. Regardless of whether you're a fantasy elf or something else entirely, something is very wrong here.

I never said DA2's models were perfectly anatomically accurate (they aren't, and I have plenty of petty complaints about them as well), but they are sigificantly more accurate than DAO's. The muscles are relatively closer to where they should actually be than DAO's were.

But im very curious about your opinion and explanation about the grafic style of DA2. How do you feel about the grafic style in DA2? How would you describe it and where would you position the art style of DA2?

I don't really care about making comparisons between DA2 and other art styles. It's kind of pointless. Categorizing it doesn't really accomplish anything. It is what it is.

ipgd, a translation for you. "Cartoony" means "stylised", "not simply a lower resolution version of looking like a true-to-world photograph" when spoken in this manner, I believe.

I know what they meant. That is why I am telling them to stop using a word that doesn't have anything to do with what they actually meant (though in this regard, I don't see DA2 as anything more than a horizontal movement).

He used those same level of adjectives in his responses as did yourself by calling yourself a beast. The only difference is his and/or your disdain for certain other adjectives being used relating to something you or he likes.

No, I didn't. Again, there is a difference between using a self-acknowledged hyperbole as a joke and believing that your hyperbole or misrepresentation is literally true and then attempting to defend the literal truthiness of it at length.

[whykikyouwhy]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
You have a problem with DAII's art style. That's totally fine! Now tell us what it is, without adjectives. If you can do that, it'll be a start toward being able to actually have a discussion instead of just waving your arms around like a child with Downs syndrome*.

*See what I did there? That's because I'm a beast.

He used those same level of adjectives in his responses as did yourself by calling yourself a beast. The only difference is his and/or your disdain for certain other adjectives being used relating to something you or he likes.

Actually, she was using "beast" as a noun, not an adjective.

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

You guys rape linguistics when try to use it as an argument in a discussion around simple matter of taste and making character design likeable.

[Maconbar]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

ipgd, a translation for you. "Cartoony" means "stylised", "not simply a lower resolution version of looking like a true-to-world photograph" when spoken in this manner, I believe.

There are oh so many ways to present stylised graphics though, and I find it sad so many seem to think realistic is the only way to go or immersion goes out the window. I like all of these shots, and they all look distinct from each other and they're all stylised, and I've cried to more than one of these games cause they were so touching;





None of these games have photorealistic graphics, but they're all of quite distinct styles. How is that not good? ^^;

I would characterize photos 3,4, and 5 as cartoony. I don't think that stylized = cartoony.

[Addai]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

None of these games have photorealistic graphics, but they're all of quite distinct styles. How is that not good? ^^;

It's a taste issue.  People react to art in different ways.  Maybe you can be "taught" to get over a certain reaction and to appreciate a different style, but that's going to be a hard thing to do when what we're talking about is buying art.  I'm not induced to buy something that I find unappealing, and stylized graphics are unappealing to me.  They're alienating.  I'm much less likely to play a game that's done in that graphic style (I'm thinking of Borderlands here).

DA2 art style has always been a conundrum for me.  On the whole I find it ugly, bland and unappealing, especially character models and landscapes.  Architectural details and some armor and weapon designs (the more toned-down versions, not the spiky jagged oversized stuff) are an exception.

People always criticize Origins' art style as "generic."  The thing is, I don't recall big arguments about it.  So I guess the designers got what they wanted in changing the art style drastically- it's distinctive, but polarizing.  I'd rather have an art style that gets out of the way of the story.

[Dragoonlordz]

In the end DA2 visually is to me a combination of rubber, plasticine, lego and playdough both in appearence and reminiscence. DAO had the same but was far less obvious and far better hidden through the artistic style of that title while in DA2 and it's artistic style, it is far more obvious.

The faces look made of rubber due to how smooth and wrinkle free plus shiny, bodies as though made from playdough / plasticine because of how sculpted and buffed up they are and the hair reminds me of lego much like Mr Potato Head image from few pages back where feels tacked on as an afterthought with barely any texture and poor quality. These things I associate with childs toys therefore DA2 visually does the same.

The combat is so over the top, flashy with UI so colourful including bars that the animations and combat itself is what feels like fight / combat scenes from a cartoon. The cartoon word associated with the combat and UI, while the childlike aestethics are the character models and specifically more so regarding the faces and hair.

Now let me make this clear. If you don't like what I just said then feel free to cry me a river.

If you need more clarification than that then here's a smilie playing the worlds smallest violin.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 17 septembre 2011 - 09:43 .

[TEWR]

FitScotGaymer wrote...


But this is not the case. Elves in the DA universe were intended to be attractive to humans and in DAO they were. In DA2 they arent at all.
The only ones who look half decent is Fenris and Merill; and the annoying thing is they are the ones that should look retarded because the pair of them are half wits.

Even this picture of Tallis; modelled on Felicia Day just makes her look like she is mentally retarded as well. Its not good.

This argument makes no sense to me. For one thing, people are assuming that what one man said applies to all of the elves in Thedas when he couldn't have possibly met every single elf in Thedas. It only applies to those that he actually met. Genitivi has had no experiences with the Dalish. Even his "encounter" was most likely just an encounter with a bunch of non-Dalish, non-city elf bandits. Reason I say this is because the Warden has a similar encounter in Awakening.

For another, there were plenty of elves in DAO that repulsed me and actually made me dry heave. Cammen comes to mind, but then there was also Soris' bride-to-be and various NPC elves. Or the NPC City Elf that talks about Velanna in Amaranthine.

Finally, that people in our world don't find some of the elves attractive doesn't mean people in Thedas won't either. Arianni and Vincento are a case in point.

Beauty is subjective, and there is no denying that. I find Merrill, Athenril, Lia, Ineria, and Tallis to be drop-dead gorgeous. I find Orsino, Fenris, Paivel, Ilen, Marethari, Zevran, and others to also be well-designed (though I do admit Zevran needs more work done). The way you phrased your post makes it sound like it's an absolute fact that the DAII elves are horrendously ugly. While that's not your intent I'm sure, it came off that way.

And for all of the "they look like Na'vi" people, I just don't see enough similarities to say they do. Frankly I don't see any at all. Even if there are some, the differences far outweigh them. And no, the nose is not a similarity between the two races. Na'vi have a cat-like nose. The DAII elves don't.