429 réponses à ce sujet

[BubbleDncr]

I personally prefer not having Hawke and company's heads covered by armor. Yes, its not realistic, but its a video game, and I would rather see my character's pretty heads than helmets.

DAO was ok, with all the helmets toggled off during conversation, but when I first started equiping helmets (since no one starts with them equipped), I got a little bummed out that they covered people's faces, or just looked dumb. I found that often times, I would get a helmet that had awesome stats, but I hated the way it looked on the character. So to me, DA2 had it perfect with helmets always toggled off, cos my character still looked good, not matter what helmet I put on them.

As for arms, legs, and other parts being exposed - I think majority of video games, comic books, etc, don't have realistic armor for characters. I mean, even for DAO, the Dalish Armor exposed the female Warden's mid-drift. So that's just something I've accepted as never going to be realistic, and I'm ok with that, as long both sexes are treated equally in their non-realism.

With Origins, I made Wynne and Arcane Warrior. So she ended up looking exactly the same as Alistair. I'd rather they look different.



As for Fenris's look making him appeal to pre-teens, and teens - perhaps there are more preteens and teens that love his look. But I'm in my 20's and had no problem with him, so I think its more personal preference.

[alex90c]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It might be a maul or a battleaxe

What I don't understand is why Fenris has all of that ... well whatever it is and then a random block of metal strapped to his chest. 

The chest and the head are the places that need the most protection, so having a metal plate over the chest is normal. He is a former slave, so I doubt appropriate armor was something he could acquire (plus Danarius and Hadriana were pricks).

so:

1. it is revealed that between the acts Fenris does a bit of mercenary work
2. Hawke is swimming in money

and yet he doesn't get any sort of upgrade at all

I wouldn't have minded the... block of metal if it was integrated well in to the actual armour (say like a chestplate and then chainmail to cover the remaining not-so-vital parts) but when it's just strapped there it just looks odd.

[Il Divo]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I'll let you get away with Vader, because he wears the same costume the entire original saga.

But Han Solo? Come on. 

The guy wears about three different costumes in each movie. Sure, you have the generic one he is seen wearing in the Mos Eisley (sp?) bar, but he also wears the furry get up on Hoth, the Imperial disguise on the Death Star, the rebel suit... yet, SOMEHOW, we are able to actually determine that it is him. We must all be miracle genius babies because he didn't wear the exact same articles of clothing the entire trilogy.

The same could be said of Luke, Leia and Lando.

A few problems with this.

1) It assumes that a character must wear the same exact outfit at all times in order to identify them, which is not the case. Luke's farmer outfit on Tatooine and his black attire are both indicative of Luke Skyalker, despite his  change of clothes. Likewise with Leia's Episode IV outfit and her bikini in Episode VI. Iconic doesn't indicate that the character must wear it exclusively, only that you will be able to identify the outfit as belonging to that character.

2) You are relying strictly on our movie perception of Han Solo. Of course I recognize who he is. I hear his voice, recognize his wit, etc. Iconic doesn't mean it's the only way to identify the character on screen. I recognize Han Solo because I recognize Harrison Ford, for example. Iconic means creating a stronger connection between a character's appearance and the ability to recognize that character.

In the films, Han Solo wears the iconic vest through the entire experience. That changes at exactly three points. During the Death Star sequence in Episode IV, the intro to Episode V, and a small period of Episode VI with the "jungle outfit". Otherwise, he's still recognized mainly by that signature vest. Or are you indicating that Han Solo is more easily identified by his five minutes in a snow get-up than the clothing we observe him in for all three movies?

Modifié par Il Divo, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:18 .

[TEWR]

alex90c wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It might be a maul or a battleaxe

What I don't understand is why Fenris has all of that ... well whatever it is and then a random block of metal strapped to his chest. 

The chest and the head are the places that need the most protection, so having a metal plate over the chest is normal. He is a former slave, so I doubt appropriate armor was something he could acquire (plus Danarius and Hadriana were pricks).

so:

1. it is revealed that between the acts Fenris does a bit of mercenary work
2. Hawke is swimming in money

and yet he doesn't get any sort of upgrade at all

And that's due to the limitations on the armor system.

http://social.biowar...ndex/7992640/48

Apply what I said regarding Isabela to Fenris.

I wouldn't have minded the... block of metal if it was integrated well in to the actual armour (say like a chestplate and then chainmail to cover the remaining not-so-vital parts) but when it's just strapped there it just looks odd.

I thought it was integrated pretty well.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 octobre 2011 - 08:16 .

[xkg]

That Fenris armor isn't all that bad.
But from my pov it looks more like armor for rogue rather than TH warrior. TH warrior is not using any shield so he should be wearing some heavier protection.

[bEVEsthda]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The point was that the change to DA's style was said to be done to make it more unique. It accomplishes the exact opposite. Coming from Final Fantasy and being breast fed on spikes, feather adournements, horns and antlers, fluffy hairdos, you might be somewhat blind to this, but check out recent and upcoming Fantasy RPGs. They all look like DA2. DA2's style is ultra-cliché.

To be fair, DAO already had creatures with horns on their heads and it was the developers' original intent for Kossith to have horns. That shouldn't be an issue.

Feathers also shouldn't be an issue considering DAO also had them.

Can't comment on fluffy hair.

This is something that angers me about the forums. What people claim to be bad about DAII was something that in most cases was already present in DAO.

   ...Sooo...
Your claim is that the style of the game hasn't changed between DA:O and DA2?
Because I can't really see that there can be any other point to your post, this or your followups.

[TEWR]

bEVEsthda wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The point was that the change to DA's style was said to be done to make it more unique. It accomplishes the exact opposite. Coming from Final Fantasy and being breast fed on spikes, feather adournements, horns and antlers, fluffy hairdos, you might be somewhat blind to this, but check out recent and upcoming Fantasy RPGs. They all look like DA2. DA2's style is ultra-cliché.

To be fair, DAO already had creatures with horns on their heads and it was the developers' original intent for Kossith to have horns. That shouldn't be an issue.

Feathers also shouldn't be an issue considering DAO also had them.

Can't comment on fluffy hair.

This is something that angers me about the forums. What people claim to be bad about DAII was something that in most cases was already present in DAO.

   ...Sooo...
Your claim is that the style of the game hasn't changed between DA:O and DA2?
Because I can't really see that there can be any other point to your post, this or your followups.

It hasn't changed so significantly like people claim from what I've seen at least. It has changed. There are armors in DAII that are more spiky like the Champion set, Darkspawn armor, or Dimension, and it works for the former one and not for the latter two (and imo, the Darkspawn armor needs a total revamp to be half-assed yet still effective, with variance between grunts. DAO's was too well-made while DAII's was just stupid. And people have seen my posts regarding the Darkspawn themselves.)

However, there are also plenty of armor sets in DAII that have the same style as the Origins' armor sets while others are just reminiscent or toned down a tad for different classes.











And as for the Kossith, yes that's a significant change, but it shouldn't be an issue for two reasons:

1) As I said before, it was their original intent for the Kossith to look that way. Granted, the codexes do contradict this, so it becomes hard to tell what was originally intended. But a gaming company that lies to the fanbase is one that can't be trusted at all, so they have no reason to lie about it or give out faulty excuses. "One man's perspective" wouldn't be able to cover how that one man said that all of the Kossith that landed were all bronze skinned giants.

But to be fair, the codex doesn't mention horns, which doesn't mean that they never had horns, though imo that seems like a fairly crucial detail on something like the Kossith since it helps to separate them from the other races. So one can assume (and Bioware should do this imo) that there are bronze skinned horned Kossith out there.

2) Bioware has assured us that hornless Kossith do in fact exist still, so it's not a retcon.


Not sure if there's anything else to talk about. Art style and art direction are things I'm unsure of in regards to their meanings (unless they mean the same thing), so if there's anything else we should talk about feel free to mention it and I shall discuss it.

[Yrkoon]

mousestalker wrote...

I don't see any of the Bioware games as being made for kids. Neither of the main game consoles as well as nor any PC's are especially suited for hoofed creatures. Not even adult goats can play these games.

This is nonsense.  I have hoofs. 

I was able to play DA2 without any problems... well, save for almost keeling over  from boredom about halfway through

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 09:36 .

[Gotholhorakh]

thats1evildude wrote...

For my sister to be recognized as Morrigan, she needs to wear the Swamp Witch outfit. That's why iconic looks benefit cosplay and fan work in general.

I think you just deconstructed the idea you were explaining, this shows how the look the character has when we meet them/see them in important cut scenes etc. is a completely recognisable "iconic look" without fixing their apparel at all.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 09 octobre 2011 - 09:52 .

[addiction21]

Yrkoon wrote...

mousestalker wrote...

I don't see any of the Bioware games as being made for kids. Neither of the main game consoles as well as nor any PC's are especially suited for hoofed creatures. Not even adult goats can play these games.

This is nonsense.  I have hoofs. 

I was able to play DA2 without any problems... well, save for almost keeling over  from boredom about halfway through

http://social.biowar...play=characters

Man you must of keeled over multiple times. No really for such a horrible game that is so boring you have spent a hell of a lot of time playing it...

[Yrkoon]

4 of those are my little brother's playthroughs.

[Il Divo]

Gotholhorakh wrote...


I think you just deconstructed the idea you were explaining, this shows how the look the character has when we meet them/see them in important cut scenes etc. is a completely recognisable "iconic look" without fixing their apparel at all.

Actually, it demonstrates quite the opposite. His point demonstrates the necessity of the iconic look, but also demonstrates how most Bioware games don't make iconic looks viable (see Mass Effect, KotOR, and Origins as examples). Morrigan being the only exception with her upgraded swamp outfit, I have the choice in Origins to equip my companions (making them gameplay effective) or leave them in original outfits (iconic). Dragon Age II may not provide the best of both worlds, but it's an attempt I still prefer over the original. Most Bioware games don't allow me to retain iconic outfits and make my squad members more capable.

[Fast Jimmy]

Il Divo wrote...

A few problems with this.

1) It assumes that a character must wear the same exact outfit at all times in order to identify them, which is not the case. Luke's farmer outfit on Tatooine and his black attire are both indicative of Luke Skyalker, despite his  change of clothes. Likewise with Leia's Episode IV outfit and her bikini in Episode VI. Iconic doesn't indicate that the character must wear it exclusively, only that you will be able to identify the outfit as belonging to that character.

2) You are relying strictly on our movie perception of Han Solo. Of course I recognize who he is. I hear his voice, recognize his wit, etc. Iconic doesn't mean it's the only way to identify the character on screen. I recognize Han Solo because I recognize Harrison Ford, for example. Iconic means creating a stronger connection between a character's appearance and the ability to recognize that character.

In the films, Han Solo wears the iconic vest through the entire experience. That changes at exactly three points. During the Death Star sequence in Episode IV, the intro to Episode V, and a small period of Episode VI with the "jungle outfit". Otherwise, he's still recognized mainly by that signature vest. Or are you indicating that Han Solo is more easily identified by his five minutes in a snow get-up than the clothing we observe him in for all three movies?

One problem with all your points. 

Bioware has said one of the main reasons the companions in DA2 looked pretty much the same the entire game was to cultivate an iconic hero. I'm not saying Han Solo has to wear the same outfit through the entire trilogy to be an iconic hero... BIOWARE is. I don't diagree with any of your points about what makes an iconic hero, however if the reason supplied by Bioware for companions wearing the exact same outfit for 20+ hours of gameplay IS iconic gameplay, than that is what I am objecting. I am not objecting the concept of iconic heroes. I am objecting to the cost of the same appearance the entire game simply for the idea of an iconic hero and the ability for fans to easily cosplay.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 09 octobre 2011 - 10:05 .

[bEVEsthda]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
   ...Sooo...
Your claim is that the style of the game hasn't changed between DA:O and DA2?
Because I can't really see that there can be any other point to your post, this or your followups.

It hasn't changed so significantly like people claim from what I've seen at least...

Look, I don't really care much about the re-used environments. Of course it's wrong and can't really be accepted, but Mike did it as a way of making the game longer, and I see that point. I don't really care much about the falling waves either. I suppose I had already distanced myself so much from the game by then...

There are two things that really break DA2 for me. One thing is that I'm just led along by a ring in my nose, like a cow. But that isn't immediately discovered. The one thing that really put me off was the new style. A new style motivated, discussed and defended by the Bioware. A style that is the subject of this thread. And here you are, trying to tell me that it hasn't changed?
 
Ridiculous.

For armour, I refer you to my old thread. But the new style of the game is not just armour. Style is design, mood, and animations. All of it hangs together. And it's a new image. And this was intentional, just as Bioware has explained. Something they wanted to accomplish.

So don't come here with your contrieved, detailed arguments that it's not. And don't tell me that my complaints angers you.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 09 octobre 2011 - 10:14 .

[TEWR]

There are two things that really break DA2 for me. One thing is that I'm just led along by a ring in my nose, like a cow. But that isn't immediately discovered. The one thing that really put me off was the new style. A new style motivated, discussed and defended by the Bioware. A style that is the subject of this thread. And here you are, trying to tell me that it hasn't changed?
 
Ridiculous.

For armour, I refer you to my old thread. But the new style of the game is not just armour. Style is design, mood, and animations. All of it hangs together. And it's a new image. And this was intentional, just as Bioware has explained. Something they wanted to accomplish.

So don't come here with your longwinded, contrieved, detailed arguments that it's not. And don't tell me that my complaints angers you.

Like I said, art style and direction are things I'm unsure of in regards to their actual meaning. Perhaps I shouldn't have spoken at all about something I didn't fully understand from the very beginning, but hindsight is always 20/20 and there's nothing I can do about it. I can edit my post to have nothing, but there'd be no point to that. What I said shall stay said.

I'm not a fan of DAII. There are only a few things about it I like. The new combat on the side of the players' spectrum is one of them. The combat on the side of the enemies' spectrum isn't. It's far from perfect. But the new animations for each class are something I enjoy for the most part. Does it need to be worked on? Definitely. Do I want total realistic combat? No as that would be boring. DAO's combat wasn't totally realistic either, yet people had fun with that. I'd like for a discernable touch of realism however, which my latest blog entry has my thoughts on.

.....though why I brought up combat just now I don't know. But whatever.

Now, as I said at the end of my post, whatever there is in regards to art style and whatnot that people would like to be discussed I will gladly discuss. But I'll need more specifics than just "the mood of the game". Are we talking about the new racial designs? The disjointed story? The movement animations in dialogue that are the same as DAO's, with a few new ones? The linearity of the disjointed story? And so on and so forth.

[addiction21]

Yrkoon wrote...

4 of those are my little brother's playthroughs.

Was it the 4 named Yrkoon or the other 4 named Yrkoon?

[TEWR]

addiction21 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

4 of those are my little brother's playthroughs.

Was it the 4 named Yrkoon or the other 4 named Yrkoon?

I think it was 2 from the first set of Yrkoon and 2 from the second set of Yrkoon.


....



But seriously, didn't that get confusing naming all your characters Yrkoon, Yrkoon?

[Yrkoon]

addiction21 wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

4 of those are my little brother's playthroughs.

Was it the 4 named Yrkoon or the other 4 named Yrkoon?

I create the character, then leave him alone to play it.  he's 12.

And what's this have to do with this thread, besides  being your attempt to derail it?

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
But seriously, didn't that get confusing naming all your characters Yrkoon, Yrkoon?

That's nothing.  I have 25 characters in DA:O...  all of them named Yrkoon.  Even the Female Dwarf.   It's an inside joke, dating back to my Baldur's Gate 1 days.  You wouldn't understand.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 10:51 .

[Il Divo]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Bioware has said one of the main reasons the companions in DA2 looked pretty much the same the entire game was to cultivate an iconic hero. I'm not saying Han Solo has to wear the same outfit through the entire trilogy to be an iconic hero... BIOWARE is. I don't diagree with any of your points about what makes an iconic hero, however if the reason supplied by Bioware for companions wearing the exact same outfit for 20+ hours of gameplay IS iconic gameplay, than that is what I am objecting. I am not objecting the concept of iconic heroes. I am objecting to the cost of the same appearance the entire game simply for the idea of an iconic hero and the ability for fans to easily cosplay.

But that is one method of creating the iconic hero. Where did Bioware say that if a character doesn't wear the exact same outfit throughout the experience that it is no longer iconic? You're crediting Bioware with a claim which they did not make. That is the point of my Han Solo/Luke Skywalker examples. Both characters possess iconic appearances, but there are also points where they wear other outfits, for various reasons. Bioware's method still demonstrates an iconic appearance, because it involves recognizing a character through more than simply their voice and personality. Aveline still demonstrated that multiple appearances are possible, as she begins the game with merely a sword and shield before reaching Kirkwall. Her outfit changes as is necessary.
 
What cultivates the iconic hero image is that appearance doesn't change on a very frequent basis and (as the player) I did not have a significant role in choosing that character's appearance. I support this method because it prevents companions from appearing generic, which is the effect which most armor customization has had in games like KotOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect. Either my characters look unique or they're combat effective. Until now, Bioware has not allowed me to have both. Even if Bioware supplied an "iconic range" of appearances, it still wouldn't take us back to Origins style customization.

Modifié par Il Divo, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:01 .

[Yrkoon]

I understand all these arguments, but they just don't gell with me. First off, why are we speaking in terms of movie heros? Is DA2 a movie? It's really game isn't it. A party-based RPG, in fact, where you're supposed to have a modicum of freedom to shape and define the "heros" you control, at least to a decent extent, to your own vision.    And therein lies the folly with the whole notion of  having Iconic but controllable  characters in games, IMO.

 And second, excuse me for being pedantic here, but if we're going to point out that Luke Skywalker and Han Solo wear "iconic" outfits, then DA2 has already failed to reproduce this, Since ITS protagonist can wear anything he/she wishes....

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:14 .

[Il Divo]

Yrkoon wrote...

^I fully understand all these arguments, but they just don't gell with me. First off, why are we speaking in terms of movie heros? Is DA2 a movie? It's really game isn't it. A party-based RPG, in fact, where you're supposed to have a modicum of freedom to shape and define the "heros" you control, at least to a decent extent, to your own vision.    And therein lies the folly with the whole notion of Iconic controllable characters in games IMO. 

We could speak in terms of game heroes.  Adam Jensen? Link from Legend of Zelda? Master Chief? They exist as well.

However, I'll come clean and say that  I'm the type of gamer who prefers having minimal control over appearance/outfits, which is seen in conversation. Character conversations are great, but for myself the more "heroes" I control, the less of a connection I can have to each one. It's why I try to avoid switching party members except when absolutely necessary. Imo, full customization over Hawke is more critical than control over any aspect of a companion character because anything Hawke does is intended to reflect what I want him to do, more than any other.

Edit: I do however support complete statistical freedom in terms of companions; the ability to modify their gameplay abilities without impacting their appearances. But as I said, the problem is most Bioware games only allow either the unique image of combat customization.

And second, excuse me for being pedantic here, but if we're going to point out that Luke Skywalker and Han Solo wear "iconic" outfits, then DA2 has already failed to reproduce this, Since ITS protagonist can wear anything he/she wishes....

The protagonist is, at the core, intended as your character in an RPG. The game is supposed to define that character for you as little as possible, which is a problem with VA. You provide the character's class, specialty, and at times their personality in role-playing.

In the case of Dragon Age, a single name/image/character may work better for marketing (such as Hawke/Shepard), but not so much when the developers are allowing you to role-play the character in question. Appearance can also be seen as a vehicle to observe a character's personality, which is why I prefer minimal control over companion outfits. I point it out for companion characters specifically because, like Luke/Han, I am intended to be completely cut off from who that character is.

Modifié par Il Divo, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:30 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Il Divo wrote...

But that is one method of creating the iconic hero. Where did Bioware say that if a character doesn't wear the exact same outfit throughout the experience that it is no longer iconic? You're crediting Bioware with a claim which they did not make. That is the point of my Han Solo/Luke Skywalker examples. Both characters possess iconic appearances, but there are also points where they wear other outfits, for various reasons. Bioware's method still demonstrates an iconic appearance, because it involves recognizing a character through more than simply their voice and personality. Aveline still demonstrated that multiple appearances are possible, as she begins the game with merely a sword and shield before reaching Kirkwall. Her outfit changes as is necessary.
 
What cultivates the iconic hero image is that appearance doesn't change on a very frequent basis and (as the player) I did not have a significant role in choosing that character's appearance. I support this method because it prevents companions from appearing generic, which is the effect which most armor customization has had in games like KotOR, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect. Either my characters look unique or they're combat effective. Until now, Bioware has not allowed me to have both. Even if Bioware supplied an "iconic range" of appearances, it still wouldn't take us back to Origins style customization.

Aveline's outfit does not change "as neccessary." She starts out with an outfit in the Prologue, it changes when she joins the guard, to never change again.

Bethany does the same thing. As a apostate, she wears normal clothes. As a Circle/Warden mage, she wears something else.

These examples are exceptions to the rule. Fenris? Isabella? Merrill? Varric? Sebastian? All wear identical clothes the entire game. Anders BARELY gets new threads, adding some black feathers in Act 3. It makes you wonder how much their dry cleaning bills to get all that blood out so often must cost.

I agree with your point that DAO's characters all looked very similar if decked out in the same exact armor. However, at least let us unlock new "skins" for these characters that we can use at will. Or have more than one upgrade for slot, allowing us to customize the gear boosts to reflect our own style of play.

I don't have a problem with creating a unique look. But if the reason I can't customize my characters gear to reflect how I want their build to work is "iconic heroism," then I say that argument is flawed and is not something I want to play in a game. As I stated last comment, the concept of an iconic hero is not a bad one. But if it is used as an excuse to cut out aspects of the game that I find enjoyable, then I am opposed to it.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:56 .

[Stanley Woo]

Are we back to discussing iconic characters or viable armours? Because that's not really the subject of this thread.