787 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

I confess I prefer a system where what you see is what you get without all this artistic screwing around for the sole purpose of making NPCs look distinct, but I don't care enough about armour customisation to discuss the point much further. :/ I don't think what's been presented looks bad, but the whole iconic thing has started to irk me.

My preferred method would be iconic outfits and the armor you equip them with merely changes the stats. I'd also ditch armor prerequisites all together.

I guess I don't understand why people keep saying Morrigan lost her identity as soon as you couldn't see her sideboob, and none of the other characters in DA:O had identity due to lack of vanity armour.

I don't think anyone has said that.

What people have said is that games are a visual medium and giving each follower a distinct look *helps* with characterization. You could say the same about voice actors. You could have followers be silent or you could have the player assign them a voice set, but giving each one their own voice actor *helps* with characterization.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 14 avril 2012 - 01:36 .

[slashthedragon]

Start the game with the companions in their iconic looks (for the cosplayers?) and then have armor that looks pretty much the same no matter who you put it on. You'll have to adjust for different races, and perhaps smaller armor for any human females that do not have large muscles, but PLEASE don't let a plate mail armor suddenly have a cinched in waist, breast holders (which is very silly, a female would bind her chest to be able to move better, and would not place her chest into cold, hard separating metal) and/or a 'chest window'. If an armor on a male looks like 'x' then it should look like 'x' on a female as well, but as I said before smaller when necessary.

Modifié par slashthedragon, 14 avril 2012 - 01:36 .

[Icinix]

I love it.

We've been magically switching armour between dwarves, giants, males and females for years, the only difference is it now switches not just size but visual appeal without losing either the identity of the armour or the identity of the character wearing it.

Quite frankly this is pretty much bang on to what I would love to play and tinker with.

[Maria Caliban]

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

I'm beginning to think it's another variant of 'Element X I dislike is to appeal to COD retards. Element Y I like is for TRUE RPG players.'

[Lord Nikon 001]

Vaeliorin wrote...

I have to admit, I'm liking everything except the class restriction bit (possibly because I really like the concept art.) If I want to put leather on my warrior or plate on a rogue, I feel like I should be able to, assuming they meet the stat requirements.

Say, for example, I want to go with a non-standard warrior build and focus on Dex for crit, with the bare minimums in Str. With class restrictions on armor, I'm at the mercy of the devs, hoping they created some crit focused warrior armor (which I don't recall existing in DA2) while without class restrictions, I could use any armor, including that "rogue" leather I found with great crit bonuses.

That being said, my compliments again to the concept artists. Those images are excellent.

I agree with this. Restrict the armors by attributes rather than class. Keeps the feeling of the player being in control based on how we build the NPC up.

Modifié par Lord Nikon 001, 14 avril 2012 - 01:39 .

[Atakuma]

slashthedragon wrote...

Start the game with the companions in their iconic looks (for the cosplayers?) and then have armor that looks pretty much the same no matter who you put it on. You'll have to adjust for different races, and perhaps smaller armor for any human females that do not have large muscles, but PLEASE don't let a plate mail armor suddenly have a cinched in waist, breast holders (which is very silly, a female would bind her chest to be able to move better, and would not place her chest into cold, hard separating metal) and/or a 'chest window'. If an armor on a male looks like 'x' then it should look like 'x' on a female as well, but as I said before smaller when necessary.

I don't know why people are worried about this. There's no evidence to suggest they'd start adding breast cups and cleavage windows. They actually got rid of the breast cups and bare midriff in DA2.

Modifié par Atakuma, 14 avril 2012 - 01:41 .

[eyesofastorm]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

Absolutely.  It is free advertising.  Cosplayers not only involve their friends in the fiction, but they end up pasted all over the gaming media as well.  It's just good business.  What I don't get is why you think that is seen as a negative thing in and of itself?  I think it's a negative because chasing that free advertising results in a loss of choice for me.  But that's purely personal.  I don't think there is any inherently negative connotations about cosplay at all.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

I'm beginning to think it's another variant of 'Element X I dislike is to appeal to COD retards. Element Y I like is for TRUE RPG players.'

You have to admit, whether it's a valid argument or not, BioWare has a hand in perpetuating it on the forums.

eyesofastorm wrote...

Absolutely.  It is free advertising.  Cosplayers not only involve their friends in the fiction, but they end up pasted all over the gaming media as well.  It's just good business.  What I don't get is why you think that is seen as a negative thing in and of itself?  I think it's a negative because chasing that free advertising results in a loss of choice for me.  But that's purely personal.  I don't think there is any inherently negative connotations about cosplay at all.

This.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 14 avril 2012 - 01:42 .

[mesmerizedish]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Okay, let me put this out here:

• Suppose armor was purely stat dependant, not class. You need X strength to wear this mail, or what have you.
• We make sure that works with the player, but if you go "out of class" on a follower, it looks "okay" but not as one-to-one as if you stuck with the intended class.
• So: You take a bunch of strength with your mage, and you move plate onto your mage. His armor looks pretty "heavy" but doesn't look necessarily like plate. It still has all the stats that platemail has, though.
• If you moved that armor onto a warrior, it would look closer to how it looks on your player. (Since you'd be back in the expected space for that character's class)

Better? Worse? I ask because something like this might very well be possible.

Better or worse than what? I think this sounds fab, but I don't know what I'm comparing it too XD

[RosaAquafire]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

I'm beginning to think it's another variant of 'Element X I dislike is to appeal to COD retards. Element Y I like is for TRUE RPG players.'

Yeah, I agree. Pretty sure it's coming from the same corner as the DA2'S COMBAT WAS ANIME, IF YOU LIKE IT YOU LIKE JRPGS AND NOT "REAL" RPGS.

There are four types of people who play Dragon Age, apparently. Console scrubs, animu kids, girls, and the master race.

The whole thing is disingenuous. We all like the same games and we all are here because at one point, Bioware made something we think is great.

[CENIC]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

I'm beginning to think it's another variant of 'Element X I dislike is to appeal to COD retards. Element Y I like is for TRUE RPG players.'

I think the iconic looks are meant to appeal to cosplayers, for sure. There's nothing wrong with that, although if Bioware thinks cosplayers = free advertising I'm a bit concerned.

[Amycus89]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Okay, let me put this out here:

• Suppose armor was purely stat dependant, not class. You need X strength to wear this mail, or what have you.
• We make sure that works with the player, but if you go "out of class" on a follower, it looks "okay" but not as one-to-one as if you stuck with the intended class.
• So: You take a bunch of strength with your mage, and you move plate onto your mage. His armor looks pretty "heavy" but doesn't look necessarily like plate. It still has all the stats that platemail has, though.
• If you moved that armor onto a warrior, it would look closer to how it looks on your player. (Since you'd be back in the expected space for that character's class)

Better? Worse? I ask because something like this might very well be possible.

Better or worse than what? I think this sounds fab, but I don't know what I'm comparing it too XD

[*]Better or worse than having class restrictions like in DA2. like having it so that warriors can't equip light armor for example.

Modifié par Amycus89, 14 avril 2012 - 01:46 .

[slashthedragon]

Atakuma wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...

Start the game with the companions in their iconic looks (for the cosplayers?) and then have armor that looks pretty much the same no matter who you put it on. You'll have to adjust for different races, and perhaps smaller armor for any human females that do not have large muscles, but PLEASE don't let a plate mail armor suddenly have a cinched in waist, breast holders (which is very silly, a female would bind her chest to be able to move better, and would not place her chest into cold, hard separating metal) and/or a 'chest window'. If an armor on a male looks like 'x' then it should look like 'x' on a female as well, but as I said before smaller when necessary.

I don't know why people are worried about this. There's no evidence to suggest they'd start adding breast cups and cleavage windows. They actually got rid of the breast cups and bare midriff in DA2.

Yes, DA has done pretty well with this *coughexceptFlemethcough*
And while the new armors that were presented so far look good, I did notice the female's armor always cinched in at the waist.  Unless that is a Seeker thing?

[Naugi]

I like this idea, I think its quite clever.

I always preferred characters to have their own look, to a degree at least. It fits with the story and the lore, we're dealing with characters from vastly different backgrounds with different fashions, customs and traditions. No reason for a ranger from Orlais to look like a dwarven ranger or a Qunari one.

[Sylvianus]

Atakuma wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...

Start the game with the companions in their iconic looks (for the cosplayers?) and then have armor that looks pretty much the same no matter who you put it on. You'll have to adjust for different races, and perhaps smaller armor for any human females that do not have large muscles, but PLEASE don't let a plate mail armor suddenly have a cinched in waist, breast holders (which is very silly, a female would bind her chest to be able to move better, and would not place her chest into cold, hard separating metal) and/or a 'chest window'. If an armor on a male looks like 'x' then it should look like 'x' on a female as well, but as I said before smaller when necessary.

I don't know why people are worried about this. There's no evidence to suggest they'd start adding breast cups and cleavage windows. They actually got rid of the breast cups and bare midriff in DA2.

The case of Isabela has focused so much attention that many people have not realized that the armors were already similar between a male and a female in DA2.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 14 avril 2012 - 01:59 .

[Icinix]

RosaAquafire wrote...

Yeah, I agree. Pretty sure it's coming from the same corner as the DA2'S COMBAT WAS ANIME, IF YOU LIKE IT YOU LIKE JRPGS AND NOT "REAL" RPGS.

Personally I think the problem with DA2s combat was that it was nothing like JRPGs (it was much better, it was fun, had more tactical options etc), but it was presented in JRPG form. Exagerratted, too fast, too much pointless blood and explosions. Had the visual presentation of the combat been different, I imagine the opinion of the combat would have been quite a bit different.

[Maria Caliban]

CENIC wrote...

I think the iconic looks are meant to appeal to cosplayers, for sure. There's nothing wrong with that, although if Bioware thinks cosplayers = free advertising I'm a bit concerned.

I'm not a cosplayer but I loved the iconic look. I asked for it long before DA II came out.

Cosplayers may also like the iconic looks but they're a tiny percentage of players.

[beermat77]

Stat based over class seems the way to go.Ideally armour with a point system where you could chose where to place the points your self.
i.e. 20point chest plate could be +20 str or +20 dex or somewhere between the 2 +10 str and +10 dex for example.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Brockololly wrote...
[*]That sounds better, although I'm not clear on what you mean by having the mage with plate armor equipped have a "heavy" look thats not necessarily plate?  Like a "heavy" variant of that companion's default look thats just not customized to the specific armor, but just generically "heavy"?

 

It would be something along the lines ot taking that follower's "heaviest" customization options and create a visual mapping that ties them to anything heavier than cloth. It would be a best-fit kind of thing, and not offer the same level of variety a mage follower would have with robes on. So, yes, something like generically heavy, and probably not looking like full-on platemail.

Another option would be to simply say "If follower armor =/= expected armor for follower class, follower appearance = base"

*ponders* I'll consider it.

[Atakuma]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

I'm beginning to think it's another variant of 'Element X I dislike is to appeal to COD retards. Element Y I like is for TRUE RPG players.'

One dev mentioned cosplay when talking about the appeal of iconic looks, and the bsn took that as an admition that the reason for iconic looks was because bioware likes cosplayers so much.

Modifié par Atakuma, 14 avril 2012 - 01:52 .

[CENIC]

Maria Caliban wrote...

CENIC wrote...

I think the iconic looks are meant to appeal to cosplayers, for sure. There's nothing wrong with that, although if Bioware thinks cosplayers = free advertising I'm a bit concerned.

I'm not a cosplayer but I loved the iconic look. I asked for it long before DA II came out.

Cosplayers may also like the iconic looks but they're a tiny percentage of players.

I'm glad you got what you wanted, then...? And congratulations on spearheading a game feature...?

The reason people associate cosplayers with the iconic look is because Bioware always brings cosplayers (specificially, how the majority of Origins cosplayers are Morrigan, compared to a wider spread for DA2 characters) to the fore when talking about iconic looks and why they are important.

[RosaAquafire]

slashthedragon wrote...
Yes, DA has done pretty well with this *coughexceptFlemethcough*

If I can take a moment to argue in favour of something I never do, putting women in oocly stupid outfits, I actually LOVED Flemeth's look in DA2. I think Flemeth's character is all about making herself into whatever she wants to be perceived as, and she wanted to look young and powerful to Hawke. She was still an old woman, her face was still lined and her hair was still white, but she looked sensual and confident and warrior-princessy in DA2 and I think that was what Flemeth meant to be.

[eyesofastorm]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
*ponders* I'll consider it.
[*]

Consider it?  You're locked in now dude.  It's a promise folks.  You heard it here first!  

[Withidread]

I like it. This would be what I'd wish the DA2 system could've been visually.

In terms of who can wear what, given my choice, I'd prefer to go purely stat dependant. But in the end it isn't a "deal breaker" for me to have armor be restricted by class.

Also, yes, if a mage is going into battle wearing robes, those robes ought to look as though they're intended for battle, as opposed to, you know, lounging around the living room. But, it should be noted, that when dealing with mages, "intended for battle" may not necessarily mean lots of heavy chainmail. Mages have options the rest of us poor sots don't after all.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Maria Caliban wrote...

My preferred method would be iconic outfits and the armor you equip them with merely changes the stats. I'd also ditch armor prerequisites all together.

I don't even have a preferred method. I'm not going to be very useful here.

What people have said is that games are a visual medium and giving each follower a distinct look *helps* with characterization. You could say the same about voice actors. You could have followers be silent or you could have the player assign them a voice set, but giving each one their own voice actor *helps* with characterization.

Don't they have faces for visual characterisation?

Yeah yeah, I know. I can't argue that clothes/armour would provide more help with characterisation. What I question is its apparent necessity.

What is this 'iconic look is for cosplayers' meme we have going? Do you really think BioWare bases major parts of their design around cosplayers?

It was outright stated in a previous thread discussing proposed iconic character costumes that it would make things easier for cosplayers. I can't link you, so I apologise.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 14 avril 2012 - 02:04 .