356 réponses à ce sujet

[Rylor Tormtor]

Great post above about art style and overall integration. Interesting stuff.

For me, looking away towards the character models, there is one sin greater than all the others -

Darkspawn

The redesign was just a joke. I know everything gets a bit tired with exposure, but I remember some genuine revulsion on my part the first time my human noble warrior actually faced off against darkspawn. Playing through the tower at Ostagar on nightmare for the first time evoked a certain feeling of the breathing, senseless evil that the darkspawn represented. Ogres were the pinnacle of these unknown and unknowable creatures. As you progress through the narrative, you gain insight into the origins and behavior of these creatures, from the lowly genlock to skulking shrieks.

In DA2, you wade through what feels like twice the population of the tower in half the time when you start. The over-stylized bumbling waddle was just terrible. And of course the ranks become streamlined and while you finally see Alphas in Legacy (and the genlock alpha? really?) as far as I remember somehow emissaries are somehow their own species now.

[StElmo]

Rylor Tormtor wrote...

Great post above about art style and overall integration. Interesting stuff.

For me, looking away towards the character models, there is one sin greater than all the others -

Darkspawn

The redesign was just a joke. I know everything gets a bit tired with exposure, but I remember some genuine revulsion on my part the first time my human noble warrior actually faced off against darkspawn. Playing through the tower at Ostagar on nightmare for the first time evoked a certain feeling of the breathing, senseless evil that the darkspawn represented. Ogres were the pinnacle of these unknown and unknowable creatures. As you progress through the narrative, you gain insight into the origins and behavior of these creatures, from the lowly genlock to skulking shrieks.

In DA2, you wade through what feels like twice the population of the tower in half the time when you start. The over-stylized bumbling waddle was just terrible. And of course the ranks become streamlined and while you finally see Alphas in Legacy (and the genlock alpha? really?) as far as I remember somehow emissaries are somehow their own species now.

In DA:O it felt a bit too much like orcs from LOTR IMHO.

[eroeru]

In DA ][ it felt a bit too much like seizing ape clowns with a hint of Skeletor.

Modifié par eroeru, 17 septembre 2012 - 01:57 .

[StElmo]

eroeru wrote...

Having played with and owned lots of action figures in my youth I can confirm the DA2 skin-tones as being "plastic".

Well on PC they look awesome - I love the mottled skin tone and slightly rough texture, people don't look porceline and I love it!

[eroeru]

^ Aah, in that picture it's pretty good (lighting is probably at "fault" here). Don't like the hair still. It's as if out of paper.

Modifié par eroeru, 17 septembre 2012 - 01:55 .

[Rylor Tormtor]

eroeru wrote...

In DA ][ it felt a bit too much like seizuring ape clowns with a hint of Skeletor.

Amen to this.

Seizing ape clowns...  heh. 

[eroeru]

Aah, thanks for the grammar edit.

[Welsh Inferno]

StElmo wrote...

In DA:O it felt a bit too much like orcs from LOTR IMHO.

Why is this a bad thing? They look nasty, evil, intimidating. They give the desired effect, which is what's important.

On the other hand the new Darkspawn look like clowns. Terrible.

[StElmo]

eroeru wrote...

^ Aah, in that picture it's pretty good (lighting is probably at "fault" here). Don't like the hair still. It's as if out of paper.

Well most games are like that with hair - so you can't complain I think (alistairs hair in DA:O anyone?)

Also, no, at 1080P the skin tones pop off the screen all the time for me and I love it. I would blame consoles for the plasticy look, not the developers intententions. Oh and all the wierdos who WANTED their character to look porceline and chose to have no skin texture dialed in on the character creation.

Modifié par StElmo, 17 septembre 2012 - 02:04 .

[StElmo]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

StElmo wrote...

In DA:O it felt a bit too much like orcs from LOTR IMHO.

Why is this a bad thing? They look nasty, evil, intimidating. They give the desired effect, which is what's important.

On the other hand the new Darkspawn look like clowns. Terrible.

Clowns are scary.

[StElmo]

Avejajed wrote...

I have a real problem with hair- not the texture, whatever, but I've seen modded hair and it's awesome and I have no idea why we shouldn't just have awesome hair in the game for those of us that play on console- along with more colors and the ability to tweak a default (like default hawke who I thought was beautiful but I'd love to have been able to change her hair or eye color) without a mod.

Then you are talking about the texture, which is impossible to improve on current gen consoles if you want any worldspace to walk around in at all.

Also this is a graphical thing  and has nothing to do with the art style.

Art style is the style that the game takes, angular, interesting and intimidating.

Modifié par StElmo, 17 septembre 2012 - 02:07 .

[Das Tentakel]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

StElmo wrote...

In DA:O it felt a bit too much like orcs from LOTR IMHO.

Why is this a bad thing? They look nasty, evil, intimidating. They give the desired effect, which is what's important.

On the other hand the new Darkspawn look like clowns. Terrible.

It was a total waste of resources, especially given the very limited screentime they got.
The old Darkspawn were LotR-ish perhaps, but pretty effective in DA:O.
We might have had female Dwarves and Qunari and a better Dalish camp for the same price .

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 17 septembre 2012 - 02:08 .

[StElmo]

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

[Welsh Inferno]

Das Tentakel wrote...

It was a total waste of resources, especially given the very limited screentime they got.
The old Darkspawn were LotR-ish perhaps, but pretty effective in DA:O.
We might have had female Dwarves and Qunari and a better Dalish camp for the same price .

Yes it was. I mean, we encounter Darkspawn what? 4/5 times in the game in total maybe? Why the complete re-design?!

[ianvillan]

StElmo wrote...

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

The DA2 artstyle supporters must have there beer goggles on as well then.

[eroeru]

StElmo wrote...

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

Origins looks better than that on PC. (though I'd guess ][ does so as well - aside the more obvious faults that were design "decisions")

[Knight of Dane]

StElmo wrote...

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

<3 Here's a like for saying that while providing a link that perfectly displays that DA2 hasn't improved anything.

Modifié par Knight of Dane, 17 septembre 2012 - 03:04 .

[eroeru]

It also displays how incredibly cheesy and annoyingly cheap DA2 lines were.

[Das Tentakel]

eroeru wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

Origins looks better than that on PC. (though I'd guess ][ does so as well - aside the more obvious faults that were design "decisions")

It's the console version, including the cutscene at the start (checked on PC, unmodded vanilla hi-res max detail version). It may be that the DA2 cutscene was from the PC version, on the other hand in both cases the action scenes seem to be from console versions. Not quite sure though - in some of the DA2 scenes you don't see the controller buttons in the lower right corner.

It's typically a product placement video, PR to show the 'improvements' of DA2 over DA:O.
What struck me is that, apart from the cutscene comparison (which may have cheated - not sure), it isn't all that convincing.:mellow:

Needless to say, the console versions of DA:O were notorious for having, even for consoles in 2009, crappy graphics. I remember professional reviewers highly recommending buying the PC version over the console versions.
Not that it helped, to the surprise of some of those same reviewers, DA:O apparently sold comparatively few copies on PC. Maybe CRPG players on PC have already voted with their wallet, and us PC DA fans are just fighting a rearguard action :(.

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 17 septembre 2012 - 03:22 .

[Mr Fixit]

Being lost for words, I am compelled to paraphrase Khan Noonien Singh with regards to Tentakel's eloquence and knowledge:

"They task me! They task me and I shall have them!"

[Jerrybnsn]

This post has become kind of moot with the announcement of the new game engine. Looks like we'll have new graphics and artwork. I hope they improve on the artwork better than DA2 and make it look more like Origins.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

StElmo wrote...

Nostalgia goggles are ON I think with all you DA2 artstyle critics: www.youtube.com/watch

But there's a problem. Everyone (except you, I guess) knows the console versions of DA:O are terrible.

Here are some shots of the PC (real) version of the game:

[TEWR]

StElmo wrote...

I don't get how people say DA2 was too plastic and then they say DA:O was great...

I didn't say DAO's look was great.

ಠ_ಠ

DA:O looked hella plastic

DA2 at least has skin tones that look real.

Xanthos Aeducan's skin tone is plenty real. DAII suffered from one problem with skin tones: the face would be one color, the entire body would be white. Whereas DAO actually covered the entire body of my Dwarf Noble avatar the same tone as his face.

I don't have any images on that to place here regarding DAII, but I recall another poster brought it up.

DAO didn't look plastic.

Scratch that, it didn't always look plastic. And neither did DAII, as I said sometimes the game looked like that. Both games suffered from bad hair textures though, as it looked little more then just paint. DAO, however, was better at hiding this fact.

As I said, the trees just looked like cardboard -- save for the Brecilian Forest. That's bad, but aside from that I didn't have a problem with how it looked -- just like I don't have a problem with DAII's look, if it's given sufficient time.

I do however have a problem with how some of the people in-game -- in both games, that is -- were designed. Elder Miriam's eyes creep me out and her face looked really squished together. Then there were the unfinished people in DAII.

Anyway, as I said, my opinion on the art style of both games is "Meh". Sometimes they looked great, other times they fell flat. 

Give Bioware enough time, and they can come up with something that looks great to me. 

eroeru wrote...

Don't like the hair still. It's as if out of paper.

DAO had the same problem, believe you me. It was just better at hiding it.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 septembre 2012 - 08:37 .

[Ianamus]

The artwork and concept of Kirkwall was fine: 





But when it appeared in the actual game the city just looked empty and dull:



http://cloud.steampo...BA12F6BD5FAA5/ 


Compare this to cities from other games:


 



 


Or even a city from dragon Age: Origins 



 



Dragon Age 2 had one city, and that was where you spent 90% of the game, and somehow they didn't manage to make it look as good as cities in other games with multiple cities and locations. In Guild wars 2 I can spend literally hours exploring a single city and marevelling at all the small details. If you try to explore Kirkwall and see all the small details you are faced with this:



http://t1.gstatic.co...9rI-D5OQqviMwg 

Modifié par EJ107, 17 septembre 2012 - 09:50 .