113 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

I think what people want is fantasy realism which basically is a contradiction in terms. We can accept mages defying the laws of physics, dragons flying, demons etc because that is all fantasy. Bows must have bowstrings. Swords must have scabbards and be replicas of past ages and look realistic. We are okay with the plus two sword of smiting as long as it looks realistic.

It boils down to a preference, but everyone's preference is not the same.

[mousestalker]

How about we compromise? Y'all can have your fantasy weapons if boobs are adjusted down to an era appropriate B cup and women's armour is also drawn as though it were useful?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maclimes wrote...

Not me. I LIKE the stylized, large weapons. I like to be able to see a real visual difference in the awesome, magical, ancient gear I am picking up. It should LOOK ancient and powerful.

I agree it should look ancient and powerful.

It just shouldn't look too heavy to lift.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

When stuff is too over the top, like the combat in DA2, it undermines other aspects of the game that try to be realistic.

[whykikyouwhy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

When stuff is too over the top, like the combat in DA2, it undermines other aspects of the game that try to be realistic.

But people have different perspectives for what is "over the top" as well as "too over the top."

[Dintonta]

Maclimes wrote...

Oh, I see now. Well, I like it. To hell with realism. I like the stylistic options in my fantasy games.

I completely agree with you (the same for the threads pleading for more 'realistic' armors.)

A little opinion divergence though : I happen to prefer by far the more 'historical' looking stylistic option, for aesthetic reasons only : To me it's the coolest, the more 'badass'.
While the oversized, squared, and sometimes convoluted style usually remind me of light plastic toys for kids...
Or decorative ornaments for a black-metal music fan bedroom : Nothing like ancient, magic, or powerful.

DA:O made some weapons look very nice to me. (I wasn't very fond of NWN1 for that matter, and I used mods.)

For me it's a problem of aesthetic preferences, just like for you.
For others, like the OP, I think, it perhaps also touchs the question of 'suspension of disbelief' (rather than strict realism.)

PS : It would be cool to find a reference to Tolkien explaining that notion, and ask to the moderators if it could become sticky.

[Merlex]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The point was BioWare doesn't care about realism.

I kind
of figured that out when I saw skeletons rising to attack, dragons
flying through the air, and mages violating the laws of physics. I find
that I am ok with this.

Concessions have to be made. I think too many were made with DA2.

Hooray for double standards! [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Lord of the Rings has a double standard? What about Dragonslayer? Merlin?

What i believe they are asking for, is that the weapons not look cartoonish. IMHO, some of the weapons looked too big. For instance daggars. They weren't daggars, they were short swords.

Modifié par Merlex, 05 octobre 2012 - 10:30 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

When stuff is too over the top, like the combat in DA2, it undermines other aspects of the game that try to be realistic.

But people have different perspectives for what is "over the top" as well as "too over the top."

I think most people would agree that DA2's combat was over the top. The only thing that people have to decide for themselves is whether or not that's a negative or positive.

[Mr Fixit]

Realmzmaster wrote...

I think what people want is fantasy realism which basically is a contradiction in terms. We can accept mages defying the laws of physics, dragons flying, demons etc because that is all fantasy. Bows must have bowstrings. Swords must have scabbards and be replicas of past ages and look realistic. We are okay with the plus two sword of smiting as long as it looks realistic.

It boils down to a preference, but everyone's preference is not the same.

What many people want, even if they're not exactly aware of it, is for the fictional world to be congruous with itself, or rather with its purported or perceived themes and general atmosphere.

The oft used argument that boils down to 'you want realism in a fantasy game?!?!?' looks cute on the surface, but misses the mark. Would the majority of Trekkies be OK with Transformer-type robots appearing in the show? If not, why? It IS only science fiction, isn't it? What's wrong with giant robots, magic, or vampires appearing for an episode or two?

Well, it's incongruous with the established world (or universe if you'd like) of Star Trek!

The 'realism' or 'plausibility' isn't something that is firmly established or hardcoded into the system, it is a fluid and debatable 'flavour' that each fan feels in his own way. When enough fans perceive that flavour to be on a specific part of the 'verisimilitude spectrum', what we get is a certain critical mass of people perceiving, and through the beauty of mass communications reinforcing each other's ideas of 'what the fictional world ought to be like for me to immerse myself in it with least outside resistance".

Hence, the realism wars between people resting on different parts of verisimilitude spectrum.

Long story short, all are entitled to their opinions, but please DO NOT use the silly argument how realism has no place, and furthermore, shouldn't be expected in a fantasy game.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 06 octobre 2012 - 12:16 .

[Merlex]

mousestalker wrote...

How about we compromise? Y'all can have your fantasy weapons if boobs are adjusted down to an era appropriate B cup and women's armour is also drawn as though it were useful?

I hope that the CC is developed enough in future titles, that we can have multiple body types.

[RazorrX]

I personally like more realistic looking weapons. For DA:O I always use Adonnay's Weapon replacement mod. In DA2 I just edited the weapon to look like a more normal one. As long as that feature is still in and *SOME* weapons look normal I will be happy.

Now if I could just make the staff of Parthanon be a two handed sword so i can have a Horse Cutter...

[Masha Potato]

Um guys, you can't just base your whole argument on "i assume a lot of players liked ...". It's not even remotely constructive

[whykikyouwhy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

When stuff is too over the top, like the combat in DA2, it undermines other aspects of the game that try to be realistic.

But people have different perspectives for what is "over the top" as well as "too over the top."

I think most people would agree that DA2's combat was over the top. The only thing that people have to decide for themselves is whether or not that's a negative or positive.

It's quite a generalization to say what "most people" would agree on, no matter what the topic.

[Atakuma]

Thinner blades and all together smaller weapons is all I really want.

[Xewaka]

Realmzmaster wrote...
I think what people want is fantasy realism which basically is a contradiction in terms. We can accept mages defying the laws of physics, dragons flying, demons etc because that is all fantasy. Bows must have bowstrings. Swords must have scabbards and be replicas of past ages and look realistic. We are okay with the plus two sword of smiting as long as it looks realistic.
It boils down to a preference, but everyone's preference is not the same.

I like to call it the fantasy uncanny valley. Things which are so far removed from our reality as to be pure fantasy, we can more easily disregard, and suspend our disbelief about. However, the closer it gets to having a real counterpart, the less willing we are to suspend our disbelief. Hence why it happens like that: There's nothing comparable to a dragon in the real world. But we know exactly how a bow works in the real world. That's why we don't care of the physical impossibility of a dragon flying but care about the bowstring.

[hoorayforicecream]

Merlex wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The point was BioWare doesn't care about realism.

I kind
of figured that out when I saw skeletons rising to attack, dragons
flying through the air, and mages violating the laws of physics. I find
that I am ok with this.

Concessions have to be made. I think too many were made with DA2.

Hooray for double standards! [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Lord of the Rings has a double standard? What about Dragonslayer? Merlin?

What i believe they are asking for, is that the weapons not look cartoonish. IMHO, some of the weapons looked too big. For instance daggars. They weren't daggars, they were short swords.

Lord of the RIngs has no double standard. Everything in the LotR movies was a stylistic choice. Proponents of "fantasy realism" have double standards. They readily accept that dragons can fly, the spirits of the dead can walk, that fire can burn with no fuel, but not that swords can be bigger than they are in real life.

The funny thing is that if somebody said "I like it when weapons look more historical than fantastic", I'd be fine with it. It's a stylistic preference. But saying "BECUZ REALISM!!!11!" as some sort of reasoning is silly, because it brings up a huge double standard.

If you like more historic-looking weaponry, more power to you. I'll stick with my bow made of lava with a bowstring made of flame that shoots fireballs, thanks.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't know to what extent this was done with DA2, but for DAO there are many mods available that replace the giant weapons with more realistically sized weapons.

Being able to do that is easily sufficient.

[Mr Fixit]

hoorayforicecream wrote...


Lord of the RIngs has no double standard. Everything in the LotR movies was a stylistic choice. Proponents of "fantasy realism" have double standards. They readily accept that dragons can fly, the spirits of the dead can walk, that fire can burn with no fuel, but not that swords can be bigger than they are in real life.

Yes. Because the games flat out tell us that magic and dragons exist. On the other hand, nothing I've seen makes me believe Hawke has superhuman strength to lift that sword or magical dexterity needed to use that thing effectively.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mr Fixit wrote...

Yes. Because the games flat out tell us that magic and dragons exist. On the other hand, nothing I've seen makes me believe Hawke has superhuman strength to lift that sword or magical dexterity needed to use that thing effectively.

This is important.  Where the rules that govern the fictional world differ from the rules that govern our world, those differences need to be explained in some way.

Magic gets explained.  Materials technology doesn't.

[Dintonta]

Mr Fixit wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I think what people want is fantasy realism which basically is a contradiction in terms. We can accept mages defying the laws of physics, dragons flying, demons etc because that is all fantasy. Bows must have bowstrings. Swords must have scabbards and be replicas of past ages and look realistic. We are okay with the plus two sword of smiting as long as it looks realistic.

It boils down to a preference, but everyone's preference is not the same.

What many people want, even if they're not exactly aware of it, is for the fictional world to be congruous with itself, or rather with its purported or perceived themes and general atmosphere.

The oft used argument that boils down to 'you want realism in a fantasy game?!?!?' looks cute on the surface, but misses the mark. Would the majority of Trekkies be OK with Transformer-type robots appearing in the show? If not, why? It IS only science fiction, isn't it? What's wrong with giant robots, magic, or vampires appearing for an episode or two?

Well, it's incongruous with the established world (or universe if you'd like) of Star Trek!

The 'realism' or 'plausibility' isn't something that is firmly established or hardcoded into the system, it is a fluid and debatable 'flavour' that each fan feels in his own way. When enough fans perceive that flavour to be on a specific part of the 'versimilitude spectrum', what we get is a certain critical mass of people perceiving, and through the beauty of mass communications reinforcing each other's ideas of 'what the fictional world ought to be like for me to immerse myself in it with least outside resistance".

Hence, the realism wars between people resting on different parts of versimilitude spectrum.

Long story short, all are entitled to their opinions, but please DO NOT use the silly argument how realism has no place, and furthermore, shouldn't be expected in a fantasy game.

I agree with the gist of what you say, though I think the use of the term 'realism' is bound to run into many pointless debates, and probably would be better avoided (even if TBH, I don't know many others which could convey easily the ideas of 'congruence', 'suspension of disbelief' and 'versimilitude spectrum'...)

Threads like this one, or others about armors, are interesting, though probably more if people are aware of the subjective reasons behind their own personal preferences, and can share them with others... (Not necessarily to bicker about opinions.):happy:

[Merlex]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Merlex wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The point was BioWare doesn't care about realism.

I kind
of figured that out when I saw skeletons rising to attack, dragons
flying through the air, and mages violating the laws of physics. I find
that I am ok with this.

Concessions have to be made. I think too many were made with DA2.

Hooray for double standards! [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Lord of the Rings has a double standard? What about Dragonslayer? Merlin?

What i believe they are asking for, is that the weapons not look cartoonish. IMHO, some of the weapons looked too big. For instance daggars. They weren't daggars, they were short swords.

Lord of the RIngs has no double standard. Everything in the LotR movies was a stylistic choice. Proponents of "fantasy realism" have double standards. They readily accept that dragons can fly, the spirits of the dead can walk, that fire can burn with no fuel, but not that swords can be bigger than they are in real life.

The funny thing is that if somebody said "I like it when weapons look more historical than fantastic", I'd be fine with it. It's a stylistic preference. But saying "BECUZ REALISM!!!11!" as some sort of reasoning is silly, because it brings up a huge double standard.

Fair enough. I like it when weapons look more historical than fantastic.

If you like more historic-looking weaponry, more power to you. I'll stick with my bow made of lava with a bowstring made of flame that shoots fireballs, thanks.

You misunderstand my positon. A bow made of lava, with a bowstring made of flame, that shoots fireballs; would be of magical construct. I would have no problem with it, if it had a magical property that prevented the user from burning his/her hands off.

My big problem with the look of DA2 weapons is some of their sizes. The daggers being so big look cartoonish. There was a made for tv movie 30 some years ago. The hero had a weapon called a Hartbow. It fired lightning bolts, but it wasn't 12 feet tall.

I have no problem with weapons with fantastic properties, i played D&D from the Basic box set to Advanced 2nd edition. There were a lot of fantastic weapons in those games. My problem is with the size of the majority of the weapons. In D&D giant weapons were well, used by giants. Unless you had incredible strength, or it was an item that could be used by human sized characters. In the DA universe oversize weapons are the norm.

For me, it's a matter of style. I prefer the D&D, LOTR, Merlin, Dragonslayer style. That has nothing to do with how fantastic the weapon is. It has to do with the oversized cartoonish look of some DA weapons. But has to do with the anime artstyle.

[hoorayforicecream]

Mr Fixit wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...


Lord of the RIngs has no double standard. Everything in the LotR movies was a stylistic choice. Proponents of "fantasy realism" have double standards. They readily accept that dragons can fly, the spirits of the dead can walk, that fire can burn with no fuel, but not that swords can be bigger than they are in real life.

Yes. Because the games flat out tell us that magic and dragons exist. On the other hand, nothing I've seen makes me believe Hawke has superhuman strength to lift that sword or magical dexterity needed to use that thing effectively.

The game shows us magical weapons. Ones made from fantasy materials like dragonbone and silverite, worked by mages and smiths, affixable with magical runes. We can see that certain weapons deal fire damage, nature damage, or cold damage, despite being physical objects. We can see Hawke, Fenris, and Carver swing these two-handed weapons with ease. Yet you choose to accept the first bunch, but not the second, despite the game showing them to us in the same way.

Why is it so hard to make that leap from "they can make these from fantastic materials and have them do fantastic things" to "They can make them light enough to wield"? Why is "bursts into perpetual flame" acceptable, but "bigger than reality" not? It seems awfully arbitrary to me.

[Mr Fixit]

Dintonta wrote...


Threads like this one, or others about armors, are interesting, though probably more if people are aware of the subjective reasons behind their own personal preferences, and can share them with others... (Not necessarily to bicker about opinions.):happy:

Well said. I think internet forums in general would be much more conducive to debate if more people examined their viewpoints and motivations and argued from there, instead of invoking the dreaded 'fun' or 'cool' card.

[Cyberfrog81]

I can deal with "cartoony" and "over-the-top" if it suits the game in question.

DA2 seemed to want to tell a serious story about a refugee and his or her many challenges in a dangerous city. The massive amount of almost pathetically cartoony violence doesn't fit.