Guest_Nizaris1_*
Modifié par Nizaris1, 06 octobre 2012 - 06:32 .
Modifié par LDS Darth Revan, 06 octobre 2012 - 06:33 .
Guest_Nizaris1_*
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I support rapiers. According to Fire Emblem, they are good against armored enemies, so they'll be handy for when we fight Chevaliers/Templars. However, I don't mind some weapons looking unrealistic as long as it's explained lorewise.
Edit: Wow, first to reply on both of your threads. I must seriously like medieval weaponry
Modifié par Bfler, 06 octobre 2012 - 06:54 .
Something that seems to frequently come up when discussing the design of a game system is whether or not some aspect of that system adheres to reality. Or, more precisely, whether the outcomes of that system accurately simulate the results that the person making the argument expects, based on their particular interpretation of reality.
Generally, these arguments come from players, or from non-designers, or less experienced designers, and will take the form of, "But XXXX isn't realistic!" or "Realistically, YYYY should happen instead". And, frequently, experienced game designers will turn around and say "Who cares?" and merrily go on their way designing an "unrealistic" system.
I wanted to give a quick explanation of why this is, explain what role I see realism as having in game design, and then provide a bit of a defense of "realism" as it relates to something I call the "responsibility of expectations" that is placed on any game design.
First - game designers primarily ignore or devalue realism because their primary goal is rarely to construct an accurate simulation of a real world. At their core, game systems are sets of rules that encourage and discourage, or reward and punish, certain choices within the game versus others. In establishing both what choices players can take, as well as the rules effects of those choices, designers are generally attempting to create a system which a) avoids "dominance"provides opportunities for players to differentiate their strategies based on the decisions they take, and c) give players opportunities to make "good plays" in response to opponents (be they computer or human controlled).
As a very basic example, take armor in Fallout: New Vegas. Wearing Light Armor has strengths (you move faster) and weaknesses (you absorb less damage). Wearing heavy armor has the opposite effects. Heavy armor does not dominate Light Armor, even though it performs better at its core functionality, because there are cases in which moving faster is more important than absorbing damage.
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Why this is only 60-80% on topic is the fact that you're asking for weapons to look more realistic. But I feel the reason you even bring this up will devolve into two-handed weapons don't swing that fast and ninja jumps with daggers and all that noise.
In which case who cares if it looks realistic?
Guest_Nizaris1_*
The reason the swords are exaggerated is to allow for increased detail to the models. Otherwise one greatsword would look pretty much the same as any other. Which is boring.
Realmzmaster wrote...
Fantasy writing is full of unrealistic swords such as Stormbringer wielded by Elric, Vorpal Sword from Through the Looking Glass, Atlantean Sword wielded by Conan, Excalibur, and Caladbolg to name a few. So why should developers be limited to making only realistic swords available?
). DA:O seemed more like A Song of Ice and Fire with its fantasy elements amped up than something like World of Warcraft.
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I support rapiers. According to Fire Emblem, they are good against armored enemies, so they'll be handy for when we fight Chevaliers/Templars. However, I don't mind some weapons looking unrealistic as long as it's explained lorewise.
Edit: Wow, first to reply on both of your threads. I must seriously like medieval weaponry
Modifié par philippe willaume, 06 octobre 2012 - 01:31 .
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Rapier proper and late rapiers (ie small
sword with a rapier hilt) are probably not stiff enough to go through the
mail that protect the bit where there is no plate but game wise that's good
enough and does not require that much suspension of disbelief.
There's no weapon except heavy spiked maces and the like that can pierce heavy plate armour. Rapiers are designed to poke through the eye-slits on a heavy helm or the joints in the ememy's armour. in China that was the use of the elegant thin sword -- try to block with that and the blade would snap.Bfler wrote...
A rapier is no medieval weapon and in reality you can't penetrate heavy armor with it. It is a weapon for close combat, when the enemy has passed the range of rifle fire, like a cavalry saber.
not to mention that ,you don't spend your life in full plate either. I mean 15th century civilian gear is quite cool.Nizaris1 wrote...
Rapier proper and late rapiers (ie small
sword with a rapier hilt) are probably not stiff enough to go through the
mail that protect the bit where there is no plate but game wise that's good
enough and does not require that much suspension of disbelief.
interesting thought....maybe DA: Inquisition take place where Thedas no longer wear armor or wear less armor, moving to the Illuminated Renaissance era...so having rapier and fresh air in the game is cool with Orlesian noble clothing, The Three Musketeer hat, wearing gowns...and the shoes...oh the shoes....
Modifié par philippe willaume, 06 octobre 2012 - 02:57 .
Retour en haut
