567 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Honestly, the thing that impresses me the most about the JRPG concept art is the sheath.

Yes, particularly large swords often went into sheaths worn over the shoulder and across the back. No, all weapons do not magically affix to the back like in Dragon Age.

Out of curiosity, what JRPGs (or games in general) have both sheaths for weapons and non-uniform sizes and shapes for those weapons?

Witcher and Witcher 2?

[TheBlackBaron]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Honestly, the thing that impresses me the most about the JRPG concept art is the sheath.

Yes, particularly large swords often went into sheaths worn over the shoulder and across the back. No, all weapons do not magically affix to the back like in Dragon Age.

Out of curiosity, what JRPGs (or games in general) have both sheaths for weapons and non-uniform sizes and shapes for those weapons?

None, as far as I'm aware of (granted, I play very few JRPG's). DA actually isn't far from what can be considered a "realistic" size for weapons. I'd just like to see sheaths for them, same as many desire bowstrings for bows. 

[hoorayforicecream]

Herr Uhl wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Honestly, the thing that impresses me the most about the JRPG concept art is the sheath.

Yes, particularly large swords often went into sheaths worn over the shoulder and across the back. No, all weapons do not magically affix to the back like in Dragon Age.

Out of curiosity, what JRPGs (or games in general) have both sheaths for weapons and non-uniform sizes and shapes for those weapons?

Witcher and Witcher 2?

The swords in the Witcher (and its sequel) are all the same dimensions in terms of blade size. The only thing that differs are their hilts, which is why you can sheath them - one size (literally) fits all.

[Brockololly]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
Out of curiosity, what JRPGs (or games in general) have both sheaths for weapons and non-uniform sizes and shapes for those weapons?

Well, that concept art in the OP is from either Dark Souls or Demon's Souls. I know in Dark Souls you have a sheath for most one handed swords and you can have a variety of other weapons. Although Dark Souls has plenty of over the top designs too and I think if you sheath two handed weapons there they do the whole float on your back routine.

[Herr Uhl]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

The swords in the Witcher (and its sequel) are all the same dimensions in terms of blade size. The only thing that differs are their hilts, which is why you can sheath them - one size (literally) fits all.

No, they weren't. They had different sizes and shapes. There were shortswords, long swords and sabres. Witcher 1 didn't have sheaths though, so I'm retracting that.



The above for example.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 11 janvier 2013 - 02:31 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Herr Uhl wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

The swords in the Witcher (and its sequel) are all the same dimensions in terms of blade size. The only thing that differs are their hilts, which is why you can sheath them - one size (literally) fits all.

No, they weren't. They had different sizes and shapes. There were shortswords, long swords and sabres. Witcher 1 didn't have sheaths though, so I'm retracting that.

I didn't come across any swords that didn't fit in the same sheath, though admittedly my playthrough was far from exhaustive. Can you provide closer view screen shots of the different shaped weapons? I'm having difficulty finding them. I remember that all of the swords I found and/or crafted were the same size and shape.

The general issue with sheaths is that you need one for each shape of weapon you have. If you limit the player to only three standardized shapes of weapon, then you can have three standardized shapes of sheath to switch between. You can cheat by standardizing only certain parts of them (the blade just above the crossguard must be these dimensions, and the sword itself must be this thickness overall) and you can use things like straps to hold them down. Thus, if you want sheaths for weapons, it means you get either fewer different weapons, or more weapons that have the same dimensions.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Brockololly wrote...

And from the Art Director, Matt Goldman,  in this interview:

A new setting yields new scope: as art director on the series, Matt  Goldman makes regular reference to a new, ‘hotrodded’ art style.  “Marketing told me to say that,” he sighs.

Actually it’s a doddle to see the change between Origins’ muddy,  bleary visuals and Dragon Age 2’s stark, highcontrast lines. Clearly the artistic blandness of the first game still rankles for Goldman. “Damn cheese-wheels,” he semimutters, referring to the ubiquitous  hunks of Edam deployed around Origins’ dungeons. Put in place solely to  fill up space in sparse areas, they – and similar cliche-fantasy  ephemera – distracted from the game’s overall motif, softening the point of swordblades with down-home pointlessness. Matt snaps back from his  frustrated reverie and explains: “The props are to help give context for what the area is, but overall I’d say Dragon Age 2 is a lot more  minimalist looking. The intent is to create a strong personality without getting in your face and without distracting you with all these details that don’t really do anything – they just screw up your path line and  make shadows a lower resolution.”

Matt’s background gives him a uniquely artistic perspective: [b]“we’ve  stripped off what’s extraneous and as a result made the environments and characters sharper. The environment is basically – in terms of a band – the bassline. You have to lay down a nice thick bassline to set the  mood: it’s the backbone of the picture-making, story telling. But if  it’s too detailed then you get this disrupting camouflage problem where  you can’t tell what’s going on. So by stripping away things and looking  for opportunities to create some more dramatic silhouettes, you can  focus attention on the character.”

Thanks for the quote.

I don't totally disagree with his attitude about design, but if Kirkwall for example is meant to reflect that ideal then they have work yet to do. No matter your approach to design, a city shouldn't be so... soulless. I don't doubt the engine had a lot to do with it but clutter doesn't have to mean obstacles.

As far as Silverman's opinion goes, well, I think it's better just to ignore him.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 11 janvier 2013 - 02:45 .

[Brockololly]

Pseudocognition wrote...
I don't totally disagree with his attitude about design, but if Kirkwall for example is meant to reflect that ideal then they have work yet to do. No matter your approach to design, a city shouldn't be so... soulless. I don't doubt the engine had a lot to do with it but clutter doesn't have to mean obstacles.

That's a big part of my problem with much of DA2's design: I can't necessarily tell what parts of the final product are working as they mostly intended or what parts were the result of the shortened timeline or lack of resources or whatever else excuse they might want to use. Obviously they've mentioned things like the recycled environments as being affected by the development timeline. Fair enough!

But what about something like the art? If we're going to take Goldman's word that the sparse or minimalistic environments were a conscious design choice, then I don't think thats a very good one (unless they went with super stylized visuals or something).

Yet his line about lowering the shadow resolution makes me think that perhaps some of the art decisions in DA2 were in part due to technical limitations trying to work within the confines of the engine. So just how much of the art changes were necessarily done purely for the sake of wanting that style of art change versus simply compromising to make the most of the engine? That's my question going forward. One would assume BioWare would have fewer technical limitations with DA3, so will they still embrace that minimalist look with their Frostbite powered engine in DA3? Or will they be able to put in some clutter to the environment and not sacrifice the resolution of the shadows? Basically, what is their actual goal with these aspects of the game for the end user?

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

But what about something like the art? If we're going to take Goldman's word that the sparse or minimalistic environments were a conscious design choice, then I don't think thats a very good one (unless they went with super stylized visuals or something).

I don't think its a fundamentally bad idea, it just fails when the building blocks that comprise a minimalist environment are weak and unappealing. The modular city idea was efficient but very very obvious without many variable pieces.

Yet his line about lowering the shadow resolution makes me think that perhaps some of the art decisions in DA2 were in part due to technical limitations trying to work within the confines of the engine.

This would be correct for many things, and applies to DA:O as well. Eclipse is supposed to be a nightmare to work with. I am not a tech artist so I can't fathom why the number of props would affect shadow resolution, but it sounds like a bad problem to have. It's not one I've come across yet. But if having less junk laying around would make the game look better in Eclipse, it's not a bad decision.

One would assume BioWare would have fewer technical limitations with DA3, so will they still embrace that minimalist look with their Frostbite powered engine in DA3? Or will they be able to put in some clutter to the environment and not sacrifice the resolution of the shadows? Basically, what is their actual goal with these aspects of the game for the end user?

Frostbite 2 will not have the same problems as DAO or 2, graphically. I doubt they will be hindered at all. As for minimalism, as I said, it can work well and also contain clutter and life and 'soul' (see: portal 2) but its all in the execution.

I expect the result will be better in DA3.

In case you're curious, here's an example of how a 3D artist goes about making a modular environment. This is a strategy used... basically everywhere. It is incredibly un-subtle due to the small number of pieces to each modular set in DA2 but, executed better, its a very expedient way to make environments.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 11 janvier 2013 - 04:13 .

[cJohnOne]

Do you really want DAO art to come back or is that so three years ago.

What's wrong with Generic? A rock is a rock. A tree is a tree. A path is path. Isn't it?

[gneisenau556]

What I like about the OP's picture is that the armor on the left incorporates lots of cloth with the metal.

Though, the champions armor also uses a mixture of cloth, and to be honest if it didn't have so many edges, it wouldn't look nearly as bad.

[Corto81]

cJohnOne wrote...

Do you really want DAO art to come back or is that so three years ago.

Yes.

Updated graphics, DA:O art style. It was "serious"; as opposed to the over-the-top childish and cartoony DA2.

[Sutekh]

gneisenau556 wrote...

What I like about the OP's picture is that the armor on the left incorporates lots of cloth with the metal.

Though, the champions armor also uses a mixture of cloth, and to be honest if it didn't have so many edges, it wouldn't look nearly as bad.

But who's to say that it looks bad for everyone? I like it. Granted, I could do without the pointy fingers, but overall, I prefer it to the more "realistic" model on the right, which I find slightly boring - as in, "oh, a ~realistic~ suit of armor that I've seen a thousand times in illustrations and movies".

Honestly, there are some games where this kind of realism fits (Game of Thrones, for instance, given the source material is much on the low side of the fantasy scale - and even there you have really strange things). I just don't think DA is one of them.

[Gyrefalcon]

Corto81 wrote...

cJohnOne wrote...

Do you really want DAO art to come back or is that so three years ago.

Yes.

Updated graphics, DA:O art style. It was "serious"; as opposed to the over-the-top childish and cartoony DA2.

I did not find it cartoony but there were elements that were over-the-top.  And I think a lot of people noted the issue on the DA: Inquisition Top 5 Thread.  In particular, the problem with the look of weapons and armor was brought up.  Most people on that thread were unhappy that the items looked non-functional or unwieldy.  The armor got really bulky, the weapons got over-sized or created unrealistic results such as arrows causing people to explode into bits.  There was also a lot of dislike for the elves being given anime-styled donkey ears.  The proportions were a bit extreme.  For me the discrepencies were most pronounced in the Legacy download with Malcolm's staff.  I had a female character and it looked like she was holding a flagpole!  And not a skinny one either.

The other discrepency that was very jarring was in the house that Varric's brother was holed up in.  We are told that he killed all the other servants and did something horrible.  We are mentally expecting to see something like we did in the Circle Tower in Origins.  Instead, the place is completely tidy and the only hint that "something" might have happened was some worn clothing in a chest.  

This is where I think things went astray.  It really did feel like the streets were empty and with so many of the people wearing hoods or being bald they looked uniform and bland.  In Origins you could walk up and talk to most anyone, in DA2 you could only listen in.  This only served to make the emptiness stand out.  And this is a city that is over-run with refugees?  People are packed in?  The final result was that it did not match up visually to the story they were attempting to weave for us.  But now it is likely we are moving to Orlais.  And this raises the creative bar greatly given how rich and complex the costumes should be there.  And the buildings should be mostly older and ornate.  It will be interesting to see what they do in the next installment.  But given the engine they are choosing, one can hope that there will be a huge increase in how we can interact with our environment.

I am hopeful they will tone down some of the over-the-top characteristics on weapons, armor, and elven ears, but I actually look forward to more ornate clothing otherwise.  And maybe we will see some mage hats that don't have pompoms on the top and some dresses or robes that flow instead of sticking to people like glue.  That would be a nice art change in my book!

[shubnabub]

I don't understand this obsession with realism. Some of the most serious, darkest stories ever told were done in a completely unrealistic art style. And it wouldn't have helped them a bit to have been done any other way.

I've got faith that with a real dev cycle, whatever Bioware produces will be pretty swanky. Even if they go BESM with all the characters. In fact, I always find it enjoyable when an unrealistic world presents you with believable, deep characters. The contrast is satisfying. And I also find that super realistic, dark, and gritty looking games tend to support some of the shallowest characters and stories you've ever encountered (not always, but frequently).

And maybe they'll bring back tactical view (sure) and memorably constructed encounters.

[Liamv2]

calypsnex wrote...

I don't understand this obsession with realism. Some of the most serious, darkest stories ever told were done in a completely unrealistic art style. And it wouldn't have helped them a bit to have been done any other way.

I've got faith that with a real dev cycle, whatever Bioware produces will be pretty swanky. Even if they go BESM with all the characters. In fact, I always find it enjoyable when an unrealistic world presents you with believable, deep characters. The contrast is satisfying. And I also find that super realistic, dark, and gritty looking games tend to support some of the shallowest characters and stories you've ever encountered (not always, but frequently).

And maybe they'll bring back tactical view (sure) and memorably constructed encounters.

I compleatly aggre with what you said but you avatar is still going to give me nightmares

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

calypsnex wrote...

I don't understand this obsession with realism. Some of the most serious, darkest stories ever told were done in a completely unrealistic art style. And it wouldn't have helped them a bit to have been done any other way.

I don't understand why people insist that incredibly unrealistic things are realistic. Its like they don't know what reality is.

If "realistic" means "lifelike" then all but a handful of games do not qualify as realistic and those that do certainly aren't fantasy RPGs. (inb4 Witcher) In most games, parts of them will be more realistic than others, but to deem an entire game and everything about its visuals "realistic" is incorrect, unless you're talking about... I dunno, Gran Turismo 4.

At this point this is just me being annoyed about semantics (and this is not directed at you specifically calyps) but realism is not an appropriate word to use in relation to video games anyway. Quoth Wikipedia, "Realism in the visual arts and literature is the general attempt to depict subjects as they are considered to exist in third person objective reality, without embellishment or interpretation and "in accordance with secular, empirical rules"


Game art broadly fits into three categories. (right click > view)

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 11 janvier 2013 - 09:47 .

[Naitaka]

Brockololly wrote...

And from the Art Director, Matt Goldman,  in this interview:

<snip>
Matt’s background gives him a uniquely artistic perspective: “we’ve  stripped off what’s extraneous and as a result made the environments and characters sharper. The environment is basically – in terms of a band – the bassline. You have to lay down a nice thick bassline to set the  mood: it’s the backbone of the picture-making, story telling. But if  it’s too detailed then you get this disrupting camouflage problem where  you can’t tell what’s going on. So by stripping away things and looking  for opportunities to create some more dramatic silhouettes, you can  focus attention on the character.”

While I respect his view and understand his rationale, I'd have to disagree with his design philosophy at least when it comes to DA. When you strip away the background (or ambient art) to accentuate character, you are essentially stripping the feeling of culture and history of the game, making it orient toward journey of bunch super heros regardless of whether it's set in a medievil, gothic, or contemporary world. Instead of having different parts of Denerim having drastically different atmosphere to them, we have Kirkwall where no matter where you go, everything looks the same. The house that Varric's brother was in was also a good example where the background no longer tells a story. While I agree that siloutte is imporant when it comes to designing a easily recognizable character, I really don't think throwing functionality and practicability all out of the window to achieve such an effect is what the game needed to achieve that goal. Perhaps in a Korean MMORPG where the story takes a back seat to having everything look "awesome" it might have made sense, but a universe as rich in background stories as DA, do you really need to go to such extreme just to make things recognizable? Was it really necessary to turn darkspawns into power ranger mooks instead of coming up with a design that's more in line with the lore?

Modifié par Naitaka, 11 janvier 2013 - 09:44 .

[Chaos Lord Malek]

DA2 art style will stay - look at the new book coming out. And i am glad for it. Another change of style would only ****** people off more then fix anything.

[smallwhippet]

Naitaka wrote...

 Instead of having different parts of Denerim having drastically different atmosphere to them, we have Kirkwall where no matter where you go, everything looks the same.

Could you really not see the difference between Hightown, Lowtown, Darktown and the Gallows?

Gosh.

And as for different parts of Denerim having drastically different atmosphere...to my mind the architecture of market place, back alleys and alienage were virtually indistinguishable, save for degrees of dilapidation, and the castle interiors were pretty much the same as in Redcliffe or Highever. The lighting throughout the town was pretty uniform.

In Kirkwall, whilst the lighting was bright, the air was cleaner in Hightown, compared with the smoke and dust of Lowtown, and Darktown wasn't just like Lowtown with bits of rubbish thrown around to give the impression of squalor.

[shubnabub]

 @psdo Yeah, I just think getting realism off the table as the end all be all of serious storytelling is important because it's just not true. It's not even the end all be all of immersion. I get lost in worlds where the characters and story are engaging, not where a tree looks stunningly like a...tree. Internal consistency is more important than realism, any day. The only game on the top row that I would take to a deserted island would be HL2. The rest of my island games come from the other two rows (not limited by what's pictured).

I believe one of the draws of being able to call a game "realistic" (whether it is or not) is that it somehow justifies the experience. You're not "playing" a silly game, you're experiencing a "fully realized world" full of magic, goblins, elves, and dwarves. But it's so realistic, not one of those kiddy games that are just a waste of time where elves have silly long ears. Better if the armors look awkwardly ripped from history, regardless whether they actually are period accurate or function apropriate (I seem to remember a lot of jousting armor in DAO, nevermind that there are no horses). And never mind that real plate armor is fitted to the wearer and not bulky and awkward like DAO plate armors. If someone walks in it looks realistic enough that I don't have to feel embarrassed like I was caught playing. I was clearly experiencing a historically accurate, gritty, realistic medieval world so realistic it's almost educational. This is serious business.

Not to say there isn't a place for realism. I just don't trust everyone's motives when they start saying stuff like "what's wrong with generic?" How hard are you trying to justify this thing that you would suport mediocrity? 

Modifié par calypsnex, 11 janvier 2013 - 11:56 .

[daft inquisitor]

Herr Uhl wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Honestly, the thing that impresses me the most about the JRPG concept art is the sheath.

Yes, particularly large swords often went into sheaths worn over the shoulder and across the back. No, all weapons do not magically affix to the back like in Dragon Age.

Out of curiosity, what JRPGs (or games in general) have both sheaths for weapons and non-uniform sizes and shapes for those weapons?

Witcher and Witcher 2?

I'm sorry, but I have to be That Guy.

*ahem*

The Witcher franchise is NOT a JRPG. They're not from Japan. They're from Poland, you dummy. <_<

[Maria Caliban]

calypsnex wrote...

Not to say there isn't a place for realism. I just don't trust everyone's motives when they start saying stuff like "what's wrong with generic?" How hard are you trying to justify this thing that you would suport mediocrity? 

I don't think being generic is the same as being mediocre.

The majority of Dragon Age and Origins is generic. Pseudo-medieval European fantasy world with elves, dwarves, and mages. Fighting demons, dragon, and mindless minions of evil. A combat system built around fighter, rogue, and magic-user. The 'save the world from an ancient evil' plot of Origins. Spending the majority of time doing errant, unconnected side-quests with a motley band.

I mean, if you've played Dungeons and Dragons, 80% of Dragon Age is familiar to you. And there's evidence that this was exactly what they intended with DA:O.

I think they're trying to get out from under that. The focus on the mage/Templar conflict and trying to do a more personal story with Hawke, for example.

But honestly, I question how many people pick up a BioWare game for an innovate, unusual, or unique experience.