567 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Pseudocognition wrote...
he Witcher 2 is a fully realized, well researched Medieval German inspired world and every aspect reinforces this art direction.

So how does it deviate from Genre conventions?  Aside from the dumb looking hats

Skyrim is a fully realized, well researched Norse inspired world and every aspect reinforces this art direction.

So how does it deviate from genre conventions?  We've seen vikings before.

DA2 does not reference any particular real
life culture but has a consistent aesthetic in its architecture and has a
stylized twist to everything that is quite unique for the genre.

What stylised twist?  Most of the art seems straight out of modern DnD to me.  And the consistent aesthetic seems to consist of using the same horrible texture absolutely everywhere.  Not sure how you could be anything but consistent when there's only 3 areas, anyway.

Of the bunch, Mass Effect 1 is the most generic and uninspired, being an
unapologetic Syd Mead ripoff....Syd Mead being the artist who basically
laid the foundation for modern science-fiction. Throughought the series
it maintains the Syd Mead style but starts throwing other stuff in
there to offset the cliche, ending at ME3 which manages to be its own
thing even though its basically a sci-fi stew.

ME1 was easily the best looking of the ME games, IMO.  Guess generic and uninspired is what I like.

Upsettingshorts wrote...

By whose definition of good?

Because, again, they didn't think another Origins would be good.

Well, the people they were selling it to?  The reviewers, who counted it easily the worst Bioware RPG?

And putting out a more rubbish version of a previous game's formula, one they don't believe in, would do... what, exactly?

Well,
it would have made people more ready for a change.  Rather than making
them inherently hostile, because they associate change with what they got in DA2.

And if they hadn't been busy breaking stuff that worked, they'd have had more time to produce a nice, solid, no nonsense cash-in.

Modifié par Wulfram, 11 janvier 2013 - 06:59 .

[upsettingshorts]

Wulfram wrote...

So how does it deviate from Genre conventions?

You left out an important word.

It's important because had you left the word in, you'd answer your own question.

Wulfram wrote...

ME1 was easily the best looking of the ME games, IMO.  Guess generic and uninspired is what I like.

They stole from Syd Mead near-exclusively.  That's why it looks good.

They didn't make "generic science fiction."  They made Syd Mead: The Game.

...for the rest of your post, please refer to my comments on what the BSN is apparently about.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

@Addai: I checked with a friend higher up on the FNV food chain, he confirms your dates. I apologize. I cannot pass on the details he provided, however, the difference between DA2 and FNV is current tools and efficient tech. The FNV team was not hindered by its engine.

[axl99]

Wulfram wrote...
Guess generic and uninspired is what I like.

ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE HENCEFORTH INVALID.

Modifié par axl99, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:03 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

Edit:

Already posted.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:07 .

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

You left out an important word

It's important because had you left the word in, you'd answer your own question.

How does it deviate from broad genre conventions?

...for the rest of your post, please refer to my comments on what the BSN is apparently about.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[axl99]

Elton, you make no sense sir.

[Xewaka]

Wulfram wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
You left out an important word
It's important because had you left the word in, you'd answer your own question.

How does it deviate from broad genre conventions?

Allow me:

Wulfram wrote...
Are you saying this doesn't apply to DA2?  If so, please expand on how it deviates from genre conventions in it's[sic] art.

Okay, technically it was three words, not one, that you left out.

Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:08 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

axl99 wrote...

Elton, you make no sense sir.

In what?

In saying that an anime with gothic architecture is still an anime or that the artstyle of Dragon Age 2 was ****? Feel free to make your case against any of the two.

[upsettingshorts]

Wulfram wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

You left out an important word

It's important because had you left the word in, you'd answer your own question.

How does it deviate from broad genre conventions?

By not being broad.

It's really not that hard.  Broad genre convntions means, to borrow a math term, lowest common denominator.  

Skyrim is specifically Norse, and The Witcher 2 is specifically Germanic.  Even Mass Effect 1 is specifically Syd Mead.

Origins is specifically nothing.  It is a fantasy loaf, made of generic fantasy parts chunked and formed into something ugly and inconsistent.

[Wulfram]

I have absolutely no idea what you're saying Xewaka? Of course we're talking about the art.

Of which Skyrim and Witcher are possessed of extremely generic art. Which is also very good. Unlike DA2, which is an undistinct, confused mess of bad art and bad graphics.

[axl99]

Not until you actually go do some research yourself Elton. Your opinions are invalid otherwise.

Actually, I don't care for your opinions either way. They're malinformed, misleading, and biased.

Modifié par axl99, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:13 .

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Origins is specifically nothing.  It is a fantasy loaf, made of generic fantasy parts chunked and formed into something ugly and inconsistent.

Submitting proposal for "fantasy hot dog" to serve as a synonym for "fantasy loaf."

"Loaf" sounds too delicious. Hot Dog contains mystery meat.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:13 .

[upsettingshorts]

Elton John is dead wrote...

axl99 wrote...

Elton, you make no sense sir.

In what?

In saying that an anime with gothic architecture is still an anime or that the artstyle of Dragon Age 2 was ****? Feel free to make your case against any of the two.

Here's what we've all been saying from the start, using your terms and examples:

An "anime" that has gothic architecture in it and an "anime" that has neoclassical architecture in it have different art styles because they have different aesthetic design.  For them to be the same, they would have to both be animes and share the same design philosophy in their architecture.

Furthermore, editing in a gothic building from the first anime next to a bunch of neoclassical buildings in the second anime does not mean the latter has suddenly become the former.  

[KarshKaIe]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

@KarshKaIe:  If you actually read what hoorayforicecream captioned each image with, it'd be obvious to you each screenshot was commenting on the art, not the graphics. 

• Absolutely gorgeous.
  
• And those little touches! The award for most brilliant use of fish in decor goes to...
  
• Truly an artistic masterpiece, the style of which should be emulated for decades to come.
  
• Amazing realism.
  

Those commented on the graphics. Only two pictures truly attacked the art and that were the two referring to the color.

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

By not being broad.

It's really not that hard.  Broad genre convntions means, to borrow a math term, lowest common denominator.

Skyrim is specifically Norse, and The Witcher 2 is specifically Germanic.  Even Mass Effect 1 is specifically Syd Mead.

OK, I understand what you're saying now.

TW2, Skyrim and ME do not deviate from genre conventions, broad or narrow.  But they do conform to a more specific, defined, subset of those genre conventions.

That doesn't apply to DA2, of course.  That's just a random ugly mess.

Origins is specifically nothing.  It is a fantasy loaf, made of generic fantasy parts chunked and formed into something ugly and inconsistent.

So taking a 50% of that loaf, then grinding it up together with a bunch of random uglier stuff in DA2 was an improvement?

Modifié par Wulfram, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:21 .

[upsettingshorts]

KarshKaIe wrote...

"And those little touches! The award for most brilliant use of fish in decor goes to..."

Because clearly, she needed a powerful rig to render those fish lamps. 

Likewise, those pictures are lifted straight from psdo's blog in which she is critical of the art style.  None are examples of Origins thoroughly poor graphics because DA2 isn't really any better in that department anyway.

Wulfram wrote...

So taking a 50% of that loaf, then grinding it up together with a bunch of random uglier stuff in DA2 was an improvement?

It's not random stuff.

And as to whether or not it's uglier is, of course, subjective.

Nobody here is arguing that DA2 is some masterpiece, only arguing against moving backwards to DAO.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:25 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Here's what we've all been saying from the start, using your terms and examples:

An "anime" that has gothic architecture in it and an "anime" that has neoclassical architecture in it have different art styles because they have different aesthetic design. For them to be the same, they would have to both be animes and share the same design philosophy in their architecture.

Furthermore, editing in a gothic building from the first anime next to a bunch of neoclassical buildings in the second anime does not mean the latter has suddenly become the former.

So setting setting Dragonball Z in an environment with gothic architecture and design but keeping the same visuals it currently has gives it a gothic artstyle? Thanks for proving what I thought all along. According to your definition every Dragon Age game will have a different artstyle (as they'll all set in different countries with cities that have different architecture) even if they retain the exact same visuals and graphics.

There's no debate to be had here. Even if Bioware gave Dragon Age a surrealist artstyle or made it look EXACTLY like El Shaddi Ascension of the Metatron you'll still be defining the artstyle based on the architecture.

[upsettingshorts]

You're the one who limited the aesthetic design to architecture, not me.

We're saying that everything about how an example of media looks contributes to and is derived from its art style.

You're claiming that we're saying it's only one thing, and then "correcting" us by saying it is two things.

It's everything.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:38 .

[The Hierophant]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Nobody here is arguing that DA2 is some masterpiece, only arguing against moving backwards to DAO.

If that's the case i agree, i did like how some of the environments were styled in Awakenings like Knotwood Hills, outskirts Amaranthine, the cavern leading to Kal'Hirol.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 11 janvier 2013 - 07:40 .

[Emzamination]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Oh right, I forgot. Only True Fans ™ need apply, no potential converts welcome.

Yep, nurturing the growth of the existing fan base is the only way to go. Taking gambles on gaining potential fans and possibly losing established fans is self-destructive.

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

It's not random stuff.

In what way is it not?  It's DA:O with boring floors, bad lighting, Undead Darkspawn instead of Orc Darkspawn, Dagger Bat'leths, shoeless elves, random armour, reused noble clown outfits and doughy faces with rubbish noses.

Maybe there was some intent to have something more coherent at some point, but when you only have time to implement a quarter of it then what you get out of it at the end is not a style, it's just a complete mess.  Not that what I see suggests that the intended end product would have been anything but moving us from classic Generic Fantasy to 3rd/4th edition DnD Generic Fantasy.

And as to whether or not it's uglier is, of course, subjective.

Nobody here is arguing that DA2 is some masterpiece, only arguing against moving backwards to DAO.

Which presupposes that DA2 was any sort of move forward.  Which is something I find utterly utterly incomprehensible.

DA:O is at least a base point that has some nostalgia behind it, even if you personally think it's unwarranted.  DA2 is both bad and unpopular.

[upsettingshorts]

Emzamination wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Oh right, I forgot. Only True Fans ™ need apply, no potential converts welcome.

Yep, nurturing the growth of the existing fan base is the only way to go. Taking gambles on gaining potential fans and possibly losing established fans is self-destructive.

That's right BioWare!  Don't make the games you want, make more of the same game people who are already buying them expect.

Pay no attention to criticisms of complacency or excessive derivation!  They're just trying to bait you into self-destructive "creativity."

[Emzamination]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Oh right, I forgot. Only True Fans ™ need apply, no potential converts welcome.

Yep, nurturing the growth of the existing fan base is the only way to go. Taking gambles on gaining potential fans and possibly losing established fans is self-destructive.

That's right BioWare!  Don't make the games you want, make more of the same game people who are already buying them expect.

Pay no attention to criticisms of complacency or excessive derivation!  They're just trying to bait you into self-destructive "creativity."

Unless bioware is planning to buy a million copies of their own game, I'd say listening to the counsel of your established customer base is sound advice.

[In Exile]

Emzamination wrote...
Yep, nurturing the growth of the existing fan base is the only way to go. Taking gambles on gaining potential fans and possibly losing established fans is self-destructive.

Because everyone who buys your game originally would buy the sequel, right?