567 réponses à ce sujet

[Augoeides]

Is anyone else really unnerved by that skull or is it just me?

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Augoeides wrote...

Is anyone else really unnerved by that skull or is it just me?

Not just you. I'm pretty sure posting that was unnecessary >_>

[PsychoBlonde]

EpicTragedy wrote...
I personally liked Hawke's polearm, even though most of the other criticisms about DA:II in that photoseem like legitimate concerns where DA:O style was better.

I just want everyone who thought DA:O's style was better to tot up the unique leather armor looks in the game.  (Looks, not colors.)  Go ahead.  I'll wait.  How many were there?  

THREE.  Say it with me now.

THREE.  Once more with feeling.

THERE WERE THREE UGLY-ASS SUITS OF LEATHER ARMOR TO CHOOSE FROM AND ALMOST ALL OF THEM WERE SOME HIDEOUS PURPLY-BROWN COLOR THAT LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE SOAKED IN BORSCHT.   

Oh, and the female body models were godawful.  And everyone had ENORMOUS HANDS.  And those horrible brown teeth.  And the mage hats.  And those horrible weird-looking trees.  DA:O had quite a lot of really bad art in it.  It's telling that DA2 improved many things yet was still in many respects pretty substandard.

I will happily take the everything-is-covered-in-stucco look from DA2 if that's what it takes to get rid of some of the horror show from DA:O.  I don't expect everything to get fixed in one shot.  No, it didn't magically transform into Jade Empire or Skyrim.  But they've got a whole new non-obsolete engine to work with now.  I expect we'll see some good stuff once they start showing it.

[Orian Tabris]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I find the OP's picture interesting. "Play" is the word used on the Hawke-side. "Summon" is the word used on the Mr. FancyCoat-side. I guess there wasn't any consistency in the 100-people survey applied to those images? 

There wasn't any consistency in judging the two designs.

1/10 vs. 10/10? Please! All of DAII's armour had some semblance of logic in their designs. To compare it to another example, then to use swear words and your own opinions to support the other design, makes one look childish.

Making fun of Hawke's weapon design, when you know what it is, and that he's a mage, while the other example is of a knight?
Touche, OP. <_<

[ravnkl0]

The people in DA2 certainly looked prettier if less realistic than Skyrim.

[shubnabub]

I see a guy acting obtuse when it serves his argument, and getting very specific in pointless ways to further obfuscate any real discussion (art style versus art design leading to pages of pointless semantic nonsense).

While I will agree that "shading" (or shadows and lighting as we call it outside of drawing since shading usually refers to shaders when discussing game graphics, and frankly shading isn't a thing at all outside of amateur artist vocabularies because it describes the act of capturing light and shadow poorly) was not taken into as much consideration for DA2 and frequently the lighting bugged the crap out of me because it was like they didn't even try to light faces dramatically/in a cinematic way. That might be explained by the rapid dev time of the game, that they just didn't have time to position every character and every light for maximum effect. If it was a conscious decision that person made a bad call IMO.

That said, I didn't miss the art style of DAO at all and welcomed the more dynamic approach to costume design and animation in DA2. And all the examples given of how DA2 landscapes and environments are somehow worse than DAO are fails in my opinion and the comparisons chosen were constant choices of apples and oranges except for one comp of the deep roads in which DA2 looked better anyway.

Meanwhile, this guy seems totally unaware that he's arguing with actual industry veteran artists, and trying to school them by pulling half baked nonsense out of his...pocket...instead of listening and processing anything anyone else says beyond looking for ways to mischaracterize or derail any real discussion.

This thread is the worst example of stubborn ignorance I've seen in a long time.

[Orian Tabris]

I don't know if anyone has pointed it out yet, but if you're gonna "plea" to BioWare - or anyone for that matter - you shouldn't make fun of what they've done previous. Also, it would help if what you wrote, actually felt like a plea, rather than a way to express your opinion, in the vain hope of getting your way. An actual synopsis of the art style, would help, instead of giving a one half-hearted paragraph.

Overall, the OP's post felt more like a reply, than an actual thread-starting post. It's not too desimilar to false advertising, and customers often complain when they aren't given what they're promised. Just like BSN users complaining about DA2's and ME3's end results. So the developers, in their role as the customers, aren't going to look at this thread and feel obliged to change the artstyle.

It's really just another thread with regulars and semi-regulars arguing and discussing semantics and opinions. Like this reply, the thread isn't going to really change how DA3 turns out (ignoring the fact that it's undoubtedly too late to change the artstyle).

[Masha Potato]

Well,

[Corto81]

Dragon Age:Origins was so befitting a "dark fantasy" setting, with "grey" characters, often difficult choices and believable villains.

DA2 was more cartoony, much like it's plot and NPCs.

And comparing DA2 to Dark Souls isn't really fair.
It's like comparing Spartacus to The Wire...

[aedan901]

I hope they throw DA2 art style in the trash and return to DAO art.

[Femlob]

Masha Potato wrote...

Well,

Instant win.

[Blight Nug]

The art style is probably one of the first thing they decide on in the game development cycle.
They already showed us a few concept art pictures and it looks pretty good IMO.

One thing I'd like to note is that I thought the DA2 concept art was ok, yet it looked pretty bad in game. IMO DA2's problem was more about the execution of the art style and not just the style itself. If DA2's textures, shading, contrast and level of detail were better, I'd think it would've been a lot better.

DAO's art style (armor design, monster design...etc) was conservative with traditional fantasy settings.
DA2's art style was more unique but wasn't coherent nor polished enough, and it also wasn't executed well in game.

It seems to me that DAI has a different concept artist for characters than DA2. Either that or the same artist really stepped up his or her game. The DA2 concept art was too cartoony for my taste, but I will say it's at least trying something new.

[Blackout62]

DA:O had an artstyle? I thought it was just medieval fantasy generica. Also that extra shield arm armor your JRPG armored gent has was historically used in jousting and nowhere else due to it limiting movement to the extent of hindering the effectiveness of the shield. It was also from the Reinassance.

Modifié par Blackout62, 10 janvier 2013 - 11:31 .

[upsettingshorts]

Corto81 wrote...

Dragon Age:Origins was so befitting a "dark fantasy" setting, with "grey" characters, often difficult choices and believable villains.

DA2 was more cartoony, much like it's plot and NPCs.

And comparing DA2 to Dark Souls isn't really fair.
It's like comparing Spartacus to The Wire...

Nobody here has been arguing that Dragon Age 2 wasn't more stylized than Origins.  Nobody.  This much is plainly obvious to anyone with eyes.  

When we do argue that Origins was not "dark gritty and realistic" it does not follow that we believe DA2 was any of those things either.

I'm not going to get into a discussion of DA2's plot as compared to Origins in this thread, suffice to say I disagree completely, so let's bring it back to art style.

But statements that Origins art style befits "dark fantasy" and supports its "grey characters" have to be backed up with evidence.  They cannot be though, because it's a specious non-argument.  When Loghain lectures the Landsmeet on the necessity of his actions at Ostagar, he is wearing polished, garish, unrealistic plate armor from head to toe.  The Landsmeet is dressed in all the colors of the rainbow not to mention prolonged looks at any collectionon of nobles in the game will induce vomitting, finally Anora is clad in a sky blue/yellow monstrosity to match.  Origins is full of scenes that look just like this.   This is what can happen when you don't give your artists any direction or guiding philosophy in the name of playing it safe.

There's a reason the previsualization of a proposed sequel to Origins - what would become DA2 but didn't even have a story or characters associated with it yet - created before DAO was even released, looks nothing like Origins at all.  (source)



Did they pull it off completely with DA2?  I don't think anyone, least of all BioWare, would claim that they did.  But it's a process, and I want to see where they take it in DA:I.

If I was going to summarize the arguments against Origins' art style, it would be to say that in refusing to accept the description of it as dark, gritty and realistic, we are asserting it was simply a boring, generic, ugly cartoon that lacked its own style.  Any relationship with those descriptive terms are incidental and fleeting.

Dragon Age 2, for better or worse, and you're welcome to believe it was for the worse, emphatically had its own style. This is why, when discussing future Dragon Age installments, those of us who appreciate such things would be aghast at the suggestion DA:I return to Origins'  fantasy loaf and instead utilize Frostbite to provide a more effectively realized version of the style introduced in DA2.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 janvier 2013 - 11:59 .

[Uccio]

I like the DAO leather armour. At least it doesn't have "hobo" written all over it like in DA2.

[Blackout62]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

There's a reason the previsualization of a proposed sequel to Origins - what would become DA2 but didn't even have a story or characters associated with it yet - created before DAO was even released, looks nothing like Origins at all.  (source)

*Sighs* Still waiting on that cute elf with the undercut.

[upsettingshorts]

Blackout62 wrote...

*Sighs* Still waiting on that cute elf with the undercut.

This may or may not be old news, and it is definitely off topic but:

She's never coming

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 janvier 2013 - 12:05 .

[Blackout62]

Eh, I'll live. She probably would have just been Dragon Age Jack.

Modifié par Blackout62, 10 janvier 2013 - 12:09 .

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Dragon Age 2, for better or worse, and you're welcome to believe it was for the worse, emphatically had its own style.

Pleas tell me what it was.  Maybe I'm missing it within all the stuff I dismiss as being the result of poor quality due to a lack of time, rather than policy.

I believe the vast expanses of horribly boring floors were deliberate - I recall the talk of negative space before the game was released.  Totally and utterly inappropriate for a crowded port city known for twisting alleys that are easy to get lost in, but still apparently deliberate.  But what else?

Is it the rubbish looking lighting?  The doughy looking faces?  The random scatter of different armour?  Your favourite Noble Clothes that were taken from Origins?

And once you've said what it was, tell me why it's good.

[upsettingshorts]

Wulfram wrote...

Is it the rubbish looking lighting?  The doughy looking faces?

Well I can easily start here.  Not this.  This is Eclipse being a crappy engine, and these issues were present in Origins as well.  Not to mention things like the low poly elves hanging around a mostly-empty Kirkwall are not a deliberate design decision.

Regardless of where we stand on the art style, we should all be glad Eclipse is not returning.

Wulfram wrote...

Maybe I'm missing it within all the stuff I dismiss as being the result of poor quality due to a lack of time, rather than policy.

Some things were, such as:

Wulfram wrote...

The random scatter of different armour?  Your favourite Noble Clothes that were taken from Origins?

Armors, clothing, and weapons lifted without modification straight from Origins definitely seems like things that were rushed.  As are the repeated environments.

Wulfram wrote...

Please tell me what it was. 

I'm no artist, so I'll probably butcher several terms and concepts.  I tend to defer to people like pseudo and axl99 to explain instead, as they have the tools to articulate concepts that to me are hard to explain.  Since neither are around at the moment, I'll defer to art director Matt Goldman himself:

Here's an interview on the very subject in which he answers your question.  From BioWare's blog.  

For more information, here's another interview on the very subject for Destructoid.

His opinion is infinitely more valuable and educated than mine, or yours.  His answer is definitely preferable to pretending I possess the knowledge to articulate my impressions effectively, unlike some posters in this thread who have annointed themselves experts with no right to that label.

Wulfram wrote...

And once you've said what it was, tell me why it's good.

Having a non-derivative, non-generic style is inherently good.  Like I said previously, my posts are less "Dragon Age 2 art is fantastic" and more "Dragon Age: Origins art sucks."  In that respect, my answer to this question is simple:  Anything that isn't Origins is good.  Of course I hope DA:I looks even better.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 janvier 2013 - 12:48 .

[Reikilea]

Well not for the overall design, but what I din´t like was anime "inspiration". Like Fenris hair, spiky very spiky armour, enormous blades and 3.

I like western fantasy to stay western.

So I wouldn't mind coming back to this gritty medieval style. It worked better with the setting and the world they created. New design - with boobs, spikes, anime hair and navi elves bothered me. And what´s with the high ceilings.

So yup, go back to the more realistic design. More medieval fantasy. (cough Witcher, cough.).Except don´t change Anders. Leave Anders as he was in DA2. I dont think there can be anyone more handsome than he.

[upsettingshorts]

It's not inspired by anime.

It's inspired by sources like Kurosawa's Throne of Blood and Bruegel's The Triumph of Death.  I know this because they've said as much.

...and Origins isn't realistic, either.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:31 .

[Reikilea]

If DA2 was inspired by Kurosawa I believe it would be more muddy and gritty. And rainy. It always rains in Kurosawa films. And mist. And more Toshiro Mifune. I only said it reminded me of anime. Because of spikes and bishounen white haired elves.

Can´t really see Bruegel´s. Maybe the sky. Well my graphic card is quite old, so it may be somewhere. And I do like his paintings. Interesting choice for a game design. If only they worked on it better and added some realistic element.

Edit: Uh, this was reaction on the post above me.

Modifié par Reikilea, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:55 .

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...


Well I can easily start here.  Not this.  This is Eclipse being a crappy engine, and these issues were present in Origins as well.  Not to mention things like the low poly elves hanging around a mostly-empty Kirkwall are not a deliberate design decision.

Regardless of where we stand on the art style, we should all be glad Eclipse is not returning.

Neither of these issues existed in DA:O.  Or at least not in the same way.  The faces didn't look doughy, by and large.  The lighting could look goofy by and large, but it was at least more interesting

Wulfram wrote...

Maybe I'm missing it within all the stuff I dismiss as being the result of poor quality due to a lack of time, rather than policy.

Some things were, such as:

Here's an interview on the very subject in which he answers your question.  From BioWare's blog. 

I hate listening to podcasts

For more information, here's another interview on the very subject for Destructoid.

The only concrete things I can get from that, that apply to the game as a whole, are

1.  Brighter.  Which is part of the lighting which you've just assured me isn't deliberate.
2.  Colourful.  Which isn't reflected in my impression of the game.

And neither of which really make something either distinctive or good.

edit:  There's talk about looking for inspiration, but little about what this translates to in the game.

Having a non-derivative, non-generic style is inherently good.

Only if it's a good style.  It can just mean that everyone else realised what a stupid idea it was.  And it asumes DA2 possesses this

At the start of the podcast, Mr Goldman says that Dragon Age: Origins does not pop off the page when put alongside other examples of the fantasy genre, that you can't identify it easily unless you're familiar with the contents itself.  That would seem to me to apply in spades to DA2.

Actually I'd say DA:O is more easily recognisable, if only because the lack of variety of armour and the damn silly giant shoulders on the Massive armour.

Modifié par Wulfram, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:56 .