513 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadow Fox]

Squire wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Since it is indeed about the combat/battle, and the DA games don't use outfits for characterization 

Uh... *cough* Morrigan *cough*

Also, 'characterisation' doesn't always mean 'sexed up'. Leliana wasn't overly sexed up, as far as I recall. Neither was Wynne. But Leliana was still attractive.

Female characters can be sexy without looking completely impractical.

It's so silly when people start complaining about realism in a fantasy
game. I mean, the fact that there seems to be a 50/50 split in male and
female warriors is pretty unrealistic, but nobody ever complains about
that. If you really wanted realism, 99% of the warriors would be big
burly men, not half of them be frail women who are just as strong as
their counterparts.

You're right, we don't want 'realism'. If it had realism, the only warrior PCs would be big burly men, there'd be no elves, dwarves or dragons, no magic, and nobody would ever be able to afford plate armour.

What we want is believability. There's a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that we can allow, and one of those things is having attractive female warriors, or male warriors who aren't big and burly, as well as elves, dwarves, dragons and magic.

It does not extend to ridiculously oversized weapons, giant spaulders, and  cuirasses that only cover 10% of the chest. Then it's no longer believable, but silly.

Magic isn't believable to me I simply shrug and accept it as fantasy.
Why not the characters are already superhuman and the armor already magical why try to make the game's armor and weapons conform sorely  to your aesthetic preference?

Modifié par Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke, 10 octobre 2013 - 08:50 .

[Shadow Fox]

The Woldan wrote...

Fardreamer wrote...

Because there are people who want those sexualized armors in the game. I'm offering arguments against this idea.

Sexualized armors are great... why would you argue against that?  I'm also all for over the top weapons and armor.

Believability suffers greatly when characters who wear ridiculous armor that makes no sense at all participate in serious combat. This has an extremely negative impact on my gaming experience. I can't take the characters wearing that kind of armor seriously and immersion falls apart. 

I also don't find sexualized armor ''hot'' or anything like that. Metal boobs on armor? Hot? I mean, seriously? It just looks dumb, as dumb as metal dicks or butt cut-outs would look like on armor.

You know what I find sexy? A no BS female fighter who looks like she knows what she is doing. No compromise in armor, functional weapons, and tactics that make actual sense. Now thats hot. 

So insulated kevlar and bows only then?

[Shadow Fox]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
]It does because they didn't come out of it unscathed and like I said in that case it doesn't matter if you're wearing fullplate,Champion armor or a chainmail bikini since the characters are already unnaturally resilient armor only comes down to aesthetics and stats.

Nope.
People did survive lightning strikes - some were burned, some had internal damage, but some were mostly OK.

Like I said, party-based real-time games always have characters more durable then normal. That doens't make armor pointless, since that endurance is still very much limited.

Considering mages can conjure infernos and blizzards I doubt it.

And what's the temperature of that inferno? How does magical fire work compared to normal fire? Waht's the voltage of a mages lightning? Does it depend on the mages power or it is it fixed?

With magic, so many things are unknown that you can't make definitive claims.

So basically make the character both psychic and have unnatural reflexes.

Eh? What?
How does "if you carry a shileld on your right and you get hit from your left, you get no deflection" translate into that?

"mostly ok" doesn't equal "unscathed" and "undebilitated"

It does when you can survive arrows,swordstrikes and firestorms just by boosting dex and con

Well considering the apearence of the flames atleast 1,800 °F,The same,The average lightning bolt contains 1 billion volts so I'd reckon around that,most likely.

Yes I can in saying metal armor would be wortless against it.

Misread your post then regardless if a couple of arrow hits don't cripple or kill you you're superhuman.


 

[Giant ambush beetle]

prostheticlimbs wrote...

I read this whole thread. I regret all of my life choices, thank you for asking. Now: We're talking about realism. In a fantasy game. A game that has dwarves, elves, magic, and strange creatures.

Realism.

In Dragon Age. I can't. I hope I never come back to this place.

I love it how people always fail to understand the difference between believability and realism. No wait, ''love'' is the wrong word, ''hate'' it is.

I don't have no problems with the ''fantasy'' in fantasy games, I have a problem with armor and design choices that make no goddamn sense, thats what breaks the game for me. Last time I checked fantasy didn't mean throwing logic over board.

Modifié par The Woldan , 10 octobre 2013 - 11:02 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Appropriate armor:



http://img203.images...4/chainmail.jpg

http://www.commissio.../2005-08-12.jpg

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 10 octobre 2013 - 01:19 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
"mostly ok" doesn't equal "unscathed" and "undebilitated"

Soem did survive unschated.
And b.t.w. - when you get hit in the game with lighting, you DO take damage (a lot of it) so your point is moot, becuase unless therei s magic resistance involed, you dont' get out unschated.

It does when you can survive arrows,swordstrikes and firestorms just by boosting dex and con

How does "I survived one hit from that" make armor pointless?
I can survive being stabbled with a sword (if I'm lucky and it misses my vitals). That doesn't make armor pointless.

Well considering the apearence of the flames atleast 1,800 °F,The same,The average lightning bolt contains 1 billion volts so I'd reckon around that,most likely.

Apperance is irrelevant in this context and your guess is just that - a guess.

Misread your post then regardless if a couple of arrow hits don't cripple or kill you you're superhuman.

I would all depend on where they hit you, wouldn't it?
There are accounts of people getting shot 30 times and surviving. THIRTY TIMES.

[Vilegrim]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...


"mostly ok" doesn't equal "unscathed" and "undebilitated"

It does when you can survive arrows,swordstrikes and firestorms just by boosting dex and con

1)Well considering the apearence of the flames atleast 1,800 °F,The same,The average lightning bolt contains 1 billion volts so I'd reckon around that,most likely.

Yes I can in saying metal armor would be wortless against it.

2)Misread your post then regardless if a couple of arrow hits don't cripple or kill you you're superhuman.


 

1) Created by magic and certainly don't behave as if the have that high a tempretaure of voltage (for instance the mage doesn't cook his hand to the bone whne he cast firball, or burst his eyeballs when channeling lightning) so appearances are deceptive.

But yes metal armour would be (and is in game stated to be) worthless against magic, so what?  You can go play your game with people in chainmail underwear firing AKs out of their arses, while summoning LSD monsters and raping angels, you have most RPGs from the last 10 years for that, please leave at least one game that does not require high grade drug addiction to get suspension of disbelief in.


2) i narmor? Nope, unless the archer got real lucky you are fine and closing on him fast.
as show nere: 

Modifié par Vilegrim, 10 octobre 2013 - 11:56 .

[Mistress9Nine]

I prefer aesthetic gear to real gear or over the top gear. But they can sometimes overlap. As long as there are tiaras, I don't care.

[Squire]

Why not the characters are already superhuman and the armor already
magical why try to make the game's armor and weapons conform sorely  to
your aesthetic preference?

Because I want my character to be an ordinary person who becomes a hero through great deeds, not a superhero who becomes a hero by having speshul powarz.

If you're already a superhero, what's the point in becoming a hero?

I don't read Marvel/DC comics, so I'm not into the whole "superhero" thing. My favourite characters in Lord of the Rings aren't the Aragorns and Gandalfs but the Faramirs and Beregonds - the people who aren't of ancient bloodlines with special powers.

And before you state the obvious, magic in this game is a discipline that has to be learned, and people who learn it have to sacrifice something for it. I can accept its existence for that reason: it's not a thing that everybody has, and the people who do have it still have to learn it, and become less capable in other areas because of it, and they still have plenty of weaknesses that other classes don't have, so they're still not superhuman. It's like Superman, but with only one power, that he has to spend his whole life in training to acquire.

[Iakus]

Squire wrote...

Why not the characters are already superhuman and the armor already
magical why try to make the game's armor and weapons conform sorely  to
your aesthetic preference?

Because I want my character to be an ordinary person who becomes a hero through great deeds, not a superhero who becomes a hero by having speshul powarz.

If you're already a superhero, what's the point in becoming a hero?

I don't read Marvel/DC comics, so I'm not into the whole "superhero" thing. My favourite characters in Lord of the Rings aren't the Aragorns and Gandalfs but the Faramirs and Beregonds - the people who aren't of ancient bloodlines with special powers.

And before you state the obvious, magic in this game is a discipline that has to be learned, and people who learn it have to sacrifice something for it. I can accept its existence for that reason: it's not a thing that everybody has, and the people who do have it still have to learn it, and become less capable in other areas because of it, and they still have plenty of weaknesses that other classes don't have, so they're still not superhuman. It's like Superman, but with only one power, that he has to spend his whole life in training to acquire.

Bah, Sam Gamgee was the true hero!  The only RIngbearer to give up the One Ring without needing serious convincing if not outright force

Besides, it takes serious guts to go after a spider the size of a small car when you're the size of a five year old and armed only with a knife and a glass of water

But yes, I agree with the sentiment.  I find weapons and armor look best where its function is clear in purpose.  Where the weapon fits the bearer. Not bizarrely oversized and covered in spikes that look to threaten the wielder as much as the enemy.  

[Fardreamer]

The distinction between realism and believability is also silly. If you can't believe that a rogue would wear a sexy/revealing outfit to distract her opponents in battle, or a mage would wear scraps of cloth to show her sexuality and confidence, then your imagination is small, and you have no business playing fantasy games built around using your imagination.

I'm not talking about plate armor that's low cut or exposes the midriff. Those have never been a part of Dragon Age. But many of the female armors in DA2 were form fitting in ways that displayed the curves of the body. (Think Meridith's armor, not Avalene's)

[AresKeith]

Fardreamer wrote...

The distinction between realism and believability is also silly. If you can't believe that a rogue would wear a sexy/revealing outfit to distract her opponents in battle, or a mage would wear scraps of cloth to show her sexuality and confidence, then your imagination is small, and you have no business playing fantasy games built around using your imagination.

I'm not talking about plate armor that's low cut or exposes the midriff. Those have never been a part of Dragon Age. But many of the female armors in DA2 were form fitting in ways that displayed the curves of the body. (Think Meridith's armor, not Avalene's)

Just admit you like seeing female characters in sexy outfits

Because that's what your basically saying or just trolling now

[cjones91]

I have no problem with over the top armor and weapons as long as they don't look ridiculus.

[Fardreamer]

AresKeith wrote...

Fardreamer wrote...

The distinction between realism and believability is also silly. If you can't believe that a rogue would wear a sexy/revealing outfit to distract her opponents in battle, or a mage would wear scraps of cloth to show her sexuality and confidence, then your imagination is small, and you have no business playing fantasy games built around using your imagination.

I'm not talking about plate armor that's low cut or exposes the midriff. Those have never been a part of Dragon Age. But many of the female armors in DA2 were form fitting in ways that displayed the curves of the body. (Think Meridith's armor, not Avalene's)

Just admit you like seeing female characters in sexy outfits

Because that's what your basically saying or just trolling now

Of course I like seeing female characters in sexy outfits.... I thought that was obvious.  I don't play fantasy video games for realism.

[Absafraginlootly]

I like fantastical weapons and armor, I don't like HUGE weapons and armor that make my character look like they're going to fall over.

Fantasy armor/weapons does not necessarily equal huge and spiky. Smaller less insane armor/weapons does not necessarily equal boring and/or realistic armor (not that realistic armor has to be boring).

There is a huge expanse of armor art between totally realistic and 'aargh I"m falling over!'

I think we can have armor that is cool/pretty/fantastical and looks like it could actually protect our character without it having to be totally realistic.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Fadedreamer, I don't think anyone here is arguing that you shouldn't be able to equip your character any way you like - which included chainmail bikinis. After all, history is full of silly and impractical (and ultimatively failed) things people made.

What people here are arguing that chainmail bikinis should SUCK stat-wise.

[Squire]

Absafraginlootly wrote...

I like fantastical weapons and armor, I don't like HUGE weapons and armor that make my character look like they're going to fall over.

Fantasy armor/weapons does not necessarily equal huge and spiky. Smaller less insane armor/weapons does not necessarily equal boring and/or realistic armor (not that realistic armor has to be boring).

QFT!

From what I've seen, it doesn't look to be too much of a problem anyway... in a video, the woman's pauldrons are reasonably sized, and the two-handed sword is about the right size for a two-hander (yeah...you can see why they didn't last very long, can't you? ;-) ).

[Lotion Soronarr]

Tell em whet's the first thing you notice here:

http://redlea.net/co.../zweihander.jpg

http://www.algonet.s...useum/zwei2.jpg

They are not big and fat.

[Angrywolves]

I doubt there will be over the top gear/sexualized stuff.
The romances being nuanced, there's no need for audacious displays of skin.
Technologically, I hope the shops/ peddlers will have new gear at periodic intervals.

[Magdalena11]

Yes, new gear will be welcomed with gusto.

[Fardreamer]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Fadedreamer, I don't think anyone here is arguing that you shouldn't be able to equip your character any way you like - which included chainmail bikinis. After all, history is full of silly and impractical (and ultimatively failed) things people made.

What people here are arguing that chainmail bikinis should SUCK stat-wise.

I'm not so sure about that.  Maybe the armor values should be lower, but any gear that magically makes you stronger, faster, etc obviously does so through magic.  So even bikini armor could have the same stats.

I actually doubt there will be much in the way of sexy armor.  The only sexy armor I can think of has been Morrigan and Isabella's.  But it doesn't hurt to ask for more

[Squire]

Did Morrigan have armour? I didn't think she did, since she was a caster. Dunno about Isabella, because I didn't play DA2.

I'm actually thinking now that it'd be kind of funny if they included a mail bikini as a joke (but made it so useless that nobody would actually use it...maybe it can be a cursed item or sth! XD )

[Cyberstrike nTo]

Snowflake_in_Hel wrote...

There does seem to be a trend in modern games to make armor and weapons completely unrealistic, perhaps that is because the modern gamer needs to feel "invincible"? Is that true for you?  Do you need an axe that is three times too large to feel "cool"?  Do you need a two handed sword that is taller than you are to feel "tough"?  Is it more important for you to have armor that is totally over the top, or are you the kind that has a little respect for realism? 

Perhaps realism is just something that falls by the wayside where RPG games are concerned.

I am curious, just wondering.

 

Wassail.  
Snjarulfr.
werwulf.




 

I play games to escape from reality not dwell in it, if I want reality I'll watch the news. So IMO for video games realism is vastly overrated. When you have fire breathing dragons, elves, magic, demons, and so on reality went out the window. I don't give a damn if an armor is over-the-top as long as it protects my character (and doesn't look too stupid) or if a weapon is used in an unrealistic mannor as long as that weapon kills the enemies in my character's way.
I have no problems with reality-based games but I've ZERO interest to play a total 100% true reality sim that is just a waste my time and money.