I was replying to someone that said that no median could exist, and then said they preferred quasi realistic armour. This confused me.
Combing elements of real armour that never, in reality where mixed is fine, (so Lorica full plate ala oblivion for instance), or plate and scale ala Lannisters, boob windows or huge amounts of spikes on other wise functional armour looks...wrong (unless we are talking warhammer which gets grandfathered in on the I liked it when I was 10 pass.)
As far my own personal preferences go, I tend to prefer armor designs that range from near exact copies of historical armors to designs that combine historical details with a dose of artistic license but still look practical.
I tend to dislike armor designs when they shed all practicality and expose more skin than they cover, or are so bulky (pauldrons of massive ridiculousness) or have odd design features like random spikes jutting out everywhere, that the design should be more of a hindrance to the person wearing it than a form of protection.
I also think that both historical designs and fantasy designs that preserve practicality can also look visually appealing, and usually do look better than the more outlandish designs. Appearance versus function is bit of a false dilemma. Why not both?
I think you need a bit of both. This being fantasy I want to look cool and be able to see the differences between the races craftsmen styles.
Pleasing to the eye sometimes in dragon age games I've put on weaker sets of armor becuase they looked cooler
I personally think this is one of those situations that can be a win-win situation for the developers. Why can't there be both? I myself prefer a quite conservative approach to armour and weapons but I know there are people out there who want to wear the most ridiculous hats and armour they can. Thats fine.
This can be done I feel, without creating thousands of different armour peices. Maybe 15 of each conservative/ extravagant. That way you satisfy the extroverts and also the people who would rather not walk around feeling like a ******.
I personally think this is one of those situations that can be a win-win situation for the developers. Why can't there be both?
Because NPCs wear armour too. And a muddle of different styles on them will just leave your game looking a mess.
My favorite set of armor well robes honestly of all time is leliana's robes in the inquisition trailer when she's on the right of the inquisitor when the inquisition is gathered by the table I hope thats obtainable. One thing about armor though that can be a turn off is if it's pleasing to the eye but extremely weak to the point of unbelief.
That wigned helm is based on the Prankhe helm ... which can be seen at the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nürnberg It is a real helm.
So good for you for finding pictures of armor that are both pretty and practical. How about attempting an archetype that's actually difficult? A seductive character? A cat thief? A notive who would probably look out of place wearing heavy armor? A prostitute? A druid or a priest? A criminal? A barbarian?
Here are some of my favorites (female armors, that is) that, in my opinion, are practical and aesthetically pleasing. Biggest issue is the long flowing hair in all of them.
Can be both. Realistic (can actually defend you) with nice design and colors.
Dat Ravine armor looks properly done.
I think there can be a happy medium between the two. This armor is obviously meant to be more ornamental, but still has the same style as armor you would actually risk fighting in.
Really just anything but battle bikini's and giant boob window armor, they look terrible (my personal opinion of course).
I think there can be a happy medium between the two. This armor is obviously meant to be more ornamental, but still has the same style as armor you would actually risk fighting in.
Really just anything but battle bikini's and giant boob window armor, they look terrible (my personal opinion of course).
See, again, this is an example of armour I find unbearably ugly. It's not just not aesthetically pleasing, it's actively displeasing (for me). The fact that it's really pimped out armour doesn't change how unappealing it is visually.
See, again, this is an example of armour I find unbearably ugly. It's not just not aesthetically pleasing, it's actively displeasing (for me). The fact that it's really pimped out armour doesn't change how unappealing it is visually.
It's only something I'd like to see a little bit of for tanky plate users, not all characters. I think the Witcher 2 did a great job with lighter armors and clothing that would be nice to see a bit of as well. There is no right answer to be had in this thread anyways since it's all personal preference.
Anyways, do you have an example of armor that you enjoy?
(Sorry if you posted one already, I only lightly skimmed the thread.)
I'm going to be shallow and say I want my armour to be pretty. If I'm going to be staring at my character for 80+ hours of gameplay they might as well look nice. That being said, I don't want to disregard practicality completely. I'd prefer armour to be fitted rather than clunky, mobility has to be a key issue, surely. The kind of knights that wore heavy armour tended to fight from horseback rather than do anything strenuous on foot if I remember rightly. Infantry need to be able to keep up their strength for long periods of time, so fitted chain mail would be more appropriate I think. For characters which rely on agility, fitted leathers might be more appropriate- affording less protection but still viable, and giving a great range of movement. Then if you can spice those up with pretty designs, well happy days 
In reality, I'll be happy with whatever I get. I'm easily pleased.
Can be both. Realistic (can actually defend you) with nice design and colors.
Dat Ravine armor looks properly done.
That's what I was thinking as well. Why not both? 
See, again, this is an example of armour I find unbearably ugly. It's not just not aesthetically pleasing, it's actively displeasing (for me). The fact that it's really pimped out armour doesn't change how unappealing it is visually.
By any chance do you prefer this?
Anyway I'm pro-historic-styles. I don't like punk styles.
I think there can be a happy medium between the two. This armor is obviously meant to be more ornamental, but still has the same style as armor you would actually risk fighting in.
Really just anything but battle bikini's and giant boob window armor, they look terrible (my personal opinion of course).
Yeah I'm with Exile, that's just waaay too busily engraved.
Full plate armour as you exemplified in your post was not, historically, used by front-line infantry. For warfare purposes, it was only used by musketeering brigades, who wouldn't need to move. They didn't even load their own rifles; each soldier had one person responsible for loading and handing them the rifles. Warriors facing each-other in close combat would, at most, wear plate pieces strapped onto a mail and leather armour, but most importantly they would keep the joints flexible.
Keeping that in mind, I had no problem with my warrior Wardens wearing the heaviest full plate armours in DAO. Suspension of disbelief in a game like that isn't that hard. There are many more concessions, and more glaring ones, that I make to immerse myself; one more isn't that hard.
What? Muskets?
Full plate armour as you exemplified in your post was not, historically, used by front-line infantry. For warfare purposes, it was only used by musketeering brigades, who wouldn't need to move. They didn't even load their own rifles; each soldier had one person responsible for loading and handing them the rifles. Warriors facing each-other in close combat would, at most, wear plate pieces strapped onto a mail and leather armour, but most importantly they would keep the joints flexible.
Keeping that in mind, I had no problem with my warrior Wardens wearing the heaviest full plate armours in DAO. Suspension of disbelief in a game like that isn't that hard. There are many more concessions, and more glaring ones, that I make to immerse myself; one more isn't that hard.
The polite term is citation needed. So please provide one, preferably several. I have seen no source that makes the claims you are, and having worn plate armour I can tell you it is easier to move in than chain because it spread the load better. You can do hand stands in full harness if you really want to, press ups a full aerobic work out https://www.youtube....h?v=xm11yAXeegg
https://www.youtube....h?v=zvCvOC2VwDc
In other words sir, you are wrong.
I just don't know why he started talking about muskets. We're not playing "front-line infantry" either? 
Because NPCs wear armour too. And a muddle of different styles on them will just leave your game looking a mess.
Seriously, if you're going to quote me, at least have the decency to read my post properly. At no point did I mention mixing two styles together. I was referring to making x amount of visually symetrical armour sets and x amount of non symetrical armour sets.
It's entirely subjective. What looks good to you? Do you prefer visibly symmetrical or asymmetrical armor? Do you like the realistic look? What if the "realistic" look isn't actually realistic?
It's really hard to say, but I like to think that Bioware does a pretty job of creating a variety of looks. For myself, I just need the armor to look like I can fight in it. Visible weight isn't important, but flexibility is. If any section of armor looks like it would pinch, hurt, or otherwise interfere with certain bodily movements, it's not for me. I flipping hate spikes -- they get caught on everything.
Yeah I'm with Exile, that's just waaay too busily engraved.
No. The point of this armor is to confuse and distract the enemy by its particularity. The owner doesn't look at it much!
Retour en haut
