429 réponses à ce sujet

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Yea sure, it's fine if it's ornamental, Romans had abs and nipples after all, they just weren't molded in. (though having things smooth and angled would help things glance off yes?)

[Inprea]

Yea sure, it's fine if it's ornamental, Romans had abs and nipples after all, they just weren't molded in. (though having things smooth and angled would help things glance off yes?)

Smooth rounded curves are better for distributing forces and redirecting energy then sharp corners yes. In general the sharper the corner the more it serves to concentrate the force in a given area. This is good for a weapon. All the sword of the swing and weight of the weapon focused on a single hard edge. It's bad for armor though. Well good for weapons in terms of letting them cut things naturally the sharper the edge the more you have to do to maintain it.

[BrotherDragon2]

What I would like is to be able to see a difference in enemies who are wearing higher level armor. In DA:2 you can easily tell if a companion is wearing red steel armor because of its color. Enemies unfortunately always look the same no matter what level they are.
______________________________
"I'm trying to think but nothin' happens" -Jerome "Curly" Howard

[Lucy Glitter]

How did you get geralt in such nice armour? Everything I could find in game were mostly just thick clothes.

 

I don't think it's in the game only the promos. 

[Giantdeathrobot]

I was *mostly* okay with how Isabela dressed because she is a pirate. Pirates wouldn't be heavily armored because they are sailors, and in the age of sail that involved lots of hard work that armor would interfere with. At most maybe she should have been wearing pants or leggings and if any armor at all, nothing heavier than a light leather jerkin.,

 

Which was kinda ruined by the mountain of jewelry she had on top of her massive tracts of land. Isabela's attire is in no way practical for combat.

[In Exile]

Which was kinda ruined by the mountain of jewelry she had on top of her massive tracts of land. Isabela's attire is in no way practical for combat.

 

That's just their way of fixing the whole neck-body issue that they have. Though I suppose they could have just used a choker. 

[Han Shot First]

Which was kinda ruined by the mountain of jewelry she had on top of her massive tracts of land. Isabela's attire is in no way practical for combat.

 

She is a pirate. Pirates like bling.

 

I'm not saying there weren't some issues with her appearance in DA2. The lack of pants for instance...

 

But I also don't think she needed to be armored up much. Like mages, it kind of made sense that she wouldn't be.

[Das Tentakel]

I don't think it's in the game only the promos. 

 

There are Mods for this; I think this is actually from a Mod.

[ladyofpayne]

For me ideal fantasy armor was in Discipes 3. It looks beautiful but realistic

[simpatikool]

I always have preferred a middle of the road approach. Though, I have been known to prefer armor sets that look marvelous over those that have amazing stats.

[ladyofpayne]

ok?  I don't find that armor attractive, but better that than this:

 

There is only one place for that.

[Maeshone]

In a game like Dragon Age, or at least Dragon Age II, which had a very distinct and stylized artstyle, I think the aesthetics should be the number one priority when designing armor, as long as the armor seems at least somewhat protective as well. That rules out boobplates and chainmail bikinis.

 

For example, I am a big fan of the Stonehammer plate from DAII

 

But I also really liked the design of the Armor of the Champion, as I felt that it fit the general aesthetic of DAII

 

 

For other armors that I like, I can point to The Witcher 2, which also had an armor design consistent with it's own world, and my favourite example would be the Vran Armor

 

Lastly, judging by what we've seen so far from Inquisition, I am quite confident that there'll be armors that I enjoy at least, as the armor in this picture looks absolutely stunning to me.

 

[Pateu]

I ran with this during Dragon Age:Origins and DLC.

 

Loved it.

 

[Vilegrim]

 

 

Lastly, judging by what we've seen so far from Inquisition, I am quite confident that there'll be armors that I enjoy at least, as the armor in this picture looks absolutely stunning to me.

 

  Don't like it, don't hate it either..so call it a meh I guess?

[Stiler]

One thing I noticed in DA:O/2 is the pauldrons, what is with them? Some of them look like they have one too many pieces to them on the top for the haute piece.

 

The last thing you want with pauldrons is to have a part that sticks straight out at a sharp angle, where a sword or something can easily "catch" it, you want the blows to glance off. 

 

Even pauldrons that had haute pieces (the flanges that go up near the neck on some pauldrons) they were rounded and not a very sharp angle and they weren't a huge piece attached to the top. They usually just had one flange that went up to protect the neck area, no other part went out from the side (like straight out from your shoulder)

 

See:

http://www.pinterest...27634049983820/

https://www.flickr.c...oog/4472327514/

 

 It seems in DA when armour has a haute piece it's a very large "extra" piece added on top of a normal looking pauldron and usually has a part sticking straight out at a 90 degree angle.

 

See the Witcher 2 pick with Geralt in his Vran armor that Maeshone posted, his pauldron has a haute piece but it doesn't have the extra part sticking istraight out of the side nor is it a large piece stacked on top of the pauldron.

 

Hopefully there's some good "sleek" pauldrons in DA:I, even if they have a haute piece they don't have to be big.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

those are so pretty. See to me realistic and pleasing to the eye are definitely not an "or"

[AkiKishi]

Bound By Flame has a very good armour system. 

 

https://www.flickr.c...in/photostream/

 

 

 

Start around 1:05 for the armour.

[Das Tentakel]

One thing I noticed in DA:O/2 is the pauldrons, what is with them? Some of them look like they have one too many pieces to them on the top for the haute piece.

 
That is just generic / mainstream fantasy armour design. You find similar double / triple / quadruple etc. pauldrons all over Fantasyland.
 

 

 

 
The same applies to my personal object of hatred, the sideward (rather than forward) faulds and / or tassets.
 
I am not sure when they became popular among fantasy illustrators ('copying is easy, research and creative thinking are hard'), but you can see examples already in D&D 3E art. I don't remember seeing it on older generic art by, say, Larry Elmore, so something happened in the '90s. Maybe there was something in the water.

Minor edit:

 

Here's an example of 'older' elaborate fantasy armour (I think it's from Dragonlance and is by Larry Elmore). The spike has made its entry, but it's not over the top by modern standards. The leaflike tassets are on the side, rather than forward. The rot has started here, but hasn't advanced very far. In a generic fantasy game (Two Worlds or Divinity series, Dragon Age) I actually wouldn't mind something like this.

It would, however, stick out like an Ent with Christmas tree decoration in The Witcher, Game of Thrones or anything based on the books of, say, Joe Abercrombie, Judith Tarr, Lois McMaster-Bujold, Guy Gavriel Kay etc.

[AkiKishi]

It's the anime/JRPG influence. 

[Deflagratio]

 

 

If this concept art is indicative of the final look, I honestly have no complaints about the compromise between believable and stylized, but I'm easy to please.

[Vilegrim]

 
That is just generic / mainstream fantasy armour design. You find similar double / triple / quadruple etc. pauldrons all over Fantasyland.
 
*snipped images*
 

 

 
The same applies to my personal object of hatred, the sideward (rather than forward) faulds and / or tassets.
 
I am not sure when they became popular among fantasy illustrators ('copying is easy, research and creative thinking are hard'), but you can see examples already in D&D 3E art. I don't remember seeing it on older generic art by, say, Larry Elmore, so something happened in the '90s. Maybe there was something in the water.

Minor edit:

 

 

Here's an example of 'older' elaborate fantasy armour (I think it's from Dragonlance and is by Larry Elmore). The spike has made its entry, but it's not over the top by modern standards. The leaflike tassets are on the side, rather than forward. The rot has started here, but hasn't advanced very far. In a generic fantasy game (Two Worlds or Divinity series, Dragon Age) I actually wouldn't mind something like this.

It would, however, stick out like an Ent with Christmas tree decoration in The Witcher, Game of Thrones or anything based on the books of, say, Joe Abercrombie, Judith Tarr, Lois McMaster-Bujold, Guy Gavriel Kay etc.

 

 

Faulds go all the way round that is kinda the point, on the tassets front, I am absolutely convinced I have seem some real examples that protected the sides of the legs, with a fauld protecting the front: The search commences.

[Das Tentakel]

Faulds go all the way round that is kinda the point, on the tassets front, I am absolutely convinced I have seem some real examples that protected the sides of the legs, with a fauld protecting the front: The search commences.

 

Faulds either protect all sides or are merely on the front; I don't think I've seen actual armour where they only protect the sides.

The same applies to tassets: they do occur on the sides (particularly the case with lamellar tassets on samurai armour), but the front (side of the legs) takes priority, for obvious reasons.

 

This is a very basic design, already known from archaic hoplite armour.

 

 

What you will not see (at least not very often, 99% but not 100% sure) is faulds or tassets just protecting the sides of the upper legs, and nothing in front. As in these DA armors (and many more from DA and other fantasy CRPG's):

 

 

Family jewels and the enemy usually coming in from the front side, and all that. Not a problem in some parts of Fantasyland, apparently.

[Vilegrim]

Faulds either protect all sides or are merely on the front; I don't think I've seen actual armour where they only protect the sides.

The same applies to tassets: they do occur on the sides (particularly the case with lamellar tassets on samurai armour), but the front (side of the legs) takes priority, for obvious reasons.

 

This is a very basic design, already known from archaic hoplite armour.

 

 

What you will not see (at least not very often, 99% but not 100% sure) is faulds or tassets just protecting the sides of the upper legs, and nothing in front. As in these DA armors (and many more from DA and other fantasy CRPG's):

 

 

Family jewels and the enemy usually coming in from the front side, and all that. Not a problem in some parts of Fantasyland, apparently.

 

you could give the Grey Warden set a 'that might be Brigandine pass' but it does look like the Templar set is based on cavalry armour.

 

 

Like so:

 

Henry the VIII feared no nut shots apparently, and the degree of articulation on that armour is mind blowing.

 

https://www.youtube....mYgo_ukMnv4b3QT

 

40minutes in approx for someone daring to wear Henry the VIIIs armour.  The articulation and movement on the armour is masterful, the insides of the joints have articulated, overlapping plates, leaving no gaps...

[Das Tentakel]

you could give the Grey Warden set a 'that might be Brigandine pass' but it does look like the Templar set is based on cavalry armour.
 
 
Like so:
 
Henry the VIII feared no nut shots apparently, and the degree of articulation on that armour is mind blowing.

The DA armours with sideways faulds / tassets are not based on cavalry armour, but other fantasy armour. You can trace it back at least to D&D3E (and possibly before) and videogames like the first Guild Wars game, Prophecies (2005)



 
The armour you posted has faulds oriented towards front and side. The unarmoured parts - including the Tudor family jewels - are protected by the horse and the saddle (particularly the family jewels). The 'gap' in front is still relatively narrow and is basically analogous to slits in other cavalry armour like long mailshirts. That is not the same as just ´having the stuff only on the sides´. There are plenty of paintings of,  and surviving examples of, cavalry  armours where you can clearly see this . With 16th/17th century infantry armour or armour for fighting tournaments on foot any gaps are smaller still, of course, or have received some additional protection.

 

 
 

 

Perhaps, once, in the dim and almost-forgotten eighties, there was a fantasy illustrator who looked at some 16th or 17th century armour and tried to depict this 'in front', but ended up with a gap that was waaaaaay too large. But then it was copied, and copied again, and again, ad infinitum. Nobody did a reality check and noticed that the front sides of the upper legs are no longer adequately protected, which is pretty much the main reason for the existence of faulds and tassets. The front takes priority.
 
P.S. I hope you´re not referring to the rightmost DA armour as being a brigandine, because I don´t know what it is but it´s basically ´meh. we really couldn´t bother and just cooked something up´ armour.

 

Having said all this, DA is a generic / mainstream fantasy gaming franchise mainly descended from D&D and its offshoots, and as such, 100% 'believable' armour would be nice but isn't really needed. One might even argue it would be somewhat out of place.

Then again, a bit of sensible self-control and good taste is never amiss...