144 réponses à ce sujet

[CENIC]

If I had my personal preference, the only weapons slung across the back would be two-handers, staves and bows.
Swords and daggers would be sheathed at the hip and shields would be worn on the arm.

And every weapon would have some sort of visible sling, sheath, or strapping while sheathed that would seamlessly blend with whatever armor the character was wearing.

Obviously, BioWare either doesn't have the resources for such a feat, or there are technical limitations with Frostbite. Or both.

I'm kinda hoping for mods. Skyrim has some pretty cool ones for sheath positioning, that also changes the "draw weapon" and "sheathe weapon" anims to fit.

[GoldenAbel]

I finish a playthrough when I have nothing else to do with that character. My most rewarding playthrough of DAO ended when the PC was killed by Sten for being a self-absorbed little jerk. I ran out of things to do in DA2 right at the start of Act 3.

But often I'll replay a game without finishing a playthrough. I've played through the first 3 chapters of Baldur's Gate probably 20 times, but I've never seen chapter 6.

Different players play differently. We can't look at a list of achievements and from those presume anything about player behaviour.

Incidentally, I intensely dislike achievements. I would turn them off, if I could.

I'm not saying that's a wrong way to play but the fact as it is, is that you, me and a lot of the people of the forums are people that love finishing and talking about the whole experience. But do we represent the majority? 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm not saying that's a wrong way to play but the fact as it is, is that you, me and a lot of the people of the forums are people that love finishing and talking about the whole experience. But do we represent the majority?

The majority doesn't exist. We are all merely a collection of individuals, each acting independently.

[Schreckstoff]

The majority doesn't exist. We are all merely a collection of individuals, each acting independently.

So I guess society doesn't exist either...

[Sylvius the Mad]

So I guess society doesn't exist either...

Of course it doesn't.

[KaiserShep]

I replay games a lot more often than I finish them.

 

And we likely don't share a common definition of "finish" in this context.

 

There's really only two definitions anyway: finish as in turn off the system when you're done with it, regardless of how far in the game you are, and finish as in completed the actual story of the game.

[Schreckstoff]

Of course it doesn't.

And neither does herd mentality and any of the other mechanisms making human behaviour much less independent than humans want to admit/believe.

[Sylvius the Mad]

And neither does herd mentality and any of the other mechanisms making human behaviour much less independent than humans want to admit/believe.

Herd mentality is an individual characteristic.  It affects individuals making decisions.  Each of them abrogates responsibility for his choices to the aggregate around him.

 

Each of us makes choices for himself.  If you buy a sandwich, it is because you think you benefit from doing it.  If you vote, it is because you think you benefit from doing it.  If you recycle, it is because you think you benefit from doing it.  And each of us is wholly responsible for those choices.

[Sylvius the Mad]

There's really only two definitions anyway: finish as in turn off the system when you're done with it, regardless of how far in the game you are, and finish as in completed the actual story of the game.

What constitutes "the actual story"?

I suggest it is the sum total of what occurs within the game world. That includes backstory you imagine, off-screen events you invent, and the PC's thoughts and motivations, which are controlled exclusively by you, the player.

What definition are you using, and why? What special privilege do you grant the authored narrative as compared to the emergent narrative?

[Schreckstoff]

Herd mentality is an individual characteristic. It affects individuals making decisions. Each of them abrogates responsibility for his choices to the aggregate around him.

Each of us makes choices for himself. If you buy a sandwich, it is because you think you benefit from doing it. If you vote, it is because you think you benefit from doing it. If you recycle, it is because you think you benefit from doing it. And each of us is wholly responsible for those choices.

Multiple individuals still form a group with its own behaviour. You can say that this behaviour is simply the influence of the group on the individual's choices but that doesn't disregard the existence of either.

We aren't wholly responsible for every choice we make for ourselves. There are many circumstances under which part of the responsibility is pushed on someone else.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Multiple individuals still form a group with its own behaviour. You can say that this behaviour is simply the influence of the group on the individual's choices but that doesn't disregard the existence of either.

We aren't wholly responsible for every choice we make for ourselves. There are many circumstances under which part of the responsibility is pushed on someone else.

I completely reject that.  Everything you do, you do.

 

What you've done may be different based on circumstances, but you still did it.

[Schreckstoff]

I completely reject that. Everything you do, you do.

What you've done may be different based on circumstances, but you still did it.

Good thing you're no judge.

[KaiserShep]

What constitutes "the actual story"?

I suggest it is the sum total of what occurs within the game world. That includes backstory you imagine, off-screen events you invent, and the PC's thoughts and motivations, which are controlled exclusively by you, the player.

What definition are you using, and why? What special privilege do you grant the authored narrative as compared to the emergent narrative?

 

The "actual story" would be the series of events, and by "events", I mean the fixed plot points that lead up to the game's resolution, and by "resolution", I mean the eventual solution to the primary conflict written into its content. I gather from this stuff about "special privilege" when it comes to the fixed story of the game that this is not going to go anywhere fast.

[Allan Schumacher]

Philosophy and Sociology discussions can go to off topic forum please.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The "actual story" would be the series of events, and by "events", I mean the fixed plot points that lead up to the game's resolution, and by "resolution", I mean the eventual solution to the primary conflict written into its content. I gather from this stuff about "special privilege" when it comes to the fixed story of the game that this is not going to go anywhere fast.

I think that's a needlessly narrow definition.

My point here is that we should be careful when interpreting gameplay data, because we don't know what that data means to the players that generated it.

[Gabdube]

Do you really think it's their artistic vision or something that weapons must float? Do you think they wouldn't do it if they could because it just wouldn't occur to them without someone telling?

If they really can't make weapons that don't float on your back without gimping gameplay/story/level design, then we have a problem.

Look, we know it's a question of priorities. That's the reason why people are asking to reconsider those priorities.

A sheath for swords and daggers is much more important to a lot of people than, for example, the complex visual effect of rocks sticking to the body of a mage who casts rock armor...

I mean, fewer puddles, bushes and piles of rubble would be a very reasonable tradeoff for, at least, sensible weapon placement (at the waist).

 

[...] Generally speaking the argument is that in real life, you'd need a sword sheath in order to safely carry your sword hands free. That's true. But in the same line of thinking, we're playing around in a fictional world with magic and dragons, neither of which exist in real life. So it's really not that terribly hard to suspend belief when it comes via sheaths vrs no sheaths.

 

In the same line of thinking that people don't tend to have hair that is plastic and unmoving. Mind you not all hair moves in the same ways that other hair might. While it's nice to have "tress fx" because it looks more realistic, it's also costly and a resource hog that I would rather be spent anywhere else - up to and including gameplay itself. [...]

The "magic fantasy world" argument doesn't explain why you can have humans prancing around with gigantic steel paddles without them being "magical fantasy super-humans". Dragon Age tries hard to be darker and edgier in order to be taken seriously. A large part of that atmosphere is the result of having humanoid characters we can relate to, who can fuel our willing suspension of disbelief. However, those believable characters are also a potention weak point in the immersiveness of that fantasy world, as we expect them to function much as real-world humans do. And a real-world human can't possibly draw a 100-pound 6-handed oar sword from his back without having a very very weird skeleton.

The back-hovering anime-style weapons and armor designs (dem pauldrons) are working against the strengths of this franchise.

As for needing a sheath to safely carry a bladed weapon, it mostly depends on the weapon. The only thing that war swords and dress swords have in common is the fact that they weren't very sharp, just pointy. Battle-ready longswords were ofen used as warhammers, grabbed at mid-blade to bash in plate helmets. Their scabbard was to protect the blade from damage and corrosion, not so much the wearer.

[Mirrman70]

If they really can't make weapons that don't float on your back without gimping gameplay/story/level design, then we have a problem.

Look, we know it's a question of priorities. That's the reason why people are asking to reconsider those priorities.

A sheath for swords and daggers is much more important to a lot of people than, for example, the complex visual effect of rocks sticking to the body of a mage who casts rock armor...

I mean, fewer puddles, bushes and piles of rubble would be a very reasonable tradeoff for, at least, sensible weapon placement (at the waist).

 

The "magic fantasy world" argument doesn't explain why you can have humans prancing around with gigantic steel paddles without them being "magical fantasy super-humans". Dragon Age tries hard to be darker and edgier in order to be taken seriously. A large part of that atmosphere is the result of having humanoid characters we can relate to, who can fuel our willing suspension of disbelief. However, those believable characters are also a potention weak point in the immersiveness of that fantasy world, as we expect them to function much as real-world humans do. And a real-world human can't possibly draw a 100-pound 6-handed oar sword from his back without having a very very weird skeleton.

The back-hovering anime-style weapons and armor designs (dem pauldrons) are working against the strengths of this franchise.

As for needing a sheath to safely carry a bladed weapon, it mostly depends on the weapon. The only thing that war swords and dress swords have in common is the fact that they weren't very sharp, just pointy. Battle-ready longswords were ofen used as warhammers, grabbed at mid-blade to bash in plate helmets. Their scabbard was to protect the blade from damage and corrosion, not so much the wearer.

 

 

I'm just gonna say that I at least care nothing for a minor visual effect that would ultimately have no effect on gameplay or story. It might create "immersion" for you but sheaths are so low on my priority list that honestly I never notice they aren't there. I mean if we want to go full immersion why don't we add chains that attach our swords to our gauntlet, real knights often had those. Or how about rather than letting the bow "float" behind our backs we unstring it after battle pack it away and then right before battle restring it? that was commonly done as well. I dislike talks of "this would increase my immersion" because why does one small realism point increase your immersion so much? it increases your immersion to be partially realistic, partially fantasy? As far as I am concerned game designers should only put a ton of focus on realism if that is part of what the game is about.

[Realmzmaster]

Why is it that some posters think what they want is more important than what other posters want? How is it that those same posters think that more people want what they want than what the other posters want?

 

I believe that Bioware's designers know the priorities that they wish to pursue. I doubt very seriously that Bioware is going to change that list of priorities so late in development. If sheaths, bow strings, bow sounds etc are on the list then they may or may not be in the game. It depends on how high on the list those priorities are in relation to other priorities.

[KaiserShep]

If they really can't make weapons that don't float on your back without gimping gameplay/story/level design, then we have a problem.

Look, we know it's a question of priorities. That's the reason why people are asking to reconsider those priorities.

A sheath for swords and daggers is much more important to a lot of people than, for example, the complex visual effect of rocks sticking to the body of a mage who casts rock armor...

I mean, fewer puddles, bushes and piles of rubble would be a very reasonable tradeoff for, at least, sensible weapon placement (at the waist).

 

The "magic fantasy world" argument doesn't explain why you can have humans prancing around with gigantic steel paddles without them being "magical fantasy super-humans". Dragon Age tries hard to be darker and edgier in order to be taken seriously. A large part of that atmosphere is the result of having humanoid characters we can relate to, who can fuel our willing suspension of disbelief. However, those believable characters are also a potention weak point in the immersiveness of that fantasy world, as we expect them to function much as real-world humans do. And a real-world human can't possibly draw a 100-pound 6-handed oar sword from his back without having a very very weird skeleton.

The back-hovering anime-style weapons and armor designs (dem pauldrons) are working against the strengths of this franchise.

As for needing a sheath to safely carry a bladed weapon, it mostly depends on the weapon. The only thing that war swords and dress swords have in common is the fact that they weren't very sharp, just pointy. Battle-ready longswords were ofen used as warhammers, grabbed at mid-blade to bash in plate helmets. Their scabbard was to protect the blade from damage and corrosion, not so much the wearer.

 

I think it's more likely that what you'd see less of as a result of creating sheaths would be the vast variety of weapons and armor, before you start seeing fewer puddles or animated blades of grass. It's just as likely, perhaps more so, that the variety of weapons and armor players can choose from is more important to them in general than details such as this. After all, this isn't a simulator. The way the combat is designed brings this home better than anything.

 

As for the "strengths of this franchise", I suspect that things like the story, characters/companions and setting have much more to do with this than technical details for armor and weaponry.

[Gabdube]

I think it's more likely that what you'd see less of as a result of creating sheaths would be the vast variety of weapons and armor, before you start seeing fewer puddles or animated blades of grass. It's just as likely, perhaps more so, that the variety of weapons and armor players can choose from is more important to them in general than details such as this. After all, this isn't a simulator. The way the combat is designed brings this home better than anything.

 

As for the "strengths of this franchise", I suspect that things like the story, characters/companions and setting have much more to do with this than technical details for armor and weaponry.

When I mentioned the "strengths of this franchise", I was refering to the atmosphere of the game. It is, in fact, the setting, the story and characters that make this game appealing, along with the gameplay and combat mechanics. In DA, you are pretty much always staring at people who are carrying weapons, so the placement of said weapons on the characters' bodies does affect the visual atmosphere of the game.

You wouldn't think that the atmosphere of the game would feel the same if everyone visually put their swords up their arse between fights, would you?

I'm not saying that back-hovering weapons is unforgivingly bad, just that it could be done better. After all, what defines "next-gen" titles is the attention to details. Old DOS games could have had a great story, great characters and great gameplay (even by today's standards for some) ; what really improved with time is the visual and audio atmosphere of games, the immersiveness of those virtual worlds.
 

 

 

I'm just gonna say that I at least care nothing for a minor visual effect that would ultimately have no effect on gameplay or story. It might create "immersion" for you but sheaths are so low on my priority list that honestly I never notice they aren't there.

I agree that scabbards and visual sheaths would not be the highest on my priority list either. What I care more about is weapon placement. Having weapons hanging close to the characters' hips instead of hovering on their backs would be an rather easy fix that I think would satisfy most people who care about those details, myself included. It's already done for one-handed swords in DA:I, so "more clipping" definitely isn't an issue, even less so with daggers.