66 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonPogo]

I mean who wears DAGGERS on their back?  I think they moved the sword to the hip right?  So why keep daggers floating on the back?  It looks silly for a game coming out in 2014 with this great new engine they keep bragging about.

[King Dragonlord]

Well, if they really were floating and it wasn't just a game artifact, you have to admit, that would be a good place to keep them.

[Lebanese Dude]

What's so horrible about daggers sheathed on the back again?

They're small enough that it makes sense. It was jarring when you lifted a full length zweihander from behind. Daggers are fine.

[Dubya75]

Daggers on the back looks cool to me and it makes practical sense.

[A.Kazama]

What's so horrible about daggers sheathed on the back again?

Nothing really, I guess an option would be pretty cool though...

Plus there's just so much reaching for it. Can you imagine a rogue like Han Solo reaching for his blaster if it was strapped to his back and not his side. The result would most likely be Han not shooting first... Or at all...

[Lebanese Dude]

Nothing really, I guess an option would be pretty cool though...
Plus there's just so much reaching for it. Can you imagine a rogue like Han Solo reaching for his blaster if it was strapped to his back and not his side. The result would most likely be Han not shooting first... Or at all...

Guns are ranged weapons though. You gotta draw and shoot almost instantaneously. Daggers are melee, and if used as ranged (thrown), also more practical to be drawn from the back and shot directly.

Even bows are typically sheathed in the back through the arm if not in danger, but drawn at the slightest hint of danger.

[Serza]

Daggers are actually the only bladed weapons that can be drawn from the back in a quickdraw fashion, I believe.

[DarthLaxian]

What's so horrible about daggers sheathed on the back again?

They're small enough that it makes sense. It was jarring when you lifted a full length zweihander from behind. Daggers are fine.

 

Not really - having any kind of weapon on your back is bad IMHO (unless there is not other way to store it, like a modern day rifle (can't carry that on your hip, can you?))...even more if you want to have easy and fast access to it (even more so, if you might need to be able to draw while being watched (sneaking your hands to your hips - close to your weapons - is easier than sneaking them up to your back)

 

greetings LAX

ps: a shield belongs on the back - when not used, but everything else? - no, not really (maybe bows, too - but that's it)

[SardaukarElite]

Guns are ranged weapons though. You gotta draw and shoot almost instantaneously.

 

It's got to be easier to bring a blade to a ready position if it is strapped to your hip or thigh than on your back.

 

Plus there's just so much reaching for it. Can you imagine a rogue like Han Solo reaching for his blaster if it was strapped to his back and not his side. The result would most likely be Han not shooting first... Or at all...

 

Don't say that! Now they're going to have to re-release all the films with Harrison Ford using a CGI back holster.

[mentos]

Plus it looks cool.

[Maria Caliban]

I read this thread title as 'Why can't dragons be worn at the hip?'

Anyways, as to the actual question: I don't know. They managed to put daggers at the hip and swords/bows at the back for Kingdoms of Amalur, and it looked quite good.

[Nukekitten]

Guns are ranged weapons though. You gotta draw and shoot almost instantaneously. Daggers are melee, and if used as ranged (thrown), also more practical to be drawn from the back and shot directly.

Even bows are typically sheathed in the back through the arm if not in danger, but drawn at the slightest hint of danger.

Regular carrying of a bow slung across the back in peace time strikes me more as being a hunting thing than anything else.

If you were expecting a fight would you really bring just a knife? If you did why would you do so? The only reasons I can think of are because you couldn't get hold of a better weapon or because you had to conceal it. (Even then, I'd be inclined to bring an axe or a hammer/cudgel instead.)

Obviously the game is a tad unrealistic to begin with, but knives strike me as being primarily weapons of opportunity. Something you carry as a matter of routine and don't know when you'll have to produce; perhaps in a hurry perhaps not.

I can see why people might be sort of 'Hang on, that just feels wrong.'

Whereas a fight where you'd bring a bow, or a large sword or whatever, seems more like something you'd expect ahead of time, rather than something where you regularly walk around with a two handed great sword and just happen to get into a fight, where you'd expect to have sufficient time to release the weapon from your back before things kicked off.

[The Elder King]

They're not knives, they're daggers. And some/most of them looks like short swords in term of lenght instead of daggers.

[Karlone123]

Daggers on the back looks cool to me and it makes practical sense.

 

Having daggers on the nipple area also make practical sense too.

[dutch_gamer]

A new engine or any mystical year doesn't make clipping disappear.

It is always easy to say that it works in other games but more often than not those other games are one-character games with either one piece of armor or variations of the same piece of armor. To avoid weapons clipping through anything the easiest way to do this is by having floating weapons on the back. Sure, one can say this looks bad and isn't very realistic but making it "realistic" leads to clipping and it reduces armor variation just to solve clipping.

An addendum to the year 2014 even the Witcher 3 still features weapons on the back, sheathed but still in a non-realistic position.

[dielveio]

Well, if they really were floating and it wasn't just a game artifact, you have to admit, that would be a good place to keep them.

https://www.youtube....h?v=AYiXEPHLeUY

[Nukekitten]

An addendum to the year 2014 even the Witcher 3 still features weapons on the back, sheathed but still in a non-realistic position.

To be fair, they're worn on the back in the books too

[NextArishok]

wow.  this is my first time posting here on the road to a game release.  I understand everyone has their own personal concerns about things that are big deals to at least them.  I have some of my own, but does the nit picking get worse and worse as release day approaches?

[umadcommander]

too much work, dis is next gen, etc etc

(to cut through the sarcasm: they cant be bothered)

[J-Reyno]

Daggers at the hip would be so much better.  Or at least crossed at the lower back.

[RenegadeXV]

Has there been any footage of rogue gameplay? I've been trying to avoid watching trailers until November.

From what I have seen though, one-handed warriors actually have a scabbard for swords.

[JJDXB]

I think if you had a single dagger it should go on your hip.  But if you're dual wielding, try yourself to draw them if there's one on each hip.  Especially since it's standard that the weapon go on the opposite side of your hip to your weapon hand.  It would be fine if you wielded them backwards i.e. tip is facing downwards when drawn, you wouldn't need to draw from the other hip - the dagger on your right hip would be wielded by your right hand.  But if you wield normally, then bringing both your arms across your chest diagonally is probably more difficult (and dangerous since your other arm is getting in the way) than bringing your right and left arms to your right and left shoulders respectively.

[CENIC]

I'm guessing it's because they wanted to keep double-bladed style daggers, which would clip like hell if worn on the hip.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

Yeah, I didn't get it either. They finally got long swords on the hip but daggers are still on the back? Doesn't make any sense.

[Eagle Pusuit]

Daggers at the hip would be so much better.  Or at least crossed at the lower back.

I agree and would add a dagger set on a bandoleer across the chest. That would be a fast draw.

But as to the OP, the answer is aesthetics.