Darksiders

Recommended Videos

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
Mirroga said:
AC10 said:
He can still be humanoid but he doesn't have to essentially BE human. I'm thinking something along the lines of this: http://www.gosfordhobbies.com.au/shop/images/P/newimagelge-67.gif
That's what I'm getting at. A non-human-like approach is common in video games and a lot in media. But you can never/rarely remove humanoid elements since those elements are the ones which immerse us with the characters, a face we can remember, and hands we can use. I can create a spectral being as a main protagonist, but I cannot change its head shape or anatomy into something outside humanity or remove his hands whenever he tries to do something. It's because if I remove those things, the gamer/reader would not be able to comprehend or immerse or understand it, thus becoming less appealing.
Are you saying you didn't feel bad for the companion cube? ;(
 

Mirroga

New member
Jun 6, 2009
1,119
0
0
AC10 said:
Mirroga said:
AC10 said:
He can still be humanoid but he doesn't have to essentially BE human. I'm thinking something along the lines of this: http://www.gosfordhobbies.com.au/shop/images/P/newimagelge-67.gif
That's what I'm getting at. A non-human-like approach is common in video games and a lot in media. But you can never/rarely remove humanoid elements since those elements are the ones which immerse us with the characters, a face we can remember, and hands we can use. I can create a spectral being as a main protagonist, but I cannot change its head shape or anatomy into something outside humanity or remove his hands whenever he tries to do something. It's because if I remove those things, the gamer/reader would not be able to comprehend or immerse or understand it, thus becoming less appealing.
Are you saying you didn't feel bad for the companion cube? ;(
Let's just end this discussion before the meme gets old. :(

Also I have mixed feelings for talking with someone who has an avatar who is actually the best example of our topic.
 

shadow skill

New member
Oct 12, 2007
2,850
0
0
ostro-whiskey said:
13752 said:
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Oh contraire, In Warhammer many parties have resorted to melee combat for whatever reason, so that is why it makes sense. I dont see any "symbolic contents" it seems to like like you're just trying to be conceited. Again you try to say that something in which you have claims is "incoherent and varied", you clearly do not realize the stupididty in this, as I have already pointed out that you have no standing to be able to make such a claim. Perhaps you need to choose your words more carefully.

I never said Fantasy is a liscence to do whatever you want, you are putting words in my mouth, I said the concept behind trying to find fault in the design and practicality of items in a Fantasy world is absolutely stupid.
I'm guessing since you're not down with the whole symbolism thing, you're also not too good with irony.

It is not at all stupid to criticise the practicality of fantasy. You only achieve willing suspension of disbelief if you have coherent logic behind the fantastical concepts you introduce into the world. In literature, a plot resolution achieved through an external device is known as "deus ex machina", and it tends to alienate readers because if you establish boundaries with logical limits, you're expected to stay within them for a resolution. The same principle applies to the practicality of fantasy designs. If we see characters fighting with swords, we expect primitive combat governed by the laws of physics. If you break something like this and create a justification for it that doesn't fit coherently into the overall tenor of your fantasy world, it makes it harder for audiences to willingly suspend disbelief.
How can you claim to know the logic behind a fantasy concept. The fact that it is fantasy is indicative that our logic does not comply. We can safely assume that the guy from Darksiders is closer to a robot than a human, therefore you point is, once again, idiotic. You have yet to clarify what you meant by the "symbolic contents" of the armor, ofcoure its quite likely you were just talking out of your ass.
Uhh there is logic in every single fantasy story that there is. Only a fool tries to argue that our logic does not apply when our logic is applied to these worlds all the time.
Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
logic doesn't have to be realistic. Logic is just a set of rules that apply to a setting.
Wtf ?
Do you even know what you're saying. Logic is the act of reasoning, from your response you dont seem to have much.
Logic is also a given system of reasoning. It's this aspect of logic being employed to varying degrees in any
fctitious work. All fiction in order to work has to be internally consistent. So rather than anyone else not having logic I would say that, that award belongs to you. Supernatural entities typically have hierarchies, dispositions and so forth. Just look at how angels are organized in Judaism and Christianity and tell me that there is no reasoning behind the organization of these entities.
 

MasterMayhem117

New member
Sep 14, 2009
9
0
0
Fronzel said:
MasterMayhem117 said:
When describing War the his right and his left etc gets confused.. Not to nitpick Yahtzee for fear of being judged and condemned.. Possibly by Yahtzee dressed as Kratos...
He strikes me more as a Sniper...maybe it's the hat?
Bollocks, you're right.. Touche sir... Touche...
 

hem dazon 90

New member
Aug 12, 2008
837
0
0
Dont Fear The Reaper said:
I was hoping he would trash Warhammer 40k and finally accomplish his task of alienating every fanbase in the world, but a good article nonetheless.

there is someone else that loathes that rubbish as much as I do? Praise Allah!
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
ostro-whiskey said:
Now you are trying to weasel out of the arguement by claiming that the point I made (which applied to the practical application of materials in a fantasy world) was directed at all universal laws in a fantasy world, which I never said or even hinted upon. You could make a good b grade lawyer with these rat skills, or maybe not.
Funny, because earlier you said:

Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
 

MpSai

New member
Jun 25, 2008
58
0
0
Even from a comic book standpoint War is terrible. You want to design a character in a way that's not incredibly difficult to draw over and over again. Then again that's a constant problem in Marvel and DC art where everyone is stiffly posing all the time.
 

Yahtzee Croshaw

New member
Aug 8, 2007
11,049
0
0
I agree with the distinction of the main character above everyone else, Alex Mercer was a character rather weird at first sight, but it's easy to identify in game, and even artwork you might find around there.
The characters from Left 4 Dead are also well made, you can't ask much about it, but it does the job.
Going into more fantasy designs, even Mario and Sonic has a distinctive appearance in their worlds and outside it.
Heck, even Gordon Freeman, though you don't see it in game that much, has a design you can recognize unless you're from Jupiter.
I didn't know that Madureira was behind it, but on a second look, it's easy to believe.
 

ostro-whiskey

New member
Aug 23, 2009
204
0
0
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
13752 said:
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Oh contraire, In Warhammer many parties have resorted to melee combat for whatever reason, so that is why it makes sense. I dont see any "symbolic contents" it seems to like like you're just trying to be conceited. Again you try to say that something in which you have claims is "incoherent and varied", you clearly do not realize the stupididty in this, as I have already pointed out that you have no standing to be able to make such a claim. Perhaps you need to choose your words more carefully.

I never said Fantasy is a liscence to do whatever you want, you are putting words in my mouth, I said the concept behind trying to find fault in the design and practicality of items in a Fantasy world is absolutely stupid.
I'm guessing since you're not down with the whole symbolism thing, you're also not too good with irony.

It is not at all stupid to criticise the practicality of fantasy. You only achieve willing suspension of disbelief if you have coherent logic behind the fantastical concepts you introduce into the world. In literature, a plot resolution achieved through an external device is known as "deus ex machina", and it tends to alienate readers because if you establish boundaries with logical limits, you're expected to stay within them for a resolution. The same principle applies to the practicality of fantasy designs. If we see characters fighting with swords, we expect primitive combat governed by the laws of physics. If you break something like this and create a justification for it that doesn't fit coherently into the overall tenor of your fantasy world, it makes it harder for audiences to willingly suspend disbelief.
How can you claim to know the logic behind a fantasy concept. The fact that it is fantasy is indicative that our logic does not comply. We can safely assume that the guy from Darksiders is closer to a robot than a human, therefore you point is, once again, idiotic. You have yet to clarify what you meant by the "symbolic contents" of the armor, ofcoure its quite likely you were just talking out of your ass.
Uhh there is logic in every single fantasy story that there is. Only a fool tries to argue that our logic does not apply when our logic is applied to these worlds all the time.
Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
logic doesn't have to be realistic. Logic is just a set of rules that apply to a setting.
Wtf ?
Do you even know what you're saying. Logic is the act of reasoning, from your response you dont seem to have much.
Logic is also a given system of reasoning. It's this aspect of logic being employed to varying degrees in any
fctitious work. All fiction in order to work has to be internally consistent. So rather than anyone else not having logic I would say that, that award belongs to you. Supernatural entities typically have hierarchies, dispositions and so forth. Just look at how angels are organized in Judaism and Christianity and tell me that there is no reasoning behind the organization of these entities.
Well this is actually a bad example, because the thought that a High Being such as God, would possess the anthropomorphic traits of servitude and egocentrism is pretty irrational. As such the entire Judeo Christian religion was organized in such a way as to keep the plebian masses from questioning their rulers by making them believe there was a higher purpose to being pacifistic, servile and docile. So the point doest really apply here. Also I never claimed that the entire Fantasy world could throw rationality to the wind, I claimed you cannot claim something to be illogical when regarding something such as magic, which already defies logic.
 

ostro-whiskey

New member
Aug 23, 2009
204
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Now you are trying to weasel out of the arguement by claiming that the point I made (which applied to the practical application of materials in a fantasy world) was directed at all universal laws in a fantasy world, which I never said or even hinted upon. You could make a good b grade lawyer with these rat skills, or maybe not.
Funny, because earlier you said:

Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
Yes I did say that, whats your point ?
 

SAMAS

New member
Aug 27, 2009
337
0
0
Switchlurk said:
I agree with yahtzee on the need for video game characters to have a fairly distinctive shape and outline. If you listen to the vaulve in game TF2 commentary on character design they say the exact same thing, especailly in a competitive game, you need to see who's who.

But the thing is, while i would cop this argument for the enemies design, i don't buy it for the main character. YES, the main design is over elabroate and compleatly ridicuilous, but for me, that's half the point.

Yeah, i agree, sleek and simple elegence looks cool, but in real life. When i go to fantasy, not only do i want everything to be over exagerated and elaborate, but i expect it. I want to see superhuman feats of strength and power. I want magic to look like a lazer show of cluster effects. And i'm fine with the characters dressed in over elabroate armour. When's the last time you looked at medieval armour? It's quite frankly boring. Fling in a sholder pad the size of a watermellon and a guanlet with metalwork that looks like a gold weaving spider had an epiliptic fit on it and hey hey, im interested agian.

Yeah it looks rediculious, but hell, i'm willing to laugh and just roll with it.
I think the problem, after reading Yathzee's analysis, is that while the intent of the design is clear, it's not done very well. When people say he looks like a World of Warcraft character, it's not just because of the art style, but by the fact that his outfit is just short of [Rainbow Pimp Gear [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RainbowPimpGear].

(For those who don't want to follow that link and ruin their whole day, Rainbow Pimp Gear is when a player equips their character in a way that every piece is from a different armor/clothing set. This is usually done to maximize stat gains, and has little to no bearing on how the PC looks as a result, and it usually shows).

That is to say, War's outfit looks like it came from at least three entirely different sets.
 

shadow skill

New member
Oct 12, 2007
2,850
0
0
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
13752 said:
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Oh contraire, In Warhammer many parties have resorted to melee combat for whatever reason, so that is why it makes sense. I dont see any "symbolic contents" it seems to like like you're just trying to be conceited. Again you try to say that something in which you have claims is "incoherent and varied", you clearly do not realize the stupididty in this, as I have already pointed out that you have no standing to be able to make such a claim. Perhaps you need to choose your words more carefully.

I never said Fantasy is a liscence to do whatever you want, you are putting words in my mouth, I said the concept behind trying to find fault in the design and practicality of items in a Fantasy world is absolutely stupid.
I'm guessing since you're not down with the whole symbolism thing, you're also not too good with irony.

It is not at all stupid to criticise the practicality of fantasy. You only achieve willing suspension of disbelief if you have coherent logic behind the fantastical concepts you introduce into the world. In literature, a plot resolution achieved through an external device is known as "deus ex machina", and it tends to alienate readers because if you establish boundaries with logical limits, you're expected to stay within them for a resolution. The same principle applies to the practicality of fantasy designs. If we see characters fighting with swords, we expect primitive combat governed by the laws of physics. If you break something like this and create a justification for it that doesn't fit coherently into the overall tenor of your fantasy world, it makes it harder for audiences to willingly suspend disbelief.
How can you claim to know the logic behind a fantasy concept. The fact that it is fantasy is indicative that our logic does not comply. We can safely assume that the guy from Darksiders is closer to a robot than a human, therefore you point is, once again, idiotic. You have yet to clarify what you meant by the "symbolic contents" of the armor, ofcoure its quite likely you were just talking out of your ass.
Uhh there is logic in every single fantasy story that there is. Only a fool tries to argue that our logic does not apply when our logic is applied to these worlds all the time.
Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
logic doesn't have to be realistic. Logic is just a set of rules that apply to a setting.
Wtf ?
Do you even know what you're saying. Logic is the act of reasoning, from your response you dont seem to have much.
Logic is also a given system of reasoning. It's this aspect of logic being employed to varying degrees in any
fctitious work. All fiction in order to work has to be internally consistent. So rather than anyone else not having logic I would say that, that award belongs to you. Supernatural entities typically have hierarchies, dispositions and so forth. Just look at how angels are organized in Judaism and Christianity and tell me that there is no reasoning behind the organization of these entities.
Well this is actually a bad example, because the thought that a High Being such as God, would possess the anthropomorphic traits of servitude and egocentrism is pretty irrational. As such the entire Judeo Christian religion was organized in such a way as to keep the plebian masses from questioning their rulers by making them believe there was a higher purpose to being pacifistic, servile and docile. So the point doest really apply here. Also I never claimed that the entire Fantasy world could throw rationality to the wind, I claimed you cannot claim something to be illogical when regarding something such as magic, which already defies logic.
Except things like magic and so forth don't necessarily defy logic, the way characters behave in fictional worlds, the arts they practice all have rules and limitations imposed on them by their creators. They tend to be internally consistent. The angelic hierarchy is a perfect example of this. All of our laws function on the same principle they have no meaning aside from what we say they mean, but we still go through the trouble of making them consistent within the framework that we ccreate even though they don't have any real meaning outside of our own. Further you contradict yourself by saying that you cannot claim that something that defies logic cannot be called illogical while saying at the same time that you are not saying that a fantasy world can throw logic to the wind. If you can't claim that something in a fantasy world is internally inconsistent (illogical) then that world has to be able to throw logic to the wind. If it cannot do that then you must be able to say that elements of a fantasy world are nonsensical.

Of course the real issue with War's design isn't whether or not his design is internally consistent. It is whether that design allows people to sufficiently suspend disbelief. In addition it is a question of whether War's design makes him distinct as a character. Does he look like anything? Can you pick him out instantly? Is he memorable? Is the player able to take him seriously in his assigned role?
 

Ghonzor

New member
Jul 29, 2009
958
0
0
While not supporting War's design, there actually is a reason to the gigantic left arm (sort of): his actual arm was cut off in a fight with the other Horsemen.

Aside from that, you are correct. The style and outfit don't give any hint to the character at all. And I have been wondering what the fuck that scar is supposed to be since I first saw the trailer oh so long ago.
 

chozo_hybrid

What is a man? A miserable little pile of secrets.
Jul 15, 2009
3,479
14
43
He's War, he's supposed to look ridiculous right? I am enjoying the game itself thought ^_^
 

TheScarecrow

New member
Jul 27, 2009
688
0
0
A good article as usual but I feel you wern't exactly giving War a fair chance there Mr. Croshaw.
Ok, sure it's overdone and all that but the evaluation was a lot more biased than the other characters. The hood over his head could have been because War isn't actually a person, it's a...war? The faces could symbolise his connection with demons, fighting them or whatever he does, I don't remember. Perhaps he wears so much armour because, well, he's War, what do you expect a tiger suit? His giant hand could show his strength and the white hair his age because War is conflict and conflict has been around since the dawn of man. These are just some specuations. As for the sword, well, it might be over-sized, but he is war...

At this point I'd like to point out I have no direct experience with the game...
 

Vect

New member
Jul 22, 2009
48
0
0
On the disproportionate arms:


I think it's mentioned in some comic that came out for promotional purposes or something that War's Left Arm is artificial since it got chopped off or something. His bosses decided to give him the Ed Elric treatment and strap some special prosthetic or whatever.


Not justifying it. Still, like someone earlier the artstyle does appeal to the inner 14-year olds like how Warhammer 40,000 does with it's excessiveness.
 

BloodSquirrel

New member
Jun 23, 2008
1,263
0
0
his is a good example of why Yahtzee needs to stop trying to make serious points. He doesn?t want people just saying that they think War looks cool, but when it comes down to analyzing his character design, the best he can do is to list a bunch of things, and then say that those things don?t look cool.

For an actual analysis-

First off, War isn?t human. He?s War. The hood hides his face and makes his glowing eyes stand out. The overly elaborate designs on some of his armor and sword are part of that as well- they don?t look like something you?d see on a human because War is not human. The long white air also gives a sense of age, helping to cast War as something ancient. Oh, and his huge left gauntlet is a weapon. That?s pretty obvious to anybody who isn?t being willfully stupid.

The character?s torn cloak makes him look like he just came from a battle. Again, appropriate for War.

The character?s color scheme uses a classic three color design: two main colors (red and grey) with goldish highlights. The grey fits because of the armor. Red has had a long association with war and bloodshed. The gold contrasts the two, but is a neutral enough color not to clash.

The character?s broad design also fits the general concept of War. He?s not a precision instrument; he?s a large, powerful bruiser. Not only that, but he contrasts with the other characters in the game. When you have a bunch of angles and demons fighting, War can walk in and look distinctive. If he looked like every other character in the game, it would be a less impressive effect.

All in all, Yahtzee fails to raise any valid points about his design. In fact, I don?t think Yahtzee really understand aesthetic design at all. He doesn?t argue from any established or explained principles, he just tries to justify his argument with snark. The best example of this: One of the most accepted principles of character design is that the character should be distinctive by silhouette alone. So what does Yahtzee do? Complain about everything that makes his silhouette distinctive, of course.

Of course, it wouldn?t be a Yahtzee article without massive doses of hypocrisy, so I?ll just go easy and point out that the Heavy in TF2 has just as distorted bodily proportions as War does. In fact, he?s worse.
 

CD-R

New member
Mar 1, 2009
1,355
0
0
Dont Fear The Reaper said:
I was hoping he would trash Warhammer 40k and finally accomplish his task of alienating every fanbase in the world, but a good article nonetheless.
He'll have plenty of opportunities to do that when the Warhammer 40k space marine game comes out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHKIFDjk9I
 

ostro-whiskey

New member
Aug 23, 2009
204
0
0
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
13752 said:
ostro-whiskey said:
shadow skill said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ostro-whiskey said:
Oh contraire, In Warhammer many parties have resorted to melee combat for whatever reason, so that is why it makes sense. I dont see any "symbolic contents" it seems to like like you're just trying to be conceited. Again you try to say that something in which you have claims is "incoherent and varied", you clearly do not realize the stupididty in this, as I have already pointed out that you have no standing to be able to make such a claim. Perhaps you need to choose your words more carefully.

I never said Fantasy is a liscence to do whatever you want, you are putting words in my mouth, I said the concept behind trying to find fault in the design and practicality of items in a Fantasy world is absolutely stupid.
I'm guessing since you're not down with the whole symbolism thing, you're also not too good with irony.

It is not at all stupid to criticise the practicality of fantasy. You only achieve willing suspension of disbelief if you have coherent logic behind the fantastical concepts you introduce into the world. In literature, a plot resolution achieved through an external device is known as "deus ex machina", and it tends to alienate readers because if you establish boundaries with logical limits, you're expected to stay within them for a resolution. The same principle applies to the practicality of fantasy designs. If we see characters fighting with swords, we expect primitive combat governed by the laws of physics. If you break something like this and create a justification for it that doesn't fit coherently into the overall tenor of your fantasy world, it makes it harder for audiences to willingly suspend disbelief.
How can you claim to know the logic behind a fantasy concept. The fact that it is fantasy is indicative that our logic does not comply. We can safely assume that the guy from Darksiders is closer to a robot than a human, therefore you point is, once again, idiotic. You have yet to clarify what you meant by the "symbolic contents" of the armor, ofcoure its quite likely you were just talking out of your ass.
Uhh there is logic in every single fantasy story that there is. Only a fool tries to argue that our logic does not apply when our logic is applied to these worlds all the time.
Ohh, you must be referring to the logic of magic, and midichlorians. Lets not forget the logic of monsters and the supernatural. Nice one douchebag.
logic doesn't have to be realistic. Logic is just a set of rules that apply to a setting.
Wtf ?
Do you even know what you're saying. Logic is the act of reasoning, from your response you dont seem to have much.
Logic is also a given system of reasoning. It's this aspect of logic being employed to varying degrees in any
fctitious work. All fiction in order to work has to be internally consistent. So rather than anyone else not having logic I would say that, that award belongs to you. Supernatural entities typically have hierarchies, dispositions and so forth. Just look at how angels are organized in Judaism and Christianity and tell me that there is no reasoning behind the organization of these entities.
Well this is actually a bad example, because the thought that a High Being such as God, would possess the anthropomorphic traits of servitude and egocentrism is pretty irrational. As such the entire Judeo Christian religion was organized in such a way as to keep the plebian masses from questioning their rulers by making them believe there was a higher purpose to being pacifistic, servile and docile. So the point doest really apply here. Also I never claimed that the entire Fantasy world could throw rationality to the wind, I claimed you cannot claim something to be illogical when regarding something such as magic, which already defies logic.
Except things like magic and so forth don't necessarily defy logic, the way characters behave in fictional worlds, the arts they practice all have rules and limitations imposed on them by their creators. They tend to be internally consistent. The angelic hierarchy is a perfect example of this. All of our laws function on the same principle they have no meaning aside from what we say they mean, but we still go through the trouble of making them consistent within the framework that we ccreate even though they don't have any real meaning outside of our own. Further you contradict yourself by saying that you cannot claim that something that defies logic cannot be called illogical while saying at the same time that you are not saying that a fantasy world can throw logic to the wind. If you can't claim that something in a fantasy world is internally inconsistent (illogical) then that world has to be able to throw logic to the wind. If it cannot do that then you must be able to say that elements of a fantasy world are nonsensical.

Of course the real issue with War's design isn't whether or not his design is internally consistent. It is whether that design allows people to sufficiently suspend disbelief. In addition it is a question of whether War's design makes him distinct as a character. Does he look like anything? Can you pick him out instantly? Is he memorable? Is the player able to take him seriously in his assigned role?
I grow weary of your malcontent, you seem to just be repeating yourself, highlighitng the same crap you were previously. I never contradicted myself, in a fantasy world they have logical laws, the laws of physics, laws of matter ,mathematics, these universal laws are consistent. However from our context magic is completely illogical, it is not bound by any sense of rational thought. Furthermore the fact that you a trying to prove your point by a single flimsy example is pretty pathetic to say the least because there are countless fantasy stories, most of which are different.

You seem to have a problem understanding my point so Ill put it to you this way. How can you say that a 1. A creature that is magical in essence, does not need 2. Bulky over compensaroty armor when 3. A guy would explode your gooch with lightening crackeling from his fingertips.

Im not sure what your problem is, I think your trying too hard to justify why you dislike something on a personal level. The character fits into its assigned world, and is believable in its role. I had a harder time believing how Gnomes were meant to contend with ravaging demons in Wow, but within the context of that world it makes sense.