Poll: The fantasy RPG genre needs more practical equipment

[Gray-Philosophy]

I'm right there with you OP. I vastly prefer functional looking armour and weapons over exaggerated designs. Functional doesn't have to be bland, and I often find it more intimidating if it looks believable.

I too wish there were more RPGs in medieval fantasy settings (magic and monsters) but with "realistic" physics and functionality. Sure a wizard can bend reality to his will, but that doesn't mean that your average warrior can too.

However, I must admit that some exaggerated designs can also look pretty awesome.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

The "fantasy" needs more "practical"...

OK. Just that statement right there makes me wanna slam my head in a wall. Unless that fantasy delves into concepts centered around practical things and practical means...it's a goddamn fantasy! Let it be what it is.

I tend to just take things in the context of which they are presented, laugh at the ludicrousness of some things and note the awesomeness of things that pique my attention, and just...play on.

But the problem is that the ratio of, shall we say, "sensible" fantasy visual design (think The Witcher, Game of Thrones and Dark Souls for example) as opposed to the ludicrous (Warhammer, JRPGs and basically everything by Blizzard) is completely out of balance, at least in video games. It certainly doesn't help trying to convince people of gaming becoming more mature when the most famous and biggest selling fantasy games still feature hulking wrestlers dressed in spiked shoulder pads bigger than their heads and lingerie models with skintight clothes and stilettos (I'm looking at you, female hunter from Diablo III). It just seems immature, and feels like pandering to the easiest demographic, ie. teenage boys craving for over the top power fantasy with some cheesecake on the side.

 

[Elvis Starburst]

I'm not gonna pretend normal plate doesn't look alright. It can look cool as hell. But I tend to prefer the more fantastical designs in other RPG's. It's just my style preference. I think that flashy stuff looks awesome

 

[small]

and you have the whole issue of weapons as well. modern media tends to completely downplay the real killer of warfare for millenia, the spear in preference of everyone using swords. yes the are more cinematic as such but you would be more likely to be stabbed by some guy with a sharp pointy stick than a sword

 

[endtherapture]

There's different tones and styles of fantasy games and they can have different styles. Not everything has to cater for your likes.

There's the more realistic designs like The Witcher and Game of Thrones and Lord of the Rings.

There's the fantastical, but still practical, designs like Dark Souls and Dragon Age.

And then there's the mad insane fantasy ones like World of Warcraft and Kingdoms of Amalur.

Having all 3 is fine for the different tones the games present.

 

[AntiChri5]

I know confronting Mount & Blade or Dark Souls style of armor with Warhammer is a little bit extreme, but that was the point of it - to show how few games actually have an armor that can be called practical, while there are many games that either rely on Warhammer's idea of equipment completely, or do something inbetween, that more often than not looks equally stupid. Like Dragon Age 2 for example.

Mount & Blade isn't really a valid example, in my opinion. It contains nothing supernatural or abnormal. It isn't fantasy. Dark Souls is a better example, it is fantasy but gear is still very grounded. However, there are still stupid sets in DS. Xanthous set comes to mind.

I've played Skyrim for many hours and I know the context of those armor sets.

Then you know that the game agrees with many of your conplaints. You think the Iron Armour set is imperfect and, due to the exposed arms, offers incomplete protection? So does Skyrim. It is the worst set of heavy armour in the game and offers very little protection compared to other sets. All the problematic armour you bring up is justified by context and mechanics. Fur armour is just bits of fur strung together with far too much exposed skin. It's barely better then clothing, and the games context and mechanics reflect this. It is worn by impoverished bandits who would get killed if they set foot in a town or city, so even if they could afford better they would still have to scrape by with wha they could scavenge or piece together. It is, straight up, THE worst armour in the game. Forsworn armour is similar. It is a pathetic amount of fur and cloth and nothing else. But the Forsworn are demon worshipping lunatics squatting in caves and camps desperately scavenging together what they can. Their "armour" doesn't offer much protection. Ancient Nord armour is, as the name implies, ancient. It is very outdated and relies on lighter materials in critical places, as such there is only one or two characters in the game who wear it.

That doesn't really justify their stupid look, though. I mean, the game did some of the armor right. Why not the rest?

Variety and versimilitude. It would be visually boring (and pretty stupid) for everyone to be wearing similar gear. Actual soldiers and successful mercenaries wear proper armour and bandits and savages often don't. That is hardly stupid.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

The "fantasy" needs more "practical"...

OK. Just that statement right there makes me wanna slam my head in a wall. Unless that fantasy delves into concepts centered around practical things and practical means...it's a goddamn fantasy! Let it be what it is.

I tend to just take things in the context of which they are presented, laugh at the ludicrousness of some things and note the awesomeness of things that pique my attention, and just...play on.

But the problem is that the ratio of, shall we say, "sensible" fantasy visual design (think The Witcher, Game of Thrones and Dark Souls for example) as opposed to the ludicrous (Warhammer, JRPGs and basically everything by Blizzard) is completely out of balance, at least in video games. It certainly doesn't help trying to convince people of gaming becoming more mature when the most famous and biggest selling fantasy games still feature hulking wrestlers dressed in spiked shoulder pads bigger than their heads and lingerie models with skintight clothes and stilettos (I'm looking at you, female hunter from Diablo III). It just seems immature, and feels like pandering to the easiest demographic, ie. teenage boys craving for over the top power fantasy with some cheesecake on the side.

The same argument of mine applies as much to "sensible" as it does to "practical" when it comes to "fantasy", in any ratio. It's made up. Besides, the way I approach this issue is not in how "mature" their design looks, it's how "mature" it is all presented and in what context the developer decides to attempt to give it. I will agree with you, however, on the issue of pandering to the easiest demographic; but, let's face reality where it needs to be faced: that's what publishers and developers both are going to aim for because making money helps to ensure they can go on to make the next project/dream/sequel on their list.

Take Dragon's Crown, for Christ's sake - yes their character design is extremely over the top, but then, so are the rest of most of the characters you interact with in that game, especially Morgana, the weapon and armor dealer, and Roland the walking meat fridge. The story and the challenges in the dungeons, however, are nicely designed and does give me the sense of that old Golden Axe, side-scrolling dungeon feel, something I liked and appreciated back then. But you won't hear many people talk about the latter part of the game because too many people get caught up discussing the pettiness of the former. Almost, if not entirely, ALL of that game is designed "over the top", yet it works because ALL of it is designed that way. Consistency counts for that kind of thing, at least to me it does. Shock value, especially in character design, just for the sake of it really isn't appealing and, more to the point, is immature on both developer and publisher.

Now that I think about it, perhaps a thread discussing about a ratio of "sensibly" designed games to "ludicrously" designed games in the fantasy genre might be something worth exploring.

 

[ninja666]

However, there are still stupid sets in DS. Xanthous set comes to mind.

That's true. Although, Xanthous set is a robe that belongs to a mage, therefore it has to look weird and/or fancy-looking to make use of fear tactics, mentioned by NiPah - even if you're not powerful, at least look like you are. Sure, Xanthous Set by itself probably won't cause much fear, but combine it with circumstances you see it in - on a clifftop with lots and lots of impaled corpses, a black phantom emerges from the ground, wearing some really extraordinary clothing, who then proceeds to smack you a few times with a barbed whip to stun you, throws magic fireballs that turn into lava on contact, and then shows his true power by summoning pillars of fire raising from the ground in random places. The wearer himself makes you fear this armor.

 

[Something Amyss]

I, for one, demand realism in my fantasy games.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

It's fantasy, it's MEANT to be fantastical. You're also assuming the smiths in these different worlds had knowledge enough to MAKE some of your examples. Not to mention the fact that some of the armour is just ceremonial. And the Space Marines NEED those big-arse suits in order to survive in their universe.
The fantastical female wasn't a very good example because she looks like a succubus, she wouldn't be very effective in full armour.
As for the weapons... meh. There needs to be a bit of variety, or we'd just have the same weapons over and over again in every fantasy game to the end of time.

The stuff you linked all actually has a practical purpose.

As for the chainmail bikini, that looks like an older comic book, so what would you expect to be honest.

 

[ninja666]

I think some people really don't get it. They talk like I want to eliminate the very existence of bulky, big pauldroned armors, gigantic axes etc. I can tell you that right now - I don't, you can have it. The thread was to complain about how few RPG games actually have equipment that's practical, useful and believable - made for people who enjoy more realistic artstyle, while there are tons of games that make an impression of trying to outmatch each other with absurdity of equipment available to the player. RPG devs really need to step it up and cater to the former more rather than making another Blizzhammer Giant Pauldroned Gun Show.

 

[Senare]

I, for one, demand realism in my fantasy games.

Yes that would be fantastic.

One series that was missed which deserves huge credit here is The Witcher. Geralt is great, and the game shows you don't need to devolve into simple looting mechanics for bigger & more badass equipment.

I agree, but while it certainly had more practical armor, there was a grand total of 3 armor sets in the whole game. Don't know about the sequel, but I'm gonna guess it's about the same. We need an RPG where there's a shitton of equipment to be bought, found, or looted off corpses (so generally - a standard RPG) and all of it is realistic and practical. Souls series don't count!

Would you like it to be realistic in terms of stats as well? How much of a progression would you like between armour sets?

Since realistic armour is somewhat based on what people would realistically want to wear to minimize risk of injury in battle, I think the armours would converge pretty rapidly. People generally do not want to wear sub-optimal armour.
Hence it would not be much use in upgrading any more except to sport a new look. Alternative game mechanics such as customization of armour pieces for looks or trading one functionality for another could alleviate this somewhat. You could also introduce size restrictions on the armour pieces.

 

[ninja666]

Would you like it to be realistic in terms of stats as well? How much of a progression would you like between armour sets?

Since realistic armour is somewhat based on what people would realistically want to wear to minimize risk of injury in battle, I think the armours would converge pretty rapidly. People generally do not want to wear sub-optimal armour.
Hence it would not be much use in upgrading any more except to sport a new look. Alternative game mechanics such as customization of armour pieces for looks or trading one functionality for another could alleviate this somewhat. You could also introduce size restrictions on the armour pieces.

I'm more in for the believable and more realistic look alone rather than truly realistic progression. Standard RPG equipment progression, where there's a clear distinction between what's stronger and what's weaker is the best solution for me. Your idea, however, also sounds really interesting. Little to no distinction between equipment would kinda kill off the "RPGiness" of an RPG, but when we combine it with some type of inability to acquire armor (be it price or availability of materials), it'd make the player more attached to their equipment and make them change it only when they find something that's really better than what they're currently wearing. Of course, it's not my idea of a perfect progression, but certainly sounds interesting.

 

[AntiChri5]

However, there are still stupid sets in DS. Xanthous set comes to mind.

That's true. Although, Xanthous set is a robe that belongs to a mage, therefore it has to look weird and/or fancy-looking to make use of fear tactics, mentioned by NiPah - even if you're not powerful, at least look like you are. Sure, Xanthous Set by itself probably won't cause much fear, but combine it with circumstances you see it in - on a clifftop with lots and lots of impaled corpses, a black phantom emerges from the ground, wearing some really extraordinary clothing, who then proceeds to smack you a few times with a barbed whip to stun you, throws magic fireballs that turn into lava on contact, and then shows his true power by summoning pillars of fire raising from the ground in random places. The wearer himself makes you fear this armor.

That's intimidation in spite of his armour, which honestly just makes me giggle. He would be more intimidating wearing almost anything else.

 

[AntiChri5]

I think some people really don't get it. They talk like I want to eliminate the very existence of bulky, big pauldroned armors, gigantic axes etc. I can tell you that right now - I don't, you can have it. The thread was to complain about how few RPG games actually have equipment that's practical, useful and believable - made for people who enjoy more realistic artstyle, while there are tons of games that make an impression of trying to outmatch each other with absurdity of equipment available to the player. RPG devs really need to step it up and cater to the former more rather than making another Blizzhammer Giant Pauldroned Gun Show.

I get it, honestly, i do. The Drakeblood Armour in Dark Souls 2 is probably my favourite game armour of the past five years. It's annoying how rare aweseome armour like that is and how common skimpy bullshit and hilariously bulky crap are. So little falls into that perfect middle ground.

I just think you are ignoring some important details.

 

[deathbydeath]

I think RPG devs should cater to fans of many fantasy subgenres, not just high/epic/hero/power fantasy.

I think RPG devs should cater to whatever fanbase that can support them and will buy what they make.

I'm not against "omg so real" works/settings per se, but they rarely cater to the larger-than-life spectacle I typically enjoy. Until then I'll be enjoying my silly Eredan-esque fantasy stuff. Have a nice day.

Spoiler: Eredan Artwork Dump of Historic Proportions

Shame I couldn't easily find Shori's artwork, because that would throw you for a loop.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Dark Fantasy =/= Low Fantasy.

Okay, you're correct about that - many people misuse the term Dark Fantasy to mean Low Fantasy, so A) I assumed you were too and B) I also used it incorrectly. I have checked the definition...

The difference between them is the level of magic. You can have a dark setting with a lot of magic that's commonly used - it's Dark Fantasy. You can't have a setting where magic is commonly used in Low Fantasy.

However, your definition of Dark Fantasy is still incorrect. Dark Fantasy requires the use of Horror elements. The Diablo series, while having a heavy focus on the undead, rarely goes full horror. The setting being "dark" is not the definition of Dark Fantasy, otherwise half of all fantasy settings (including Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls) would be "dark fantasy" - and they're not.

Eternal Darkness is a good example of Dark Fantasy - a blend of Lovecraftian horror and fantasy elements (and modern mystery elements too). I believe Dark Souls is as well, although that's only from what others have said.

In Diablo 3 you storm Heaven and kill several Devils. That's pretty High Fantasy. That's so High, it's practically JRPG.

 

[Greg White]

What do you think specifically makes the armor practical and down-to-earth even with the fantastical elements?

Basically, it's something you'd not be afraid to wear into a real battle. It has to be sleek and slender, fit well, protect every part of your body equally and allow you to be mobile. I don't know how buff you'd have to be to be able to move and fight with a Warhammer or Warcraft-styled armor.

For the warhammer-style armor, particularly the kind the Khorne Berserkers wear, about the size of the 9-foot monsters wearing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iO9cGopQq0

Those guys live and breath nothing but battle and keep going until they either ascend to become a daemon prince or die trying.

Their weapons also kind of make sense in setting since they tend to fight everything from hordes of rat men, to human-sized enemies, all the way up to manticores, dragons, and other monsters.

 

[Nieroshai]

Did you miss the "fantasy" part of the "fantasy RPG". It's fantasy, fantastical, if everything is sensible and average, it's not very fantastical is it?

I refer you to most fantasy literature that doesn't rely on games or film as a medium. Written fantasy, while having fantastical elements, often focuses on verisimilitude as a ground for a relatable cast and world. Gravity stays because it makes sense. Plate armor is heavy because it makes sense. Dragons exist because they're cool, but they're still affected by gravity and can only carry so many hapless knights in plate armor back to his lair.

 

[Nieroshai]

The "fantasy" needs more "practical"...

OK. Just that statement right there makes me wanna slam my head in a wall. Unless that fantasy delves into concepts centered around practical things and practical means...it's a goddamn fantasy! Let it be what it is.

I tend to just take things in the context of which they are presented, laugh at the ludicrousness of some things and note the awesomeness of things that pique my attention, and just...play on.

The best fantasy ever written, as I think I've written a hundred times by now, has been fantasy that for the most part been realistic except for sorcery and mythical beings, not a physics-defying mindfuck-fest where the rules don't apply simply because the fantasy label gets slapped on by a publisher. Armor is typically as real as the author knows to make it, same with weapons, culturally appropriate implements and dress, etc. Rarely do you see business suits and rayguns on a wizard in the middle ages or a peasant farmer leaping over towers because gravity doesn't apply here--and when this is acceptable it's usually in a shitty pulp fantasy or a bad fanfiction from a tween who's read more manga than Tolkien.