Sure, but having said problem in games, is like having modern language in LARP ("Fuck you Black night! I go whereever i want!") , it breaks immersion and leaves a sour taste in my mouth.The_root_of_all_evil said:
RANT: Weapons on your back
- Thread starter Christian Lerche
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm just glad my WOW character's don't carry all their crap visibly, 5 backpacks, spare set of armour, spare weapons, bow, parrot cage, full size horse, wolf, raptor, and motorised trike, just to start with.
I actually care. I don't like the "It's a game, it doesn't matter" statement because I like it when people take extra time to add detail to games and that's just a cop out. Also the argument of "Other parts don't make sense so nothing has to". And this detail makes sense to add.
Of all the things in wow that don't make sense, you picked how the weapon is attached to the back? How about how a gnome can carry a head the size of it's own body on it's shoulders? I get your rant, it makes sense and would be nice to see implemented, but it would cover up everyone's epic lewtz.
Not strong enough, but I'm pretty sure it'll work if it gets more strengh and has a pull on about 20 kg.ryo02 said:
And I don't wanna talk to no scientist, dudes lyin' an' makin' me pissed!The66Monkey said:
Thanks for agreementPalademon said:
Like you, I belive, having a game, where it a belivable world is the best. Sure it's unreal, but taking a bit of realism and combine it with the "sparta" factor, that makes an awesome setting you really can immerse yourself into. Examples like Deux Ex, Mass Effect, Assasins creed and so on. And if you're making a game where it's unserios and made out of crack, it's fine to have weapons spawn out of nowhere (looking at you Kratos) because it's already so much over the top that it's ridicules. Bulletstorm should likewise have a bigger inventory and unlimited ammo, because it's already so silly.
I think the perceived problem is how accepted it is among the games, even the "serious" ones, more than the lack of any real attempt to make it "realistic". It's like not seeing your feet in an FPS - unreal, yet universally accepted. Some people are still bothered by it, of course, while other couldn't care less. It doesn't necessarily mean any group is particularly more in the right.
The difference between these examples is, while it would be exceedingly hard to offer any kind of justification for the FPS Ghost Syndrome, RPG floating invisible scabbards have it way easier. Just have the weapon bathe briefly in golden light any time it is put on/off the hero's back. Voilà. The world is consistent, floating makes sense, badass points are scored. The game is arguably more awesome as a result. Not doing this can only be attributed to being lazy or dismissive.
The only problem is can see with it, it changes the world. A realm that allows for such an everpresent, utilitarian arcane power can no longer be a perfect Tolkien fantasy. Some people might have a problem with that. Ultimately, from the creator standpoint, it comes down to the difference between creating one's own world or maintaining a flawed masquerade. You can either tell people to imagine the scabbards being there, floaty and possibly invisible, or decide to just fuck Tolkien and actually try to think up something yourself.
Which, of course, brings me back again to the conclusion that studios are lazy. There's little to no excuse for that.
The difference between these examples is, while it would be exceedingly hard to offer any kind of justification for the FPS Ghost Syndrome, RPG floating invisible scabbards have it way easier. Just have the weapon bathe briefly in golden light any time it is put on/off the hero's back. Voilà. The world is consistent, floating makes sense, badass points are scored. The game is arguably more awesome as a result. Not doing this can only be attributed to being lazy or dismissive.
The only problem is can see with it, it changes the world. A realm that allows for such an everpresent, utilitarian arcane power can no longer be a perfect Tolkien fantasy. Some people might have a problem with that. Ultimately, from the creator standpoint, it comes down to the difference between creating one's own world or maintaining a flawed masquerade. You can either tell people to imagine the scabbards being there, floaty and possibly invisible, or decide to just fuck Tolkien and actually try to think up something yourself.
Which, of course, brings me back again to the conclusion that studios are lazy. There's little to no excuse for that.
You, good sir (meant respectfully, not as an insult) have won my respect. It has to be beliveable in its own world, and you made a very valid point.Santa216 said:
It's not "Aesthetic" just laziness from the creators..
I think it's more that we've reached a point where these sort of things are easily done, they're just not, and when you spend some 24 hours on a game (ala DA:O, and that's assuming you don't replay) these sorts of things start to stand out.Tax_Document said:
They're no more whiny than any other group, to be honest.
And I have to admit, staring at the gun floating in mid-air while playing Fallout 3 is aggrevating as all hell.
I hate this too but not to the point that I dont play a game, BUT the one thing that I question in game like Falllout 3 is the carry button, what do I have the force of something!
Well thats what I thought anyways ,that my characters are soo powerful that they have the force...
Well thats what I thought anyways ,that my characters are soo powerful that they have the force...
You're forgetting The Rule Of Cool. Weapons sheathed on the back are cool, thus entirely plausible in games. I'm more concerned about where Snake was keeping all his weapons...
They don't make me angry. It's the small part of otherwise excellent games that should just have they weapons in a belivable way (wow I repeat myself a lot). Is it too much to demand from a game to make sense in its own world? Like, it makes sense that there are flying cars in "Blade Runner" because its the future, it's the norm. Floating weapons do not make a damn sense in the world they're in, and it's an easy problem to fix.Sarge034 said:
The second part means, that some have wondered about the same thing and agree with me. Maybe not, but still. I haz a point.
EDIT: If I wanted to troll, I'd speak about something controversial or insulting. This is a very minor problem. Do you see yourself as some sort of police or something? Judging from your profile pic it's hard not to get the thought.