|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
I don't want "beautiful people", I just don't like helmets especially: I like to see my characters. For example, I was happy enough with the splattering effect in DA:O, but I also preferred to use the helmet-hiding mod.
I'm not sure there's really much point in trying to analyse this (especially from the "who's the better RPGer" angle), since the answer is really "just because".
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2005
|
I think what we need to understand about helmet-hiders is that they go for aesthetic ideals instead of realism. Their aesthetic ideal of their hero is without a helm, however unrealistic it is (at least I am assuming this is about aesthetics, which strikes me as a safe bet).
I'm a fan of more realism, but I know many people want to play beautiful people for some reason, even though no adventurer would look good very often, what with the injuries, dried gore on their armor, etc. But hide helm is more like an extension of not showing the dirtied armor etc.
Just my thoughts on why that compromise isn't really addressing the desires of either community. The toggle for the visual is more helpful and the realism ones won't mind afaik. I know that it is msotly about vanity as most fantasy games turned not just since japanese fantasy games into some Barbie dressing games where heroes seem to dress more strangely like they work in some establishment of easy virtues and seem to wear less and less armor as higher they get in level, that's what all that tank vs. bikini thread is about. I don't want to take their dressing option away from them as I believe in choices and agree in one detail, it is annoying how the 'hide helmet' option is inconveniently hidden in most games in some sub-sub-option menu. A simple hotkey with helmet on/off would be a more elegant solution even we ignore conveniently where the helmet gets stored, likely into the bags of holding all adventurers carry these days.  A game which would also has critical damage on the head would even encourage then players not to forget to dress up again. I think the compromise is a good idea as you can always decide to look godo even on the battlefield if you want to. Just keep your helmet off and keep smiling when the clobbering starts. A game without consequences is a joke. If they still want their helmets be gone they can still dig for the sub-sub menus and get rid of their protective helmet of shame.
Last edited by Bearhug; 21/03/14 05:35 PM.
Ideals are like stars. We might never reach them. But we can set our course by them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2014
|
@Vometia: If you aesthetically don't like helmets, that's really all my argument needed. Beautiful people was listed as many people, not all helmet hiders. It is divorced from reality just like a lack of armor gore is; i.e. you prefer aesthetics to hard realism (nothing wrong with this). I was not saying they must both come as a pair for anyone concerned with certain aesthetics.
Edit: If you like the gore on armor, that is still an aesthetic preference and doesn't contradict aesthetics over realism, noting.
@Bearhug: I fail to see why you should punish someone with different priorities because you don't like the idea without consequences. I don't see where the right to dictate how a game should be played by others comes in.
It's also a very strawman argument to say they want no-consequence gaming. They just want a game that puts less force on hard realism than you do. Games are already divorced to some degree from realism, so limiting it at any given point is arbitrary and effectively indefensible for that reason. There's no reason for plate armor to work in adventuring; it's too bulky and high-maintenance. There's no reason that these adventurers should level up, realistically, either.
Notice none of these are any different categorically in that they are simply different departures from hard realism toward fantasy.
Last edited by YoungFreshNewbie; 21/03/14 09:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
I think the desire for an option to hide helmets is a result of character customization options. Why have dozens of different hair styles and colours available in character customization, when some minutes into the game that will be irrelevant? Depending on the style, a helmet could also cover any facial customization choices.
I might use a hide option, if available. If it isn't available I wouldn't care, but would hope the game wouldn't waste my time (since I will scroll through every option and check out every stat, etc, for character customization).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
I think Raze sums it up for me, really. It isn't really a realism vs. aesthetics thing as such, though I guess there is an element of "artistic licence". But we all have our own thing when it comes to realism: one example I've mentioned previously is that I like to see realistic swords in games and generally I dislike the stereotypical fantasy sword that's more likely to damage its wielder than its target, though I still managed to overlook their presence in Ego Draconis and if anything enjoyed using some of the more outrageous-looking examples now and then. But I'd still rather have realistic ones, generally speaking.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2005
|
@Vometia: If you aesthetically don't like helmets, that's really all my argument needed. Beautiful people was listed as many people, not all helmet hiders. It is divorced from reality just like a lack of armor gore is; i.e. you prefer aesthetics to hard realism (nothing wrong with this). I was not saying they must both come as a pair for anyone concerned with certain aesthetics.
Edit: If you like the gore on armor, that is still an aesthetic preference and doesn't contradict aesthetics over realism, noting.
@Bearhug: I fail to see why you should punish someone with different priorities because you don't like the idea without consequences. I don't see where the right to dictate how a game should be played by others comes in.
It's also a very strawman argument to say they want no-consequence gaming. They just want a game that puts less force on hard realism than you do. Games are already divorced to some degree from realism, so limiting it at any given point is arbitrary and effectively indefensible for that reason. There's no reason for plate armor to work in adventuring; it's too bulky and high-maintenance. There's no reason that these adventurers should level up, realistically, either.
Notice none of these are any different categorically in that they are simply different departures from hard realism toward fantasy. I am not punishing anyone with my idea as I was just proposing a compromise in form of a Vometia’s desired ‘hide helmet’ function and a helmet on/off hotkey for those who do like more realism in a game as ‘fantasy’ does not has to exclude realistic elements. Even such detailed games cannot deny some realism, even ‘fantasy worlds’ are divorced to some degree from it, so much at some points at that it is arbitrary and effectively indefensible for that reason. Why does anybody still bother with armor instead of learning all magic and frying, freezing or zapping anything in their way? There's no reason that adventurers should bother about any armor and enjoy the light show. I think you were measuring in your response with two standards because you’re bias with the original idea. But I see no reason why a compromise solution should be ignored of someone’s strawman arguments just because he does not like the idea of consequences for those who do like them. Notice that in a game where you can also bake bread like in Ultima VII can be also a place for such two simple features as, oh so hard ‘harsh’, reality can spice up even high fantasy for some. Peace man.
Ideals are like stars. We might never reach them. But we can set our course by them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Nov 2012
|
Nothing says character like a face.
In the majority of RPGs I play, I usually hide headgear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
OP
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2014
|
It´s not only about good/bad looking helmets or hiding nice faces.
Some helmets may look good, but are not suitable to certain armors.
Like full plate helm and robe or leather armor.
There are three simple facts:
1) The absolute majority of people prefer to be able to "Hide helm".
2) Doing this is very easy for developers, it takes an absolute minimum of time.
3) IT IS ONLY SELECTABLE OPTION! NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO USE IT!
Anyone who reads this and still feel need to share with us his indisputable opinion how "bad idead" is be able hide ours helms is simply troll.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2005
|
It’s certainly clear that some people are not reading thoroughly all postings and jump to conclusions and from there to accusations for trolling.
But I am tired of watching this hostile feelings growing into some mobbing about a simple different suggestion which is NOT against the helmet hiding option but a second addition to it, that’s all, period.
Just because many do like the original idea only does make an additional wish neither a bad idea nor does the second idea has to collide with the original one, both are optional.
One is simply about convenience and the other about a bit more realism, but well, I guess most didn’t read this post anyway through to this point.
I wish the game still anything well and look forward to the release date.
Ideals are like stars. We might never reach them. But we can set our course by them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
From the beta patch log:
- Equipment has toggle helmet visibility now
so there you go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
|
And, with that, I will now wear a bucket or pot on my head instead of forcing Madora to make use of the added protection instead. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Apr 2013
|
I can see both sides really and it is a good thing to *wear* a helmet for its stats and still see your character's face. If people want realism that's fine, they have that choice, while there is still an option for those who really take the time to appreciate every aspect of character creation without being forced to play a character that's under-powered....especially on higher difficulties this choice becomes more and more critical and people can easily feel they are forced to wear a helmet and will ignore character creation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Apr 2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Apr 2011
|
It's already included.
Just broken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2014
|
It's already included.
Just broken. It's weirdly broken too. You can either have the box next to it blank, put a check in there, or put a sword icon in there. It has 3 toggle states. I wonder what they're supposed to do (or if there are only supposed to be 2).
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
I guess that the three states are "never hide helm", "always hide helm", and "only hide helm when not in combat", but I don't know for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Apr 2014
|
I guess that the three states are "never hide helm", "always hide helm", and "only hide helm when not in combat", but I don't know for sure. Seeing how other games handle this matter I would think the same way as you.
|
|
|
Moderated by ForkTong, gbnf, Issh, Kurnster, Larian_QA, LarSeb, Lar_q, Lynn, Monodon, Raze, Stephen_Larian |
|
