Morghus wrote: Did the original EQ2 team design the game to fail? Why make this so "incredibly convulation and time consuming" in the first place?
LordFyre wrote: I'm not quite sure where the idea of clothing is hard on a character model unless the original Devs of EQ2 made it that hard. If you look at other MMOs, players are even able to manipulate client side files to add new clothes in. Of course these changes will not work on a live version of those games. Another thing to consider is take a look at this Crysis Mod: http://www.mechlivinglegends.net/ The developers of MechWarrior Living Legends do a fine job with 3d modeling and rendering and have provided some outstandingly detailed models and landscapes that the original game just did not have. Further more they recieve no payment for their work as it is only a mod. Though being "only a mod" is the reason why I bought Crysis. Does it take time for the art team to add stuff in? Sure does, but is it as bad as some people say it is? I don't think so. But what I do know is they have priorities. If an expansion is in the works, we won't see much added until that expansion. Which to me is a shame that could be the only incentive. Blizzard likes to add stuff because they think it would be cool to do and their artists are told to have at it. I don't know if SoE has the same idea, I know the artists here would probably like to do the same thing, but are they allowed that freedom or have the time? This isn't known.
I'd love to see more outfits in the game. Revealing or not are both ok for me. I've always been a fan of the outfits on characters for Icewind Dale. Here's a good example (linking to pic since it's pretty large). Here's another one with the rest of that first set. edit: I also would love to have the outfit that the Safar of Maj'Dul (found in QH and EFP) wears!
Streppoch@Guk wrote: Whereas I, a 30-ish female gamer, in part stuck with EQ2 back at the beginning because my assassin's armor actually covered her body! Finding that a breastplate actually covered the chest, no matter who I put it on, was seriously one of my early motivations for signing up for a sub. (I initially had a toon on a boyfriend's account, back in late '04.) Given the choice of appearance slots, I see no reason for equal-opportunity unprotected-looking adventurers, but I hate hate hate hate HATE when armor changes its appearance drastically just by being equipped on a female.
LordFyre wrote: Actually it was a sensible design decision given what they originally wanted. It let them tailor armor closely to races and genders, so Froglok (highly non-human skeleton) armor could look and fit as good as human armor. That of course came at a cost, it made creating entirely new armor models hard. But the idea was you wouldn't have a huge variety of armor models, you'd create some good-looking realistic armor early on and that'd be suitable for re-use with just variation in coloring (which was easy). But things didn't go exactly as planned. People like the realistic appearance of EQ2 armor, but they want more variety in armor models and they want kinds of armor that weren't originally designed. So now that original design decision doesn't mesh with how the players and the devs would like things to go, but we're stuck with it until the coders can change the underlying engine components (and coder time's a lot harder to come by than content dev (artwork, quest stories, etc.) time). It's the same thing that happened with the fast-single-core design of the game's engine: it made sense at the time, pity the world changed course shortly thereafter.
LordFyre wrote: I was refering to the game Tera the OP is posting about, where there seem to be no other armour styles for the females than that silly skimpy one. (there are other games like that one) For now there aren't any (IMO) good choices for cloth wearers in EQ2 that look good. The best I have found is the tranquil sackcloth one (and a few other similar ones with non-clowny colors) I'm not very happy about the cut of the robes in this game, they make the females look like a sack of potatoes. So for fluff my mages have a choice between a couple of jumpsuits. The social clothing (which is basically 2 types of dresses with umpteen colorchoices) make us look like we belong in the Red Light district. I want good looking robes like that one I posted from Dragon Age or something similar. They are sexy and don't make us look like tarts (or just downright silly)
Just prior to DAOC coming out, one of it's main "selling" (?) points was ladies running around nearly naked. That did not save the game from a totally failed combat system, however. Somehow cloth-using mage type girls seem at least somewhat appropriate in hot looking gowns, but I don't want my Troubador running around half naked in see-through chain.
I'd like more OPTIONS, especially for a cloth restricted class. I want the OPTION to dress more "skimpy" or less. I want the OPTION for more looks other than an all encompassing robe in 2 styles (with several texture overlays in various re-colours). I want the to have as many OPTIONS for "clothing" as plate unrestricted classes. I also want more OPTIONS to mix and match tops and bottoms and sleeves for a wider variety of "looks". Additionally, I would think that robes (which in the devs' minds are the only garment a mage class would ever want/need to wear) for 6 classes would have as many styles as gis for 2. But there are 4 or 5 unique gi styles and only 2 robe styles. Sure, there is the excuse that 24 classes can wear robes while only 18 classes can wear gi.. oh wait.. that's still fewer for the gi which has more styles than the robe.
Please no. This isnt an asian MMO. Can we have western armour styles please, ones that arent asymmetric or look like they are tattooed on instead of worn? The Halas fur armour is great.
Rijacki wrote: Wait, really? I can only think of three styles, although two of them actually share the same base...
Nevissa@Crushbone wrote: No there's 6 actually; though they look similiar they are not the same unlike the 2 robe models (Ignoring the formal wear model)
Pouts wrote: I would count your top right and bottom middle as being the same with the bottom left being similar enough to have been built on the same structure. The other three, though, are completely different from each other. AND the male vs female structures are 100% different on each.. which actually doubles the number of unique gi 'models' in the game. The two robe styles are roughly the same for males and females in the same way all non-gi armor is.
EtoilePirate wrote: This! This is probably on the Top 5 List of why I have stayed in EQ2, almost since launch. I have nothing against the OPTION to put characters (both male and female) in more revealing armor, so long as it doesn't encroach upon my ability to make my female characters fully armored badasses. It's just such a rare thing to find in a game, I'd hate to lose it. Although it doesn't show anymore skin, the more recently added robe model forces female characters to have even larger, rounder, and more gravity defying breasts when they put it on. I think it looks ridiculous, and I don't put that model on any of my characters. Which kind of stinks, because some of the colours and patterns are nice and would work for my casters. Most of the new cool robes that come out now are this model, and that is the worry that I have about overtly and ridiculously revealing or gender specific armor. As long as they don't stop making REAL armor for women, then people can run around in chainmal pasties all they want.
Pouts wrote: Ah, I'd forgotten about the first one there. Looks like a lot of cuts from the same base though. Different textures on the same cut of pants on the last four. Different cut out areas on the top. Hmm... wonder if something like that could be done with robes, as well... It's unfortunate how they chose to go about armor creation in this game. I get the perks, but the lack of variety has been a big complaint for a long time now.
Caelen@Lucan DLere wrote: You know I remember an interview of a Costume designer for ST:TSO and he was big on NOT showing too much skin, and it is not just because of censors, but because leaving more to the imagination accually makes women more sexy.
Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote: We are baising our information on what it takes to create even one new armor piece on WHAT THE DEVS HAVE TOLD US, and the fact that it took them almost a year and a half just to make unquie class hats.
adolf102 wrote: Well, the developers of EQ2 actually do get this idea. But, they also realized that it must be voluntary. (This was also before the Appearance Slots became part of the game.) The real problem is that: Like many people the original character artists chose to go the route of Realism vs Fantasy. Whether you agree with that choice, you have to recognize that he/she have a lot of players that agree with that direction. The bigger problem, now that Appearance Slots are available, is that the character modeling system that EQ2 uses is so ridgid that the current artists are unable to add as much variety as many players might like.
Jrral@Unrest wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HokbrASX-uo Well actually it was supposed to be an easy system to make armor and revealing armor was also in the initial design. Why they changed it i'm guessing is due to hardware limitations. I mean just look at this Alpha footage it looks better then the game does now more then 6 years later. The armor was supposed to auto scale to the different races so armor creation should have been easy. This didn't make it to live either and after the game came out there was this supposed skeletal revamp to make the game do what according to this preview should have done at launch and after leading us on for 2+ years about this skeletal revamp it was scraped. Its just disappointing for 2 or more years we were told it was coming we get to have new armor appearances once it was easier and less time consuming to do. But never ended up happening. I hope they have all these problems fixed for eq3. Easy way to make armor, correct understanding of Moores Law. That would be awesome.
