Curse

[email protected] · Sep 25, 2007, 04:23 AM // 04:23

I really don´t care much about this rant on heroes vs player armor because obviously heroes have different armor sets then player, or else we would be listening to rants about OMG Livia has my armor

and so on.

What i think is that Anet should have made different parts for each armor set that would go along well, i like the new bandana and ninja cap stuff but when i look at for example the destroyer gloves or the chaos gloves it gives a feeling of "where is the rest of the armor set"? gloves are great so why not an helm or a chest plate etc?

I would like to see some helms for the Paragons for example, why do i have to get a shiny thing in the forehead and not a cool looking spartan like helm or so.

What i mean is that armor sets should have more open options for all tastes, if someone likes a glowing thing than ok but if other player likes an helm its ok too because it should always be a matter of choice in a game like this.

I have to say that when i first saw the chaos gloves i thought, omg a chaos armor set, and now its just a pair a gloves, not cool.

/sigh

..L.. · Sep 25, 2007, 02:11 PM // 14:11

Some responses from Gaile at wiki:

Quote:

The initial question is "Is there a reason why the armours are this way?" My first answer is to say that one reason is because it fits the story, the location, and the very lore in which we are currently involved, with Guild Wars: Eye of the North. My second answer is that this is in fact not a new game but an expansion pack. I've played a lot of games, including XPs, and I don't see anything substantially different between how the armours are designed for GW:EN and how things played out in the other XPs. So again, there are certain inherent justifications for the way the armours appear. One of them is real world: this is an XP, not a new game. One of them is story-based: We are revisiting areas that have a direct connection with the lands we traveled once before. We are, after all, in Tyria. While not all armour is Tyrian in look or feel -- particularly for the non-Tyria-born -- doesn't it make sense that you are in the same land and having armours that are visually related to that land seems right, in the context of continuity and lore?

I will certainly be happy to ask those more intimately involved in these decisions about this matter. However, I do not anticipate that we will set the Art Team to work on creating brand new armour for the Tyrian-based expansion pack. However, again, I will be happy to ask about this and will let you know what I learn. --Gaile 19:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Quote:

"Just because this is an expansion its suppose to justify all this?"

Yes, that's how I see it. It's not a new game -- it's an expansion pack. There is enough content, in the primary repeatable quests and the multitude of maps and additional quests -- to fill most games, it's true. But GW:EN is, and has always been heralded as, an XP. Therefore, I would say that, in my personal opinion, it would not be a realistic to expect that one should have all the features of a new game, all options for completely new sets of armour, any more than my Protoss were completely revamped in Brood War, or any more than Gordon gets a different suit and a new pair of specs in Opposing Forces.

I don't want to imply that this an "official statement" in response to your concerns. I'm sharing this in a casual sense, here on the "chat corner" of my talk page. Because I'm not at the office I cannot confer with the design and art leads to have their input on formulating a more formal answer. But again, as a personal opinion and a personal expectation, based on years of playing new games and expansion packs, I think the presentation of armour in GW:EN is fine. --Gaile 00:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Quote:

Yes, precisely! What some have shared is personal opinion. What one has called "hideous," another person has reacted to with a "Hey, cool!" There are a lot of choices in armour, and it's probably true that no one will react to every single piece in the same way. As with anything in the game, I encourage each player to feel free to exercise your right to acquire what you like and reject what you don't like. I discourage anyone from making a "cause" of this by demanding the immediate replacement of this armour set or that armour piece based solely on how he or she feels about it. When that happens, the person who likes it is affected, and that's not fair. In the end, there are an awful lot of choices, and that's a good thing. --Gaile 02:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Quote:

The last time I checked, the art team would prefer that we not hold such a contest. For there are many, many elements of armour design that would not be understood by the general community, and it is extremely doubtful that any of the designs would be workable with our character models. In fact, most would decidedly not work at all, despite looking great in concept, I'm sure. Designing a weapon is relatively simple, and the weapon interacting with the character models and the armour of those models is something that the art team can work into the actual weapon design that they come up with based on the fan concept. However, according to those who are expert in this field, someone can design the coolest looking armour in the world, but it won't work at all with the character animation rigging, or it isn't resizeable, or it's not possible to create a form that resizes to body types and the two genders.
I want to be very clear about something: There is no lack of cool ideas for great armour within the art team. I could say "go" and half a dozen artists could sketch out cool armour in 10 minutes. The time-consuming aspect is not the design or the conceptualization, it's making it work: Fitting it to all the body parts, hooking it to the vertices (I think that's the term

) sizing and resizing, making sure that it looks great from every angle with every one of hundreds of different animations, emotes, etc., etc.
So thank you for the suggestion, but that really would not address the major issue involved, which is the enormous amount of time and staffing needed to create new armours. --Gaile 18:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Quote:

In the end, all I really can say is that I'm sorry to hear that some of you don't like the new armors, tell you that the dev team is actually quite proud of the GW:EN armor sets, and let you know that there are absolutely no plans to rework any existing armor in the game --Gaile 21:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks like their saying just because its an expansion it gives us the right to make lame reskinned armors.

iriyabran · Sep 25, 2007, 02:20 PM // 14:20

Quote:

The initial question is "Is there a reason why the armours are this way?" My first answer is to say that one reason is because it fits the story, the location, and the very lore in which we are currently involved, with Guild Wars: Eye of the North.

doesn't that apply to heroes AND players
we do in fact go both in same parties in different campaigns..
also we have entirely different races - asuras and norns (norn has some originals but also reskins)
what's the connection between those and the humans or the bald dwarfs in grotto
did they go and steal their designs?
i imagine asuras diging their way till leviatan's pit and smacking the armor crafter there to steal his 15k necro lux set for example........
i believe anet just doesn't want to work on gw1 anymore
and me still loving it am very disappointed...i'm not sure if i will continue with gw2 at all..

Avoc · Sep 25, 2007, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Why the hero's get better armor? Their union is better. And they know where the children of the armor designers go to school.