Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Portraits?

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
Those two new ones are great.
 

golgotha

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
187
Agreed. I like how each portraits tries to set a mood. With this you'd be able to invoke a sense of the NPCs personality instead of only having an indication of "here's what he looks like".
 

Seboss

Scholar
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
947
Amazing job Sept13. I really like the nonchalant look on their face.
 

Lord Chambers

Erudite
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
1,018
Claw said:
Give all characters talking heads, or none at all?

Hey, that sounds like the logical conclusion.
Do you disagree that portraits, when only given to important NPCs, represents a break of the fourth wall? Maybe for you, you don't notice. I think most people are like me though, and think "oh, he's got a portrait, I better listen up. I better save before talking to him. I better not to attack or kill him. Or maybe I can recruit him?" It's not game breaking, but I don't like having to meta-game and special portraits give me no option.

A designer shouldn't ask, "I must have portraits (because of tradition/convention) so how many can I get with my resources?" He should ask, "what characters require a portrait to enhance the player's experience?" And the answer to that should be either "everyone" or "none."
 

MacBone

Scholar
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
554
Location
Brutopia
Nice art, Sept13. Those two portraits seem like they capture actual characters rather than just stock figures.
 

callehe

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
459
Location
Gothic Castle
Sept13: those are really good! I love your style, reminds me of some really good graphic novels. Only gripe: maybe decrease saturation a little? even though the colours are great, the colours of the in game tends to be much more bleached. I hope your art makes it into the game.
 

Lumpy

Arcane
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
8,525
I didn't really picture them that way - I imagined Cado to be a bit further away from the stereotypical Master Thief - but they're pretty great anyway.
The only ones so far that are better than the originals.
 

Dagon

Scholar
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
108
Location
POLAND
Yep the two last ones are very good :)
looking forward to see them in game
 

OverrideB1

Scholar
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
443
Location
The other side of the mirror
I liked both of Sept13's portraits -- although I agree that colour saturation is probably a bit high to fit in with the rest of the game.

But my favourite portrait has to be the one VD posted back on page 1.
 

dagorkan

Arbiter
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
5,164
I agree it's a nice portrait but I don't think it's practicable to make portraits that detailed for every NPC in the game. Sept13's are great.
 

Sept13

Novice
Developer
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
4
I also agree the portrait that VD posted back in page 1 to be the best, it's great piece of art with great details. I did my best in the timelimits that I had :) Thanks everyone for positive comments.
 

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
Does he ever crack a smile or was his face paralyzed in a horrible accident?
 

Sovy Kurosei

Erudite
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
1,535
Lord Chambers said:
Do you disagree that portraits, when only given to important NPCs, represents a break of the fourth wall? Maybe for you, you don't notice. I think most people are like me though, and think "oh, he's got a portrait, I better listen up. I better save before talking to him. I better not to attack or kill him. Or maybe I can recruit him?" It's not game breaking, but I don't like having to meta-game and special portraits give me no option.

You can say the same thing with dialogue. "Oh, he talks a lot. I better save, not attack him, maybe I can recruit him?" So should all characters have equally detailed dialogue or none at all?
 

Lord Chambers

Erudite
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
1,018
Sovy Kurosei said:
Lord Chambers said:
Do you disagree that portraits, when only given to important NPCs, represents a break of the fourth wall? Maybe for you, you don't notice. I think most people are like me though, and think "oh, he's got a portrait, I better listen up. I better save before talking to him. I better not to attack or kill him. Or maybe I can recruit him?" It's not game breaking, but I don't like having to meta-game and special portraits give me no option.

You can say the same thing with dialogue. "Oh, he talks a lot. I better save, not attack him, maybe I can recruit him?" So should all characters have equally detailed dialogue or none at all?
A fair comparison if you don't really understand what I'm saying. I don't have problems with the narrative revealing who the important characters are. I think that's part of it's function. In other words, dialogue is part of the gameplay. You do it. You read it. It part of the game's essence.

Conversely, things like interface are outside of that narrative. They aren't gameplay. They aren't what urges you to sit down at your computer and play. An interface is a necessary sort of evil so we interact with the game. Narrative elements like characterization shouldn't be part of it ideally.

You are welcome to disagree with this, but I think the majority of RPGers respect the plot of games and recognize, if they're critical thinkers, when they are getting information external to the setting. For me that's kind of spoilerish and annoying. As a designer, if your resources limit who you give unique portraits to, then you will communicate the importance to an NPC to the player the instant it pops up. This can be limiting, meaning you can never have the player bump-in-to the important NPC on the road. He will know by the portrait he is going to meet that person again.

If the promise of future run-ins is conveyed through dialogue, then the NPC may as well have a generic portrait and the player will react the same. If promise (of future run-ins) isn't conveyed through dialogue or some narrative means in-the-setting then the player is going to consciously game (either saving or not killing or whatever). He may do this anyway, but at least then it's because he understood the dialogue and not because te portrait was a flashing neon "important" sign reminded him he was playing a game. I think that is a fundamental flaw in game design, even if the majority of the times it's not gamebreaking to know who the important NPCs are other than to break your immershun.

There are some workarounds. Perhaps if you want the player to bump into an imporant NPC early on, without revealing his important immediately, you give him a robbed portrait that doesn't show his face. Then later when he has you strapped to a torture device he reveals His True Self. Or, you can play on player expectations and make an obviously important NPC die unexpectedly. For instance, anyone not familiar with the plot of Oblivion probably wouldn't have expected Uriel Septim to get killed considering he was voiced by Patrick Stewart. In Fallout 3, players not familiar with current developments will expect that Liam Neeson is going to be a reoccurring character since he's such a prominent name. Here I'm talking about celebrity voices, but it's exactly the same as unique portraits. In both circumstances letting outside design resource issues dictate narrative elements inside the game is sloppy and possibly limiting as a designer and annoying for the player.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Another portrait:

Neleos, the guildmaster of the assassins guild.

Neleos' smile seemed to be a permanent feature of his face. He was always in a good mood, even when things didn't go his way, and he was well liked in Teron despite his line of work. Few people thought of him as an assassin, and the general consensus was that Neleos was more of an administrator of the guild, rather than someone who killed for a living. Neleos was well aware of those rumors, but he made no efforts to either confirm or deny them.

neleos.jpg


Inspired by:

wallach.jpg


Opinions?
 

Sovy Kurosei

Erudite
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
1,535
Lord Chambers, you write five paragraphs and all you do is dig a hole in your argument so deep that you can't get out of it.

You say that portraits force people to metagame by marking out which NPCs are special or not. I say that dialogue would do the same. Now you turn around and go on for paragraphs how dialogue is part and parcel with the RPG and that the majority of RPGers think just like you on this issue and then imply that I am a fucking idiot. However this is the line that gets me:

Lord Chambers said:
He may do this anyway, but at least then it's because he understood the dialogue and not because te portrait was a flashing neon "important" sign reminded him he was playing a game.

So it is alright for a player to metagame if he sees that a character is important due to dialogue yet if he metagames when a portrait flashes up this is bad? Give me a break.

You cannot make the case against metagaming then back up and say that some metagaming is alright and that some of it is bad. You are trying to play it both ways. That's bullshit.

There are some good arguments against devoting resources to producing portraits in an RPG. "Because it will promote metagaming" isn't one of them.

Lord Chambers said:
For instance, anyone not familiar with the plot of Oblivion probably wouldn't have expected Uriel Septim to get killed considering he was voiced by Patrick Stewart.

Because we all know that celebrities will never play as a character that will die in the story. :salute:

VD:

The resemblance is uncanny but it looks pretty good. It looks grittier than the first two portraits and I think it would fit into AoD's setting.

Also according to Hollywood cowboys all got a really awesome dental plan. :lol:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom