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.

Codex Review Arx Fatalis Review

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,039
Location
Behind you.
That's pretty much the case. I think the main argument not to use portraits is that they provide nothing in terms of gameplay, and just seem to provide a reason to bitch about something on the forums. Ever seen a game that had portraits where people didn't bitch about them?

There's not enough portraits! How come there's no good Drow portraits?! The portraits are all UGLY!

And so on. Really, if they add nothing to the gameplay, and are just a source of contention, why do developers insist on wasting the time and resources to impliment them? It's rather silly.
 

Mistress

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Messages
341
Location
UK
Saint_Proverbius said:
That's pretty much the case. I think the main argument not to use portraits is that they provide nothing in terms of gameplay, and just seem to provide a reason to bitch about something on the forums. Ever seen a game that had portraits where people didn't bitch about them?

To be honest not that I can think of. It's sad really. I was reading a post by JE on the IPLY boards regarding this and the fact that people keep whining about the IWD2 portraits. I think he's pretty much in favour of not including them in future games, if I remember correctly. I don't blame him either - the portraits aren't badly done at all, they aren't at all important and really, when there is the option to use your own custom made portraits - what the hell is the problem? It's basically, just something else to whine about.

There's not enough portraits! How come there's no good Drow portraits?! The portraits are all UGLY!

I think some of them spend longer choosing a portrait than they do actually making important character decisions..... I WANT A KEWL DROW RANGER WITH A BLACK PANTHER!!! LOL! Unsurprisingly some of these people are also the ones obsessed with dual wielding scimitars.

And so on. Really, if they add nothing to the gameplay, and are just a source of contention, why do developers insist on wasting the time and resources to impliment them? It's rather silly.

I think that, the more people whine about superficialities like this, the more some developers will get pissed off with it. So in the end, they will end up with no portraits at all, and they will only have themselves to blame.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,039
Location
Behind you.
Mistress said:
To be honest not that I can think of. It's sad really. I was reading a post by JE on the IPLY boards regarding this and the fact that people keep whining about the IWD2 portraits. I think he's pretty much in favour of not including them in future games, if I remember correctly. I don't blame him either - the portraits aren't badly done at all, they aren't at all important and really, when there is the option to use your own custom made portraits - what the hell is the problem? It's basically, just something else to whine about.

You know the funniest thing about stats, particularly in a D&D game. In most of them, you can't pick your stats, right? How come you can pick your face then? That's never made a lick of sense to me. :)

The best part about a lack of portraits is that what the character looks like is left up to the player's imagination. There's very little room for pissing and moaning about what your character looks like because it's left up to what you think he or she looks like. The only argument might be, "Hey, why are there no portraits?"

I think some of them spend longer choosing a portrait than they do actually making important character decisions..... I WANT A KEWL DROW RANGER WITH A BLACK PANTHER!!! LOL! Unsurprisingly some of these people are also the ones obsessed with dual wielding scimitars.

Probably true, especially in the case of a dungeon crawler where not much matters other than fighting ability. Honestly, what the hell is the point of portraits in such a game? There is none, so why complain about it? A choice of a portrait won't make an impact on how scared an enemy is of you. It won't let you charm one either, so why bother having it?

I think that, the more people whine about superficialities like this, the more some developers will get pissed off with it. So in the end, they will end up with no portraits at all, and they will only have themselves to blame.

That'd be a shame. I know that Lionheart won't have portraits for the characters. :D
 

Mistress

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Messages
341
Location
UK
Saint_Proverbius said:
The best part about a lack of portraits is that what the character looks like is left up to the player's imagination. There's very little room for pissing and moaning about what your character looks like because it's left up to what you think he or she looks like. The only argument might be, "Hey, why are there no portraits?"

Yes, and I'm all for imagination. Imagination is why the LoTR books are so much better than the movies ever could be to me, imagination is why kids shouldn't be allowed to watch so much TV - because it kills it. If the game is good - I see my character in my head, I have a view of who they are, where I want them to go, what they look like and what their point of view is. In a game where you play first person, it's somewhat easier - you *are* the character, you are the one doing everything, you're not looking at someone else doing things so to speak.

Probably true, especially in the case of a dungeon crawler where not much matters other than fighting ability. Honestly, what the hell is the point of portraits in such a game? There is none, so why complain about it? A choice of a portrait won't make an impact on how scared an enemy is of you. It won't let you charm one either, so why bother having it?

Exactly - there's no point moaning about something which has no actual bearing on the game. Especially when you can just get a picture you do like and use that instead....I just like the portraits because they're pretty and I like flicking through them, as simple as that may sound. It's just something nice to look at.

That'd be a shame. I know that Lionheart won't have portraits for the characters. :D

Hehheh, I can take 'em or leave 'em really. It has no bearing on my enjoyment of a game, or on my choice of game etc. I'm not going to moan about the quality, presence or absence of portraits - they aren't why I buy the game so....
 

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