Can we tone down the visuals for greataxe and warhammer

Game Feedback Game Feedback
114

How about a big ass chain gun, cannons, muskets, etc… all of which you can find in wars on this game?

Your argument seems to be: if it’s found in reality, it needs to be realistic, and across weapon types they all need to be realistic then. But that’s crazy… there’s pirates who are realistic, but then zombies and skeletons come to life… should those be deleted? There’s wolves that look real, but then some made of wood and glowing with a magical essence, and others that are zombie dogs. There’s just countless examples in the game where something could happen in reality but across the artistic set there’s something else that could never happen. I just don’t know why warhammer/great axe is the thing you’d home in on.

115

Can you not understand the difference between realism and an art style?

Yes, we all understand there are magical elements in the game. We’re not idiots. We can all accept that crazy things happen on the island. That’s not the issue or the “ha ha, gotcha” point you think it is.

What we’re looking for is verisimilitude, which in terms of media means that a work of fiction sets up certain rules and expectations and then the world abides by them.

New World puts us in a world where true death is rare because most people (and things) resurrect after dying and sometime they come back wrong. We know there’s a magical element (Azoth) to the island (as evidenced by the Angry Earth) and there’s a corruption spreading that is causing all kinds of problem. We play as the latest shipwreck victims and try to make our way on the island and learn what’s going on.

That’s all fine, it’s what we’re here for.

However it also portrays everything as being a real place on our Earth not dissimilar to Atlantis. We’re 16th or 17th century explorers, probably sailing on a Spanish ship given Captain Thorpe’s armor.

So now we’ve got both fantastical elements, but it’s been grounded in the real world. Take every real weapon and the armor and you can trace them back to their real world equivalents, except for the great axe and war hammer. And the magic weapons are designed to look like weapons humans can carry and wield, despite magic not being real.

Now there’s some variation in the weapons, for example some of the spears might be a touch too big, but that’s fine. Some artistic license is fine so long as it fits the visual style.

Likewise, cannon, muskets, fire launchers, and all that are real weapons that existed during the game’s setting. Even the repeater isn’t too far off as repeating weapons were first invented in the 17th century. Using the magical metals and other regents would allow gunsmiths to take their knowledge of those primitive repeater weapons and make larger versions.

But the great axe and war hammer stick out like sore thumbs. They do not fit. It’s not a case of us not realizing there’s magic on the island. It’s that the grounded nature of the weaponry. They’re rejects from anime. Hell, even World of Warcraft has better sized axes.

Being a fantasy game doesn’t mean “anything goes”. The setting has rules and those weapons break those rules. If we can lug that war hammer around, why am I wasting my time with a musket when I could run around with a ship cannon? Why can’t I carry a ballista around and fire it at people? It would weigh less than a war hammer after all.

2 Likes
116

You’re just really narrowing down one element in this fantastical magical realm to suit one little aesthetic in a huge world of inconsistent elements. That’s all I’m saying. A lot of people like this art style and don’t have such a nuanced view that hyper focuses in on this one detail: they do not fit in your opinion, but a lot of people didn’t give them a second look, or outright like the image of a warrior carrying a giant weapon. It looks cool, anime aside. Rambo carrying an M60 in his arms was cool before anime gained its cult-following popularity. People like the look of an abnormally sized weapon.

Also… I mean just try to imagine that along with the magic in the game that allows the axe to shoot a rift in freaking reality comes the added magical strength to heft these weapons…. And before the “artistic style”
Comment: the gravity well and all other abilities are also artistic! And you invoke believable things to prove your points about the aesthetic so… I can’t see how it would be hard to imagine that the warriors that train with these magical weapons like ice gauntlets and fire staffs also get the magical strength necessary to carry giant weapons. It’s not inconceivable within the rules of a universe you are not the arbiter of, but instead are playing a game within.

117

And what we’re saying is that the art style is pretty consistent overall, those two weapons aside.

Your example of Rambo is a good example, but for our side of things. An M60 can be used by a normal human, it’s just not meant to be used that way effectively. That would be like some of the pictures people have posted in this thread and other threads about this topic.

We don’t have a problem with weapons being a little oversized for dramatic effect. That fits.

But this isn’t Rambo carrying an M60, it’s Rambo carrying the the GAU-8/A cannon from the A-10.

And this goes back to the art style conveying expectations. If I can carry weapon as absurdly massive as the war hammer, then I would expect to be able to carry a cannon or ballista as well. Why is one fine, but the other not allowed?

1 Like
118

I’d just like to say that part of why I enjoy playing axe/hammer is the exaggerated sfx and gfx. It feels and sounds impactful. Please don’t change it!

119

GA being shit broken in PVP and the problem we see with it is its visuals. Non funny, bro.

I have a solution though - remove this OwerPowered weapon from the game completely. Together with life staff and heavy armor. May also add Hatchet to this pile as well. Will fix bothj problems at the same time.

120

“Why is one fine, but the other not allowed?“

Because the magic that the axe or hammer contains allows it and those weapons don’t have it? Make up any excuse you like? Think about Thor’s hammer in the Avengers. There’s something to the hammer that allows only him to wield it or fast travel with it.

121

See, now you’re having to make up excuses for things that are obviously wrong according to the in-universe rules. It just leads to more questions like “why don’t we make cannon with the same magic?”. Or “why does such a huge hammer not work any better than a normal sized sword?”

Marvel is a bad counter-example because that’s a universe where damn near anything goes.

1 Like
122

Why is this not a universe where anything goes? You seem to have a weird assumption there confined only to the weight of 2 weapons, that is limited to there and nothing else in the world. That’s pretty inconsistent.

123

Ugh, it’s based on the presentation of the game’s art and the in-game lore. That’s the freaking point.

We can’t fly, we can’t run super fast, we’re not dual wielding two giant swords. Nor are we using huge levels of magic. The spells the staves and gauntlets cast are pretty tame by fantasy settings. Hell, going out into the wilderness and you can get killed by what seems to be a mundane bear.

Even our inventory is limited by bags that require magical runes of holding to craft.

Aside from the art style, nothing in the lore speaks of being granted immense strength to wield massive weapons.

You might like giant weapons but that doesn’t mean the fit the aesthetics of the game. And that’s all this conversation is. I (and other people) show why the weapons don’t fit the art style, and your (and other people’s) only response is “but I like them”

2 Likes
124

That’s not the only response. You just ignored all the millions of other data points that we are trying to point out where something doesn’t fit, but you have this hyperfocused view on these two weapons. The truth for you is that same as us, you just don’t like the way they look, but you’re trying to make it into some objective thing where it’s sensical. But any invitation to argue that these don’t fit the bounds of the world begs the question: why do you get to decide what the bounds are? And any example you point out showing “realism” is counterbalanced by millions of other points: I.e., we can’t fly, sure… BUT WE CAN TELEPORT LIKE STAR TREK. I mean come on man. You can’t see how nit-picky this one little aesthetic detail is in the bounds of your argument? The real truth is: “I just don’t like how it looks!” Like us saying “we do!” It’s just preference.

125

dude… millions? and the post is specifically about those two weapons… so shouldn’t they be you know, hyperfocused on them? what are you smoking? it’s bad stuff

1 Like
126

It was an exaggeration but there are countless examples. Instead of attacking me or picking apart semantics, maybe address the question? My point is that it’s strange to be hyperfocused on these two weapons, when you could say there are an infinite number of things in the game that are slightly inconsistent with the “art style” and then just throw out arguments as to why it doesn’t make sense. But all the arguments are grounded in some kind of rule about reality, suspended for some things but active for only the things on which to make your point. It’s just extremely fallacious reasoning. I’d prefer the honest statement of: “I just don’t like how they look.” When it’s ironic that that’s what you accuse the defense of this art style to be. Then when I point out ways these can also be grounded in the rules of the universe, they are dismissed as non-plausible. But then it’s like…. When does the plausibility stop and start besides with the points you want to make?

127

The examples you provided (cannon, repeaters, etc) are all either period appropriate or mild exaggerations of contemporary technology.

That or you’re picking the obviously magical stuff (rain of arrows for example) in a setting that contains magic.

Your defense of “maybe the hammer/axe are magically enchanted to let us wield such heavy weapons” doesn’t work because it brings up more questions than it answers.

  • Why don’t we enchant other weapons like cannon to be man-portable?
  • Why don’t we use giant versions of the other weapons? A 20’ spear would be very useful
  • Even if you’re strong enough, why add the 2nd head to either weapon? That’s not something a competent weaponsmith would add because it adds nothing but bulk

What’s more, there haven’t been any shown examples in the universe that allow us to make such magic. You basically just said “magic exists, so therefore we can be extra strong”.

And again, for the thousandth time, **IT’S NOT ABOUT REALITY! IT’S ABOUT AN ART STYLE GROUNDED IN REALITY".

You know what’s not realistic? Using a rapier as a battlefield weapon. The first time you struck armor it would snap in half and you’d be screwed. But it’s fine because rapiers are associated with the time period and the pirate aesthetic.

What’s also not realistic? Not keeping your shield in front of you at all times. But we accept that because it’s a game and if shields could block 95% of the time, even while attacking, everyone would run sword and board.

But nothing anybody has been able to find has justified the size of those weapons beyond “big hammer go brrr”.

Hell, if I had the choice between a giant hammer that was magically enchanted to let me wield it and a normal sized war hammer that made me just as strong but only weighed a few pounds, I’d take the normal sized one because it would do damage!

2 Likes
128

all the weapons but those two, follow a stylistic theme and size… so yeah, seeing two massively oversized weapons is jarring to some of us. i don’t care about some exotic explination, consistancy now, or we’re going to get more shit like the lion and the rabbit.

1 Like
129

You’re still not addressing my point. You are only using the realism argument to address this issue. But in all other aspects of the game, you say it’s fine to ignore. ( Show me an example of a giant chain gun from the 17th century by the way. You’re at least two centuries off: The Gatling gun is a rapid-firing multiple-barrel firearm invented in 1861 by Richard Jordan Gatling. It is an early machine gun and a forerunner of the modern electric motor-driven rotary cannon. )

And a more fundamental point: most people come to a fantasy game to be immersed in fantasy. To argue that you need realism to be immersed in the fantasy is strange to me.

130

What’s wrong with the rabbit? I understand the cats look a bit misplaced at times, but the rabbits seem fair. Except when they talk back :wink:

131

they were “galaxy” rabbits…

image
image1920×1080 266 KB

image
image900×506 52.4 KB

1 Like
132

The gatling gun isn’t the first repeating weapon. There are repeating rifles that date back to 1690.

The siege weapon in New World is called a repeater and bears a resemblance to an upscaled pepperbox gun, pistol/rifle versions of which existed in the 1600s. The NW version, while anachronistic in terms of complexity, is based on real weapons.

You have really got to stop with “stop using realism” because you obviously don’t understand what you’re arguing against. None of us care if we’re wielding a sword that bigger than us if we’re playing Monster Hunter or Final Fantasy. Those games art styles are all about exaggeration everything.

However New World has a much more grounded style. That’s why we dislike these two weapons, not because they’re unrealistic. Magic doesn’t exist in our world, but it’s realistic in terms of New World (there’s that verisimilitude thing again!). But even by New World rules, those weapons don’t fit.

2 Likes
133

Show me the example you are referring to and compare it to New World version.