Guild Wars 2

…less paper, more substance!

Hello and good morning, day, evening or night to you all, wherever and whenever you may read this.

A fair warning, wall of text by a non-native-speaker of the english language incoming:

This thread was opened by me with the hope and intention of capturing the attention of someone at Arenanet, so they may read and hopefully pass on to the relevant devs/designers what I’m about to write here.

I’ve been playing GW2 on and off since it’s release, sometimes taking a short break, sometimes a longer one. Now, this isn’t supposed to be heavy criticism, just my plea for less usage of what me and my friends refer to as “Paper-Equipment”. And before anyone makes this claim: yes, I’m running it on a gaming rig that can and does display GW2 in all it’s glory at max. settings while still getting decent FPS

There are countless examples in the Game of either Weapons or Armor being so thin that you may not even notice they even exist if looking from some point of view. There are the Chains from the new Marjory-Outfit, some Metal-Plates from several sets of heavy armor and while it may be ok for “armor” that’s made out of cloth to be thin, it should at least be there if I look at it from a different angle than the standard position of the Camera. I may be obsessing over some small details, but I find it really depressing to note such small things.

Why not simply make them that small bit bigger? You’re animating them in a way so they seem to be there if looked at from vertain points of view, why not simply put them there in the first place?

Please ANet, stop using Paper while crafting weapons and armor and use the real stuff!

TL:DR: No more parts for Armor or Weapons that are only “1 Pixel / Paperthin” in width

From a modder’s perspective the answer is clear: ANet uses “paper” thin parts for their weapons and armor for increased performance and because it’s easier to make. Objects that actually have a substance (thickness > 0) require two layers of polygons, while thin objects only require one. That’s double the vertices, double the dev work and double the workload for our graphics cards. So whenever a designer works on something really thin, they just make it have a thickness of 0.

You are right, but the additional work is not a big factor I guess. From my hobby experience in modelling: you can just make a box out of a sheet with dragging it, right? They probably do just that for thicker stuff, modelling the curves in a sheet, then give it some height by dragging. Thinking about how I would do it if I wanted a thick cloak instead of using a sheet.

Performance is probably the main issue, more vertices, more to compute. Since I started playing games in the 90’s, everything where I cannot count the pixels is already great for me. I’m happy with the texture and modelling quality in GW2. Only thing that bothers me is too many trench coats and few alternatives for my Thief.

Beshbaliq.3724:

There are countless examples in the Game of either Weapons or Armor being so thin that you may not even notice they even exist if looking from some point of view. […]

TL:DR: No more parts for Armor or Weapons that are only “1 Pixel / Paperthin” in width

Yes, absolutely! This is especially noticeable with some sword skins. Just awful!

For instance, one of the reasons I refuse to get the two/three legendary “Twilight” swords is their non-existent blade thickness. “Paper skin” does pinpoint it nicely.

Ashantara.8731:

Beshbaliq.3724:

There are countless examples in the Game of either Weapons or Armor being so thin that you may not even notice they even exist if looking from some point of view. […]

TL:DR: No more parts for Armor or Weapons that are only “1 Pixel / Paperthin” in width

Yes, absolutely! This is especially noticeable with some sword skins. Just awful!

For instance, one of the reasons I refuse to get the two/three legendary “Twilight” swords is their non-existent blade thickness. “Paper skin” does pinpoint it nicely.

Those swords have 0-thickness blades for a reason – they’re rifts in reality, not physical blades. They really are two-dimensional planes projected from the hilt.

This is an engine that is at least five years old, and has to accommodate players on dated computers. Your suggestion doesn’t seem to be very viable.

Pretty Pixie.8603:

This is an engine that is at least five years old, and has to accommodate players on dated computers. Your suggestion doesn’t seem to be very viable.

To be fair, there are quite a few skins – especially the newer ones – that are thicker than Paper or 0 Polygons. At least where it would be visible if otherwise.. So I don’t think that’s really a big issue. Even tho some players play GW2 on dated machines, I don’t believe t hat the added thickness of some trenchcoats or swordblades/ornaments would cause any noticeable performance issues? Do correct me if I’m wrong, but I dare say that this should not be the issue that forces your game to start lagging.

Sartharina.3542:

Ashantara.8731:

Beshbaliq.3724:

There are countless examples in the Game of either Weapons or Armor being so thin that you may not even notice they even exist if looking from some point of view. […]

TL:DR: No more parts for Armor or Weapons that are only “1 Pixel / Paperthin” in width

Yes, absolutely! This is especially noticeable with some sword skins. Just awful!

For instance, one of the reasons I refuse to get the two/three legendary “Twilight” swords is their non-existent blade thickness. “Paper skin” does pinpoint it nicely.

Those swords have 0-thickness blades for a reason – they’re rifts in reality, not physical blades. They really are two-dimensional planes projected from the hilt.

Doesn’t make it any better, though. Still looks silly, esprecially with the childish broad blade and paintbrush effects. I prefer swords that actually look like swords.