Are people really this upset about 2cm? (0.78 inches in inferior measurements) Character Creator shinanegans

[Greywolf]

So I keep hearing this argument that the character creation in Dragons Dogma 2 is so much worse than the original and because the height slider does not have the variability of the first game this has caused them to not want to play the game because we all know the major thrill of the first game was adjusting your height right?

Well in the interest of fairness I decided to put these claims to the test and see just how lacking the Dragon's Dogma 2 character is when compared to the first

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979833

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979962

As you can see here the minium size for a female pawn is about 136cm and through the height slider you can raise their height to 193 cm, which is a difference of 57cm which is a fairly good range right? Lets look at the second game

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176981874

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979522

Booo, as you can see there is a minimum size of 160cm and a maximum of 215cm which leaves us with a difference of only 55cm? You mean to tell me Capcom sacrificed a whole 2cm from the character creator and only gave us more scars, face paint and body paint options and more options on where and how to apply them and more control over body part sliders? How dare they! I can see why you are livid about this!

[Azyle]

This isn't directed at you because I believe you are being helpful and logical but good grief this game just needs to come out because it really is unbearable lately around here.

[chaosdemon122]

Originally posted by Greywolf:

So I keep hearing this argument that the character creation in Dragons Dogma 2 is so much worse than the original and because the height slider does not have the variability of the first game this has caused them to not want to play the game because we all know the major thrill of the first game was adjusting your height right?

Well in the interest of fairness I decided to put these claims to the test and see just how lacking the Dragon's Dogma 2 character is when compared to the first

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979833

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979962

As you can see here the minium size for a female pawn is about 136cm and through the height slider you can raise their height to 193 cm, which is a difference of 57cm which is a fairly good range right? Lets look at the second game

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176981874

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979522

Booo, as you can see there is a minimum size of 160cm and a maximum of 215cm which leaves us with a difference of only 55cm? You mean to tell me Capcom sacrificed a whole 2cm from the character creator and only gave us more scars, face paint and body paint options and more options on where and how to apply them and more control over body part sliders? How dare they! I can see why you are livid about this!

They sacrificed a whole 24cm from the minimum height, which is the reason people are complaining because the smallest character they can make in DD2 is 5'3" which, while it is on the short side of average, people want to make "dwarf" characters. 5'3" is way too tall for a dwarf.

[Drake]

It's not the variation that is the problem. It's the minimum height. They are complaining about the 160 cm instead of the 136.

No one is complaining about a 215 cm female...

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by chaosdemon122:

Originally posted by Greywolf:

So I keep hearing this argument that the character creation in Dragons Dogma 2 is so much worse than the original and because the height slider does not have the variability of the first game this has caused them to not want to play the game because we all know the major thrill of the first game was adjusting your height right?

Well in the interest of fairness I decided to put these claims to the test and see just how lacking the Dragon's Dogma 2 character is when compared to the first

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979833

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979962

As you can see here the minium size for a female pawn is about 136cm and through the height slider you can raise their height to 193 cm, which is a difference of 57cm which is a fairly good range right? Lets look at the second game

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176981874

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3176979522

Booo, as you can see there is a minimum size of 160cm and a maximum of 215cm which leaves us with a difference of only 55cm? You mean to tell me Capcom sacrificed a whole 2cm from the character creator and only gave us more scars, face paint and body paint options and more options on where and how to apply them and more control over body part sliders? How dare they! I can see why you are livid about this!

They sacrificed a whole 24cm from the minimum height, which is the reason people are complaining because the smallest character they can make in DD2 is 5'3" which, while it is on the short side of average, people want to make "dwarf" characters. 5'3" is way too tall for a dwarf.

and they added 22cm to the max height so now people can have proper dommy mommies, I don't see what the problem is?

I would argue that you can still create a fairly convincing dwarf in this game, check out this dood

https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma2/comments/1b9dlgx/choosing_between_humans_and_furries_pfff_i_choose/

Sure it isn't the "canon" height of dwarves in dungeons and dragons but these are Dragons Dogma dwarves, taller than most dwarves but still visibly shorter than most other people, it is all about context.

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Drake:

It's not the variation that is the problem. It's the minimum height. They are complaining about the 160 cm instead of the 136.

No one is complaining about a 215 cm female...

why does your pawn or character simply HAVE to be 136 cm though? The point is people were complaining about the character creator in DD2 not having as much variation as it did in DD1, but as you can see there is only 2cm difference, only this time around they put the height difference in favour of creating larger characters instead of smaller ones.

[dirtshrimp]

Originally posted by Greywolf:

Originally posted by chaosdemon122:

They sacrificed a whole 24cm from the minimum height, which is the reason people are complaining because the smallest character they can make in DD2 is 5'3" which, while it is on the short side of average, people want to make "dwarf" characters. 5'3" is way too tall for a dwarf.

and they added 22cm to the max height so now people can have proper dommy mommies, I don't see what the problem is?

I would argue that you can still create a fairly convincing dwarf in this game, check out this dood

https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma2/comments/1b9dlgx/choosing_between_humans_and_furries_pfff_i_choose/

Sure it isn't the "canon" height of dwarves in dungeons and dragons but these are Dragons Dogma dwarves, taller than most dwarves but still visibly shorter than most other people, it is all about context.

I've seen people try to make dwarves and goblins and it just doesn't look right. Its not just about the proportion to other people but also the proportion of body parts like torso to leg to head which is extremely off in these attempts. Anyway I think its a big problem if the developers are deciding its more important to have "dommy mommies" than classic fantasy races. I don't have a problem with increasing max height but that is no reason to also increase the minimum.

[Corlain]

150cm would make more sense than 160. Lots of women are under 160cm.

[Drake]

Originally posted by Greywolf:

Originally posted by Drake:

It's not the variation that is the problem. It's the minimum height. They are complaining about the 160 cm instead of the 136.

No one is complaining about a 215 cm female...

why does your pawn or character simply HAVE to be 136 cm though? The point is people were complaining about the character creator in DD2 not having as much variation as it did in DD1, but as you can see there is only 2cm difference, only this time around they put the height difference in favour of creating larger characters instead of smaller ones.

Some people want to make dwarves, gnomes and hobbits, so 136 cm is what you would target for those races.

But the issue is again, that in DD1, some people used the small height to make children, dress them in lingerie and do weird stuff ingame and posting it on social media.

So obviously capcom limited it for DD2.

[dirtshrimp]

Originally posted by Drake:

Originally posted by Greywolf:

why does your pawn or character simply HAVE to be 136 cm though? The point is people were complaining about the character creator in DD2 not having as much variation as it did in DD1, but as you can see there is only 2cm difference, only this time around they put the height difference in favour of creating larger characters instead of smaller ones.

Some people want to make dwarves, gnomes and hobbits, so 136 cm is what you would target for those races.

But the issue is again, that in DD1, some people used the small height to make children, dress them in lingerie and do weird stuff ingame and posting it on social media.

So obviously capcom limited it for DD2.

So why not get rid of the lingerie? I guess capcom thought that was more important than the ability to make dwarves in their fantasy game.

[Drake]

Originally posted by dirtshrimp:

Originally posted by Drake:

Some people want to make dwarves, gnomes and hobbits, so 136 cm is what you would target for those races.

But the issue is again, that in DD1, some people used the small height to make children, dress them in lingerie and do weird stuff ingame and posting it on social media.

So obviously capcom limited it for DD2.

So why not get rid of the lingerie? I guess capcom thought that was more important than the ability to make dwarves in their fantasy game.

You have to keep some perverts to sell the game to I guess. Maybe they found out sexual stuff with adult chars was more okay than having children in the game.

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by dirtshrimp:

Originally posted by Greywolf:

and they added 22cm to the max height so now people can have proper dommy mommies, I don't see what the problem is?

I would argue that you can still create a fairly convincing dwarf in this game, check out this dood

https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma2/comments/1b9dlgx/choosing_between_humans_and_furries_pfff_i_choose/

Sure it isn't the "canon" height of dwarves in dungeons and dragons but these are Dragons Dogma dwarves, taller than most dwarves but still visibly shorter than most other people, it is all about context.

I've seen people try to make dwarves and goblins and it just doesn't look right. Its not just about the proportion to other people but also the proportion of body parts like torso to leg to head which is extremely off in these attempts. Anyway I think its a big problem if the developers are deciding its more important to have "dommy mommies" than classic fantasy races. I don't have a problem with increasing max height but that is no reason to also increase the minimum.

I dunno man I have seen people create pretty convincing dwarf and goblin characters with the DD2 editor. Show me your best Dragons Dogma 1 goblin pawn for comparison?


Also why is it a problem if the developers decided they would rather have the option to create big dommy mommies than to create short stacks? Maybe it is a problem for you if you have this weird obsession with creating short characters but then you didn't design the game now did you?

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Drake:

Originally posted by Greywolf:

why does your pawn or character simply HAVE to be 136 cm though? The point is people were complaining about the character creator in DD2 not having as much variation as it did in DD1, but as you can see there is only 2cm difference, only this time around they put the height difference in favour of creating larger characters instead of smaller ones.

Some people want to make dwarves, gnomes and hobbits, so 136 cm is what you would target for those races.

But the issue is again, that in DD1, some people used the small height to make children, dress them in lingerie and do weird stuff ingame and posting it on social media.

So obviously capcom limited it for DD2.

I still don't buy the idea that this is the reason why Capcom limited how short you can make your character, sure if that is what you wanted the character creator for I can see why you might be upset but I really don't think Capcom really cared one way or the other about the feelings of these guys.

Unless of course you have a source where a Capcom representative actually addresses this?

There are far more likely technical limitations coming into play when deciding the height ranges they were going to allow for character creation, things like walking speed and animations syncing up, do you increase the speed of the walking animations so smaller characters can keep up with the strides of larger characters or will smaller characters just lag behind larger ones? What about grappling and getting character animations to sync up with each other like the high 5 or whatever? There are a lot of different technical nuances that go into this sort of thing which is why most developers don't even attempt height variation in character creation, or at the very least have very limited variation in height. I really don't think they made their decisions just to spite those of you in the MAP community.

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by dirtshrimp:

Originally posted by Drake:

Some people want to make dwarves, gnomes and hobbits, so 136 cm is what you would target for those races.

But the issue is again, that in DD1, some people used the small height to make children, dress them in lingerie and do weird stuff ingame and posting it on social media.

So obviously capcom limited it for DD2.

So why not get rid of the lingerie? I guess capcom thought that was more important than the ability to make dwarves in their fantasy game.

Nah that would only piss off a larger group of people while doing nothing to appease those complaining about not being able to make characters as short as they did in the previous game.

First off you would piss off all the normal people with a healthy attraction to adult women (or men even though the lingerie was a women only item in the first game) but you would also still alienate the MAP community as even though they can still make child like characters they would still be unhappy because they would have no clothes to sexualize them with.

[KingOfFriedChicken]

Originally posted by Drake:

Originally posted by dirtshrimp:

So why not get rid of the lingerie? I guess capcom thought that was more important than the ability to make dwarves in their fantasy game.

You have to keep some perverts to sell the game to I guess. Maybe they found out sexual stuff with adult chars was more okay than having children in the game.

Why does everyone jump to child? Why can't someone be a fully grown short adult? Honestly with current DD2 sliders you can't be nearly as thin so if they only adjusted height the rest of the proportions would still be pretty adult looking no?

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by KingOfFriedChicken:

Originally posted by Drake:

You have to keep some perverts to sell the game to I guess. Maybe they found out sexual stuff with adult chars was more okay than having children in the game.

Why does everyone jump to child? Why can't someone be a fully grown short adult? Honestly with current DD2 sliders you can't be nearly as thin so if they only adjusted height the rest of the proportions would still be pretty adult looking no?

Because usually fully grown adults at that size are quite rare and usually the result of a health defect.

I am sure somebody might want to play as Warwick Davis however he is hardly representative of your average fully grown adult.