How could they have made the silhouette and basic shaped that different though? They are both female Farseers; all Farseers have a cloaky thing, though Macha seems to swap out the "dress" like robe for just a cloak, which exposes body armour, which hasn't been seen on a DOW Farseer before. Its like saying how does Boreale differ to Davian Thule (prior to getting rekt but a giant bug). They have subtle differences in armour decor and face, but they are both SMs, not much you can change. Macha and Idranel are both Farseers of a tall, slender race. Their armoured bodies are very likely to look similar. However, their faces are very different. Also, we haven't seen Macha's actual in game model in detail yet (if i am wrong send me a link ). Also, the hairstyle is similar, but not the same, it's just a practical hairstyle without a helmet.
Is it explicitly said that her ponytail was ever her real hair. I presumed it was decoration, however it seemed to serve no purpose. To explain, look at the Howling Banshees, pretty sure those huge avian like manes coming out the back of their helms are part of the helmet, to make them look intimidating AF, and I'm not the only one on this forums that has said that.
However I do agree that the ponytail was iconic, and as you said (even if it is or is not her real hair) they could make her hair more ginger.
I do agree that she bears little resemblance to DOW1 Macha though. But that doesn't bother me that much though, as she is fully entitled to change her look and armour etc, especially considering a long time has passed since the events of DOW1 and her look in DOW1 was VERY generic (but I suppose that's only because they used the same model for the expansions).
But yeah, in conclusion these are the thing that most people in the forums seem to want:
her head coin should be removed or changed
her ears should be more Eldar like, less "anime" style/ Shrek Style.
Her hair should be more ginger.
I think everything else is personal preference, some people like it, others don't, the above point are pretty unanimous
Both being Farseers or Space marines doesnt mean they look the same but it doesnt mean they have to completely look a helluva different. Why do you think they changed Davian Thules look in dow 2 yet he still retained resemblance.
Macha and Idranel it's not about who is slender and who is not nor who has this slight different face and such. They basically have the same silhuette regardless of slenderness, they have the same cape shape, the same haircut and same stance. Furthermore the fact that Macha has absolutely ZERO resemblance to her original deisgn its one huge no no.
A user here said that maybe her hair was a decoration and people are beggining to use that as if it where the actual truth, But I think its safe to assume that it it was her real hair all along. Why? Well, why do you think she has red hair herself? If it had only been decoration they would had been able to pretty much change it, as a matter of fact why would the hair decoration be coming underneath the helmet?
Whats important here is to maintain her silhuette or at least past traits that tell us that it is her. What they did was a completely new design from scratch without using a single previous trait from her original model. Not even the color palette was used.
There are art directors in the videogame field with over 30 years of experience under companies like Blizzard and Gamefreak that say that the silhuette of a character its most important, because it lets people recognize that thing right away. I mean if they are going to evolve the characters look the least they could do is have her retain some of her previous physical characteristics to pretty much state who she is.
This are my 2 cents anyway.
I get what you mean. What I meant is that pretty much all SMs have a pretty much identical silhouette. Also, as graphical capability in game advances, silhouette becomes less important.
I agree that she doesn't look anything like she did in DOW1, but for me, that's fine. And i think she DOW1 Farseer look had come to be closely associated with Taldeer. They wanted to make her look unique. And they did, so they could change the colours, and not keep references to her old look, as she is easily identifiable. I understand that there isn't any sense of nostalgia with her new look.
Sorry, but I would still disagree that Macha and Idranel look as similar as you're making it out to be. In terms of silhouette, Macha has two pairs of very obvious warpveins (one around her head and one on her back), her hair is not identical, yes they both have top knots but they are in different places with different styles, and Idranel has obvious loose bits of hair around her face, while Macha's is scraped tight with her crown thing. Also, look at the cloaks, Macha's is only on her back, her torso is exposed. Idranel wears a robe to her feet, whereas the majority of Macha's legs are exposed, pretty much up to her thighs. Macha uses a spear, not a sword. The only thing similar is their physiques. silhouettes are comletely different and identifiable in my opinion.
But her ponytail was ginger in DOW1, not the dark red colour so far in DOW3, they are starkly different. Also, I do not think it is "safe to assume that it it was her real hair". Do you think Howling Banshee hair is their real hair? And I would argue it "looked" like is came from under her helmet, so it looked like her hair. Anyway is doesn't really matter, no point turning this into an argument as neither of us can prove anything. I'm not saying it's not her hair 100%, I was merely proposing it to offer an explanation, if you don't like the theory, then don't believe it, end of.
I agree that she doesn't look anything like she did in DOW1, but for me, that's fine. And i think she DOW1 Farseer look had come to be closely associated with Taldeer. They wanted to make her look unique. And they did, so they could change the colours, and not keep references to her old look, as she is easily identifiable. I understand that there isn't any sense of nostalgia with her new look.
Taldeers look was deviated a bit thanks to the dark crusade upgrades and that she is now a wraithknight. Taldeer was to Macha what Luigi is to Mario basically.
Sorry, but I would still disagree that Macha and Idranel look as similar as you're making it out to be. In terms of silhouette, Macha has two pairs of very obvious warpveins (one around her head and one on her back), her hair is not identical, yes they both have top knots but they are in different places with different styles, and Idranel has obvious loose bits of hair around her face, while Macha's is scraped tight with her crown thing. Also, look at the cloaks, Macha's is only on her back, her torso is exposed. Idranel wears a robe to her feet, whereas the majority of Macha's legs are exposed, pretty much up to her thighs. Macha uses a spear, not a sword. The only thing similar is their physiques. silhouettes are comletely different and identifiable in my opinion.
Macha has 2 but Idranel has one, they both got the same hair chongo/topknots, it doesnt matter in which little tiny bity detail in changes because the silhutte will point this things out. Basically you are describing me her texture details and not the silhuette. From a far and ast plain sight they look the same. And this is not me but people "specially eldar players have asked me' who is this? is this macha? is she the farseer from DOW 2?
Believe me I wish I was making this up.
BTW Idranel can be given a spear as well. I think you are tryint to hard to make it different but silhuette its basically the same.
But her ponytail was ginger in DOW1, not the dark red colour so far in DOW3, they are starkly different. Also, I do not think it is "safe to assume that it it was her real hair". Do you think Howling Banshee hair is their real hair? And I would argue it "looked" like is came from under her helmet, so it looked like her hair. Anyway is doesn't really matter, no point turning this into an argument as neither of us can prove anything. I'm not saying it's not her hair 100%, I was merely proposing it to offer an explanation, if you don't like the theory, then don't believe it, end of.
Her hair was always referred to red hair regardless of her ginger color. So now we are safe to assume that it was her hair indeed.
Btw yes howling banshees hair it's real, and here is something from the guy that designed them since like forever:
I dont belive the theory because if it had been just ornamentary hair, it would definitely not be coming from underneath the helmet. Eitherway there you go the examples by Jess Goodwyn the man that pretty much has been designing and re-desinging 40k miniatures since over 30 years.
Taldeers look was deviated a bit thanks to the dark crusade upgrades and that she is now a wraithknight
This is not relevant at all...
Macha has 2 but Idranel has one
Idranel has a single warpvein on the back of her head. Macha has two PAIRS coming out the SIDE of her head and back. Vastly different silhouette.
they both got the same hair chongo/topknots, it doesnt matter in which little tiny bity detail in changes because the silhutte will point this things out
Yes both top knots, but quite different styles, a small difference, but still noticeable on the silhouette.
Basically you are describing me her texture details and not the silhuette
Maybe on some stuff, not all. In addition to the above, her cloak is different, it looks shorter, exposing more of the bottom of her legs in her silhouette, not just her feet like in Idranel's.
From a far and ast plain sight they look the same
This is completely qualitative. How far away? From what angle? I have not yet seen an image screenshot where I ever thought Macha looked too much like Idranel, apart from her being a female Eldar Farseer.
And this is not me but people "specially eldar players have asked me' who is this? is this macha? is she the farseer from DOW 2?
Who is saying this? Did they even play DOW2? Idranel is dead.... At first glance maybe they look similar, but at first glance most Farseers look similar.
BTW Idranel can be given a spear as well. I think you are tryint to hard to make it different but silhuette its basically the same.
That is true about the spear. I am not "tryint" to do anything. I merely have a different opinion to you.
Her hair was always referred to red hair regardless of her ginger color.
"Red" hair is a very common way of politely referring to ginger hair and ginger has become something of taboo word. And it being referred to as "red" does not detract from the fact that the ponytail is CLEARLY ginger in DOW1. If this is not the case, this may actually be evidence for the ponytail NOT being her actual hair, as her real hair in DOW3 is not ginger.
So now we are safe to assume that it was her hair indeed.
Lol. No we are not. You have given no real evidence.
Btw yes howling banshees hair it's real
I'm sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure you are wrong. Most aspect warriors have plumed helmets. Are you saying the dreads from the top of Striking Scorpions helms are the Eldars real hair? Are the plumes on Dire Avengers helms their real hair? Dark Reapers? Fire Dragons? It doesnt make sense considering the size and positioning of the Banshees mane, the hair is flowing from the mask about a foot about where their head ends... Just look up pictures of howling banshees or banshee helmets. There are plenty of images showing the mane is part of the helmet.
and here is something from the guy that designed them since like forever:
and
Eitherway there you go the examples by Jess Goodwyn the man that pretty much has been designing and re-desinging 40k miniatures since over 30 years.
That is obviously concept art, I have never seen anything like that or any banshee exarch like that in art or miniatures or heard of it in the fluff. This is just a drawing, one drawing, that no miniatures or anything has come from. The plume could also be attached. This proves nothing at all.
I dont belive the theory because if it had been just ornamentary hair, it would definitely not be coming from underneath the helmet
How do you know it coming from under the helmet? Where is any evidence for this at all?
Idranel has a single warpvein on the back of her head. Macha has two PAIRS coming out the SIDE of her head and back. Vastly different silhouette.
Yes both top knots, but quite different styles, a small difference, but still noticeable on the silhouette.
Maybe on some stuff, not all. In addition to the above, her cloak is different, it looks shorter, exposing more of the bottom of her legs in her silhouette, not J
Congrats you just described Idranel if her character where to have a proper rework.
This is completely qualitative. How far away? From what angle? I have not yet seen an image screenshot where I ever thought Macha looked too much like Idranel, apart from her being a female Eldar Farseer.
You feel that way because you probably knew it was going to be Macha already but the people that havent been up to date, they dont know who she is nor think she looks like macha.
I did a survey with the people of my gaming store, steam and social media so far 90% agree that she dont look like Macha AND that she resembles more the farseer of DOW 2. Plus if you go looking at the fb comments and even on /tg/ you'll see I am not alone.
Plus not all people played the campaign but they played last stand in retrubution and multiplayer so they know who she is.
That is true about the spear. I am not "tryint" to do anything. I merely have a different opinion to you.
Its okay to have different opinions but if you discuss about it in a serious way then I suggest you to be as much accurate as you can get.
I'm sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure you are wrong. Most aspect warriors have plumed helmets. Are you saying the dreads from the top of Striking Scorpions helms are the Eldars real hair? Are the plumes on Dire Avengers helms their real hair? Dark Reapers? Fire Dragons? It doesnt make sense considering the size and positioning of the Banshees mane, the hair is flowing from the mask about a foot about where their head ends... Just look up pictures of howling banshees or banshee helmets. There are plenty of images showing the mane is part of the helmet.
This is when I meant that you should base your opinions with facts, I presented you official evidence from the very pencil of Jess Goodwyn but you still deny.
Scorpion threads?
Banshee with helmet?
That is obviously concept art,** I have never seen anything like that or any banshee exarch like that in art or miniatures** or heard of it in the fluff. This is just a drawing, one drawing, that no miniatures or anything has come from. The plume could also be attached. This proves nothing at all.
Then I guess you never played dawn of war 2.
How do you know it coming from under the helmet? Where is any evidence for this at all?
More evidence that you havent even played the first dawn of war.
As we can see in this picture even fans don't stay true to the silhuette. Only recognisable by the tattoo on her cheeks
So i think its about time this back and fourth stops.
GW just as much changes their models, sometimes to extreme degrees, so everything is in line, isn't it!
Everyone has a different opinion on that matter anyways.
Personaly i like how Macha looks now. Except the ears of the forum picture, but it seems its only there looking so...awkward.
@SharKnight
I am Eldar player and i didn't ask who is that.
By the way i think its not possible to compare a 12? Years old computer model to a new one.
And on Banshee hair...its attached to the helmet. Never ever saw something else in my whole tabletop hobby years.
And there can be male Banshees too.
As we can see in this picture even fans don't stay true to the silhuette. Only recognisable by the tattoo on her cheeks
So i think its about time this back and fourth stops.
GW just as much changes their models, sometimes to extreme degrees, so everything is in line, isn't it!
So you are comparing a silhuette to the drawing of a single fan? That's nit picking. And yes GW changes their models but they seem to agree with my theory. Macha's original model is what 12 years old? Well Kharn and Eldrad had a model that was over 20 years old! And now look at them:
Heck, how about checking out kharn!
Now this is how you are supposed to do it.
Is this the extreme degree that you are speaking off?
This back and forth it's pointless, I present evidence and pictures and yet you guys are just being contrarians.
@SharKnight
I am Eldar player and i didn't ask who is that.
Well I have a friend that's an eldar player and he did ask, among a bunch others. I guess you into the "already knew" bin.
By the way i think its not possible to compare a 12? Years old computer model to a new one.
What do you mean? that is irrelevant on the topic, if the model is too old then you just give it a polish, using the example that I posted above.
And on Banshee hair...its attached to the helmet. Never ever saw something else in my whole tabletop hobby years.
And there can be male Banshees too.
In table top probably not becaue those are metal and finecast miniatures, but according to the guy that designed the entire eldar faction by himself, it seems like it's their actual hair. And I already posted proof of it.
Quote from 40k wikia http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Howling_Banshees
The Howling Banshees are the all-female Eldar Aspect Warriors
Do not confuse them with Wytches, those have mostly females but a male here and there is possible.
Unless you are speaking of eternal crusade in which it basically broke the lore - just like jumping terminators anyone - you are going to have to source me like I have been doing or its shenanigans of the heretical kind.
As we can see in this picture even fans don't stay true to the silhuette. Only recognisable by the tattoo on her cheeks
So i think its about time this back and fourth stops.
GW just as much changes their models, sometimes to extreme degrees, so everything is in line, isn't it!
So you are comparing a silhuette to the drawing of a single fan? That's nit picking. And yes GW changes their models but they seem to agree with my theory. Macha's original model is what 12 years old? Well Kharn and Eldrad had a model that was over 20 years old! And now look at them:
This is not the only drawing, there are many more!
Heck, how about checking out kharn!
Now this is how you are supposed to do it.
Is this the extreme degree that you are speaking off?
This is an example that actually is done pretty well.
There are units that changed way more though.
This back and forth it's pointless, I present evidence and pictures and yet you guys are just being contrarians.
@SharKnight
I am Eldar player and i didn't ask who is that.
Well I have a friend that's an eldar player and he did ask, among a bunch others. I guess you into the "already knew" bin.
By the way i think its not possible to compare a 12? Years old computer model to a new one.
What do you mean? that is irrelevant on the topic, if the model is too old then you just give it a polish, using the example that I posted above.
And on Banshee hair...its attached to the helmet. Never ever saw something else in my whole tabletop hobby years.
And there can be male Banshees too.
In table top probably not becaue those are metal and finecast miniatures, but according to the guy that designed the entire eldar faction by himself, it seems like it's their actual hair. And I already posted proof of it.
This is more than 20 yeats ago and not relevant anymore. Furthermore its probably just a concept and never left that phase. GW released a Artbook of Eldar Concept not to long ago, thats probably the source of those pictures you quote.
Each army evolved and changed quite a lot during the lifetime of the tabletop. In apperance and story.
Best example are the Necrons.
Quote from 40k wikia http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Howling_Banshees
The Howling Banshees are the all-female Eldar Aspect Warriors
Do not confuse them with Wytches, those have mostly females but a male here and there is possible.
Unless you are speaking of eternal crusade in which it basically broke the lore - just like jumping terminators anyone - you are going to have to source me like I have been doing or its shenanigans of the heretical kind.
I don't confuse them with wyches!
Banshees can have male warriors. Its just not represented in the models and actually not all that common to happen. But it is possible.
Here is your quote:
"However, it is possible for Eldar males to walk the Path of the Howling Banshee, though this is extraordinarily rare due to the lack of the needed psychological and physical assets amongst most males"
From the same Wiki page you quoted under Combat Role.
Now stop accusing me of false advertising! I know my Eldar, and i would consider me one of the die hard Eldar fans, maybe not the extreme kind so
Congrats you just described Idranel if her character where to have a proper rework
What? There is no need for silly, sarcastic comments.
You feel that way because you probably knew it was going to be Macha already but the people that haven't been up to date, they dont know who she is nor think she looks like Macha.
Yes, because I read the Eldar Spotlight. No she DOESNT look like Macha from DOW1, because they changed how she looks... but you don't need to recognise her as Macha immediately, because we are all told clearly that it is her! So now we know its her. People probably thought Taldeer was Macha when DOW:WA came out!
I did a survey with the people of my gaming store, steam and social media so far 90% agree that she don't look like Macha AND that she resembles more the farseer of DOW 2. Plus if you go looking at the fb comments and even on /tg/ you'll see I am not alone.
I am NOT denying that new Macha doesn't look like DOW1 Macha. At all. She doesnt. Of course she resembles Idranel more than DOW1 Macha. DOW2 and 3 have similar model and art style and textures. The model for DOW1 farseers was very basic and crude, with very low textures and poly counts, as it is a very old game. Plus the fact the isn't wearing a helmet. Graphical capabilities have developed tremendously in that time. Also, why SHOULD she look or bear resemblance to DOW1 Macha? If it is for recognition only? Or nostalgia? I'd they just be very open and clear about who she is and make her look awesome, which she does. People who think she is Idranel either don't care enough to actually think about it, look, or read.
This is when I meant that you should base your opinions with facts, I presented you official evidence from the very pencil of Jess Goodwyn but you still deny.
and
Then I guess you never played dawn of war 2.
These are Exarchs! Who aren't wearing helmets! From one idea. You are being very bias to your own opinions. Once single source of evidence is not proof if more evidence exists to the contrary. Do some unbiased research, you will find so much more evidence and lore that clearly says or suggests Aspect Warrior have hair on their helmets. Also, with these Exarchs, these could be implants or hair extension type things for Exarchs that forgo helmets type things, to make them look like the troops they lead. What if a Howling banshee who is ready to become an exarch has short or brown hair? Do they have to dye it and wait for it to grow out?
More evidence that you haven't even played the first dawn of war.
The helmet, like the banshees, may just be designed to LOOK like it's coming from under the helmet. I'm less convinced of Machas helmet but it is still possible. It still doesn't change the fact that she is free to change her hair style, length and colour.
Also, please stop these sarcastic comments. Insults and sideways comments are a clear sign of being stubborn, defensive and on the backfoot and not being able to form a convincing argument. If you can't engage in a unbiased, logical discussion without resorting to childish quips and arguing, then I won't continue to indulge you.
Master Chief, for instance, is a far more recognizable and iconic character in the world of gaming, and yet I don't remember people complaining about his armor that went through many redesigns and marks over sequels. I mean, geez. She appeared in one game, and used a model made at that time. Idranel was a pattern for DoW2, later on there were DLCs, and no doubt we'll have them here as well. Diomedes, also appeared in one game and had a helmet, and later on got his face shown. Thule, a classic Force Commander turned devastator with a bionic eye for the sequel, etc, etc. What's the big deal?
Some people just can't let go. Seeing this its no wonder anymore seeing so many complaints about Gabriel who went through the most drastic changes, over Terminator armor, new never before seen powers plus the change of his voice actor. Times are changing, even GW itself is changing models.
@Renner said:
Master Chief, for instance, is a far more recognizable and iconic character in the world of gaming, and yet I don't remember people complaining about his armor that went through many redesigns and marks over sequels. I mean, geez. She appeared in one game, and used a model made at that time. Idranel was a pattern for DoW2, later on there were DLCs, and no doubt we'll have them here as well. Diomedes, also appeared in one game and had a helmet, and later on got his face shown. Thule, a classic Force Commander turned devastator with a bionic eye for the sequel, etc, etc. What's the big deal?
Some people just can't let go. Seeing this its no wonder anymore seeing so many complaints about Gabriel who went through the most drastic changes, over Terminator armor, new never before seen powers plus the change of his voice actor. Times are changing, even GW itself is changing models.
I completely agree.
Yeah, I franky love the changes made to Macha, and thing Gabe looks epic in his Tartaros Termy armour! (Still not sure about the whole jumping thing, but I'll get over it)
I hope we don't see her running around without her helmet during regular gameplay. Interactive scenes between Macha and other plot characters could be interesting if she removes her helmet. Otherwise I'm on the fence about her redesign, the original model for dow1 was nothing to celebrate, the visual density of Macha doesn't seem to be there in the promo shot of her though. The coin on her forehead? I couldn't care less. Maybe just make it smaller so it doesn't take up 80% of her forehead haha
Yes, because I read the Eldar Spotlight.** No she DOESNT look like Macha from DOW1, because they changed how she looks**... but you don't need to recognise her as Macha immediately, because we are all told clearly that it is her! So now we know its her. People probably thought Taldeer was Macha when DOW:WA came out!
I dont think they did, because Macha is from biel tan and its white and talder wore black armor. And believe it or not that is quite enough. Just ask Mario & Luigi.
I am NOT denying that new Macha doesn't look like DOW1 Macha. At all. She doesnt. Of course she resembles Idranel more than DOW1 Macha. DOW2 and 3 have similar model and art style and textures. The model for DOW1 farseers was very basic and crude, with very low textures and poly counts, as it is a very old game. Plus the fact the isn't wearing a helmet. Graphical capabilities have developed tremendously in that time. Also, why SHOULD she look or bear resemblance to DOW1 Macha? If it is for recognition only? Or nostalgia? I'd they just be very open and clear about who she is and make her look awesome, which she does. People who think she is Idranel either don't care enough to actually think about it, look, or read.
This is not about nostalgia but silhuette integrity, look at the example that I posted above with kharn and Eldrad? Do you think they designed that way because of nostalgia?
Yes Macha was designed that way so that when you go to army painter she could be like your commander from tabletop game, however that does not excuse to not bring a single characteristic trait from her into the new design to keep coherence and silhuette integrity.
If you think she looks awesome or not it's pretty subjective thought.
>
This is when I meant that you should base your opinions with facts, I presented you official evidence from the very pencil of Jess Goodwyn but you still deny.
and
Then I guess you never played dawn of war 2.
These are Exarchs! Who aren't wearing helmets! From one idea. You are being very bias to your own opinions. Once single source of evidence is not proof if more evidence exists to the contrary. Do some unbiased research, you will find so much more evidence and lore that clearly says or suggests Aspect Warrior have hair on their helmets. Also, with these Exarchs, these could be implants or hair extension type things for Exarchs that forgo helmets type things, to make them look like the troops they lead. What if a Howling banshee who is ready to become an exarch has short or brown hair? Do they have to dye it and wait for it to grow out?
I am being bias? You are being bias! I am showing you explicit evidence from many sources and you are still in complete denial. What have you shown?
More evidence that you haven't even played the first dawn of war.
The helmet, like the banshees, may just be designed to LOOK like it's coming from under the helmet. I'm less convinced of Machas helmet but it is still possible. It still doesn't change the fact that she is free to change her hair style, length and colour.
This is just denial after explicit evidence.
It is CLEARLY comming from under her helmet and then you have her in a sequel where she has the same color spectrum as her hair.
Also Her hair was one of the most iconic thins about her character silhuette. Taking it out it's a mistake. Also this is a fictional character so I dont know why you refer to it as a real person.
Also, please stop these sarcastic comments. Insults and sideways comments are a clear sign of being stubborn, defensive and on the backfoot and not being able to form a convincing argument. If you can't engage in a unbiased, logical discussion without resorting to childish quips and arguing, then I won't continue to indulge you.
Calling me biased, stubborn and childish.
I am not even arguing, I just presented official evidence with an actual statement and if you dont like it its not my problem. You just search for an excuse to deny wathever evidence I bring and yet you fail to bring any to counter my arguments. If you made a fool out of yourself then thats on you, not me.
@Renner said:
Master Chief, for instance, is a far more recognizable and iconic character in the world of gaming, and yet I don't remember people complaining about his armor that went through many redesigns and marks over sequels. I mean, geez. She appeared in one game, and used a model made at that time. Idranel was a pattern for DoW2, later on there were DLCs, and no doubt we'll have them here as well. Diomedes, also appeared in one game and had a helmet, and later on got his face shown. Thule, a classic Force Commander turned devastator with a bionic eye for the sequel, etc, etc. What's the big deal?
Some people just can't let go. Seeing this its no wonder anymore seeing so many complaints about Gabriel who went through the most drastic changes, over Terminator armor, new never before seen powers plus the change of his voice actor. Times are changing, even GW itself is changing models.
Master chief has literally always had the same armor silhuette throught all of incarnations. Big deal here is that they are not keeping her silhuette nor any trait that connects to her original design, which is something the characters that you mentioned DID keep.
Do you even know why people complained about Gabriel? Because of him jumping like a ballerina, not because of his looks. Yes GW changed models, just look at my example of kharn and eldrad, THAT is how a model update for a character its supposed to be done.
SharKnight, saying you are making childish quips is not the same thing as calling you childish. Your attitude is unnecessary here and twisting other peoples' words to suit is not helping your case.
@Gorb said:
SharKnight, saying you are making childish quips is not the same thing as calling you childish. Your attitude is unnecessary here and twisting other peoples' words to suit is not helping your case.
@Gorb said:
SharKnight, saying you are making childish quips is not the same thing as calling you childish. Your attitude is unnecessary here and twisting other peoples' words to suit is not helping your case.
Moderate your tone, please.
I am twisting words how exactly?
honestly though I think its just another demonstrated issue of chaffing between the tabletop players and the gamers.
the preservation of silhouette for characters especially is incredibly important in the tabletop because we've got no other means of identifying the characters.
I mean if when forgeworld released horus as a model they decided to completely redesign his appearence from the ground up because "the old look was dated" their would be rioting outside GeeDubs in a day.
good god just look at the controversy over logan grimmnar when he got his wolf chariot, people are still calling him santa claus after that because they changed his silhouette too much and in tabletop games that is incredibly important.
maintaining a silhouette less important in video games though, because you've got the voice, the characterisation, the movements, any special traits the person may have had, and the way that the person interacts with their peers that the developers can use to express the connection between the previous incarnation and the current one, whereas the miniature industry has to convey as much of that emotion and character as they can in a static pose model the size of your thumb, that is why the silhouette is so important.
of course personally I agree with sharknight, relic cocked it up again
I think maintaining the silhouette is probably the single least important thing to worry about in this game. Davian Thule, Gabe and VanillaIce have words to say about ~character development~.
I dont think they did, because Macha is from biel tan and its white and talder wore black armor. And believe it or not that is quite enough. Just ask Mario & Luigi.
Not everyone would have known that. Not everyone who plays DOW is a hardcore 40K fan. Also Luigi is taller than mario
however that does not excuse to not bring a single characteristic trait from her into the new design to keep coherence and silhuette integrity
But why should they? The old design was generic and boring and overdone. Why should they keep anything to do with it? Coherence is a bad argument because a character like a Farseer CAN change what they wear. And we are also clearly told it is Macha, so no need to make it resemble her old model. New Macha has more silhouette integrity that any other Farseer from DOW, and the different in her silhouette compared to Idranel's is only (Donald)trumped by the differences between Idranels and Caerys'. And that was because of technology advancement, and graphical capability.
I am being bias? You are being bias! I am showing you explicit evidence from many sources and you are still in complete denial. What have you shown?
I am not in denial at all. Your evidence is in no way explicit. I have told you to go and research it, not just seek out and find things that ONLY show what you think. Yes you have shown evidence, but ONLY a few bits of evidence, from ONLY 1 maybe 2 sources. But ONLY for exarchs. And you have told me your INTERPRETATION of those pieces of evidence. Your evidence it in no way explicit, it is actually quite weak.
Just because I haven't spammed images, it doesnt mean I have done nothing.
This is just denial after explicit evidence.
It is CLEARLY comming from under her helmet and then you have her in a sequel where she has the same color spectrum as her hair.
As above.
No its not, you just can't see past your own opinion.
It certainly appears to look like it is, yes. But, as I said, it may just look like that. Lol, we're at "color spectrum" now? Its a completely different colour. Orange and red are different colours. As dissimilar as blue and green.
Also Her hair was one of the most iconic thins about her character silhuette. Taking it out it's a >mistake. Also this is a fictional character so I dont know why you refer to it >as a real person.
Maybe, but only because on was the ONLY thing apart from colour that made her different to anyone else.
Also, I mean she is a high ranking farseer. Therefore it is completely within lore and logic that, if the character so desired, she could change her look, for whatever reason.
I am not even arguing, I just presented official evidence with an actual statement and if you dont like it its not my problem.
Yes you are. But your evidence barely proves anything. See my above comments.
You just search for an excuse to deny wathever evidence I bring and yet you fail to bring any to counter my arguments.
Not excuses. Logical counter arguments, to your skin-deep, tenuous "evidence". You can't just post and describe one or two pictures and expect everyone to bow to you.
I've been bringing logical counters/criticism to everything you have said (and even agreeing with your point of view occasionally), but you just fail to see or register them. If you would like me to post a long string of pictures, I will, if thats the only "evidence" you think is binding.
If you made a fool out of yourself then that's on you, not me.
@MrBenis said:
I think maintaining the silhouette is probably the single least important thing to worry about in this game. Davian Thule, Gabe and VanillaIce have words to say about ~character development~.
I completely agree. Its more important in the tabletop. In the game they have many other things to identify them, like their actual name ( ) and voice. Basically what Apollyon said.
Here are pictures for you.
The 'hair' is from the helmet.
@Nautiloidor
I think there is no point in discussing this further. I saw that my post with quotes and proves has two disagrees, Lol.
He refuses the evidence. Funny is that i used the same sources as he did. And he claimed i am making things up, but he didn't read all.
however that does not excuse to not bring a single characteristic trait from her into the new design to keep coherence and silhuette integrity
But why should they? The old design was generic and boring and overdone. Why should they keep anything to do with it? Coherence is a bad argument because a character like a Farseer CAN change what they wear. And we are also clearly told it is Macha, so no need to make it resemble her old model. New Macha has more silhouette integrity that any other Farseer from DOW, and the different in her silhouette compared to Idranel's is only (Donald)trumped by the differences between Idranels and Caerys'. And that was because of technology advancement, and graphical capability.
You think the old design is generic? then this new one its far more generic and here I present an example. And I am sorry but coherence IS an actual argument SPECIALLY when it comes to videogame design.
And the change hair color and all it's irrelevant since this is not an MRPG, The fact that you need to be told it's macha means its an instant fail from art department.
If you think the old model its boring then that's your subjective opinion, and technology it's not an excuse to do a complete re-design of the character, it's just lazy.
New macha has the same silhuette as idranel, as a matter of fact check this out:
Eitherway after all the evidence you will clearly continue to go around searching for ways to be contrarian, meaning it's pointless to discuss with you. Since all you have been doing is looping.
I am not in denial at all. Your evidence is in no way explicit. I have told you to go and research it, not just seek out and find things that ONLY show what you think. Yes you have shown evidence, but ONLY a few bits of evidence, from ONLY 1 maybe 2 sources. But ONLY for exarchs. And you have told me your INTERPRETATION of those pieces of evidence. Your evidence it in no way explicit, it is actually quite weak.
Just because I haven't spammed images, it doesnt mean I have done nothing.
Okay so I showed you pieces done by the guy that designed the entire eldar range from the beggining and images from dawn of war 2 and yet you claim it's poor evidence. If that is not denial then I dont know what it is, this is a waste of time because all you have been giving is subjective opinions.
No its not, you just can't see past your own opinion.
It certainly appears to look like it is, yes. But, as I said, it may just look like that. Lol, we're at "color spectrum" now? Its a completely different colour. Orange and red are different colours. As dissimilar as blue and green.
Are you being serious or are you trying to troll me?
Also Her hair was one of the most iconic thins about her character silhuette. Taking it out it's a >mistake. Also this is a fictional character so I dont know why you refer to it >as a real person.
Maybe, but only because on was the ONLY thing apart from colour that made her different to anyone else.
Also, I mean she is a high ranking farseer. Therefore it is completely within lore and logic that, if the character so desired, she could change her look, for whatever reason.
Again, lazy excuse for character design, specially when it comes to videogames, and more subjective opinion from your part.
Not excuses. Logical counter arguments, to your skin-deep, tenuous "evidence". You can't just post and describe one or two pictures and expect everyone to bow to you.
And what have you shown to dissaprove them? Your logical counter arguments are not even arguments just opinions. You are just beign a contrarian because you refuse to accept something different.
@Nautiloidor said:
I completely agree. Its more important in the tabletop. In the game they have many other things to identify them, like their actual name ( ) and voice. Basically what Apollyon said.
Actually in videogame logic that is incorrect because you are basically changing the image if your product and are dependant on public that has prior knowledge to the product as opposed to the more casual one.
Why do you think that characters in sequels - if happen to have a re-design - they keep traits from their original design?
Probably no point as you say. He's either repeating himself, shouting his opinions as facts or name calling now.
I never named called you and all of what you have been doing is looping and been contrarian. So I can tell discussing with you its a fruitless waste of time because you are bringing absolutely nothing to the table except subjective opinions.
@Xileh said:
Here are pictures for you.
The 'hair' is from the helmet.
@Nautiloidor
I think there is no point in discussing this further. I saw that my post with quotes and proves has two disagrees, Lol.
He refuses the evidence. Funny is that i used the same sources as he did. And he claimed i am making things up, but he didn't read all.
If this proves something is that the standard banshee warrior's hair could be part of the mask, but for the exarchs and other high ranking warriors it dont prove a thing.
It also seems the artist didnt do his homework as its typical of new GW illustrators since such design would be very impractal in battle as opposed to a mask that can be easely worn, like this.
Banshee Mask
The banshee mask is worn by the Eldar Howling Banshee Aspect Warriors giving them a fearsome appearance as they charge into the fray. Not merely a piece of armour, the mask releases a keening cry when the Banshee's attack, stunning their foes and leaving them defenceless.
I havent refused evidence because this is the first one that you have actually presented, which can still be argued.
The use of the term 'mask' could just be vernacular not translating properly. There are masks out there with hairpieces added -->https://www.novica.com/masks/
In my local museum there are masks 600yrs old with added feather/flax/fibre/hair protusions.
Again, the term "mask" probably shouldn't be taken too literally. As regards the fineprint over whether or not they're also helmets that seems entirely up to the interpretation of the artist or modeler, with some generations of the model looking more like masks attached to a headpiece and other generations definitely in the more helmet direction. Scythian, Greek, Roman, Japanese, Prussian and Mongolian cultures all had expressions of helmets with hair in a variety of configurations and styles with meanings denoting either military or social rank, functional or parade helmets.
I find this ongoing debate with regards specific interpretations of the banshee helmets/Macha's helmet design to be grasping and kind of desperate. There's no reasonable need for the devs to give her a helmet with hair in any location. There's also no reasonable need for them not to. It is purely a matter of the art directors preference.
@Xileh said:
Here are pictures for you.
The 'hair' is from the helmet.
@Nautiloidor
I think there is no point in discussing this further. I saw that my post with quotes and proves has two disagrees, Lol.
He refuses the evidence. Funny is that i used the same sources as he did. And he claimed i am making things up, but he didn't read all.
If this proves something is that the standard banshee warrior's hair could be part of the mask, but for the exarchs and other high ranking warriors it dont prove a thing.
It also seems the artist didnt do his homework as its typical of new GW illustrators since such design would be very impractal in battle as opposed to a mask that can be easely worn, like this.
Banshee Mask
The banshee mask is worn by the Eldar Howling Banshee Aspect Warriors giving them a fearsome appearance as they charge into the fray. Not merely a piece of armour, the mask releases a keening cry when the Banshee's attack, stunning their foes and leaving them defenceless.
I havent refused evidence because this is the first one that you have actually presented, which can still be argued.
I trust the description of GW Codex: Eldar/Craftworlds and there its a helmet.
Blacklibrary is often enough fanfiction.
By the way, it lopks more like its just the front piece of the helmet that she takes off. And her hair is darker red than that what seems to be from the helmet.
If that picture would show more...
But as it stays, it doesn't invalidade the original description and thus doesn't prove anything.
Menu
Comments
Nautiloidor
How could they have made the silhouette and basic shaped that different though? They are both female Farseers; all Farseers have a cloaky thing, though Macha seems to swap out the "dress" like robe for just a cloak, which exposes body armour, which hasn't been seen on a DOW Farseer before. Its like saying how does Boreale differ to Davian Thule (prior to getting rekt but a giant bug). They have subtle differences in armour decor and face, but they are both SMs, not much you can change. Macha and Idranel are both Farseers of a tall, slender race. Their armoured bodies are very likely to look similar. However, their faces are very different. Also, we haven't seen Macha's actual in game model in detail yet (if i am wrong send me a link
). Also, the hairstyle is similar, but not the same, it's just a practical hairstyle without a helmet.
Is it explicitly said that her ponytail was ever her real hair. I presumed it was decoration, however it seemed to serve no purpose. To explain, look at the Howling Banshees, pretty sure those huge avian like manes coming out the back of their helms are part of the helmet, to make them look intimidating AF, and I'm not the only one on this forums that has said that.
However I do agree that the ponytail was iconic, and as you said (even if it is or is not her real hair) they could make her hair more ginger.
I do agree that she bears little resemblance to DOW1 Macha though. But that doesn't bother me that much though, as she is fully entitled to change her look and armour etc, especially considering a long time has passed since the events of DOW1 and her look in DOW1 was VERY generic (but I suppose that's only because they used the same model for the expansions).
But yeah, in conclusion these are the thing that most people in the forums seem to want:
I think everything else is personal preference, some people like it, others don't, the above point are pretty unanimous
SharKnight
Both being Farseers or Space marines doesnt mean they look the same but it doesnt mean they have to completely look a helluva different. Why do you think they changed Davian Thules look in dow 2 yet he still retained resemblance.
Macha and Idranel it's not about who is slender and who is not nor who has this slight different face and such. They basically have the same silhuette regardless of slenderness, they have the same cape shape, the same haircut and same stance. Furthermore the fact that Macha has absolutely ZERO resemblance to her original deisgn its one huge no no.
A user here said that maybe her hair was a decoration and people are beggining to use that as if it where the actual truth, But I think its safe to assume that it it was her real hair all along. Why? Well, why do you think she has red hair herself? If it had only been decoration they would had been able to pretty much change it, as a matter of fact why would the hair decoration be coming underneath the helmet?
Whats important here is to maintain her silhuette or at least past traits that tell us that it is her. What they did was a completely new design from scratch without using a single previous trait from her original model. Not even the color palette was used.
There are art directors in the videogame field with over 30 years of experience under companies like Blizzard and Gamefreak that say that the silhuette of a character its most important, because it lets people recognize that thing right away. I mean if they are going to evolve the characters look the least they could do is have her retain some of her previous physical characteristics to pretty much state who she is.
This are my 2 cents anyway.
Nautiloidor
@SharKnight
I get what you mean. What I meant is that pretty much all SMs have a pretty much identical silhouette. Also, as graphical capability in game advances, silhouette becomes less important.
I agree that she doesn't look anything like she did in DOW1, but for me, that's fine. And i think she DOW1 Farseer look had come to be closely associated with Taldeer. They wanted to make her look unique. And they did, so they could change the colours, and not keep references to her old look, as she is easily identifiable. I understand that there isn't any sense of nostalgia with her new look.
Sorry, but I would still disagree that Macha and Idranel look as similar as you're making it out to be. In terms of silhouette, Macha has two pairs of very obvious warpveins (one around her head and one on her back), her hair is not identical, yes they both have top knots but they are in different places with different styles, and Idranel has obvious loose bits of hair around her face, while Macha's is scraped tight with her crown thing. Also, look at the cloaks, Macha's is only on her back, her torso is exposed. Idranel wears a robe to her feet, whereas the majority of Macha's legs are exposed, pretty much up to her thighs. Macha uses a spear, not a sword. The only thing similar is their physiques. silhouettes are comletely different and identifiable in my opinion.
But her ponytail was ginger in DOW1, not the dark red colour so far in DOW3, they are starkly different. Also, I do not think it is "safe to assume that it it was her real hair". Do you think Howling Banshee hair is their real hair? And I would argue it "looked" like is came from under her helmet, so it looked like her hair. Anyway is doesn't really matter, no point turning this into an argument as neither of us can prove anything. I'm not saying it's not her hair 100%, I was merely proposing it to offer an explanation, if you don't like the theory, then don't believe it, end of.
SharKnight
Taldeers look was deviated a bit thanks to the dark crusade upgrades and that she is now a wraithknight. Taldeer was to Macha what Luigi is to Mario basically.
Macha has 2 but Idranel has one, they both got the same hair chongo/topknots, it doesnt matter in which little tiny bity detail in changes because the silhutte will point this things out. Basically you are describing me her texture details and not the silhuette. From a far and ast plain sight they look the same. And this is not me but people "specially eldar players have asked me' who is this? is this macha? is she the farseer from DOW 2?
Believe me I wish I was making this up.
BTW Idranel can be given a spear as well. I think you are tryint to hard to make it different but silhuette its basically the same.
Her hair was always referred to red hair regardless of her ginger color. So now we are safe to assume that it was her hair indeed.
Btw yes howling banshees hair it's real, and here is something from the guy that designed them since like forever:
I dont belive the theory because if it had been just ornamentary hair, it would definitely not be coming from underneath the helmet. Eitherway there you go the examples by Jess Goodwyn the man that pretty much has been designing and re-desinging 40k miniatures since over 30 years.
Nautiloidor
@SharKnight
This is not relevant at all...
Idranel has a single warpvein on the back of her head. Macha has two PAIRS coming out the SIDE of her head and back. Vastly different silhouette.
Yes both top knots, but quite different styles, a small difference, but still noticeable on the silhouette.
Maybe on some stuff, not all. In addition to the above, her cloak is different, it looks shorter, exposing more of the bottom of her legs in her silhouette, not just her feet like in Idranel's.
This is completely qualitative. How far away? From what angle? I have not yet seen an image screenshot where I ever thought Macha looked too much like Idranel, apart from her being a female Eldar Farseer.
Who is saying this? Did they even play DOW2? Idranel is dead.... At first glance maybe they look similar, but at first glance most Farseers look similar.
That is true about the spear. I am not "tryint" to do anything. I merely have a different opinion to you.
"Red" hair is a very common way of politely referring to ginger hair and ginger has become something of taboo word. And it being referred to as "red" does not detract from the fact that the ponytail is CLEARLY ginger in DOW1. If this is not the case, this may actually be evidence for the ponytail NOT being her actual hair, as her real hair in DOW3 is not ginger.
Lol. No we are not. You have given no real evidence.
I'm sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure you are wrong. Most aspect warriors have plumed helmets. Are you saying the dreads from the top of Striking Scorpions helms are the Eldars real hair? Are the plumes on Dire Avengers helms their real hair? Dark Reapers? Fire Dragons? It doesnt make sense considering the size and positioning of the Banshees mane, the hair is flowing from the mask about a foot about where their head ends... Just look up pictures of howling banshees or banshee helmets. There are plenty of images showing the mane is part of the helmet.
and
That is obviously concept art, I have never seen anything like that or any banshee exarch like that in art or miniatures or heard of it in the fluff. This is just a drawing, one drawing, that no miniatures or anything has come from. The plume could also be attached. This proves nothing at all.
How do you know it coming from under the helmet? Where is any evidence for this at all?
Kraken
Macha is back! Weeeee
SharKnight
Congrats you just described Idranel if her character where to have a proper rework.
You feel that way because you probably knew it was going to be Macha already but the people that havent been up to date, they dont know who she is nor think she looks like macha.
I did a survey with the people of my gaming store, steam and social media so far 90% agree that she dont look like Macha AND that she resembles more the farseer of DOW 2. Plus if you go looking at the fb comments and even on /tg/ you'll see I am not alone.
Plus not all people played the campaign but they played last stand in retrubution and multiplayer so they know who she is.
Its okay to have different opinions but if you discuss about it in a serious way then I suggest you to be as much accurate as you can get.
This is when I meant that you should base your opinions with facts, I presented you official evidence from the very pencil of Jess Goodwyn but you still deny.
Scorpion threads?
Banshee with helmet?
Then I guess you never played dawn of war 2.
More evidence that you havent even played the first dawn of war.
Xileh
As we can see in this picture even fans don't stay true to the silhuette. Only recognisable by the tattoo on her cheeks
So i think its about time this back and fourth stops.
GW just as much changes their models, sometimes to extreme degrees, so everything is in line, isn't it!
Everyone has a different opinion on that matter anyways.
Personaly i like how Macha looks now. Except the ears of the forum picture, but it seems its only there looking so...awkward.
@SharKnight
I am Eldar player and i didn't ask who is that.
By the way i think its not possible to compare a 12? Years old computer model to a new one.
And on Banshee hair...its attached to the helmet. Never ever saw something else in my whole tabletop hobby years.
And there can be male Banshees too.
SharKnight
So you are comparing a silhuette to the drawing of a single fan? That's nit picking. And yes GW changes their models but they seem to agree with my theory. Macha's original model is what 12 years old? Well Kharn and Eldrad had a model that was over 20 years old! And now look at them:
Heck, how about checking out kharn!
Now this is how you are supposed to do it.
Is this the extreme degree that you are speaking off?
This back and forth it's pointless, I present evidence and pictures and yet you guys are just being contrarians.
Well I have a friend that's an eldar player and he did ask, among a bunch others. I guess you into the "already knew" bin.
What do you mean? that is irrelevant on the topic, if the model is too old then you just give it a polish, using the example that I posted above.
In table top probably not becaue those are metal and finecast miniatures, but according to the guy that designed the entire eldar faction by himself, it seems like it's their actual hair. And I already posted proof of it.
Quote from 40k wikia http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Howling_Banshees
The Howling Banshees are the all-female Eldar Aspect Warriors
Do not confuse them with Wytches, those have mostly females but a male here and there is possible.
Unless you are speaking of eternal crusade in which it basically broke the lore - just like jumping terminators anyone - you are going to have to source me like I have been doing or its shenanigans of the heretical kind.
Xileh
This is not the only drawing, there are many more!
This is an example that actually is done pretty well.
There are units that changed way more though.
This is more than 20 yeats ago and not relevant anymore. Furthermore its probably just a concept and never left that phase. GW released a Artbook of Eldar Concept not to long ago, thats probably the source of those pictures you quote.
Each army evolved and changed quite a lot during the lifetime of the tabletop. In apperance and story.
Best example are the Necrons.
I don't confuse them with wyches!
Banshees can have male warriors. Its just not represented in the models and actually not all that common to happen. But it is possible.
Here is your quote:
"However, it is possible for Eldar males to walk the Path of the Howling Banshee, though this is extraordinarily rare due to the lack of the needed psychological and physical assets amongst most males"
From the same Wiki page you quoted under Combat Role.
Now stop accusing me of false advertising! I know my Eldar, and i would consider me one of the die hard Eldar fans, maybe not the extreme kind so
Nautiloidor
@SharKnight
What? There is no need for silly, sarcastic comments.
Yes, because I read the Eldar Spotlight. No she DOESNT look like Macha from DOW1, because they changed how she looks... but you don't need to recognise her as Macha immediately, because we are all told clearly that it is her! So now we know its her. People probably thought Taldeer was Macha when DOW:WA came out!
I am NOT denying that new Macha doesn't look like DOW1 Macha. At all. She doesnt. Of course she resembles Idranel more than DOW1 Macha. DOW2 and 3 have similar model and art style and textures. The model for DOW1 farseers was very basic and crude, with very low textures and poly counts, as it is a very old game. Plus the fact the isn't wearing a helmet. Graphical capabilities have developed tremendously in that time. Also, why SHOULD she look or bear resemblance to DOW1 Macha? If it is for recognition only? Or nostalgia? I'd they just be very open and clear about who she is and make her look awesome, which she does. People who think she is Idranel either don't care enough to actually think about it, look, or read.
and
These are Exarchs! Who aren't wearing helmets! From one idea. You are being very bias to your own opinions. Once single source of evidence is not proof if more evidence exists to the contrary. Do some unbiased research, you will find so much more evidence and lore that clearly says or suggests Aspect Warrior have hair on their helmets. Also, with these Exarchs, these could be implants or hair extension type things for Exarchs that forgo helmets type things, to make them look like the troops they lead. What if a Howling banshee who is ready to become an exarch has short or brown hair? Do they have to dye it and wait for it to grow out?
The helmet, like the banshees, may just be designed to LOOK like it's coming from under the helmet. I'm less convinced of Machas helmet but it is still possible. It still doesn't change the fact that she is free to change her hair style, length and colour.
Also, please stop these sarcastic comments. Insults and sideways comments are a clear sign of being stubborn, defensive and on the backfoot and not being able to form a convincing argument. If you can't engage in a unbiased, logical discussion without resorting to childish quips and arguing, then I won't continue to indulge you.
Renner
Master Chief, for instance, is a far more recognizable and iconic character in the world of gaming, and yet I don't remember people complaining about his armor that went through many redesigns and marks over sequels. I mean, geez. She appeared in one game, and used a model made at that time. Idranel was a pattern for DoW2, later on there were DLCs, and no doubt we'll have them here as well. Diomedes, also appeared in one game and had a helmet, and later on got his face shown. Thule, a classic Force Commander turned devastator with a bionic eye for the sequel, etc, etc. What's the big deal?
Some people just can't let go. Seeing this its no wonder anymore seeing so many complaints about Gabriel who went through the most drastic changes, over Terminator armor, new never before seen powers plus the change of his voice actor. Times are changing, even GW itself is changing models.
Nautiloidor
I completely agree.
Yeah, I franky love the changes made to Macha, and thing Gabe looks epic in his Tartaros Termy armour! (Still not sure about the whole jumping thing, but I'll get over it)
MrBenis
I hope we don't see her running around without her helmet during regular gameplay. Interactive scenes between Macha and other plot characters could be interesting if she removes her helmet. Otherwise I'm on the fence about her redesign, the original model for dow1 was nothing to celebrate, the visual density of Macha doesn't seem to be there in the promo shot of her though. The coin on her forehead? I couldn't care less. Maybe just make it smaller so it doesn't take up 80% of her forehead haha
SharKnight
I dont think they did, because Macha is from biel tan and its white and talder wore black armor. And believe it or not that is quite enough. Just ask Mario & Luigi.
This is not about nostalgia but silhuette integrity, look at the example that I posted above with kharn and Eldrad? Do you think they designed that way because of nostalgia?
Yes Macha was designed that way so that when you go to army painter she could be like your commander from tabletop game, however that does not excuse to not bring a single characteristic trait from her into the new design to keep coherence and silhuette integrity.
If you think she looks awesome or not it's pretty subjective thought.
>
I am being bias? You are being bias! I am showing you explicit evidence from many sources and you are still in complete denial. What have you shown?
This is just denial after explicit evidence.
It is CLEARLY comming from under her helmet and then you have her in a sequel where she has the same color spectrum as her hair.
Also Her hair was one of the most iconic thins about her character silhuette. Taking it out it's a mistake. Also this is a fictional character so I dont know why you refer to it as a real person.
Calling me biased, stubborn and childish.
I am not even arguing, I just presented official evidence with an actual statement and if you dont like it its not my problem. You just search for an excuse to deny wathever evidence I bring and yet you fail to bring any to counter my arguments. If you made a fool out of yourself then thats on you, not me.
SharKnight
Master chief has literally always had the same armor silhuette throught all of incarnations. Big deal here is that they are not keeping her silhuette nor any trait that connects to her original design, which is something the characters that you mentioned DID keep.
Do you even know why people complained about Gabriel? Because of him jumping like a ballerina, not because of his looks. Yes GW changed models, just look at my example of kharn and eldrad, THAT is how a model update for a character its supposed to be done.
Gorb
SharKnight, saying you are making childish quips is not the same thing as calling you childish. Your attitude is unnecessary here and twisting other peoples' words to suit is not helping your case.
Moderate your tone, please.
SharKnight
I am twisting words how exactly?
Gorb
"SharKnight, saying you are making childish quips is not the same thing as calling you childish."
Anything else, please PM me.
Apollyon
honestly though I think its just another demonstrated issue of chaffing between the tabletop players and the gamers.
the preservation of silhouette for characters especially is incredibly important in the tabletop because we've got no other means of identifying the characters.
I mean if when forgeworld released horus as a model they decided to completely redesign his appearence from the ground up because "the old look was dated" their would be rioting outside GeeDubs in a day.
good god just look at the controversy over logan grimmnar when he got his wolf chariot, people are still calling him santa claus after that because they changed his silhouette too much and in tabletop games that is incredibly important.
maintaining a silhouette less important in video games though, because you've got the voice, the characterisation, the movements, any special traits the person may have had, and the way that the person interacts with their peers that the developers can use to express the connection between the previous incarnation and the current one, whereas the miniature industry has to convey as much of that emotion and character as they can in a static pose model the size of your thumb, that is why the silhouette is so important.
of course personally I agree with sharknight, relic cocked it up again
Edit: Tone Moderated
MrBenis
I think maintaining the silhouette is probably the single least important thing to worry about in this game. Davian Thule, Gabe and VanillaIce have words to say about ~character development~.
Nautiloidor
@SharKnight
Not everyone would have known that. Not everyone who plays DOW is a hardcore 40K fan. Also Luigi is taller than mario
But why should they? The old design was generic and boring and overdone. Why should they keep anything to do with it? Coherence is a bad argument because a character like a Farseer CAN change what they wear. And we are also clearly told it is Macha, so no need to make it resemble her old model. New Macha has more silhouette integrity that any other Farseer from DOW, and the different in her silhouette compared to Idranel's is only (Donald)trumped by the differences between Idranels and Caerys'. And that was because of technology advancement, and graphical capability.
I am not in denial at all. Your evidence is in no way explicit. I have told you to go and research it, not just seek out and find things that ONLY show what you think. Yes you have shown evidence, but ONLY a few bits of evidence, from ONLY 1 maybe 2 sources. But ONLY for exarchs. And you have told me your INTERPRETATION of those pieces of evidence. Your evidence it in no way explicit, it is actually quite weak.
Just because I haven't spammed images, it doesnt mean I have done nothing.
As above.
No its not, you just can't see past your own opinion.
It certainly appears to look like it is, yes. But, as I said, it may just look like that. Lol, we're at "color spectrum" now? Its a completely different colour. Orange and red are different colours. As dissimilar as blue and green.
Maybe, but only because on was the ONLY thing apart from colour that made her different to anyone else.
Also, I mean she is a high ranking farseer. Therefore it is completely within lore and logic that, if the character so desired, she could change her look, for whatever reason.
Yes you are. But your evidence barely proves anything. See my above comments.
Not excuses. Logical counter arguments, to your skin-deep, tenuous "evidence". You can't just post and describe one or two pictures and expect everyone to bow to you.
I've been bringing logical counters/criticism to everything you have said (and even agreeing with your point of view occasionally), but you just fail to see or register them. If you would like me to post a long string of pictures, I will, if thats the only "evidence" you think is binding.
Again, completely unnecessary.
Nautiloidor
I completely agree. Its more important in the tabletop. In the game they have many other things to identify them, like their actual name (
) and voice. Basically what Apollyon said.
Ritual
More we will not see the fine skills of Eldar heroes! Now we will have three skill instead of a huge number of variations, as it was in dov2
Xileh
Here are pictures for you.
The 'hair' is from the helmet.
@Nautiloidor
I think there is no point in discussing this further. I saw that my post with quotes and proves has two disagrees, Lol.
He refuses the evidence. Funny is that i used the same sources as he did. And he claimed i am making things up, but he didn't read all.
Nautiloidor
@Xileh
Thanks! There is also a plethora of other art. Like, all you have to do is type "Howling Banshee" into google images.....
Probably no point as you say. He's either repeating himself, shouting his opinions as facts or name calling now. I don't think I'm going to win.
SharKnight
You think the old design is generic? then this new one its far more generic and here I present an example. And I am sorry but coherence IS an actual argument SPECIALLY when it comes to videogame design.
And the change hair color and all it's irrelevant since this is not an MRPG, The fact that you need to be told it's macha means its an instant fail from art department.
If you think the old model its boring then that's your subjective opinion, and technology it's not an excuse to do a complete re-design of the character, it's just lazy.
New macha has the same silhuette as idranel, as a matter of fact check this out:
Eitherway after all the evidence you will clearly continue to go around searching for ways to be contrarian, meaning it's pointless to discuss with you. Since all you have been doing is looping.
Okay so I showed you pieces done by the guy that designed the entire eldar range from the beggining and images from dawn of war 2 and yet you claim it's poor evidence. If that is not denial then I dont know what it is, this is a waste of time because all you have been giving is subjective opinions.
Are you being serious or are you trying to troll me?
Again, lazy excuse for character design, specially when it comes to videogames, and more subjective opinion from your part.
And what have you shown to dissaprove them? Your logical counter arguments are not even arguments just opinions. You are just beign a contrarian because you refuse to accept something different.
Actually in videogame logic that is incorrect because you are basically changing the image if your product and are dependant on public that has prior knowledge to the product as opposed to the more casual one.
Why do you think that characters in sequels - if happen to have a re-design - they keep traits from their original design?
I never named called you and all of what you have been doing is looping and been contrarian. So I can tell discussing with you its a fruitless waste of time because you are bringing absolutely nothing to the table except subjective opinions.
SharKnight
If this proves something is that the standard banshee warrior's hair could be part of the mask, but for the exarchs and other high ranking warriors it dont prove a thing.
It also seems the artist didnt do his homework as its typical of new GW illustrators since such design would be very impractal in battle as opposed to a mask that can be easely worn, like this.
Which is enforced by the fact that they are called "banshee masks" not "banshee helmets"
http://www.blacklibrary.com/warhammer-40000/40k-cod-sup/Banshee-Mask.html
I quote from here:
I havent refused evidence because this is the first one that you have actually presented, which can still be argued.
MrBenis
The use of the term 'mask' could just be vernacular not translating properly. There are masks out there with hairpieces added -->https://www.novica.com/masks/
In my local museum there are masks 600yrs old with added feather/flax/fibre/hair protusions.
Again, the term "mask" probably shouldn't be taken too literally. As regards the fineprint over whether or not they're also helmets that seems entirely up to the interpretation of the artist or modeler, with some generations of the model looking more like masks attached to a headpiece and other generations definitely in the more helmet direction. Scythian, Greek, Roman, Japanese, Prussian and Mongolian cultures all had expressions of helmets with hair in a variety of configurations and styles with meanings denoting either military or social rank, functional or parade helmets.
I find this ongoing debate with regards specific interpretations of the banshee helmets/Macha's helmet design to be grasping and kind of desperate. There's no reasonable need for the devs to give her a helmet with hair in any location. There's also no reasonable need for them not to. It is purely a matter of the art directors preference.
Xileh
I trust the description of GW Codex: Eldar/Craftworlds and there its a helmet.
Blacklibrary is often enough fanfiction.
By the way, it lopks more like its just the front piece of the helmet that she takes off. And her hair is darker red than that what seems to be from the helmet.
If that picture would show more...
But as it stays, it doesn't invalidade the original description and thus doesn't prove anything.
Cool Artwork though. Where did you find that?