ZOS, take a look how Baldur Gates 3 makes "Argonians"

Varana

Then maybe bring an example of what you actually mean.

And not a comparison to a species from a different fantasy world with different origins in a different game, with an image provided by someone else who, while well-meaning, obviously didn't know either what exactly you were criticising.

NotaDaedraWorshipper

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Argonian 3D model looks like that older person having to use a tooth prothesis but forgot to put it in.
The transition from the skull to the neck on the back side of the Argonian model is bad.

The jaw bone should be more V-shape when looking at it from the top and not what we have currently where the bone is sort of bent inward before bending outward to the corner of the jaw. You have to put the jaw slider to the extreme position to mitigate a bit this but it is not enough.

Yeah, this is one of the things that bothers me about argonians. It's clearly an adjusted human head and not one made for them. It becomes very noticeable in some animations as well, because argonians will move parts of their faces in ways that looks outright weird, because it's the human face movement. Such as the inner part of their brow/eye area narrows in a strange way, because that's where the human eyes are and narrows or lifts.
They also got some awful textures, even compared to other things in ESO. Like the start of their tails is terrible.

Although you should probably have cleared this up in the thread's first post. I wouldn't want argonians to be dragonborns or look exactly like them, but in BG3 so do dragonborn have a better shape and head to neck transition for a lizard/dragon-like humanoid. Even with the limited customisation, there are some good ideas there as well.

Here one can compare the difference. It's a lot less snout slapped on a human skull, and I even spent quite some time in character creation to try make these argonians less wonky. It's quite jarring, and makes the argonian fan I am disappointed, because it looks so lazy. More so compared to the artwork ESO uses for them, or just Skyrim's models.




Here are also some other dragonborn examples for those curious. Thought I could take some pictures, because the only one posted here is a bit awkward angle of a white one. (And I only remembered after taking them that I could've removed the clothes to show the head-neck angle better).

AnduinTryggva

Fair point. I thought with posting the link to the face shape was enough as I was not certain if forum rules would forbid to link an image from another game here.

I also would like to ask to consider that I said multiple times that I mean the 3D model which is not a synonym to texture.

On one point I want to disagree: I think BG3 did a really good job in depicting a lizzard race and of course I compare it to what ESO presents us as their version of a lizzardy humanoid. I wish that that they might take this as a source of inspiration of how to do believable Argonian 3d models next time they release a TES-themed game. I don't care if the two lores indicate different origins as I compare the virtual 3D model of a video game and not something out of the real world.

AnduinTryggva

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Argonian 3D model looks like that older person having to use a tooth prothesis but forgot to put it in.
The transition from the skull to the neck on the back side of the Argonian model is bad.

The jaw bone should be more V-shape when looking at it from the top and not what we have currently where the bone is sort of bent inward before bending outward to the corner of the jaw. You have to put the jaw slider to the extreme position to mitigate a bit this but it is not enough.

Yeah, this is one of the things that bothers me about argonians. It's clearly an adjusted human head and not one made for them. It becomes very noticeable in some animations as well, because argonians will move parts of their faces in ways that looks outright weird, because it's the human face movement. Such as the inner part of their brow/eye area narrows in a strange way, because that's where the human eyes are and narrows or lifts.
They also got some awful textures, even compared to other things in ESO. Like the start of their tails is terrible.

Although you should probably have cleared this up in the thread's first post. I wouldn't want argonians to be dragonborns or look exactly like them, but in BG3 so do dragonborn have a better shape and head to neck transition for a lizard/dragon-like humanoid. Even with the limited customisation, there are some good ideas there as well.

Here one can compare the difference. It's a lot less snout slapped on a human skull, and I even spent quite some time in character creation to try make these argonians less wonky. It's quite jarring, and makes the argonian fan I am disappointed, because it looks so lazy. More so compared to the artwork ESO uses for them, or just Skyrim's models.




Here are also some other dragonborn examples for those curious. Thought I could take some pictures, because the only one posted here is a bit awkward angle of a white one. (And I only remembered after taking them that I could've removed the clothes to show the head-neck angle better).

Thanks! Exactly my impression.

Just look at the - sorry to say that - lacy chin shape of an argonian head from the side view if you selected the more edge version in the triangle slider. This head shape would be great if it were not for the bad polygon settings they apply there.
To be honest, my deep impression is that they did not dedicate as much work to the Argonians than to the other races probably because they thought most people will not be interested in Argonians at all and thus they could get away with it.

Syldras

ArchMikem wrote: »

Blur does a great job at literally everything they make a cinematic for.

I think some of their ESO trailers are awful. Mer never really look like mer.

NotaDaedraWorshipper

Syldras wrote: »

ArchMikem wrote: »

Blur does a great job at literally everything they make a cinematic for.

I think some of their ESO trailers are awful. Mer never really look like mer.

Same, I loathe the mer in the trailers with a passion. They are not mer but humans with pointy ears.

zaria

RaikaNA wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

I've purchased BG3 and play a dragonborn. I think this is how Argonians should look like in ESO.

They did really an outstanding work with the head and body model.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the beast design in this game. For the khajiit.. I feel like they're just humans inside of a costume rp'ing as a furry... same with the Argonians... feels like they're too plain.

Having the body rigged the same way for all make outfits so much easier.
I say Morrowind is the only game who used different models and its execution was not good compared to WOW as an excellent example.

zaria

MasterSpatula wrote: »

I know that when I want to make a truly fair comparison, I hold the graphics and design of a nine-year-old game up against a two-day-old game.

Now ESO let you modify your face, not only having 7-10 set faces like in BG 3.

AnduinTryggva

zaria wrote: »

RaikaNA wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

I've purchased BG3 and play a dragonborn. I think this is how Argonians should look like in ESO.

They did really an outstanding work with the head and body model.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the beast design in this game. For the khajiit.. I feel like they're just humans inside of a costume rp'ing as a furry... same with the Argonians... feels like they're too plain.

Having the body rigged the same way for all make outfits so much easier.
I say Morrowind is the only game who used different models and its execution was not good compared to WOW as an excellent example.

Still BG3 gets the transition head-neck better - despite having a human-like neck. Actually BG3 is a really good example of how the 3D model could have been made. It is not about the totality of the head but on certain region it is simply not well made.
Anyhow I think the story about outfits need to fit is not hitting well since the outfits have their own 3d models. You can observe that when you put various outfits on. Sometimes your body looks broader, sometimes not. Also head model changes depending on helmet outfit.

Kallykat

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Argonian 3D model looks like that older person having to use a tooth prothesis but forgot to put it in.
The transition from the skull to the neck on the back side of the Argonian model is bad.

The jaw bone should be more V-shape when looking at it from the top and not what we have currently where the bone is sort of bent inward before bending outward to the corner of the jaw. You have to put the jaw slider to the extreme position to mitigate a bit this but it is not enough.

Yeah, this is one of the things that bothers me about argonians. It's clearly an adjusted human head and not one made for them. It becomes very noticeable in some animations as well, because argonians will move parts of their faces in ways that looks outright weird, because it's the human face movement. Such as the inner part of their brow/eye area narrows in a strange way, because that's where the human eyes are and narrows or lifts.
They also got some awful textures, even compared to other things in ESO. Like the start of their tails is terrible.

Although you should probably have cleared this up in the thread's first post. I wouldn't want argonians to be dragonborns or look exactly like them, but in BG3 so do dragonborn have a better shape and head to neck transition for a lizard/dragon-like humanoid. Even with the limited customisation, there are some good ideas there as well.

Here one can compare the difference. It's a lot less snout slapped on a human skull, and I even spent quite some time in character creation to try make these argonians less wonky. It's quite jarring, and makes the argonian fan I am disappointed, because it looks so lazy. More so compared to the artwork ESO uses for them, or just Skyrim's models.




Here are also some other dragonborn examples for those curious. Thought I could take some pictures, because the only one posted here is a bit awkward angle of a white one. (And I only remembered after taking them that I could've removed the clothes to show the head-neck angle better).

Thanks! Exactly my impression.

Just look at the - sorry to say that - lacy chin shape of an argonian head from the side view if you selected the more edge version in the triangle slider. This head shape would be great if it were not for the bad polygon settings they apply there.
To be honest, my deep impression is that they did not dedicate as much work to the Argonians than to the other races probably because they thought most people will not be interested in Argonians at all and thus they could get away with it.

It helps to see images and have specific details about the differences that bother you. I do think that if the team was to start from scratch today, there could be some improvements made to the Argonian models, but I think the same thing about other playable races too.

To say that the team "did not dedicate as much work to the Argonians" because not a lot of people would want to play an Argonian...seems farfetched. For starters, the team is not a hivemind with a unified favorite or least favorite race. I'm sure there are some people who worked on these models who love Argonians and some who don't care for them as much. If, as a whole, they decided Argonians weren't worth the effort, they wouldn't be in the game as a playable race to begin with. Saying they thought "they could get away with it" implies some kind of deception or ill-intent from ZOS that I really don't think is warranted as regards this topic. Why would they put any time and effort into a playable race they didn't expect to be played and enjoyed?

In the end, a lot of this discussion comes down to preference. I personally think the BG3 Dragonborn look great, but I wouldn't want Argonians to look quite so dragon-based. I do think the technology and engines with which they were created make a huge difference as well as the as the things the creators of each game expect their players to be able to do with character-creation and in-game activities. If you really just want the ZOS team to be aware of your desires for the next ES game, that's fine (although it's not the same team as mainline games). I would just avoid making assumptions about the reasoning behind anyone's choices when you have no evidence, especially when the decisions were made almost a decade ago and when it maligns them even in a small way.

TheImperfect

As much as I adore BG3 and all it's options - ESO is ESO and the argonians look great, don't want them to look all clumpy and thick like the BG3 type because they are not the same.

Rampeal

There are Winged Argonians, But they lie within the center of Black Marsh and we should never see them. The Center of Black Marsh is Unknown territory even in the 5th era.

TaSheen

Rampeal wrote: »

There are Winged Argonians, But they lie within the center of Black Marsh and we should never see them. The Center of Black Marsh is Unknown territory even in the 5th era.

This. There are mysteries in TES that I hope will never be revealed.

Lumenn

Rampeal wrote: »

There are Winged Argonians, But they lie within the center of Black Marsh and we should never see them. The Center of Black Marsh is Unknown territory even in the 5th era.

Yep. That's what I mentioned on the first page, the Sarpa. The cats get several subsets represented, I wish Argonian could get Sarpa(they don't ALL have to be xenophobic do they?) 😢

AnduinTryggva

Kallykat wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Argonian 3D model looks like that older person having to use a tooth prothesis but forgot to put it in.
The transition from the skull to the neck on the back side of the Argonian model is bad.

The jaw bone should be more V-shape when looking at it from the top and not what we have currently where the bone is sort of bent inward before bending outward to the corner of the jaw. You have to put the jaw slider to the extreme position to mitigate a bit this but it is not enough.

Yeah, this is one of the things that bothers me about argonians. It's clearly an adjusted human head and not one made for them. It becomes very noticeable in some animations as well, because argonians will move parts of their faces in ways that looks outright weird, because it's the human face movement. Such as the inner part of their brow/eye area narrows in a strange way, because that's where the human eyes are and narrows or lifts.
They also got some awful textures, even compared to other things in ESO. Like the start of their tails is terrible.

Although you should probably have cleared this up in the thread's first post. I wouldn't want argonians to be dragonborns or look exactly like them, but in BG3 so do dragonborn have a better shape and head to neck transition for a lizard/dragon-like humanoid. Even with the limited customisation, there are some good ideas there as well.

Here one can compare the difference. It's a lot less snout slapped on a human skull, and I even spent quite some time in character creation to try make these argonians less wonky. It's quite jarring, and makes the argonian fan I am disappointed, because it looks so lazy. More so compared to the artwork ESO uses for them, or just Skyrim's models.




Here are also some other dragonborn examples for those curious. Thought I could take some pictures, because the only one posted here is a bit awkward angle of a white one. (And I only remembered after taking them that I could've removed the clothes to show the head-neck angle better).

Thanks! Exactly my impression.

Just look at the - sorry to say that - lacy chin shape of an argonian head from the side view if you selected the more edge version in the triangle slider. This head shape would be great if it were not for the bad polygon settings they apply there.
To be honest, my deep impression is that they did not dedicate as much work to the Argonians than to the other races probably because they thought most people will not be interested in Argonians at all and thus they could get away with it.

It helps to see images and have specific details about the differences that bother you. I do think that if the team was to start from scratch today, there could be some improvements made to the Argonian models, but I think the same thing about other playable races too.

To say that the team "did not dedicate as much work to the Argonians" because not a lot of people would want to play an Argonian...seems farfetched. For starters, the team is not a hivemind with a unified favorite or least favorite race. I'm sure there are some people who worked on these models who love Argonians and some who don't care for them as much. If, as a whole, they decided Argonians weren't worth the effort, they wouldn't be in the game as a playable race to begin with. Saying they thought "they could get away with it" implies some kind of deception or ill-intent from ZOS that I really don't think is warranted as regards this topic. Why would they put any time and effort into a playable race they didn't expect to be played and enjoyed?

In the end, a lot of this discussion comes down to preference. I personally think the BG3 Dragonborn look great, but I wouldn't want Argonians to look quite so dragon-based. I do think the technology and engines with which they were created make a huge difference as well as the as the things the creators of each game expect their players to be able to do with character-creation and in-game activities. If you really just want the ZOS team to be aware of your desires for the next ES game, that's fine (although it's not the same team as mainline games). I would just avoid making assumptions about the reasoning behind anyone's choices when you have no evidence, especially when the decisions were made almost a decade ago and when it maligns them even in a small way.

Well, if you take a look at what I wrote you'd realize that I did not write that "the team did not dedicate as much work (....)" but that I have the impression which precisely expresses that it looks that way to me - NOT that it was that way.

Apart from that: If you have ever worked on a huge project with a lot of people involved when you have to finish those many little steps that have to be performed in parallel and when other steps depend on the completion of a chain of other steps and you have to meet a deadline and ressources are limited then you know that there are often decisions to be made what to prioritze and what to hope for completion later or to live with some portions not as elaborated as others. There does not need to be an ill intention behind it just a very rational decision. So unlike you presume I do not think that there was an evil behind the Argonians we have in case this race was really victim of neglect of ressources (again I did not say it was but just have the impression) but rather economic thinking. In case you have to prioritize which race to elaborate better you'd do it on one that you believe more favorable to your customers.



I've made an Argonian with a more edgy version (more on the lower right corner of the triangle in the character editor). Just look how sad the chin is (as sharp as an axe), the zigzag mouth. The cheeck bulges are sad as well as the buldge that emanates from the jaw. Observe further the lower edge of the jaw that runs from the chin to the rear. It first goes upwars then bends downwards. This really looks awefully odd and absolutely not realistic. I am not aware of any animal with bones that has such sort of jaw. The jaw slider just makes this more extreme or less extreme but it is always present.

And the skull rear: I always try to hide it but most head dress options do not allow that which strongly limits the way to create the appearance of your argonian.

And no, I don't complain here about the textures that are torn on some portions. This is clearly due to the engine and its age and that's how it is. It is the sad situation of the 3d model.

kaushad

If anything, ESO (and Skyrim) Argonians look too much like these Dragonborn for me. I think I expect their eyes to face further apart, to the sides.

xclassgaming

The BG3 ones look awful.

emilyhyoyeon

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

I like ESO argonians

Actually I will say that I agree that the ESO argonian heads definitely have some awkward bits mechanically and agree that it was probably due to not being worth allocating the resources.

A lot of the BG3 lizard people that I've seen in screenshots so far though have a ''beakiness'' (as in beak like beak of a bird) to their mouth/nose areas that I don't like though. The picture of the white one in this thread captures it.

zaria

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

zaria wrote: »

RaikaNA wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

I've purchased BG3 and play a dragonborn. I think this is how Argonians should look like in ESO.

They did really an outstanding work with the head and body model.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the beast design in this game. For the khajiit.. I feel like they're just humans inside of a costume rp'ing as a furry... same with the Argonians... feels like they're too plain.

Having the body rigged the same way for all make outfits so much easier.
I say Morrowind is the only game who used different models and its execution was not good compared to WOW as an excellent example.

Still BG3 gets the transition head-neck better - despite having a human-like neck. Actually BG3 is a really good example of how the 3D model could have been made. It is not about the totality of the head but on certain region it is simply not well made.
Anyhow I think the story about outfits need to fit is not hitting well since the outfits have their own 3d models. You can observe that when you put various outfits on. Sometimes your body looks broader, sometimes not. Also head model changes depending on helmet outfit.

Same is true in ESO I say also digtigrade is not that hard.

Daz studio, just adjusted the dress for the legs and it works petty well, no cloth physic just smoothing.

barney2525

we are not playing BG 3.

I know it's a difficult concept, but no mob/monster/creature has a single set of descriptors that is required to be used by every single Fantasy genre game in the world.

Have you seen our vampires lately?

Every company decides for themselves what their own parameters are...

And absolutely every single one of them is correct. There is no 'best' creature concept. Every person will have their own preferences and none of them is any better, or more valid, than the others.

Tyralbin

The other thing you have got to take into account is that their is 10 years difference in when the games were developed.

You can't really compare them with each other.

Tommy_The_Gun

Unpoular opinion: Divinity Original Sin 2 made it way better than BG3 in a 1st place...
...Because the "Lizard" race that was in DOS2 had entire body build from the ground up with tail taken into account, so it looked more natural & realistic as tail was a part of the body. This of course also included armours & apperal items, so if you equipped an armour - it was also covering the tail of your character with protective elements.

However, in TES games, ESO, BG3 and even Solasta - they made the reptilian races with tail that looks literally like it is "glued to the back" Eeyore - style

I can imagine that the only reason behind this is to save costs as you don’t need to model a bunch of additional armour pieces for the tail, but it really hurts the immersion.

^ This is something that I don't really understand as it makes no sense from a logical and immersivve standpoint. If a race capable of thinking & making tools and creating culture has a body piece - that body piece will be also a part of their culture, daily live, sports, economy, commers etc. If humans for example have hands and feet - then we make those things called gloves & boots. I am pretty sure if in some kind of alternative universe where human kind did not lost "the tail bone" - we would have an entire cultural, medical, clothing, sport departments that would be focused on, well - "the tail". In ESO it is especially wierd as Argonians for example literally have a sports game revolving around using a tail (just like we humans have a sports game revolving around using legs). So, why Argonians don't have any kind of protective wear for their tails ? Especially when taking into account that their sports game can be kinda brutal ? It does not make much sense.

Alphawolf01A

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Unpoular opinion: Divinity Original Sin 2 made it way better than BG3 in a 1st place...
...Because the "Lizard" race that was in DOS2 had entire body build from the ground up with tail taken into account, so it looked more natural & realistic as tail was a part of the body. This of course also included armours & apperal items, so if you equipped an armour - it was also covering the tail of your character with protective elements.

However, in TES games, ESO, BG3 and even Solasta - they made the reptilian races with tail that looks literally like it is "glued to the back" Eeyore - style

I can imagine that the only reason behind this is to save costs as you don’t need to model a bunch of additional armour pieces for the tail, but it really hurts the immersion.

^ This is something that I don't really understand as it makes no sense from a logical and immersivve standpoint. If a race capable of thinking & making tools and creating culture has a body piece - that body piece will be also a part of their culture, daily live, sports, economy, commers etc. If humans for example have hands and feet - then we make those things called gloves & boots. I am pretty sure if in some kind of alternative universe where human kind did not lost "the tail bone" - we would have an entire cultural, medical, clothing, sport departments that would be focused on, well - "the tail". In ESO it is especially wierd as Argonians for example literally have a sports game revolving around using a tail (just like we humans have a sports game revolving around using legs). So, why Argonians don't have any kind of protective wear for their tails ? Especially when taking into account that their sports game can be kinda brutal ? It does not make much sense.

Yeah! Kind of like how many Argonian Chairs have backs that are not designed to accommodate a tail the size of your leg sticking out of your backside. The ergonomics aren't there. A race with a tail wouldn't design chairs like that.

This game blows my mind sometime with the "attention to detail" one minute, and the complete lack of "attention to detail" the next. This is always on my mind with Housing, such as windows that are on one side of a wall, but not the other.

NotaDaedraWorshipper

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Unpoular opinion: Divinity Original Sin 2 made it way better than BG3 in a 1st place...
...Because the "Lizard" race that was in DOS2 had entire body build from the ground up with tail taken into account, so it looked more natural & realistic as tail was a part of the body. This of course also included armours & apperal items, so if you equipped an armour - it was also covering the tail of your character with protective elements.

However, in TES games, ESO, BG3 and even Solasta - they made the reptilian races with tail that looks literally like it is "glued to the back" Eeyore - style

I can imagine that the only reason behind this is to save costs as you don’t need to model a bunch of additional armour pieces for the tail, but it really hurts the immersion.

^ This is something that I don't really understand as it makes no sense from a logical and immersivve standpoint. If a race capable of thinking & making tools and creating culture has a body piece - that body piece will be also a part of their culture, daily live, sports, economy, commers etc. If humans for example have hands and feet - then we make those things called gloves & boots. I am pretty sure if in some kind of alternative universe where human kind did not lost "the tail bone" - we would have an entire cultural, medical, clothing, sport departments that would be focused on, well - "the tail". In ESO it is especially wierd as Argonians for example literally have a sports game revolving around using a tail (just like we humans have a sports game revolving around using legs). So, why Argonians don't have any kind of protective wear for their tails ? Especially when taking into account that their sports game can be kinda brutal ? It does not make much sense.

Yeah! Kind of like how many Argonian Chairs have backs that are not designed to accommodate a tail the size of your leg sticking out of your backside. The ergonomics aren't there. A race with a tail wouldn't design chairs like that.

This game blows my mind sometime with the "attention to detail" one minute, and the complete lack of "attention to detail" the next. This is always on my mind with Housing, such as windows that are on one side of a wall, but not the other.

So much of this. It's like they forget they actually have large tails. So little of their furniture and clothes/armour seem to take into consideration there's something that is sometimes larger than a leg back there.

NotaDaedraWorshipper

Tyralbin wrote: »

The other thing you have got to take into account is that their is 10 years difference in when the games were developed.

You can't really compare them with each other.

OP is clearly aware of that, and the age is not part of the issue, because games of similar age has done it better. TES 4, even in all it's potatofaceness had better head to neck transition. Same with TES5, which also had rather good shape.

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Unpoular opinion: Divinity Original Sin 2 made it way better than BG3 in a 1st place...

Doubt it's unpopular, DOS2 did their races well and made them more unique from eachother.

SeaGtGruff

I'm currently playing through the EP starter zones on one of my two new Arcanists (the other is playing through the AD starter zone), and I'm seeing some pretty awesome-looking Argonian NPCs in ESO.