PDA

View Full Version : Am i the only one who was made sad by the newly released footage?



jerren
27th Feb 2011, 03:29
as mentioned before, Batmans cape still cant drape over him in full epicness like this:
http://greywulf.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/dabatman.jpg
http://jlurevisited.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/wf87.jpg

Batman The Trailer Hunter
27th Feb 2011, 03:47
Do you always complain about somthing? No footage has been release. we just got to see a little clip.

JackWinz
27th Feb 2011, 03:51
I don't mind it..

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 03:59
We've known this for ages. The reasoning is most likely that Rocksteady just doesn't care enough to work about the mechanics of it. Not a big deal.

Also, lol at the picture of Bat-Bale visibly holding the cape shut. Talk about fail.

jerren
27th Feb 2011, 04:22
Do you always complain about somthing? No footage has been release. we just got to see a little clip.

I try to not complain much, only about things that are MOST important concerning this game. Things such as a free flowing cape, without it the game will fail.

Batman The Trailer Hunter
27th Feb 2011, 04:39
Yeah you complain about everything

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 04:40
Seriously, somebody call the WAHmbulance.

JD_Method
27th Feb 2011, 04:45
It probably takes a lot more work than you think to make his cape drape over him. Is it really THAT big of a deal? Sure, it would be cool, but the time spent making his cape wrap around him when he walks could be better spent elsewhere, don't you think?

Batmanhill6157
27th Feb 2011, 05:30
For real it's never good enough

stoobytoons
27th Feb 2011, 05:35
Honestly, guys. It's a pretty cool idea and, aesthetically speaking, Rocksteady has been pretty awesome at nailing a lot of Batman's epic aesthetics. It's something that was accomplished in the last generation of consoles with Batman: Vengeance and should be just as simple for Rocksteady to employ. The question might be "Why?" Other than just looking cool, what would be the function? In B:V it was simply a stagnant player animation. It would be great if the feature was used as part of stealth mode when approaching informants that weren't necessarily enemies.

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 05:37
Honestly, guys. It's a pretty cool idea and, aesthetically speaking, Rocksteady has been pretty awesome at nailing a lot of Batman's epic aesthetics. It's something that was accomplished in the last generation of consoles with Batman: Vengeance and should be just as simple for Rocksteady to employ. The question might be "Why?" Other than just looking cool, what would be the function? In B:V it was simply a stagnant player animation. It would be great if the feature was used as part of stealth mode when approaching informants that weren't necessarily enemies.

Well I think one reason is that without it Batman seems kind of rigid with his perfect posture and ultra-flexed muscles. The cape would hide that and make him seem a little less robotic.

But yeah, it is a neat visual. I'm a little surprised Rocksteady hasn't implemented it considering how much work they've put into making the cape flow smoothly.

airblitz7
27th Feb 2011, 08:33
It Really isn't that hard. Assassin's Creed 2 employed something similar to good effect.

DarkVictory
27th Feb 2011, 08:34
No, I wasn't sad because I already assumed it wasn't going to happen anyhow.

Further, it wasn't in AA, and that game was still totally and completely awesome. Never did I once, personally, think 'This game would be so awesome if only Batman's cape went all the way around his body... since it doesn't this game stinks!'

Yes, it'd be a nice thing if they could implement it, but it is certainly in no way crucial to making an awesome Batman game. The Batman they gave us in Asylum was awesome. The Batman they gave us in the Hugo Strange trailer was super awesome.

Neither Batman ever wrapped his cape around his body.



Honestly, guys. It's a pretty cool idea and, aesthetically speaking, Rocksteady has been pretty awesome at nailing a lot of Batman's epic aesthetics. It's something that was accomplished in the last generation of consoles with Batman: Vengeance and should be just as simple for Rocksteady to employ. The question might be "Why?" Other than just looking cool, what would be the function? In B:V it was simply a stagnant player animation. It would be great if the feature was used as part of stealth mode when approaching informants that weren't necessarily enemies. It was accomplished in Vengeance, but not with a cape that in any was as realitic or complicated as the cape they are using in the Arkham series.

It's simply not as simple a process as people think it would be to animate a cape with that much dynamic motion realistically around a whole human form that is also supposed to be able to move. Already we have seen that the current cape which only covers Batman from behind and part of his sides clips on his gauntlets. Imagine the clipfest that would happen if we are trying to wrap it around his whole body!

It'd be a totally awesome visual for Rocksteady to implement it, but the amount of value they'd receive would probably not justify the amount of work they'd have to put into it. I'd be stoked if they proved me wrong and were able to implement it into Arkham City, but I'm not going to hold my breath and I'm not going to care too terribly if they don't.



It Really isn't that hard. Assassin's Creed 2 employed something similar to good effect. I've seen this brought up before, and to begin with, it's not a fair comparison. Ezio's cape covers nowhere near his whole body. It only overs a quarter of his body. It's not full-length or on both sides of his body.

And, even given this... Ezio's cape STILL clips through things!

The quarter cape in ACII is pretty impressive visually, but it's not on the same level, technically, as a cape that cloaks an entire body from neck to toe.

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 09:25
Ezio's cape covers more than a quarter of his body and it looks pretty convincing. I see it as sort of a proof of concept, that you can make a cloak like that which looks realistic enough and isn't a bugfest (I never noticed much clipping unless I had a weapon with a longer than usual handle).

I think that its within Rocksteady's abilities to make a wraparound cloak but ultimately it sounds like its more trouble than its worth and I think thats why they haven't included it. They have shown that they're bridging that gap though with the fact that Batman's cape is no longer super glued to his shoulders so maybe they'll include it if they do a third Batman game.

airblitz7
27th Feb 2011, 09:40
I've seen this brought up before, and to begin with, it's not a fair comparison. Ezio's cape covers nowhere near his whole body. It only overs a quarter of his body. It's not full-length or on both sides of his body.

And, even given this... Ezio's cape STILL clips through things!

The quarter cape in ACII is pretty impressive visually, but it's not on the same level, technically, as a cape that cloaks an entire body from neck to toe.

Now, when did I state that Ezio's cape was a whole cape? Why isn't it a fair comparison? Unless you actually go looking for clippings then it shouldn't matter. All that has to be done is to employ the same effect but extend the cape. It's essentially the same except one's shorter.

jerren
27th Feb 2011, 10:38
Well I think one reason is that without it Batman seems kind of rigid with his perfect posture and ultra-flexed muscles. The cape would hide that and make him seem a little less robotic.

But yeah, it is a neat visual. I'm a little surprised Rocksteady hasn't implemented it considering how much work they've put into making the cape flow smoothly.

Thats the reason for it i was thinking of too

DarkVictory
27th Feb 2011, 11:29
Ezio's cape covers more than a quarter of his body and it looks pretty convincing. I see it as sort of a proof of concept, that you can make a cloak like that which looks realistic enough and isn't a bugfest (I never noticed much clipping unless I had a weapon with a longer than usual handle).

I think that its within Rocksteady's abilities to make a wraparound cloak but ultimately it sounds like its more trouble than its worth and I think thats why they haven't included it. They have shown that they're bridging that gap though with the fact that Batman's cape is no longer super glued to his shoulders so maybe they'll include it if they do a third Batman game. Ezio's cape does curve slightly past his waste, so technically, it might cover slightly more than a quarter of his body, but generally speaking, it's the left side of his upper body, which would be about a quarter. As for the clipping, indeed, it does appear more often with long-handled swords, but it happens at least as often as Batman's cape going through his gauntlets.

As for it being a proof-of-concept, yeah, it is to a degree, but really, even when you consider the fact that Ezio CAN bring his cape all the way around his body, his cape is still far less dynamic and animated than Batman's cape in Arkham Asylum.

I always thought the best way Rocksteady could include this that wouldn't require a whole lot f work is to include the cape wrapping around Batman's body as part of a specific animation (my idea would be a move wear Batman hides in a dark corner). This way, the cape doesn't have to animate dynamically from this position but we still get to see the look (however briefly).



Now, when did I state that Ezio's cape was a whole cape? You didn't, that's why I made sure to point out that it isn't.
Why isn't it a fair comparison? Because Ezio's cape is not a whole cape. That's the whole point.
Unless you actually go looking for clippings then it shouldn't matter. The cape clips even in cut-scenes (like the post-assassination ones)... it's not all that bothersome (at least not to me), but it certainly does not require you to 'go looking for clippings'.
All that has to be done is to employ the same effect but extend the cape. It's essentially the same except one's shorter. No, it's not essentially the same. For one, Ezio's cape only covers one side of his body. Batman's would have to cover both but remain a connected hole (thus you can't simply give him 'two Ezio capes'). Also, bringing it down to the feet means Batman's cape would have to account for the movement of his legs, not just his arms (like Ezio's). Thus, instead of accounting for one active limb as in Assassin's Creed, we are now trying to acount for the movement of four. That takes a bit more programming than just extending the cape down.

Further, as I already stated, Batman's cape is much, much more dynamic than the cape Ezio wears. The important thing to note here is we are not talking about extending Ezio's cape down (which presents enough problems of it's own), but bringing Batman's far more complicated cape around. This is an important distinction.

Batman's cape moves and reacts to Batman's movements much moreso than Ezio's cape and Batman is capable of far more active moments than Ezio.

I am not (even if it sounds like it) trying to suggest that it is impossible for Rocksteady, or any other game developer for that matter, to create a wrap around cape that is as dynamic as the cape in Arkham Asylum. I am just pointing out that is is not as simple, technically speaking, as people seem to think and it should not be expected that Rocksteady could 'easily' include this in their game.

Turn and Face the Strange
27th Feb 2011, 11:44
When you're complaining about the way his cape lies on his shoulders, you know that there's nothing to really complain about :)

AngelsDontKill6
27th Feb 2011, 12:11
his cape will doublty cross his shoulders
but it would be sweet if it did!

SirRoscoe
27th Feb 2011, 12:21
@ DarkVictory, all well made points. While it may be cool to see Batman's cape to be more cloak-like, as of now its technologically nigh-impossible, especially with how freely Batman's cape flows. He still has the best cape in all of videogames.

HellfireBat
27th Feb 2011, 12:59
This think didn't even pop into my head. I was playing Arkham Asylum and this didn't even come into my head even once. Seriously it's a small loss. It's not like the reviewers are gonna drop the score for it or the buy rates will go down.

A Dark Knight
27th Feb 2011, 13:49
I try to not complain much, only about things that are MOST important concerning this game. Things such as a free flowing cape, without it the game will fail.
Obvious troll is obvious.

Two-Face
27th Feb 2011, 13:54
People complain about Detective Mode, now this? In my opinion Rocksteady can't do no wrong.

Batman The Trailer Hunter
27th Feb 2011, 16:16
What if they gave him a cape kinda like Darth Vader?

The Bat
27th Feb 2011, 16:22
I'd much rather just keep the fully functional non- problematic cape instead of wasting their time, work and money on making a new cape that will most likely introduce problems and not really have any point in them except it looking cool. Just my opinion.

Chob
27th Feb 2011, 17:21
They could make Batman's cape and cowl pink with purple polka dots and the game wouldn't fail. On a related note, it would be nice to get a Batman of Zur-En-Arrh unlockable costume. :D

The New Blueguy
27th Feb 2011, 17:36
Exactly, what Jerren is asking for is too much for something that VERY little use. I will admit that what I've seen of the dive bomb animation makes it look entirely possible to have the cape wrasp around his entire body but the physics involved in the basic cape functions (gliding, cape stun, dive bomb) alone much less the natural physics of walking, running, jumping, falling are all too much as is.

jerren
27th Feb 2011, 18:01
I always thought the best way Rocksteady could include this that wouldn't require a whole lot f work is to include the cape wrapping around Batman's body as part of a specific animation (my idea would be a move wear Batman hides in a dark corner). This way, the cape doesn't have to animate dynamically from this position but we still get to see the look (however briefly).

THis

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 18:41
What bugs me about the gauntlets clipping through the cape is it only happens because the fins are really long. If they cut them down just slightly there'd be no problem.

stoobytoons
27th Feb 2011, 19:23
What bugs me about the gauntlets clipping through the cape is it only happens because the fins are really long. If they cut them down just slightly there'd be no problem.

I agree.

But look, the way the cape dynamics work isn't that the cape recognizes every nook and cranny of Batman's body and flows around that. There are invisible boundaries that the game engine calculates between the major extremities of the body, particularly the upper arm and back. Then special dynamics -- like wind, weight, stretch, drag during walking and running, and centrifugal force when spinning -- are calculated into the cloth. So, when Batman is just standing there, even when it's windy, you'll see the cape seem to flow behind him like normal. But the gamer just believes that it's natural movement. In all actuality the cape is essentially avoiding Batman's body to prevent any hint of clipping and unnecessary calculation for musculature collision.

I imagine that for special, cape-specific functions like the gliding and the defensive spin-move some kind of blend shape function is employed to get the came from it's default, real-time simulation, to the animated and fully held wingspan.

Now, my guess would be that if you wanted Batman to have the cape wrap around the body it would be as simple as a combination of things -- dynamic simulation of the cape AND some simple hand keyed animation. In other words, if you want Batman to wrap himself in the cape, set the function so that the cape closes and hangs for, say, 90% of the full model while the bottom 10% simulates wind or drag, and then animate the visibility of the fins on the gauntlets so that they aren't poking out of the front of the cape. All this coupled with a slow moving Batman would make for a believable presentation. And even if there was some slight clipping on the legs, it sounds like that won't prevent anyone from getting Game of the Year. ;)

Billy Mays
27th Feb 2011, 22:27
what footage is this referring to? because i sure as marbles havent seen any. unless you mean the CGI "footage" where, even if they DID put the cape wrap-around, you wouldnt be able to tell cause of all the fighting. and what movie is that batman-bale pic from? i dont remember him doing that.

Old_BenKenobi
27th Feb 2011, 22:35
what footage is this referring to? because i sure as marbles havent seen any. unless you mean the CGI "footage" where, even if they DID put the cape wrap-around, you wouldnt be able to tell cause of all the fighting. and what movie is that batman-bale pic from? i dont remember him doing that.

Theres a 10 second clip of Arkham City on youtube.

And the Bat-Bale pic is a promo shot from Begins.

Turn and Face the Strange
27th Feb 2011, 22:47
what footage is this referring to? because i sure as marbles havent seen any. unless you mean the CGI "footage" where, even if they DID put the cape wrap-around, you wouldnt be able to tell cause of all the fighting. and what movie is that batman-bale pic from? i dont remember him doing that.

There's a brief gameplay video of Arkham City from the Inside Xbox preview videos, and that's from Batman Begins, when he takes Rachel to the Batcave.

EDIT: Ah, too late :D

Matches Malone
27th Feb 2011, 22:56
That Bale pic is a production photo, they were obviously shooting a CU shot & wouldn't see him holding the cape.

Billy Mays
28th Feb 2011, 00:04
can anyone provide a link for this 10 second clip?

EDIT: found it :D

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 00:07
In a more realistic view, the cape would not work that way unless it was attached to the suit in front of his neck under his chin and it would trip him when he wants to run. It makes more sense for the cape to be the way it is now.

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 01:03
In a more realistic view, the cape would not work that way unless it was attached to the suit in front of his neck under his chin

Um, it is attached that way in most interpretations of the character, including the games.


and it would trip him when he wants to run.

Thats why he flips it over his shoulders when he runs or fights or does anything action-y.

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 01:06
Um, it is attached that way in most interpretations of the character, including the games.



Thats why he flips it over his shoulders when he runs or fights or does anything action-y.

In cartoons yea but that wouldn't work effectively in the real world. It would be better and simpler to have it the way it is in Nolan's films because it's forward enough so all he has to do is pull the cape around him a little bit and not have to waste time moving the cape out of the way when he wants to run.

TheBat
28th Feb 2011, 01:21
There Professional game makers. They have a enormous team working hard for this game I am positive. Therefore I hope to see Batman's cape be able to drape in front of him when he is moving smoothly, then when he really wants to sprint his cape will then go over his shoulders. I did not like the part in the little clip when he ran toward the wall leaped up and did a roll into a wall. I really hope Batman plays smoothly this time around. He should be able to leap up and front flip in the air and land on his feet easy. Still hoping for all batman's costumes from the comics. Sky Blue, Dark Blue, Navy Blue, Black and the different cowls,or just let us customize him the color and we want.

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 01:51
Jumping over a ledge or something and doing flips and all of that is unnecessary he should just jump over the ledge normally unless he is fighting.

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 02:30
In cartoons yea but that wouldn't work effectively in the real world. It would be better and simpler to have it the way it is in Nolan's films because it's forward enough so all he has to do is pull the cape around him a little bit and not have to waste time moving the cape out of the way when he wants to run.

Yeah but the real world is boring. Why would you want something to be like a real world? :confused:

I'd rather have something that looks cool than something as lame as this:

http://greywulf.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/dabatman.jpg

DarkVictory
28th Feb 2011, 02:30
In cartoons yea but that wouldn't work effectively in the real world. It would be better and simpler to have it the way it is in Nolan's films because it's forward enough so all he has to do is pull the cape around him a little bit and not have to waste time moving the cape out of the way when he wants to run. Yeah, realistically speaking, Batman's cape is better from a functional perspective behind his shoulders, like in Nolan's films.

Aesthetically speaking, however, it looks pretty bad -*ss when he's all wrapped up in it.



There Professional game makers. They have a enormous team working hard for this game I am positive. Therefore I hope to see Batman's cape be able to drape in front of him when he is moving smoothly, then when he really wants to sprint his cape will then go over his shoulders. I did not like the part in the little clip when he ran toward the wall leaped up and did a roll into a wall. I really hope Batman plays smoothly this time around. He should be able to leap up and front flip in the air and land on his feet easy. Still hoping for all batman's costumes from the comics. Sky Blue, Dark Blue, Navy Blue, Black and the different cowls,or just let us customize him the color and we want. Just because they are professional game makers does not automatically make difficult programming tasks easy. Free-flowing fabric that realistically drapes all the way around a person's body is something almost no game makers are able to do. Besides the number of man hours it would take getting it to work, it would at the current moment be a pretty big drain on system resources and there are far more important things I think Rocksteady would be better off focusing the game engine on handling.

As for Batman jumping and doing flips and landing on his feet... I certainly hope not. It's not realistic and it looks cheesy to see people move like that. Batman's movements should be functional (as they were, for the most part, in AA). I wouldn't mind seeing him be able to traverse the environment a little bit more organically (like Ezio from Assassin's Creed, for example), but if they start adding a lot of unnecessary jumps and flips, I would not be happy!

The Comedian
28th Feb 2011, 02:48
people on this forum whine so damn much, be glad you get to see any footage.

DarkVictory
28th Feb 2011, 02:52
Yeah but the real world is boring. Why would you want something to be like a real world? :confused:

I'd rather have something that looks cool than something as lame as this:

http://greywulf.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/dabatman.jpg I don't think that looks lame. :confused:

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 04:54
The fact that he has to awkwardly pull the cape shut and only half-suceeds because its designed to not do that doesn't look lame?

All the movie suits have looked lamed in varying degrees. There I said it.

stoobytoons
28th Feb 2011, 05:01
The fact that he has to awkwardly pull the cape shut and only half-suceeds because its designed to not do that doesn't look lame?

All the movie suits have looked lamed in varying degrees. There I said it.

Awww.. that's too bad. Oh well, we can't agree on everything, OBK. ;)

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 05:06
Batman's suit should be function over form not vice versa /discussion

stoobytoons
28th Feb 2011, 05:12
Batman's suit should be function over form not vice versa /discussion

He's not Iron Man, if that's what you're trying to go for. First and foremost, the function has been to take on the form of a bat and strike fear into the hearts of the underworld. The rest of the stuff has been piled under that common thread to some varying degree since its inception.

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 05:34
He's not Iron Man, if that's what you're trying to go for. First and foremost, the function has been to take on the form of a bat and strike fear into the hearts of the underworld. The rest of the stuff has been piled under that common thread to some varying degree since its inception.

That isn't what i was trying to go for at all, this is useless

Bat-Tutsi
28th Feb 2011, 06:07
That isn't what i was trying to go for at all, this is useless

No, it makes perfect sense in response to your "function over form" non-conversation-ender. He looks more like a bat with the cape draped over him. His name is Batman. All his gimmicks are bat-puns. What's not to understand? Are you goddam dense? (channeling Miller :rasp:)

If your comment was true still, they should just have Batman stop being a costumed hero with a cape and cowl, instead give him a full-body exoskeleton with missiles that fire from his gauntlets too. He could kick everyone's ass throughtout the game!

Gadgets over skill would be the result, instead of a balance between the two like their should be. Face it, form over function rules, because its a comic book character. :mad2:

stoobytoons
28th Feb 2011, 06:12
^Thank you. "Useless." Phehh!!

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 06:12
where is a face palm emoticon when you need one?

HA_laughingfish_HA
28th Feb 2011, 06:23
where is a face palm emoticon when you need one?

http://www.the-isb.com/images/BatmanFacepalm.jpg

Doat1
28th Feb 2011, 08:11
thank you

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 16:33
Batman's suit should be function over form not vice versa /discussion

Except its a comic book. It doesn't have to be anything as long as it looks good. Why does he wear black underpants over his grey tights? Because it makes the costume look better. Why does his cape wrap around his body so ominously? Because it makes the costume look better. Why are his eyes white when he wears the cowl? Because it makes the costume look better. Why does he only use a belt when a backpack would be necessary for all the gear he carries around? Because it makes the costume look better. Why does his mask leave his jaw chin and mouth exposed? Because it makes the costume look better. Why does he have an emblem on his chest? Because it makes the costume look better. Why does his mask have long pointy ears? Because it makes the costume look better. If you take all of the cool looking stuff away from Batman because its not functional then you'd be left with a guy covered head to two in black body armour. Yeah, thats real fun. :rolleyes:

If Batman's costume was function over form it would be something like what was seen in Kingdom Come. In other words, Iron Man with ears.

stoobytoons
28th Feb 2011, 17:46
^Yup.

Although, it seems the black outwear, as it were, is beginning to be phased out in the comics.. finally.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.comicsalliance.com/media/2010/10/bm-tdk-cv1-reg.jpg

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 17:48
I hate that design. Batman needs the black underwear. Its what ties the whole costume together. And yes, I'm serious.

Turn and Face the Strange
28th Feb 2011, 18:11
On the contrary, I love it! It's like seeing a Superman costume that does away with the red undies-on-the-outside - different, but refreshing. Looks more realistic in a way as a result.

Love the utility belt and the updated yellow insignia!

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 18:14
On the contrary, I love it! It's like seeing a Superman costume that does away with the red undies-on-the-outside - different, but refreshing. Looks more realistic in a way as a result.

Love the utility belt and the updated yellow insignia!

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/28/albundygif.gif

I just wanted an excuse to use that gif.

BigBoss
28th Feb 2011, 18:27
What's the big deal about his ******* underwear??? In the dark knight, his whole outfit was black and it was awesome.

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 18:56
No it wasn't. The all black batsuit is pretty boring, especially in the new movies where the only smidge of colour is in a dark gold belt. It was better in the Burton movies when he had the yellow emblem and belt to break it up a bit but it was still pretty boring compared to the proper suit. That being said, I'd rather the new Bruce Wayne had an all black suit than an all grey because black is kind of special.

The big deal about the underwear is how the costume fetches the eyes. Some costumes, like Aquaman, Spider-Man and Tim Drake's traditional costumes, look fine without the underwear because their shirt and pants are different colours (orange and green for Aquaman, red and blue for Spidey, red and green for Robin). Others, like Nightwing, Venom and Daredevil have mostly monochromatic suits but they work because they're either black or some other fetching colour. But grey is the single most boring colour on the face of the planet. Its not cool enough to be black and not clean enough to be white. Its just that horrible middle of the road oatmeal colour thats totally uninteresting. So when the majority of Batman's suit is grey you need something to break up the big field of grey. Thats what the black trunks do. They add some contrast, they add some flavour, they play off the yellow belt nicely and while they do look ridiculous they are necessary.

This is also why I prefer Hulk to have purple pants. As ridiculous as it is to have Bruce Banner running around in purple slacks, the purple plays off Hulk's green body much better than light blue. These are comic books, they don't have to be realistic or believable or even sane, they just have to tell the story and look good doing it.

Turn and Face the Strange
28th Feb 2011, 19:09
No it wasn't. The all black batsuit is pretty boring, especially in the new movies where the only smidge of colour is in a dark gold belt. It was better in the Burton movies when he had the yellow emblem and belt to break it up a bit but it was still pretty boring compared to the proper suit. That being said, I'd rather the new Bruce Wayne had an all black suit than an all grey because black is kind of special.

The big deal about the underwear is how the costume fetches the eyes. Some costumes, like Aquaman, Spider-Man and Tim Drake's traditional costumes, look fine without the underwear because their shirt and pants are different colours (orange and green for Aquaman, red and blue for Spidey, red and green for Robin). Others, like Nightwing, Venom and Daredevil have mostly monochromatic suits but they work because they're either black or some other fetching colour. But grey is the single most boring colour on the face of the planet. Its not cool enough to be black and not clean enough to be white. Its just that horrible middle of the road oatmeal colour thats totally uninteresting. So when the majority of Batman's suit is grey you need something to break up the big field of grey. Thats what the black trunks do. They add some contrast, they add some flavour, they play off the yellow belt nicely and while they do look ridiculous they are necessary.

This is also why I prefer Hulk to have purple pants. As ridiculous as it is to have Bruce Banner running around in purple slacks, the purple plays off Hulk's green body much better than light blue. These are comic books, they don't have to be realistic or believable or even sane, they just have to tell the story and look good doing it.

And I think it looks good the way it is.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, remember. Just because you don't like the look of something doesn't mean other feel the same :)

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 19:16
I suppose. I suppose some people like fat women too but I never understood that either.

HellfireBat
28th Feb 2011, 19:22
Lol when the first time anyone sees Batman you know what comes into their head "Why is he wearing his underwear outside his clothes?"

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 19:35
Lol when the first time anyone sees Batman you know what comes into their head "Why is he wearing his underwear outside his clothes?"

Until you take it away, then they wonder why the suit looks weird and never realize its because the underwear is missing despite being an "improvement". Well except for the crazy people who think it looks better that way.

stoobytoons
28th Feb 2011, 20:27
I dunno about "crazy," but I'm not really a fan of the gray. That said, I would still prefer a darker suit, leaning toward a charcoal color rather than light gray. Either way, I don't see the point of putting Batman in a diaper. It's a throwback to Superman's design which, in turn, is a throw back to the old musclemen from the early 20th century. And speaking of Superman, let's toss out the belt!

Old_BenKenobi
28th Feb 2011, 20:39
The point of putting Batman in a "diaper" is that its more pleasing to the eye. It being a throwback to Superman is incidental. I guess you could say its a "happy accident". Without the trunks he looks unbalanced as the grey overpowers the black. It also makes the figure "pop". I also think this is the reason Green Lantern has white gloves, to balance out the dark green and black so it doesn't look muddy.

DarkVictory
28th Feb 2011, 23:36
While I completely disagree with Mr. Kenobi when it comes to the movie Batman costumes (I like them all... well, not the Bat-nipples, but the other four movies all had cool costumes in my book), and I further disagree about the idea that Batman's suit need not display any functionality (part of the appeal of Batman has always been his gear and the melding of form with function, so I do not think you should ever do away with either)... I totally agree about the black trunks.

If Batman's suit is all black and/or has many tactical refinements (ala what he wears in Dark Knight), the extra trunks are unnecessary, but when they are going with the more solid gray motif, the trunks are definitely an aesthetically pleasing addition to the outfit (even if they don't make sense... I always pretend Batman wears them because they are his groin protector).

As he says, it adds contrast to the look. Solid gray from his chest down to his feet is kind of blah. Again, Batman's look is not just about function, but form as well. Contrast adds dynamism to the look. That's why comic characters always have contrasting colors even if it's not at all necessary (like Superman's yellow belt for no reason, since Superman doesn't need equipment). This is why I think the Arkham Asylum outfit is the absolute best Batsuit design ever.

They managed to keep the contrasting look of the comics (black on gray), but they made those differences look functional. Batman's gloves aren't a different color just because they are gloves. They are a different color because they are tactical defensive gauntlets with hard shells. The shorts DO look like they have a cup sewn in them. It's comic book design with interpretations that make those design choices look rational and functional, not just cosmetic.

I love it.