nickie on 10/3/2013 at 20:31
:laff: Nutter!
SlyFoxx on 11/3/2013 at 01:54
Never thought them a joke...been using them for years. But that T1 bungee bug can be a real bugger.
Actually saw this about a week ago. ;)
pavlovscat on 11/3/2013 at 04:08
Wow! I want to do that!
Beleg Cúthalion on 11/3/2013 at 07:06
Just came to see some videos of those guys yesterday. Sure makes most hobbies look utterly boring. But the most important thing is: They are basically using the only way a rope arrow might work: Having a loop at the arrow tip through which a thin rope is laid. With this thin rope you are later able to pull a stronger one. Doesn't say anything about how much pulling weight can be attached to the arrow tip, but the idea of shooting a thin and light rope first is the same.
Sxerks on 11/3/2013 at 14:42
why was this thread moved to T4?
nickie on 11/3/2013 at 14:47
It was probably assumed to belong here - I'll move it back.
jtr7 on 11/3/2013 at 22:39
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Just came to see some videos of those guys yesterday. Sure makes most hobbies look utterly boring. But the most important thing is: They are basically using the only way a rope arrow might work: Having a loop at the arrow tip through which a thin rope is laid. With this thin rope you are later able to pull a stronger one. Doesn't say anything about how much pulling weight can be attached to the arrow tip, but the idea of shooting a thin and light rope first is the same.
Garrett would have to have something or someone to attach the stronger rope at the other end for him, so it wouldn't translate well to gaming without brutally cheating reality.
Peanuckle on 12/3/2013 at 02:58
Man, I didn't think that dry, dead piece of wood that tried to pass itself off as a shrubbery could hold any weight.
jtr7 on 12/3/2013 at 03:26
'Cause it's not just a stick of wood. There's nothing like it in our universe. The arrow's head doesn't even need to sink into wood much at all to anchor it. Half a centimeter is enough, and it doesn't matter how flimsy or thick the wood it attaches to is, either. It turns whatever activates it, along with itself, into an immovable, inflexible, material, where the rope is concerned, until it's retrieved. It can hold G's weight and another person slung over his shoulder without a problem. It's so unrealistic it makes no sense to think of it in terms of our real laws of physics. Very little about it works according to what we know, but it is part of a universe where magic is common, normal, and where gravity can be separated from mass. This is likely why EM didn't go with it, and has apparently removed even more normal magic than TDS did. The grapple will likely behave in ways that could hardly be replicated in real life, too, but it will probably do so in a way that people will call "realistic" in our universe's sense. What the rope allows as far as opening up vertical movement for the player, and adding more navigational choices by an order of magnitude, is far more important than tying it to our world.
I'd like to ask the ex-LGS devs what they had sort of settled on for the rope arrow, if they had an idea who would manufacture them, and I'd expect different answers from different devs anyway. I don't think the came to a consensus, and of course, the limitations the devs had tow work within forced the issue. The TMA Intro cutscene artists were either instructed to go along with a concept that matched what is seen in-game, or interpreted the rope arrow's function faithfully to the in-game function. It taps the wooden ceiling/beam just hard enough to splinter the wood a bit, only sinking in a couple of centimeters, so the pressure and friction would not even be able to support the weight of the arrow itself in real life, if left to the laws of physics of our universe. The rope comes out of nowhere, in close-up, quickly, unfurling up and around, with no effect on the arrow, and Garrett descends to the windowsill below from it.
