AC/CC >> Remake Buster Sword Changes

[Lex]

This works too well. I ain't gonna go with BSotR ("Buster Sword of the Remake") just 'cause you can't put your money in an American bank. =P

You would if you understood the deep emotional trauma you're causing me, but maybe that's the appeal ;-;

I could put my money in an American bank but then I'd have to deal with that green monopoly paper you people call "bills" and I'd rather shit a cactus

 

[hleV]

Got us a new shot of the CBS to work with from the FFVII Remake promotional event in Mobius Final Fantasy. It's pretty similar to the close-up shot we have of the RBS.

Can't promise I did this as well as hleV did it, but this is what I got:

Spoiler: Click for pics of big swords

Got 30.23%. Well below the 31.87% hleV got on the close-up shot of the RBS.

Even assuming I went a little long on the yellow line, there's leeway of up to eight pixels (164) before we get close (31.71%), and somewhere between that and nine pixels (163) before we get too long (31.90%).

Assuming I did all this correctly, of course.

Anyway, as near as i can tell, this most recent model/depiction of the CBS has us well within the required space.

EDIT: Here's a higher quality image --

Got basically the same values off of it.

Spoiler: Here's my result.

35.67%

Again, keep in mind that RBS's ironbox is supposedly covering the CBS handguard, meaning there's a RBS ironbox > CBS handguard size requirement.

I'm not against the RBS over CBS idea at all (it's kinda cool and goes in hand with Cloud's SOLDIER uniform modifications), but unless RBS ironbox is bigger than it actually looks from what we've seen so far, I do not believe that RBS ironbox can cover CBS handguard.

Perhaps the golden part was simply replaced rather than covered.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

Wow, I really messed mine up.

EDIT: Wait one sec, I think I may have done mine correctly after all. Look closely at the middle of that third ridge and remember there's a slight tilt in the angle we're viewing from. Below the line where the color shifts, we're actually looking at the bottom of that ridge.

Compare to

Spoiler: this other CBS image you measured, where the handguard is at a 90-degree angle.

The ridge remains a consistent width all the way across. It doesn't get progressively fatter as it moves toward the center of the crossguard.

Your measurement stops at the appropriate line for

Spoiler: this picture you measured previously with the CBS at a greater tilt

and in

Spoiler: the one good shot we have of the RBS.

 

[hleV]

You may take 2 or 3 pixels away from my crossguard height calculation if you really want and think that changes anything, but

Again, keep in mind that RBS's ironbox is supposedly covering the CBS handguard, meaning there's a RBS ironbox > CBS handguard size requirement.

I think that your comparison is more off than mine, though.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

By my count (well, the photo editor program's count), you were off by seven pixels:

That puts your proportions at 54 and 171, or 31.58%, less than the 31.87% you got for the similar image of the RBS. That neatly satisfies the space requirement, even accounting for the need for the box to be ever so slightly larger than the CBS's crossguard -- or, at the very least, suggests that it's plenty reasonable.

Heck, even at proportions of 55 and 171, that would still only increase the percentage to 32.16%. When we're getting down to counting the difference of a single pixel in images that aren't precise duplicates of one another to begin with -- and while still needing to account for angles that aren't 90° -- we passed the threshold for reasonable doubt a while ago.

 

[hleV]

That doesn't even seem right. The 3rd ridge is not that thin. Plus it's round, so you do not know where you actually have to put the line. At max, I was off by 3 pixels.

And you seem to be somehow missing this, but 31.87% is not a requirement. It's a comparison between the height of CBS handguard and RBS metalbox. The metalbox has to be bigger in height than CBS handguard for anything to make sense.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

That doesn't even seem right. The 3rd ridge is not that thin. Plus it's round, so you do not know where you actually have to put the line. At max, I was off by 3 pixels.

We don't need to identify where the line should go, because it's highly visible. There's a pronounced line running all the way from left to right on both sides of the crossguard -- lighter above, darker below. Just like in

Spoiler: this image.

That's where the measurement needed to stop: where the light shifts.

So yeah, seven pixels.

And you seem to be somehow missing this, but 31.87% is not a requirement. It's a comparison between the height of CBS handguard and RBS metalbox.

That's not how we (you included) have been measuring. We've been taking the height of the crossguard and dividing it by the length of the tang within individual pictures. That's how you got that 31.87% to begin with -- 138/433=31.87%. That was your formula.

I followed that same formula you set down above.

The metalbox has to be bigger in height than CBS handguard for anything to make sense.

Yes, and the 31.87% you got from the measurements you made on the RBS's box is bigger than the 31.58% I just got on the CBS's handguard.


Anyway, again, we're at the point of talking about the difference of a single pixel. Even if the math didn't quite add up (it does with this latest comparison), we would have plenty of reason to have confidence in the available space proportions based on just the different results from different pictures, as well as the lack of a 90° angle in our primary reference photo for the RBS.

 

[hleV]

That line doesn't convince me at all. The 3rd ridge is pretty round, not 90 degree edge identified from a simple line. Even in

Spoiler: that other image

the shade is somewhat brighter at the beginning of the turn and gradually becomes darker. You, however, cut it right at the first opportunity to make the handguard look smaller.

Not to mention that the angle is not that good. See how the blade width expands going down and compare it to other images. In the original RBS image (the 31.87% one) the angle is better and the metalbox is still smaller in height. The point I'm making here is that the angle is biased towards your theory. If RBS is 31.87%, then CBS is above your mentioned 31.58%. Applying the fact that RBS covers CBS and has to be bigger, RBS > CBS doesn't really work.

Furthermore, for non-perfect angles, the fact that the top and bottom ridges of the CBS handguard are of different width (looking from the side, Y axis??) should be taken into consideration, but I ain't any good with that stuff so I'll pass.

All summed up, the evidence is not on your side.

EDIT:

Spoiler: Shot at in-game RBS from the trailer.

This angle favors your theory. The blade width actually shrinks going down, meaning the hilt is very slightly closer to us than the tip of the blade. Also, I took the farther side of the metalbox, which would technically look bigger (or the same considering the image size) from a perfect angle.

30.65%

 

[hian]

Can I ask why are we measuring in pixels? We know how tall Cloud is supposed to be, so why not just actually use Cloud as base and get the actual measurements for each sword and compare them?

EDIT :
Also, I noticed that the remake handle, both at the end and where it connects to the guard is in darker metal, while the compilation one is gold.
Now, I can get behind covering up the guard, but did he switch out the entire handle while he was at it?
Will the handle stay dark then, with the guard being in gold once the reveal is made?

Maybe they really just combined the two designs, to make an entirely new one?
Seems like the simpler answer at this point.

 

[Starling]

I don't think the relative heights of various characters are consistent with their listed height, so pixels is probably a more reliable method, especially across games where character height may vary. Using a method of measurement independent of a specific character for comparison also allows you to use shots of the Buster Sword where Cloud isn't present.

 

[hian]

I don't think the relative heights of various characters are consistent with their listed height, so pixels is probably a more reliable method, especially across games where character height may vary. Using a method of measurment independent of a specific character for comparison also allows you to use shots of the Buster Sword where Cloud isn't present.

Do you have any reason to assume this isn't true for pixel values as well?

I mean, how many pixels do you get from for instance, the in-game model of Buster Sword in CC?

EDIT :
Also just noticed that the in-game model and the FMV model are different in design as well - the in-game having grey handle parts, and the FMV having gold =P

 

[Starling]

That's why you're measuring pixels for multiple versions of the Buster Sword, isn't it? To figure out what the average ratios are for the remake and compilation versions. Even if pixels may not be any more accurate than measuring in relation to a character, at least you're not limited to images where you can find a character with a listed height to use as a yardstick and then have to go check how consistent their height is in relation to everyone else.

I guess you could always measure pixels for the characters too if you wanted to be really pedantic about it though.

 

[hian]

That's why you're measuring pixels for multiple versions of the Buster Sword, isn't it? To figure out what the average ratios are for the remake and compilation versions. Even if pixels may not be any more accurate than measuring in relation to a character, at least you're not limited to images where you can find a character with a listed height to use as a yardstick and then have to go check how consistent their height is in relation to everyone else.

I guess you could always measure pixels for the characters too if you wanted to be really pedantic about it though.

My issue with this is that if you're not going to be pedantic, and there is pixel variations between each of the different versions regardless, I don't think the entire "comparison" path of arguing is of much use.

If SE aren't consistent with the measurements, then it really doesn't matter. They could make the compilation design fit under the new guard regardless of the measurements if that's what they want to do.

If you're going to make the argument -" hey, look at the measurements, it fits", but then not be pedantic about the measurements then the argument is moot. If there is no single measurement to begin with, then the argument is moot whether it fits or not, because it all just depends on the whims of SE at any given point in the game or the franchise.

The real bulk of this argument I think falls on whether or not there are are hints of the compilation guard underneath, such as hints of gold, or based on stuff said by Kitase/Nomura/Nojima in interviews in regards to tie-ins.

Since I can't really see any hints of gold, and since they're pretty open about making changes both to the compilation and the original game for this entry - I think Occam's razor pretty much settles this argument on that they just redesigned the sword using elements of both the original and the compilation to give it that "best of both worlds" element and cater to fans across the board.

 

[hleV]

Pixel units don't even have anything to do with this. They're just numbers used to compare the ratio (which comes in percents) as Starling pointed out and do not tell the actual size of the in-world object or part of it. They could come in inches or meters for all we like, but that would be in relation to the picture size (could be used for printing, for example), not in relation to what's seen in the picture.

Anyway, that's exactly what we're discussing. Can the CBS handguard as we know it fit underneath the RBS metalbox? Was the CBS handguard removed/replaced/retconned to be smaller? So far CBS handguard has been pretty consistent in not fitting underneath the RBS metalbox.

 

[Starling]

That's why you're measuring pixels for multiple versions of the Buster Sword, isn't it? To figure out what the average ratios are for the remake and compilation versions. Even if pixels may not be any more accurate than measuring in relation to a character, at least you're not limited to images where you can find a character with a listed height to use as a yardstick and then have to go check how consistent their height is in relation to everyone else.

I guess you could always measure pixels for the characters too if you wanted to be really pedantic about it though.

My issue with this is that if you're not going to be pedantic, and there is pixel variations between each of the different versions regardless, I don't think the entire "comparison" path of arguing is of much use.

If SE aren't consistent with the measurements, then it really doesn't matter. They could make the compilation design fit under the new guard regardless of the measurements if that's what they want to do.

If you're going to make the argument -" hey, look at the measurements, it fits", but then not be pedantic about the measurements then the argument is moot. If there is no single measurement to begin with, then the argument is moot whether it fits or not, because it all just depends on the whims of SE at any given point in the game or the franchise.

The real bulk of this argument I think falls on whether or not there are are hints of the compilation guard underneath, such as hints of gold, or based on stuff said by Kitase/Nomura/Nojima in interviews in regards to tie-ins.

Since I can't really see any hints of gold, and since they're pretty open about making changes both to the compilation and the original game for this entry - I think Occam's razor pretty much settles this argument on that they just redesigned the sword using elements of both the original and the compilation to give it that "best of both worlds" element and cater to fans across the board.

Well, I'm not the one making the measurements, though from what I can tell any existing variation is relatively negligible, which is notable considering different games and angles will inevitably lead to some variation even with consistently proportioned objects. The issue with using Cloud as a size reference for the Buster Sword though is that not only would you need good images of him with it but character heights may not be as consistent as objects are. I recall someone comparing the heights in ACC and finding that some characters were taller than they should be in relation to other characters. I'm not sure going that route would add anything at this point, though that doesn't mean you can't try if you want to do it anyway.

I find the possibility of the compilation Buster Sword hiding under the original guard to be interesting, though I agree that they probably just combined the designs. I'm not invested enough in the matter to go out of my way proving one possibility over the other and am perfectly content watching those who are discuss it until the remake comes along.

 

[hian]

Pixel units don't even have anything to do with this. They're just numbers used to compare the ratio (which comes in percents) as Starling pointed out and do not tell the actual size of the in-world object or part of it. They could come in inches or meters for all we like, but that would be in relation to the picture size (could be used for printing, for example), not in relation to what's seen in the picture.

Anyway, that's exactly what we're discussing. Can the CBS handguard as we know it fit underneath the RBS metalbox? Was the CBS handguard removed/replaced/retconned to be smaller? So far CBS handguard has been pretty consistent in not fitting underneath the RBS metalbox.

That's why I was asking to begin with, because I don't see/understand how you make actual size comparisons making pixels, since pixels seem to have nothing to do with scale of the objects on screen, but the fidelity with which they appear.

To make a meaningful comparison wouldn't you have to settle on a unit of length that a single pixel is supposed to represent in a picture, and then a similar judgement for a different picture and then compare the values?

In just comparing pixels aren't you just comparing how many pixels of space the thing takes up on screen in its specific quality/fidelity, which says nothing about how large or big it is comparatively to other objects elsewhere?

And, I get what you're discussing - my point is, how interesting is it to discuss this if you don't have a consistent metric from which to measure from?
If pixel rates varies, depending of course on the margin of error, then there is no "CBS as you know it", since it's always conveniently changing, and as such it might as well change again to fit under the old guard.

It's not an argument as much as it is two sides lobbying assumptions at each other at that point =S

The issue with using Cloud as a size reference for the Buster Sword though is that not only would you need good images of him with it but character heights may not be as consistent as objects are. I recall someone comparing the heights in ACC and finding that some characters were taller than they should be in relation to other characters. I'm not sure going that route would add anything at this point, though that doesn't mean you can't try if you want to do it anyway.

I would think it would suffice to use Cloud's official measurements, calculate the length of one of his hands holding the Buster Sword, and then make a relative comparison using the length of hilt of the sword covered by the hand to that of the length/width of the guard of the sword, and viola.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

I would think it would suffice to use Cloud's official measurements, calculate the length of one of his hands holding the Buster Sword, and then make a relative comparison using the length of hilt of the sword covered by the hand to that of the length/width of the guard of the sword, and viola.

That's really just another (more laborious) way of doing the same thing. No point in going that route.

In just comparing pixels aren't you just comparing how many pixels of space the thing takes up on screen in its specific quality/fidelity, which says nothing about how large or big it is comparatively to other objects elsewhere?

And, I get what you're discussing - my point is, how interesting is it to discuss this if you don't have a consistent metric from which to measure from?
If pixel rates varies, depending of course on the margin of error, then there is no "CBS as you know it", since it's always conveniently changing, and as such it might as well change again to fit under the old guard.

That's been one of my main points as well. I'm engaging in the measurements exercise because it's good, nerdy fun, but I've been following serialized fiction (comics, video games, whatever) long enough to never put more stock in occasional size discrepancies than in design choices. Especially when we're talking about differences of literally millimeters while also dealing with inconsistent lighting and vantages.

Based on the design choices alone (literally every other component of the CBS being incorporated; the riveted box being much, much wider now than it was in the original design -- almost like it's wider to make room for something), I say the evidence was always leaning in this direction. At any rate, if it's the direction Nomura wants to go, at the end of the day, a few pixels aren't going to matter to him.

If we were talking about the Ultima Weapon actually being under the RBS all along or something like that, I'd probably be the first one to call it nonsense, but we're talking about something that fits in some pictures and maybe doesn't fit so well in others -- yet is still never a big enough discrepancy that you would think twice about it unless you took a screenshot and started counting pixels.

 

[Starling]

Pixel units don't even have anything to do with this. They're just numbers used to compare the ratio (which comes in percents) as Starling pointed out and do not tell the actual size of the in-world object or part of it. They could come in inches or meters for all we like, but that would be in relation to the picture size (could be used for printing, for example), not in relation to what's seen in the picture.

Anyway, that's exactly what we're discussing. Can the CBS handguard as we know it fit underneath the RBS metalbox? Was the CBS handguard removed/replaced/retconned to be smaller? So far CBS handguard has been pretty consistent in not fitting underneath the RBS metalbox.

That's why I was asking to begin with, because I don't see/understand how you make actual size comparisons making pixels, since pixels seem to have nothing to do with scale of the objects on screen, but the fidelity with which they appear.

To make a meaningful comparison wouldn't you have to settle on a unit of length that a single pixel is supposed to represent in a picture, and then a similar judgement for a different picture and then compare the values?

In just comparing pixels aren't you just comparing how many pixels of space the thing takes up on screen in its specific quality/fidelity, which says nothing about how large or big it is comparatively to other objects elsewhere?

And, I get what you're discussing - my point is, how interesting is it to discuss this if you don't have a consistent metric from which to measure from?
If pixel rates varies, depending of course on the margin of error, then there is no "CBS as you know it", since it's always conveniently changing, and as such it might as well change again to fit under the old guard.

It's not an argument as much as it is two sides lobbying assumptions at each other at that point =S

Pixels are fine in this case as they're measuring the size ratio of different parts of the same object, rather than an exact measurement. They don't need to know the exact dimensions of the guards so much as whether one can fit under the other. If you wanted a specific measurement, you'd measure the pixels of something you know the length of and then use it to measure everything else where applicable.

The issue with using Cloud as a size reference for the Buster Sword though is that not only would you need good images of him with it but character heights may not be as consistent as objects are. I recall someone comparing the heights in ACC and finding that some characters were taller than they should be in relation to other characters. I'm not sure going that route would add anything at this point, though that doesn't mean you can't try if you want to do it anyway.

I would think it would suffice to use Cloud's official measurements, calculate the length of one of his hands holding the Buster Sword, and then make a relative comparison using the length of hilt of the sword covered by the hand to that of the length/width of the guard of the sword, and viola.

You'd have to do that for every image, though. I can't imagine it'd be easy to find many where you could make a decent comparison of Cloud and the Buster Sword, since the OG's character models aren't realistically proportioned and you're limited to only a few scenes across CC, ACC, the remake trailers and stuff outside the compilation.

 

[hian]

Based on the design choices alone (literally every other component of the CBS being incorporated; the riveted box being much, much wider now than it was in the original design -- almost like it's wider to make room for something), I say the evidence was always leaning in this direction. At any rate, if it's the direction Nomura wants to go, at the end of the day, a few pixels aren't going to matter to him.

It does lack the distinct golden fittings from the protruding parts that people have been pointing to as being the original guard sticking out of the new one though, and the gold on the hilt sections.

Although it could be the making of an iconic moment to have the new guard fall of, it does raise the question of when, how and why Cloud covered it up to begin with, which is what bothers me the most.

In the original, and based on the scene in the new trailer, Cloud isn't supposed to be consciously going out of his way to pretend to be a 1st Class Soldier - he actually, mistakenly, thinks he is.
However, if he went out of his way to cover up the original sword, that I think, demands some sort of rationale.

Like for instance, wanting not to be recognized etc. (although that doesn't make sense, since he's still brazenly walking around in the Soldier Uniform).

What I do like about the concept though, is that it could be a good way of keeping the sword relevant throughout the game.
In the original, you dumped the sword the moment you got a new one, and never looked back.
Although it would be a bit contrived, having the Buster Sword come back in a new form could be a good chance to make it into a higher-tier weapon for Cloud (Buster Sword 2.0 so to speak) so players would have a reason to use it again towards the end-game.

EDIT :
Come to think of it - despite the fact that Cloud is dressed as a 1st Class Soldier there is astoundingly few people who react to him like a Shinra Representative despite the fact that they have no reason to assume that he "quite his job" (or rather, was never in it to begin with).
It's also strange that Cloud doesn't consider changing clothes along his journey to avoid being a giant walking sign-post saying "HEY SHINRA! MAVERICK WITH SUPER-POWERS COMING THROUGH!!

 

[micknutson9]

I wonder what the Hardedge would look like since it's the weapon you steal/gain from a SOLDIER 3rd in the OG. And there's artwork of him holding it when sitting on the Hardy Daytona bike.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

What I do like about the concept though, is that it could be a good way of keeping the sword relevant throughout the game.
In the original, you dumped the sword the moment you got a new one, and never looked back.
Although it would be a bit contrived, having the Buster Sword come back in a new form could be a good chance to make it into a higher-tier weapon for Cloud (Buster Sword 2.0 so to speak) so players would have a reason to use it again towards the end-game.

That's what I'm expecting. The sword's true nature could be revealed along with Cloud's, its facade falling apart as Cloud's does, and then a late-game sidequest could involve having it restored to its proper golden glory.

Perhaps it could even be Cloud's ultimate weapon this time around.

 

[micknutson9]

What I do like about the concept though, is that it could be a good way of keeping the sword relevant throughout the game.
In the original, you dumped the sword the moment you got a new one, and never looked back.
Although it would be a bit contrived, having the Buster Sword come back in a new form could be a good chance to make it into a higher-tier weapon for Cloud (Buster Sword 2.0 so to speak) so players would have a reason to use it again towards the end-game.

That's what I'm expecting. The sword's true nature could be revealed along with Cloud's, its facade falling apart as Cloud's does, and then a late-game sidequest could involve having it restored to its proper golden glory.

Perhaps it could even be Cloud's ultimate weapon this time around.

Until he decides to stick it in the ground to serve as Zack's grave marker, that is, lol!

 

[hian]

Perhaps it could even be Cloud's ultimate weapon this time around.

That I wouldn't enjoy so much. It could be a good Rangarok tier weapon, but replaying the glowing glory that is Ultima Weapon? It's not nearly cool enough to do that.

Until he decides to stick it in the ground to serve as Zack's grave marker, that is, lol!

That's what it was? Cloud's apparently lost his sense of direction together with his memories then, because Zack died overlooking Midgar, not on the other side of the mountains overlooking Junon...

 

[micknutson9]

Perhaps it could even be Cloud's ultimate weapon this time around.

That I wouldn't enjoy so much. It could be a good Rangarok tier weapon, but replaying the glowing glory that is Ultima Weapon? It's not nearly cool enough to do that.

Until he decides to stick it in the ground to serve as Zack's grave marker, that is, lol!

That's what it was? Cloud's apparently lost his sense of direction together with his memories then, because Zack died overlooking Midgar, not on the other side of the mountains overlooking Junon...

I know... I was referring it serving as Zack's grave marker overlooking Midgar after he got his memories back. Since that's what it was serving as in AC/ACC.

 

[hian]

Perhaps it could even be Cloud's ultimate weapon this time around.

That I wouldn't enjoy so much. It could be a good Rangarok tier weapon, but replaying the glowing glory that is Ultima Weapon? It's not nearly cool enough to do that.

Until he decides to stick it in the ground to serve as Zack's grave marker, that is, lol!

That's what it was? Cloud's apparently lost his sense of direction together with his memories then, because Zack died overlooking Midgar, not on the other side of the mountains overlooking Junon...

I know... I was referring it serving as Zack's grave marker overlooking Midgar after he got his memories back. Since that's what it was serving as in AC/ACC.

I'm pretty sure in AC he put it into the ground by Junon - or did he just go an pick it up from and take it back to Midgar?