268 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

As long as the bar decreases whenever you make a paragon/renegade choice contrary to your dominant alignment, it's not going to build up to levels relevant for a Paragade or Renagon: their persuade levels will be remarkably low.



It certainly (appears) to be good for people who are 90% Paragon but want that one Renegade choice or vice versa, but it doesn't allow for a balanced 50-50 player.

[Ecael]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

As long as the bar decreases whenever you make a paragon/renegade choice contrary to your dominant alignment, it's not going to build up to levels relevant for a Paragade or Renagon: their persuade levels will be remarkably low.

It certainly (appears) to be good for people who are 90% Paragon but want that one Renegade choice or vice versa, but it doesn't allow for a balanced 50-50 player.

The player would incur a slight penalty to the Persuasion points gained. They're not losing points - they're only gaining a large fraction of what they would get if they were going full Paragon/Renegade.

So they still increase their Persuasion skill, just not quite as much as the others.

[Dean_the_Young]

Unless later (read: the few significant points people complain about already) checks have point requirements high enough that getting those fractions more or less regularly prevent you from having enough points, I don't see the improvement one way or the other. You'd either still be penalized for not being Paragon or Renegade enough, or the distinction wouldn't matter.

[Ecael]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Unless later (read: the few significant points people complain about already) checks have point requirements high enough that getting those fractions more or less regularly prevent you from having enough points, I don't see the improvement one way or the other. You'd either still be penalized for not being Paragon or Renegade enough, or the distinction wouldn't matter.

Playing Paragade/Renegon shouldn't give you access to all the options, but it should give you access to most of them (especially with other bonuses tacked on).

Right now, the system will penalize a 50-50 Paragon/Renegade by shutting them out of almost every dialogue choice that would require higher than 50% at that time (later in the game, almost all choice requirements will scale higher than that).

[Gundar3]

I like the idea of shuttle and airlock dialogue. I also like the idea of the persuasion bar, but would rather have it based solely on lvling a persuasion skill instead of tied to any alignment. Paragon or Renegade bonuses are a good idea though.

[Urazz]

Perhaps instead of that purple bar you showed make it a kind of semi-rainbow bar.  Make renegade/red on the left and Paragon/blue on the right (with purple in the middle ).

For example, you earn a total of 4 persuasion points from a conversation but picked the renegade option.  Since it's a renegade option you chose, you get 75% of the points for the renegade side fo the bar or 3 points.  The paragon side of the bar gets only 25% of those points or 1 point.

Neutral options will get you about an equal amount of points for both sides of the persuasion bar.  You'll get more renegade or paragon based on how close that neutral choice is to being paragon or renegade but either way it's fairly balanced.  Basically, I'm thinking of a 50/50 split, so you'll earn 2 points on paragon and renegade if you earn a total of 4 points.

Now conversation persuasions will be based somewhat on ME2's version where it's based upon the total amount of possible points earned.

For example, you had 3 conversations that allow you to get full paragon or full renegade points and you earned a total of 9 paragon or renegade points from those conversations.  You then get into a conversation that has a conversation persuasion option available.  It depends on how hard they want that persuasion to be.

-Hard ones would require 9 paragon/reneagde points from those 3 previous conversations or all paragon/renegade choices.

-Normal ones could require a range from 7 to 8 points for that persuasions.

-Easy ones could require 6 points or basically picking all neutral options or picking 2 paragon choices and one renegade choice.

Also, I'm thinking of a new persuasion option, a more neutral one.  It would basically, have a minimum requirement for both paragon and renegade points.  So paragons or renegades that always pick their respective options will end up missing some of those more neutral persuasions.

On the squad dialogue, I like the various options being talked about.  Like watching conversations between squaddies or a squaddie and Shepard for loading screens or something like that and having conversations during the mission works without any prompts from the player would work as well.

Sorry if this is a bit incoherant, I'm just typing it as it comes to me.

Modifié par Urazz, 29 mai 2010 - 12:44 .

[TelexFerra]

What would neutral dialogue be like?



":Take it easy guys!"

[Ecael]

TelexFerra wrote...

What would neutral dialogue be like?

":Take it easy guys!"

Neutral Interrupts!

[TelexFerra]

Nobody would pick those though, and if someone did I expect they'd be pretty upset at the result. (though I think you're pulling my leg...xd)

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Hey Ecael! I like your idea of the persuasion bar, helps the guys who play Paragades like me. I agree partially that the paragon/renegade system use for the persuasion or some skill hurts the roleplaying, and something different from it for the persuasion would certainly be an improvement. Your system is fine because it works together with the morality system but it has a system on its own.



For me there should a morality for the "grey path" guys

[Jonathan Shepard]

What the people want, the people will hopefully get.

[Chuvvy]

Make it like DAO. Everything to do with characters companions dialog ect was 200% better in DAO.

[TelexFerra]

Yes, I really did feel like my party connected in DAO. Foremost, the tension between Alistair and Morrigan



Unfortunately no effort was put into ME2 to replicate that. The best we get are Jacob and Miranda's initial comments whenever someone new is recruited, then...nothing

[Redem0]

Slidell505 wrote...

Make it like DAO. Everything to do with characters companions dialog ect was 200% better in DAO.

Yes they need to flesh out a lot more

[Ecael]

Slidell505 wrote...

Make it like DAO. Everything to do with characters companions dialog ect was 200% better in DAO.

The Dragon Age: Origins persuasion system wasn't too bad, but only because the Persuasion skill was located in a separate skill tree - one where your other companions - with their skill trees - can pick up the slack. I hated having to spend any points in Charm/Intimidate (I just played for the passive point bonuses) because it limited progression in other skills.

So unless Shepard and company get an entirely separate skill tree for this, I would be hesitant to agree to that system. I doubt Garrus and Thane are going to be specializing in Herbalism or Runecrafting any time soon.

[TelexFerra]

lol



If I might just put a question out there: why are paragon/renegade checks even necessary to begin with? Certainly Shepard's prior decisions don't indicate whether he can say "STFU AND GTFO" or not.

[Whatever Works]

TelexFerra wrote...

lol

If I might just put a question out there: why are paragon/renegade checks even necessary to begin with? Certainly Shepard's prior decisions don't indicate whether he can say "STFU AND GTFO" or not.

To add challenge more or less, to necessitate multiple playthroughs and as a way to string you along into certain paths.  Pretty much adds to the difficulty scaling.  Kind of like damage and health when theoritically you can start out with just base stats on everything and scale the later enemies to the same, instead they add in thresholds you have to overcome in order to make it seem like the game is gradually picking up in difficulty when in reality you have the option of toning it down or negating it (as for instance doing Zaeed's loyalty mission early, same for Miranda and Jack's argument).  

[Ecael]

Whatever Works wrote...

TelexFerra wrote...

lol

If I might just put a question out there: why are paragon/renegade checks even necessary to begin with? Certainly Shepard's prior decisions don't indicate whether he can say "STFU AND GTFO" or not.

To add challenge more or less, to necessitate multiple playthroughs and as a way to string you along into certain paths.  Pretty much adds to the difficulty scaling.  Kind of like damage and health when theoritically you can start out with just base stats on everything and scale the later enemies to the same, instead they add in thresholds you have to overcome in order to make it seem like the game is gradually picking up in difficulty when in reality you have the option of toning it down or negating it (as for instance doing Zaeed's loyalty mission early, same for Miranda and Jack's argument).

This is it, pretty much.

The whole Paragon/Renegade persuasion check is almost like a mini-game in itself, with the reward of seeing Shepard do or say something out of the ordinary.

[TelexFerra]

It just seems a bit different though. In an RPG, base stats like health and skills improve because in-game the character is upgrading his/her armor and is learning the skills. Shep isn't learning how to talk with paragade options, is he?

[Ecael]

TelexFerra wrote...

It just seems a bit different though. In an RPG, base stats like health and skills improve because in-game the character is upgrading his/her armor and is learning the skills. Shep isn't learning how to talk with paragade options, is he?

At the same time, Shepard isn't starting out as an antisocial unpersuasive person, too.



Shepard isn't learning how to talk, but is learning how to persuade instead - and the only way to do that is with practice, not with experience through combat (unless there was a 'shoot person' Renegade interrupt for every dialogue wheel).

[TelexFerra]

Shepard learned how to persuade at the end of ME1. Why can't he diffuse an argument between Jack and Miranda?

[Ecael]

TelexFerra wrote...

Shepard learned how to persuade at the end of ME1. Why can't he diffuse an argument between Jack and Miranda?

Shepard learned how to do everything related to her class at the end of ME1.

Then she died.

[TelexFerra]

[TelexFerra]

bump

[Ecael]

TelexFerra wrote...

Yes, I really did feel like my party connected in DAO. Foremost, the tension between Alistair and Morrigan

Unfortunately no effort was put into ME2 to replicate that. The best we get are Jacob and Miranda's initial comments whenever someone new is recruited, then...nothing

The team working on Dragon Age: Origins had 7 years to develop the game, and, as a result, had around several tens of thousands of lines of dialogue by the time it was finished:

http://gameinformer....spx?PageIndex=1

The article says about 68,000 - however, it doesn't mention whether that includes the PC's unvoiced lines of dialogue.

Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 have around 20,000 and 32,000 lines of dialogue, respectively.

The Old Republic MMORPG will have at least 300,000 lines of dialogue (or more) by the time it's done.