206 réponses à ce sujet

[Heliosas]

I can smell a troll around these parts...poooee.

[Syracuse]

There always has to be one, yodeling that the sky is falling because they heard a rumor on the internet.

[Zanderat]

LOL!  I guess that I am the forum troll tonight!

Anyway, I do like DAO (why else would I be posting here?).  The camp conversations made the game for me. 

Hated Awakening, mostly becasue of the hideous conversation system. 

Now, despite DG's assertations, all that we really have to judge the future is Awakening...............  Actions speak louder than words and all that...................  So, we will have to wait and see. 

Despite Catcher's most eloquent post. I have seen enough to be pessimistic.  I hope that I am wrong.

Modifié par Zanderat, 22 mai 2010 - 01:19 .

[AmstradHero]

If you won't believe the lead writer of the game, then I really fail to see how you can possibly be convinced. David Gaider has stated the problems the Awakenings system was trying to address and has admitted that it wasn't perfect despite addressing those problems.

Are you going to get the same character depth in Awakenings? No, because it's significantly shorter than Origins, but that doesn't mean it was a failure.  You didn't particularly like it? Fine, but it undeniably addressed some of the shortcomings that have been present in conversation heavy RPGs for quite some time. If you compare Origins and Awakenings, the
amount of information that is conveyed by the equivalent amount of words
is far higher in Awakening than it is in Origins. Simply put, Awakening's character development per word is far higher than Origins. That is a good thing.

The sky isn't falling, BioWare is listening, David Gaider, lead writer of the game/franchise, is even taking the time to respond to you even though you were quite rude to him. When was the last time that happened for another game? (Not sure about you, but for me... ZERO times) When you're getting direct responses and explanations from the game's creators, that is a very clear indication that they are listening to their customers.

[purplesunset]

@Zanderat. regarding your perception of David Gaider being condescending.

I think it's just the style he chooses when it comes to forums. Some see it as honest, but others could also interpret it as being a bit too curt or condescending.

I think culture and personality type plays a role. Mr. Gaider is a thinker (T type). It's easy for feelers (F types) to incorrectly attribute malice to something which was intended to be neutral by a T type because of their preference for bluntness.

I also think that when he posts, he goes into defense mode because, face it, forums can be a brutal place. Just like how police officers go into a certain defense mode when they need to go into a neighborhood with a bad reputation. They might end up being too brusque even with innocent, law abiding people in the neighborhood just because of its previous bad reputation.

Conclusion: Don't beat yourself up too badly. You're not the first person to interpret something written by Mr. Gaider as being too blunt or condescending. This could be an incorrect reading of his post (like I said, T types don't usually intend to hurt, that's just their style). On the  other hand, it's not a completely unwarranted reading and perhaps he is terse because he goes into "defense mode" to preemptively protect himself when posting in the warzone known as a forum.

Modifié par purplesunset, 22 mai 2010 - 02:32 .

[taine]

Hanz54321 wrote...

taine wrote...

Since you seem to know so much about good business practices, then you will doubtless realize that it costs Bioware quite a bit of money to add in tons of dialogue due to the fact that they must record every single line. This was one of the main factors leading to Awakening's revamped conversation system

OK - I'm going to just stick with this one point for this one post.

It costs money to make money.  The massive effort, cash, time, and thought was what made Dragon Age Origins a hit.  And you are suggesting that, like many businesses, they ride the wave from the first great product and make cheaper, inferior products under the assumption that people will buy them because "it's a house hold name."

That only works for so long.  General Motors fell.  I've seen numerous "hip" resturaunt chains with great food expand, sell cheaper product with worse service, and now they are gone  ie: Bennigan's (at least in my area).  This product is no different.

That said - I hope BioWare patches up DAA and produces a great product in DA2 - and I believe they will.

You are operating under the assumption that Bioware has an unlimited budget. They do not. Spending money to make money is all well and good, but there is only so much to go around. I never said they should make a cheap or inferior product. I am simply echoing various developers' sentiments (and my own) that the dialogue system can be streamlined to make better use of what there is. Particularly for Awakening the budget was not as large as for DA:O, hence the greatly decreased conversation options. 

[Zanderat]

purplesunset wrote...

@Zanderat. regarding your perception of David Gaider being condescending.

I think it's just the style he chooses when it comes to forums. Some see it as honest, but others could also interpret it as being a bit too curt or condescending.

I think culture and personality type plays a role. Mr. Gaider is a thinker (T type). It's easy for feelers (F types) to incorrectly attribute malice to something which was intended to be neutral by a T type because of their preference for bluntness.

I also think that when he posts, he goes into defense mode because, face it, forums can be a brutal place. Just like how police officers go into a certain defense mode when they need to go into a neighborhood with a bad reputation. They might end up being too brusque even with innocent, law abiding people in the neighborhood just because of its previous bad reputation.

Conclusion: Don't beat yourself up too badly. You're not the first person to interpret something written by Mr. Gaider as being too blunt or condescending. This could be an incorrect reading of his post (like I said, T types don't usually intend to hurt, that's just their style). On the  other hand, it's not a completely unwarranted reading and perhaps he is terse because he goes into "defense mode" to preemptively protect himself when posting in the warzone known as a forum.

I can see what you are saying.  The internet is a tough place to convey subtleties or nuance.  The good thing is that people care about this game (even me) and I hope DG gets that. 

[sassperella]

I think one of the main problems people are having with the awakening system is the need to hunt down objects to speak to their comrades. This is something that David Gaider has indicated will be in the next convo system. Having to hunt maps for conversation points that may or may not start a conversation with one of my party members is a pain and does not have a very natural flow at all. Plus if you don't have the right party member with you it's downright frustrating.

I liked the old system, but it had it's flaws. You could learn almost everything you needed to know about a character bar a few quest driven conversations in the first quarter of the game which left the second three quarters rather lean for chats if you didn't actively pace your dialog yourself.

I'm all for tweaking the system so that it paces dialog more and has more relevant dialog to your current situation, but running around a map with tab key pressed, or constantly calling up the radial menu on consoles is just not fun and just not natural conversation progression.

Better would be to have invisible trigger areas that set off conversation with comrades so that when you entered that area on the map the conversation triggered - like the banter triggers. That way you'd not see the ones for your other party members you didn't have and you'd be less likely to miss them if they were along the route you travelled. Then maybe they could place a few in areas that mean you needed to fully explore maps just as rewards for people that did that, but no vital conversation in these areas. This was just a quick thought off the top of my head, but would be more natural for me than looking for objects. The triggers could still be objects that started the conversations, or just a point in the game that someone really had to talk to you.

So there are ways to cut down on 'laundry lists' of questions and also negate the need for trigger hunts that can lead to frustration if the right person isn't with you.



As for camp conversation the Keg idea is OK but is again using item triggers, whereas you could do something along the lines of ...for example going into camp, the camera could zoom onto the camp fire if there were companions with new dialog. These companions could be sat at the fire with you and you could click on them to chat as you ate, then when done, exit this screen and go to the normal camp where you all disperse and go your seperate ways to bed or to see the merchant or whatever. Just another quick off the top of my head example, but again more personal than clicking on a keg.



I think people don't want the depersonalisation that the item triggers may offer and that is the main worry. I'm happy if the system is changed for a better one that still keeps the feel of having companions and being able to care about them but I hated the awakening system, as for me it failed to do this.

[Ash Wind]

David Gaider wrote...

MistySun wrote...
I read somewhere that Bioware have said they're removing camp conversation and future games will be more like the Awakening system.
Don't do it. 
You made DAO a great success.
But you made Awakenings a lost cause. People (most) did not like it.
Stick to what you know best. To make a great game such as DAO.
If future DA goes the same way as Awakenings, you will lose out.

In other words...the end of the line. 

A) As was pointed out above, despite what you "read somewhere", that's not what we're doing. Just because we're not doing one thing does not make it the extreme and exact opposite. Chances are it will end up somewhere in-between... which is, frankly, the case every time someone on the forums begins panicking over a perceived change.

On the off chance what we implement isn't what you're looking for, I apologize in advance. Even so, we'll muddle through somehow despite what "most" people think.

That's acceptable... I did not like Awakenings Dialogue system at all, but can accept a hybrid of both Origins/Awakenings Systems.

Thanks for addressing the issue.

Modifié par Ash Wind, 22 mai 2010 - 05:19 .

[Sunder_2]

Man, does EA have a PR department? Do they know that David Gaider needs a muzzle?

[soteria]

Sunder_2 wrote...

Man, does EA have a PR department? Do they know that David Gaider needs a muzzle?

Maybe they could get one for you, too, while they're at it.

Modifié par soteria, 22 mai 2010 - 06:38 .

[Derengard]

They should just do what is best for the game. Conversing in camp or on the way, what does it matter. Realistic would be both, but on the way would still feel more fluid than only in the camp, which feels really gimmicky. It would also be good if there were certain stages of conversation around a campfire or something like that, but not an almost robotic function "for conversation, please visit our campsite".

Modifié par Derengard, 22 mai 2010 - 06:47 .

[MistySun]

Well it seems some people like the idea of clicking on an object to trigger a convo with a certain party member. But really, come on, .... oh, the second laamp post past ther bridge i need to click on to get the dog to attack the rat nearby....or...oh i see, if i click on the blue urn standing outside the seam mistress shop i could get a party member to comment on how pretty it is and would like one to place in the camp (presuming of course there was a camp)

Triggering objects to trigger a convo is the way forward?

I think not.

[asaiasai]

I have been thinking about this since i first played awakenings. I too am not completely happy with the A conversation system because it seems to lack life. The biggest hurdle to any conversation system is how to animate the inanimate. Machines do what they do over and over again because that is what they were made to do, people on the other hand sometimes can not explain why they do what they do. The major difference is spontinaity and that i think is how you can resolve the conversation system.



If at party camp the characters are milling around, talking amongst themselves, tending fire, cooking dinner, mending thier armor, sharing a bottle, they appear to be interacting amongst themselves but they are in fact interacting with the player, just not directly. They could still reveal thier desires, and thier feelings about the previous game events, and the course of action the PC took. Let the NPCs pull the character into a conversation more than currently, for example as you walk by a tree in Amaranthine the PC is pulled into a conversation with Velena or Anders. To make it a requirement that i as the PC must initiate every conversation is what drains the life from the conversation. Another example is that as i am running in Denerim i hear Leliana and Morrigan having the dress conversation and Leliana que cut scene drags me onto the middle and the group is now waiting on me to give one of several dialog options that have popped up. The most important thing is that as a player i should not always get the opportinuty to be dragged into a conversation, there could be factors involved like the standard approval system currently in place. This would decide, based upon the approval of the conversationalists if your going to be pulled into it or not.



Another layer could be that you do not get your approval/disapproval points at the time you decide the course of action, you would have to follow up with the party members later to discern thier feelings, probably at camp. In the above example (dress) if pulled in the conversation then you would be given your approval/disapproval points right then, if not you would have to have a follow up conversation with the participants at camp. Later at camp you might have Morrigan ask you if a red dress would make her ass look big, to which depending on what the player wants, they could answer no it is not the dress that makes your ass look big, it is your ass that makes your ass look big, at which time the PC would earn thier points.



Consider the NPCs developing relationships amongst themselves, Morrigan and Sten after surviving one tough mission suddenly feel the passion and they are not sitting around the fire and as you look over you see 4 feet protruding from Morrigan's tent. Later you might see them sitting around the fire yelling Eskimo kisses and rubbing noses, creeping out the other party members about as much as i am sure i just creeped everybody out here.



Interaction not always with the player, not always at the player's behest, and like living breathing folks not always with a good reason. Every conversation should provide the player with insight on the character. The conversation system in DAO works but i do agree, that after 17 plays it does feel like a laundry list as i sort the conversations to get Leliana to tell me about shoes so i can give her the Blue Satin shoes i grabbed from old Tegrin 4 hours ago.



Consider making lets say 30 different conversation plot points for each character, and then in the interest of replayability, the computer would do a random pick of say 10. Using the dress conversation, the player would have influence on the gifts. If say they instead of telling Morrigan her ass is big, could instead tell her that she would like very nice in a red velvet dress, and then buy her one later in the game as a gift. Leliana as a chantry sister would be scandalized at the idea of various parts of her anatomy flashing into view, but a hardened Leliana with the "i dont know i think it might be sexy" response from the PC might consider a bag of rags to fashion some revealing attire from as a gift.



Gifts should go both ways the PC could in the course of the game be asked by the NPCs about certain things like pies. The PC could be asked by Wynne if they like pies if Wynne's approval is high enough, as it grows to a point she would bake the PC a pie. At which point the player could share said pie with the folks around the fire to thier approval and Wynne's. The biggest thing is to get the conversation to flow both ways from the PC to the NPCs and from the NPCs to the PC in a an apparent random and spontanious fashion. I would consider some sort of flag on an NPC to remind or to notify the PC that they should go see that NPC as they have something to share, helpful but it would come at the expense of immersion, possibly allow the player as a game option to enable or disable it.



Sorry for the wall of text but this is not something that can be done in 50 words or less.



Asai

[DLAN_Immortality]

sassperella wrote...

I think one of the main problems people are having with the awakening system is the need to hunt down objects to speak to their comrades. This is something that David Gaider has indicated will be in the next convo system. Having to hunt maps for conversation points that may or may not start a conversation with one of my party members is a pain and does not have a very natural flow at all. Plus if you don't have the right party member with you it's downright frustrating.
I liked the old system, but it had it's flaws. You could learn almost everything you needed to know about a character bar a few quest driven conversations in the first quarter of the game which left the second three quarters rather lean for chats if you didn't actively pace your dialog yourself.
I'm all for tweaking the system so that it paces dialog more and has more relevant dialog to your current situation, but running around a map with tab key pressed, or constantly calling up the radial menu on consoles is just not fun and just not natural conversation progression.
Better would be to have invisible trigger areas that set off conversation with comrades so that when you entered that area on the map the conversation triggered - like the banter triggers. That way you'd not see the ones for your other party members you didn't have and you'd be less likely to miss them if they were along the route you travelled. Then maybe they could place a few in areas that mean you needed to fully explore maps just as rewards for people that did that, but no vital conversation in these areas. This was just a quick thought off the top of my head, but would be more natural for me than looking for objects. The triggers could still be objects that started the conversations, or just a point in the game that someone really had to talk to you.
So there are ways to cut down on 'laundry lists' of questions and also negate the need for trigger hunts that can lead to frustration if the right person isn't with you.

As for camp conversation the Keg idea is OK but is again using item triggers, whereas you could do something along the lines of ...for example going into camp, the camera could zoom onto the camp fire if there were companions with new dialog. These companions could be sat at the fire with you and you could click on them to chat as you ate, then when done, exit this screen and go to the normal camp where you all disperse and go your seperate ways to bed or to see the merchant or whatever. Just another quick off the top of my head example, but again more personal than clicking on a keg.

I think people don't want the depersonalisation that the item triggers may offer and that is the main worry. I'm happy if the system is changed for a better one that still keeps the feel of having companions and being able to care about them but I hated the awakening system, as for me it failed to do this.

Yes to all. Nice post. :-)
I didn't have a conversation with anybody in Awakening. I'm oblivious to map clicking points. X-D

Hybrid system... well... let's see how it plays out when the next game is released. I'm skeptical, but then again, I'm an Awakening hater. :-)

Modifié par DLAN_Immortality, 22 mai 2010 - 11:16 .

[Phaelducan]

I liked the flow of the dialogue in KotoR. Right off the bat you had something to say to Carth, and he to you, but it truncated quickly. Back at the ship, similar deal, there was something each time you came back, but only one thing generally per party member.



I dislike being able to get anyone to 90% approval and know almost everything about them from the first time you leave the first plot area. Still, I have no complaints, you don't HAVE to initiate all the dialogue right off the bat.



As far as NPC development, I thought Wynne was handled marvelously in DA:O. Her character only fully develops if you happen to have her in your party as you travel overland. If you don't, you miss out. I think that was what they were trying to go for with Awakenings, and with a little refinement it could be really cool. Of course... seeing as how the next game might be 1st Quarter in 2011, it might be pretty far along already.

[mr_nameless]

Awakening to the end of the Bioware we all loved. And  Frack you EA.

Going back to BG2 with Fixpack and all the wonderful mods still being developed.  

[soteria]

MistySun wrote...

Well it seems some people like the idea of clicking on an object to trigger a convo with a certain party member. But really, come on, .... oh, the second laamp post past ther bridge i need to click on to get the dog to attack the rat nearby....or...oh i see, if i click on the blue urn standing outside the seam mistress shop i could get a party member to comment on how pretty it is and would like one to place in the camp (presuming of course there was a camp)
Triggering objects to trigger a convo is the way forward?
I think not.

You're making it sound a lot more ridiculous than it actually was, and clicking on objects to trigger a convo makes decent sense if you think of the alternatives.  Say you want to trigger an optional dialogue for someone in a specific area or about a specific object.  You could have the conversation just pop up, but then it's no longer optional, and could be annoying since the player loses control.  You could have a companion's dialogue tree change in different areas, but then you're stuck trying to talk to everyone in every area to see if they have something to say.  I don't want that.  You could have people audibly comment when they see something to let you know they want to talk about something in the area, but what if you walk on for a little while before starting the conversation?  Then you could have your companion talking about a statue that's not there anymore.

Really, when you get down to it, making this argument based on the ridiculous is just complaining about what part of the screen you click on to start conversations.  I may as well say I hate the targetting systems for aoe spells because "Why would I cast a fireball at the GROUND?  I'm trying to kill the people, not the ground."  Of course, the targetting system doesn't involve trying to kill the ground any more than the Awakening dialogue system involves talking to trees and boats, as is so often claimed.

Short version:  complaining about what part of the screen you click on seems silly to me.  It's such a trivial issue.

Is there a complaint about the concept of talking to companions about things they see in the game world?

[Lanceknightmare]

As a fan of the original Dragon Age Origins. It was a no brainer. That I ended up. Placing Awakening at the top of my to buy list. Was it worth it? It definitely was worth the money. Do I think Awakening was a let down in some ways? Absolutely, the story itself was not nearly as long as the original. Though, I did play through the main storyline. I haven't played the game since I beat it. To list off the things I disliked about Origins:



The higher levels of the game. Becoming so demanding strategically. Now, this wouldn't be a problem. But, the targeting system in the game is flawed. Making it difficult to target enemies. I would often find myself. In Nightmare Mode, trying to target an enemy. While about seven others. Along with a yellow grade champion mob. Were breathing down my neck. Having to hold down the top buttons and select. I would often find my fingers slipping off a button. Then, having to pay for the glitch. With several seconds of uninterrupted beating on my characters by the Darkspawn. Sometimes the characters would just stand there and not move at all.



What Awakening had that Origins didn't:



Awakening introduced the Statistic reset stone. This meant that I wouldn't run into the problem. Of spending thirty minutes here. Or a couple of hours there. Only to feel like starting a new character. So I could try a new set of statistics out for the same situation I was in. This would usually end in me putting the game away for the night/day. With Awakening, it would only cost me a few gold coins.



The main thing about Awakening that they did wrong. Was lowering the difficult level of the game. Sure, there were more Darkspawn on average in this title. But, the additions in level, skills etc. Ended up unbalancing the hero we play as. Causing him to be stronger than his predecessor.

[MistySun]

M,mmmm. Maybe i should avoid drinking darkspawn blood. it gives me nightmares you know. I see strange objects glowing...like ghostly beings sliding through the surroundings shrouded in a an eiree greenish hue., I clicked on one and this undead attacked me.

Which is why i avoided getting the darkspawn DLC.

[AmstradHero]

Lanceknightmare wrote...
The higher levels of the game. Becoming so demanding strategically. ... Having to hold down the top buttons and select. I would often find my fingers slipping off a button. Then, having to pay for the glitch. With several seconds of uninterrupted beating on my characters by the Darkspawn.
...
The main thing about Awakening that they did wrong. Was lowering the
difficult level of the game.

Huh? The combat is too difficult yet too easy? That makes no sense.
On PC, Awakening was mostly a cakewalk compared to Origins.  The main difficulty/annoyance came from the Children, but fortunately my main character was able to cope with their Overwhelm happy nature. The armoured ogres also provided some meat, and the final boss fight was good too. No, I don't play I nightmare, and I don't desire to.

Lanceknightmare wrote...
Awakening introduced the Statistic reset stone. This meant that I
wouldn't run into the problem. Of spending thirty minutes here. Or a
couple of hours there. Only to feel like starting a new character. So I
could try a new set of statistics out for the same situation I was in.
This would usually end in me putting the game away for the night/day.
With Awakening, it would only cost me a few gold coins.

That sounds like a good thing to me...

[Zanderat]

The reset stone was a great addition. Hope they keep. But it is an easy enough thing to mod back in if they don't.  Awakening would have been ok for say a $10-$15 DLC.  But it was lacking as a full fledged expansion. And as you all I know, the conversation system is umm lacking (imho).  

Modifié par Zanderat, 22 mai 2010 - 02:48 .

[Delta_Pizza]

Dialogue trees were one of the best things about DA:O – hopefully we will continue to see them in the future.

[frostajulie]

Pubknight wrote...

In DAO I was drawn in to the story, and felt connected to the characters.
I could explore the conversation trees with them when I wished.
With Awakenings, I feel no connection whatsoever to the characters, and thus by extension, the story.
Awakenings, for all intents and purposes, is not an expansion of DAO... it really is a stand alone game.
And one that I don't particularly care for.

As someone that did not purchase Awakenings but instead borrowed from a friend and was not impressed I have to quote this because this is exactly how I felt as well.  No game has ever moved or impressed me as much with its engrossing RP capability as Origins even though I hate the darkness of Orzammar I have played this game to death on the XBOX and even bought it for the PC even though I currently have no PC that it will work on.  DAO is far and away the best game I have ever played because I was so emotionally connected to the adventure and the characters.  This happened because I was able to chat them up and learn who they were and where they were coming from.

Awakenings was a huge let down because there was 0 emotional connection to anything it was like every other game I have ever played but not as pretty.  I played once with an imported warden and once as an Orlesian and both times it was drudgery to push through because I was not emotionally connected to anything the so called expansion had to offer.

DAO set the bar for awesomeness, I feel like everytime I play I get a vacation from my life.  DAO:A blew it and spoiled the magic.  I was quite happy to giv that game back and pretend it didn't exist.