268 réponses à ce sujet

[Khayness]

So roleplaying is just selecting predetermined options and using our imagination is just fanfictioning all the way?

[Suron]

David Gaider wrote...

Suron wrote...
it's called imagination..that magical thing you gusy, and sadly most of the world, seems to have lost.

which is exactly why people are up in arms about him being voiced....tone of voice and how words are stated DEFINE a personality...giving us the tripe good/neutral/bad options is NOT giving us a personality of our own..

If your definition of a personality is being able to say the lines in your head even though you don't control what you're saying, then I suppose I can't help you. Sorry, but that ship has sailed.

and how do you even think Hawke is a good name?  it doesn't even fit in your own lore...another sign of lost imagination.  We have Alistair, Duncan, Sten, Cousland (yes I'm mixing first/last names to prove my point), Amell, Howe, etc....."hawke" is the name of a goddamn JRPG or anime character.....he belongs next to Cloud....not Loghain.

It fits in our lore just fine, considering where Hawke is from. I'm not sure why it would upset you, but I suspect it's not our lore that's your issue but rather what you're projecting onto it.

ah..I get it..so this is how you fit your anime character into your lore....lol...are there chocobo's too? I mean since it's a totally different area and all.

[Dave of Canada]

David Gaider wrote...

_-Greywolf-_ wrote...
However I will ask you this, even though it seems that we shall have more freedom to define Hawke's personality than Shepard will we still have as much freedom to define our characters personality as we did in Origins or will Hawke's personality still be a little more defined? Or is this a question you are unable to give an answer to at this point in time?

Can you clarify? How much freedom did you have to define the Warden's personality, exactly? From my perspective as the writer, you're still just picking options that I give you-- it's the same thing, unless I'm missing something.

I didn't read any of the posts after this and it's possibly been responded to but..

Let us create two Human Noble characters, Mark Cousland and Athena Cousland.

Mark Cousland is created to appear a little older, giving him more wiser traits and giving him the experienced voice to him. He's created and is nice to the guards who are playing cards, he treats the servants with respect and doesn't disrespect his parents. After Howe's betrayal, he promises his father that he'll become a Grey Warden for them.

Athena Cousland appears more posh than the average human, having been given more detail to look less like a commoner and give the sultry (is that it?) voice. She degrades her servants, insults the guards for not doing their jobs and just wants to be done with all the family buisness. After Howe's betrayal, she refuses to leave her parents and has to be conscripted.

Mark Cousland is now introduced to the world outside of Highever, he encounters people and treats them with respect and befriends companions. These companions begin to kid around and he teases them (like teasing that Alistair is a virgin) and being overly sympathetic to the plights of the people.

Athena Cousland has had everything given to her before and now that she's in the outside world, she doesn't know how to react and treats people badly because she views them as commoners. She meets companions who will assist her on her quest but cares not for their personal matters, she will only do things provided she gets material rewards and will always treat Alistair's immaturity with snide remarks.

These are two personalities of characters created from scratch using only the lines of dialogue, this was all built in one's head but the dialogue followed directly with the character's ideas. You can be sarcastic, angry, happy, helpful and such by following the non-voiced dialogue system even if they all lead to the same path and goal - it follows what you've done with the Warden and the Warden is who you've imagined them to be.

Shepard is a soldier, that's all he is. You cannot decide to create a new Mass Effect profile and decide that this Shepard will decide to be sarcastic or spoiled, he's a bad-a soldier who's story is written and we just follow the script.

Dragon Age felt (to me) more like you were developing the character instead of the Mass Effect system that feels like you're reading one of those multiple choice books where you skip to page 13 if you want to turn left. This system has led me to play four different human nobles, all of them felt like different people and the game didn't feel like I was doing the same place on the same character; it felt rather like I was somebody else each individual time, instead of Mass Effect where I just skip through the dialogue on playthrough 2-3 because I know the summary of what will happen and what Shepard is saying.

Note: I love Mass Effect, I've beaten the first one 19 times and the second one 4 times. I have nothing against it, I just don't think it's as much of a role-playing experience as the original Dragon Age. I'll probably enjoy playing Dragon Age 2.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:00 .

[_-Greywolf-_]

David Gaider wrote...

_-Greywolf-_ wrote...
However I will ask you this, even though it seems that we shall have more freedom to define Hawke's personality than Shepard will we still have as much freedom to define our characters personality as we did in Origins or will Hawke's personality still be a little more defined? Or is this a question you are unable to give an answer to at this point in time?

Can you clarify? How much freedom did you have to define the Warden's personality, exactly? From my perspective as the writer, you're still just picking options that I give you-- it's the same thing, unless I'm missing something.

I take it by the way you are trying to avoid the question that the answer is a no. But there were plenty of ways to define your characters personality, you just had to use your imagination. However you are right, I guess it would be stupid to think that Dragon Age 2 would allow you the same freedom to define your character since you cut out the different races and origins as a lot of personality options were dependent on those things (from elf with a predudice against humans to a snobby dwarven noble).

But even within a single origin you still had a lot of freedom to define your character, sure you had to pick from a set list of dialogue options but there was usually a dialogue option and choice of action to suit the type of character you were playing and since your character wasnt voiced you could twist the words to suit your character and use you imagination to set the tone of the words (although the addition of voice acting kind of kills this a little bit as well).

So I guess I answered my own question there, no I wont quite have the freedom to define my character. However while we are here and on the subject I am sure plenty of people here would love to find this out so I guess I shall just come out and ask it, do we still have the choice to make our character gay or straight?

[AlanC9]

Suron wrote...
and how do you even think Hawke is a good name?  it doesn't even fit in your own lore...another sign of lost imagination.  We have Alistair, Duncan, Sten, Cousland (yes I'm mixing first/last names to prove my point), Amell, Howe, etc....."hawke" is the name of a goddamn JRPG or anime character.....he belongs next to Cloud....not Loghain.

Huh? Hawke is an English surname; not especially common, but it certainly fits the DA lore. It's every bit as legitimate as "Howe;" in fact, both names could be derived from 18th-century British admirals.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:07 .

[Suron]

Dave of Canada wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

_-Greywolf-_ wrote...
However I will ask you this, even though it seems that we shall have more freedom to define Hawke's personality than Shepard will we still have as much freedom to define our characters personality as we did in Origins or will Hawke's personality still be a little more defined? Or is this a question you are unable to give an answer to at this point in time?

Can you clarify? How much freedom did you have to define the Warden's personality, exactly? From my perspective as the writer, you're still just picking options that I give you-- it's the same thing, unless I'm missing something.

I didn't read any of the posts after this and it's possibly been responded to but..

Let us create two Human Noble characters, Mark Cousland and Athena Cousland.

Mark Cousland is created to appear a little older, giving him more wiser traits and giving him the experienced voice to him. He's created and is nice to the guards who are playing cards, he treats the servants with respect and doesn't disrespect his parents. After Howe's betrayal, he promises his father that he'll become a Grey Warden for them.

Athena Cousland appears more posh than the average human, having been given more detail to look less like a commoner and give the sultry (is that it?) voice. She degrades her servants, insults the guards for not doing their jobs and just wants to be done with all the family buisness. After Howe's betrayal, she refuses to leave her parents and has to be conscripted.

Mark Cousland is now introduced to the world outside of Highever, he encounters people and treats them with respect and befriends companions. These companions begin to kid around and he teases them (like teasing that Alistair is a virgin) and being overly sympathetic to the plights of the people.

Athena Cousland has had everything given to her before and now that she's in the outside world, she doesn't know how to react and treats people badly because she views them as commoners. She meets companions who will assist her on her quest but cares not for their personal matters, she will only do things provided she gets material rewards and will always treat Alistair's immaturity with snide remarks.

These are two personalities of characters created from scratch using only the lines of dialogue, this was all built in one's head but the dialogue followed directly with the character's ideas. You can be sarcastic, angry, happy, helpful and such by following the non-voiced dialogue system even if they all lead to the same path and goal - it follows what you've done with the Warden and the Warden is who you've imagined them to be.

Shepard is a soldier, that's all he is. You cannot decide to create a new Mass Effect profile and decide that this Shepard will decide to be sarcastic or spoiled, he's a bad-a soldier who's story is written and we just follow the script.

Dragon Age felt (to me) more like you were developing the character instead of the Mass Effect system that feels like you're reading one of those multiple choice books where you skip to page 13 if you want to turn left. This system has led me to play four different human nobles, all of them felt like different people and the game didn't feel like I was doing the same place on the same character; it felt rather like I was somebody else each individual time, instead of Mass Effect where I just skip through the dialogue on playthrough 2-3 because I know the summary of what will happen and what Shepard is saying.

Note: I love Mass Effect, I've beaten the first one 19 times and the second one 4 times. I have nothing against it, I just don't think it's as much of a role-playing experience as the original Dragon Age. I'll probably enjoy playing Dragon Age 2.

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

[Dave of Canada]

Suron wrote...

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

Being offensive to somebody though isn't going to help either.

[David Gaider]

AlanC9 wrote...
Some folks  (not me) have assumed that you can't get enough information across in a paraphrase for complex conversations. I think the example used was the confrontation with Bastila in KotOR (LS endgame). Are you confident that would work in the DA2 conversation system?

I think having the icon for tone helps, so we're not forced to make the intent blatantly obvious within the paraphrase.

And one thing I actually like, from a writing perspective, is the ability to use player voice to initiate an exchange based on a selection. If the player elects to furiously argue with someone, we can carry on that exchange back and forth a bit rather than forcing the player to select every single response. It can, at times, be much more natural. With player voice you also aren't forced to throw up options like "Go on"/"Tell me more"/"Hurry up" or the like just to move dialogue forward. You have the option to just have the player say "Tell me more", if you really need to, and save the choices for things that actually allow the player to establish personality or take actions.

Is it perfect? No, I don't think so... but that's not to say it doesn't come with advantages that are pretty nifty. And just because you've seen the use of a feature in one game doesn't mean that every game that uses that feature has to implement it in exactly the same manner or emulate that one game's style. That's a set of assumptions that just doesn't fly.

Yes, we will get to showing you exactly what we have in mind, in time. And yes, I absolutely could write that Bastila dialogue in DA2's system. In some respects it would even be easier to do so... and, dare I say it? Possibly more dramatic in its execution.

[Suron]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

Being offensive to somebody though isn't going to help either.

how was that offensive? he didn't get what I was trying to say..hence "over his head"..that's not insulting or offensive...this guys post explains it better then I did because I didn't feel like typing something of similar length.

try harder.

Modifié par Suron, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:10 .

[AlanC9]

Thanks, David. That's exactly what I was looking for.

[Collider]

People SERIOUSLY care about the Hawke name? It's just a name. It's not going to ruin the game for you. Now, I may understand if the protagonist's last name was Cakeface or something.

[Dave of Canada]

Suron wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

Being offensive to somebody though isn't going to help either.

how was that offensive? he didn't get what I was trying to say..hence "over his head"..that's not insulting or offensive...this guys post explains it better then I did because I didn't feel like typing something of similar length.

try harder.

I had a misquote that I was too lazy to change, I meant this:

ah..I get it..so this is how you fit your anime character into your
lore....lol...are there chocobo's too? I mean since it's a totally
different area and all.

[Dave of Canada]

Collider wrote...

People SERIOUSLY care about the Hawke name? It's just a name. It's not going to ruin the game for you. Now, I may understand if the protagonist's last name was Cakeface or something.

It doesn't bother me -that- much, it's simple and seems fitting in the game world. I'm just bothered by it because of every single joke name I see with reference to it.

"Tomma Hawke"
"NightElfMo Hawke"
"Ebon Hawke"
"Tony Hawke"
"Mike Hawke"
"York Hawke"

Ect.

[Suron]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

Being offensive to somebody though isn't going to help either.

how was that offensive? he didn't get what I was trying to say..hence "over his head"..that's not insulting or offensive...this guys post explains it better then I did because I didn't feel like typing something of similar length.

try harder.

I had a misquote that I was too lazy to change, I meant this:

ah..I get it..so this is how you fit your anime character into your
lore....lol...are there chocobo's too? I mean since it's a totally
different area and all.

offensive? have you never heard of sarcasm?

again, try harder...

[Randy1012]

David Gaider wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Some folks  (not me) have assumed that you can't get enough information across in a paraphrase for complex conversations. I think the example used was the confrontation with Bastila in KotOR (LS endgame). Are you confident that would work in the DA2 conversation system?

I think having the icon for tone helps, so we're not forced to make the intent blatantly obvious within the paraphrase.

And one thing I actually like, from a writing perspective, is the ability to use player voice to initiate an exchange based on a selection. If the player elects to furiously argue with someone, we can carry on that exchange back and forth a bit rather than forcing the player to select every single response. It can, at times, be much more natural. With player voice you also aren't forced to throw up options like "Go on"/"Tell me more"/"Hurry up" or the like just to move dialogue forward. You have the option to just have the player say "Tell me more", if you really need to, and save the choices for things that actually allow the player to establish personality or take actions.

Is it perfect? No, I don't think so... but that's not to say it doesn't come with advantages that are pretty nifty. And just because you've seen the use of a feature in one game doesn't mean that every game that uses that feature has to implement it in exactly the same manner or emulate that one game's style. That's a set of assumptions that just doesn't fly.

Yes, we will get to showing you exactly what we have in mind, in time. And yes, I absolutely could write that Bastila dialogue in DA2's system. In some respects it would even be easier to do so... and, dare I say it? Possibly more dramatic in its execution.

Man, now I wish you guys could just remake KotOR with a Mass Effect-style dialogue system. I'm just imagining how such a system could effect the Revan revelation.

Also so I could listen to Revan and Jolee trading sarcastic quips back and forth.

Modifié par Randy1083, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:16 .

[David Gaider]

Dave of Canada wrote...
These are two personalities of characters created from scratch using only the lines of dialogue, this was all built in one's head but the dialogue followed directly with the character's ideas. You can be sarcastic, angry, happy, helpful and such by following the non-voiced dialogue system even if they all lead to the same path and goal - it follows what you've done with the Warden and the Warden is who you've imagined them to be.

So you like being able to read the line with the inflection in your own head, making it sarcastic or angry or happy, even if nobody in the game reacts to that? Or, in fact, reacts differently based on our intent regarding the line rather than your own? This is better?

Because I would think being able to communicate our intent more clearly and still give you options to define your personality by choosing how you say things as well as the actions you take still gives you plenty of options to take the character in the direction you choose. The only thing you lose is that your character uses a defined voice-- not necessarily a defined personality-- but if you associate that much simply with the voice then there's really not much more to say, is there?

Modifié par David Gaider, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:17 .

[Randy1012]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Collider wrote...

People
SERIOUSLY care about the Hawke name? It's just a name. It's not going
to ruin the game for you. Now, I may understand if the protagonist's
last name was Cakeface or something.

It doesn't bother me -that-
much, it's simple and seems fitting in the game world. I'm just
bothered by it because of every single joke name I see with reference to
it.

"Tomma Hawke"
"NightElfMo Hawke"
"Ebon Hawke"
"Tony
Hawke"
"Mike Hawke"
"York Hawke"

Ect.

Much like how the ME fans use ManShep/FemShep, I'm hoping the DA2 fans will call the female PC LadyHawke. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]

Modifié par Randy1083, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:16 .

[Herr Uhl]

Suron wrote...

offensive? have you never heard of sarcasm?

again, try harder...

Yes, because someone of your mighty wit clearly knows that sarcasm can't ever be offensive.

^Is above statement offensive or not?

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Suron wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Suron wrote...

bravo..you put into words what I didn't feel like typing out...

and is exactly what I was trying to portray to gaider that obviously went over his head.

Being offensive to somebody though isn't going to help either.

how was that offensive? he didn't get what I was trying to say..hence "over his head"..that's not insulting or offensive...this guys post explains it better then I did because I didn't feel like typing something of similar length.

try harder.

I had a misquote that I was too lazy to change, I meant this:

ah..I get it..so this is how you fit your anime character into your
lore....lol...are there chocobo's too? I mean since it's a totally
different area and all.

offensive? have you never heard of sarcasm?

again, try harder...

You said that your words went over his head in a way that felt (to some) condescending. Maybe it would have been better for you to say something like,  "This is what I was trying to convey, but apparently failing at if Mr Gaider didn't understand."

That way you don't sound like you think he's an idiot.

[Dave of Canada]

David Gaider wrote...

So you like being able to read the line with the inflection in your own head, making it sarcastic or angry or happy, even if nobody in the game reacts to that? Or, in fact, reacts differently based on our intent regarding the line rather than your own? This is better?

Well, there is a reponse from the NPCs. Let's take the conversation with Alistair for example where he said he was raised by dogs, you can tease him about it (I believe the specific line is: Do you write at least? I bet your mom is a ****.) and he'll laugh and continue with the idea or you could simply mock the idea and call him foolish.

I'm still following the line's direction, my character who is sarcastic / teasing will always pick that one specific line but (back to my previous example of Athena) another character won't take that line since it isn't in her character - she'd try to drag him down instead since she's a negative nancy.

The intent of the line is the same, the character who delivers it is different each time though.

Because I would think being able to communicate our intent more clearly and still give you options to define your personality by choosing how you say things as well as the actions you take still gives you plenty of options to take the character in the direction you choose. The only thing you lose if that your character uses a defined voice-- not necessarily a defined personality-- but if you associate that much simply with the voice then there's really not much more to say, is there?

I don't associate it with voice, I'm just one of those people who fears that with voiced dialogue we'll be losing out on dialogue options and such in conversations that it'll limit the personalities available to Hawke. Like I won't be able to create a sarcastic Hawke that teases his friends because the options will be limited to friendly / flirty / angry / investigate.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:29 .

[Eternal Dust]

Mr. Gaider, are you allowed to comment more on the dialogue system? Can you initiate a conversation with your companions at any given time or is it like Awakening? Honestly, this is all that I care about at the moment.

[Kinkaku]

I personnally dont have an oppinion as of right now on the game since..well....I know almost nothing or  have yet seen what they are implementing or how they plan to do things, mostly because there is hardly any solid info out yet

But since some people are now scared sh!tless and are worried over almost nothing they figure the game is ruined when they read what little info is out, I personnaly like where the direction is going and have full trust in Bioware to deliver what will be a great expierience

Modifié par Akiios, 11 juillet 2010 - 07:34 .

[Khayness]

Well then it's settled: roleplaying = picking a choice from a few determinated options rather than filling the missing options with our imagination.

[Randy1012]

Akiios wrote...

I personnally dont have an oppinion as of right now on the game since..well....I know almost nothing or  have yet seen what they are implementing or how they plan to do things, mostly because there is hardly any solid info out yet

Whoa! What do you think you're doing? You have to either love the game or hate it. Right now. We only accept snap judgments in this forum, dagnabbit!

[Brockololly]

David Gaider wrote...
With player voice you also aren't forced to throw up options like "Go on"/"Tell me more"/"Hurry up" or the like just to move dialogue forward. You have the option to just have the player say "Tell me more", if you really need to, and save the choices for things that actually allow the player to establish personality or take actions.

So to use an example from Origins, when Wynne is telling her little Grey Warden story, how would the new DA2 system work if we wanted our goofy Hawke to interject with "Griffins?" in the middle of her story? Or would little, brief responses like that which basically are  humorous "tell me more" options just get absorbed into the "cinematic" of the voice actor's response, so as to not break the dialogue up?