468 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

AlanC9 wrote...

17thknight wrote...

Firstly, that wasn't even possible as you never even knew what your character would say, but more importantly, you were just saying "Well, I'm playing a paragon this time, so I'll just click upper-right the whole way through." or "Well, I'm a renegade this time, so I'll just lick the lower right the whole way through."

Is that how you played ME? That's not how I played it. The problem is you.

I disagree, the problem was with the system. Picking any option was risky because you wouldn't know what was going to be said. If you intended to respond with honesty and integrity, the paragon option was your only option. Additionally, if you didn't pick paragon or renegade options all the time, you wouldn't earn enough points to unlock the charm or intimidate options which ultimately led to you crew members dying. The system actively encouraged you to do what 17thknight described.

Modifié par Malanek999, 14 juillet 2010 - 08:52 .

[17thknight]

AlanC9 wrote...
You said that the wheel couldn't handle lots of responses. It could and often did. Many DA conversations have three options too. Some have fewer.

Most of that paragraph is a non sequitur, but I guess it's worth discussing. DA also has plenty of conversation options that are investigation, not advancement; they're just not presented in an organized fashion. If I want my character to ask a question next, knowing where to look for the questions is helpful to me.

Of course, but you aren't just clicking through them thinking "This is investigation, this is paragon, this more investigation so I'll skip it". You pick responses based on your character, based on what they would say and do, not based on "Well I'm playing a Paragon so I'll just keep clicking in the upper right.".

The vast majority of Mass Effect conversations are 3 lines of advancement (Good/Bad/Neutral) and every now and thne you get investigation.

AlanC9 wrote...
Is that how you played ME? That's not how I played it. The problem is you.

No, the problem is the game. If you played a paragon and ever picked a renegade response your character would act wildly out of character because everything was based on extremes. One second your character is talking about how killing is wrong, the next he's murdering people.

AlanC9 wrote...
So I have to imagine someone at Bio doing some really bad design? You can't actually make an argument based on what they've actually done?

What are you talking about? I am making an argumetn about what they've actually done. The wheel exists, there are often instances where you pick a response and your character acts wildly differently than what the response yopu icked is. You know it and I know it. You're being exceptionally hositle without providing any rebuttal. You just keep name-calling.

Modifié par 17thknight, 14 juillet 2010 - 08:51 .

[17thknight]

Vulee94 wrote...

Can anyone PLEASE post some examples of someone "accidentally" clicking on a response which results in someone being punched.
As you said, the choices are obvious blue-good, red-evil, so anyone who "accidentally" punches someone is a moron.

No, I'm saying that they are obvious, and even then you have zero idea how your character will actually respond. There ARE instances in the game where all three paraphrasings read the exact same, or the paragon and renegade will read the exact same. The only thing that differentiates them is orientation on the wheel.

So if you have two responses that read the exact same, let's say "This ends here!" then what do you know about how your character will respond?

And that still doesn't deal with the fact that the you absolutely NEVER know what your character will exactly say or do, in any situation

[AlanC9]

Vulee94 wrote...

Can anyone PLEASE post some examples of someone "accidentally" clicking on a response which results in someone being punched.

There is a real issue there. I can think of one instance where a Renegade option looks like a threat, but you actually execute the guy.

[hexaligned]

My aversion to it is much simpler, I just hate it for aesthetic reasons, it looks completely tacked on and out of place in every game I've seen Bioware use it in imo. I'm not one of those big immersion types of people, but if every time I look at a dialogue screen I get annoyed at the UI, I start having complaints. Here's hoping it can be modded out at least.

[17thknight]

relhart wrote...
Here's hoping it can be modded out at least.

That is a nice thought. One of the benefits of PC gaming.

[AlanC9]

17thknight wrote...
Of course, but you aren't just clicking through them thinking "This is investigation, this is paragon, this more investigation so I'll skip it". You pick responses based on your character, based on what they would say and do, not based on "Well I'm playing a Paragon so I'll just keep clicking in the upper right.".

I didn't do that while playing ME. I would choose the reaction I felt appropriate to the situation.

Are you saying that you really did play the game by just picking an alignment and going with those options all the way?

One second your character is talking about how killing is wrong, the next he's murdering people.

My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

What are you talking about? I am making an argumetn about what they've actually done. The wheel exists, there are often instances where you pick a response and your character acts wildly differently than what the response yopu icked is. You know it and I know it. You're being exceptionally hositle without providing any rebuttal. You just keep name-calling.

No, what I am saying is that you are giving specific examples that I did not see. I thought you were just making stuff up, but  it looks like you actually believe what you're saying.

[17thknight]

AlanC9 wrote...

I didn't do that while playing ME. I would choose the reaction I felt appropriate to the situation.

Are you saying that you really did play the game by just picking an alignment and going with those options all the way?

Of course, most people did, and you're just trying to be contrary. I'll post the response from above because he said it quite well.

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Is that
how you played ME? That's not how I played it. The problem is you.

I
disagree, the problem was with the system. Picking any option was risky
because you wouldn't know what was going to be said. If you intended to
respond with honesty and integrity, the paragon option was your only
option. Additionally, if you didn't pick paragon or renegade options all
the time, you wouldn't earn enough points to unlock the charm or
intimidate options which ultimately led to you crew members dying. The
system actively encouraged you to do what 17thknight described.

I HIGHLY doubt you actually played that way,b ecause if you did, then you would not have had the points in either renegade or paragon necessary for use in intimidation/coercion scenarios, and you would have lost out on a lot of gameplay, as well as had main characters die in various points in the game.

AlanC9 wrote...

No, what I am saying is that you are giving specific examples that I did not see. I thought you were just making stuff up, but  it looks like you actually believe what you're saying.

And yet just above you, yourself, said "There is one instance where it looks like a threat and you end up killing the guy." 

So obviously you're just disagreeing with me to be contrary because in this very thread you've already admitted there are instances where the reaction is wildly out of place to what is chosen.

Modifié par 17thknight, 14 juillet 2010 - 09:03 .

[Faust1979]

what is the point of having so many things to choose from? especially when they pretty much lead to the same response from the person you're talking to despite what your character said or how it was said? I don't really care how many responses there are as long as it lets me give my character different personalities.

[17thknight]

AlanC9 wrote...

I didn't do that while playing ME. I would choose the reaction I felt appropriate to the situation.

http://social.biowar...-3004275-1.html

That's an entire thread, from these forums, where people say that's exactly how they played Mass Effect.

In fact, they're complaining that when they clicked in the upper-right it didn't give them Paragon points all the time.

[Malanek]

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

[17thknight]

Malanek999 wrote...
Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Good memory!

http://social.biowar.../index/972524/1

That thread from these very forums actually deals with that and many other situations where your character acted...well...out of character.

IT's the fundamental flaw with this entire approach, which results in your character not behaving like YOU want them to, but how the devs want them to. It's very jarring when you are forced to behave a certain way, and even worse when you don't even realize that your character is about to do something wildly out of character.

[AlanC9]

17thknight wrote...

Of course, most people did, and you're just trying to be contrary.

How do you know what most people did? Have you seen their Paragon/Renegade scores? If you've got evidence, I'll look at it. It really never occurred to me that players would do that.

I'm also not sure this helps your argument. Let's say you're right and most players prefer to just pick the options by alignment. If that's what they actually want to do, then the wheel is an improvement for them since it makes it easier for them to do what they want to do. You'd better hope that I'm right and people don't play that way; if you're right, there's no reason for Bio to ever stop using the wheel.

Just to be clear, I am absolutely not defending ME2's implementation of Persuade and Intimidate, which really does penalize you for not going all out Paragon or Renegade. I think it's Bio's second-worst design decision of all time, actually. But that's a problem with the skill implementation, not the dialog wheel itself. In ME1 you can make any Charm check in the game without being a Paragon.

And yet just above you, yourself, said "There is one instance where it looks like a threat and you end up killing the guy." 

So obviously you're just disagreeing with me to be contrary because in this very thread you've already admitted there are instances where the reaction is wildly out of place to what is chosen.

No, I'm disagreeing with some of your examples because you're either making them up or remembering them wrong. Talk about real examples for a real debate.

[AlanC9]

17thknight wrote...

http://social.biowar...-3004275-1.html

That's an entire thread, from these forums, where people say that's exactly how they played Mass Effect.

In fact, they're complaining that when they clicked in the upper-right it didn't give them Paragon points all the time.

It's not a they; it's one guy, who is only doing that because of the awful Intimidate check design. At least read a thread if you're going to link it.

[17thknight]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm also not sure this helps your argument. Let's say you're right and most players prefer to just pick the options by alignment. If that's what they actually want to do, then the wheel is an improvement for them since it makes it easier for them to do what they want to do. You'd better hope that I'm right and people don't play that way; if you're right, there's no reason for Bio to ever stop using the wheel.

Just to be clear, I am absolutely not defending ME2's implementation of Persuade and Intimidate, which really does penalize you for not going all out Paragon or Renegade. I think it's Bio's second-worst design decision of all time, actually. But that's a problem with the skill implementation, not the dialog wheel itself. In ME1 you can make any Charm check in the game without being a Paragon.

That's NOT what most players want to do, that's what most players were forced to do by Mass Effect. Hell, I didn't want to do it, but I had to. I often picked choices I didn't want, or ignored ones that I did want, specifically to advance the paragon meter.

I note that you skipped the forum from here that I posted. Most people behaved that way because they were FORCED to.

Why?
1. You have zero clue hwo your character will react based on blurbs. If you want to do something good you must always click upper right or, at worst, neutral. Since you don't actually know if a renegade option will result in shepard flat-out murdering people it's very dangerous to click it.
2. You need paragon/renegade points. Need them. The only way to get them is to incessantly click SOLELY upper-right or lower-right. If you don't, then you will run into situations you can't resolve well or have main characters die because you didn't exclusively focus on one area or another.


This all results from the wheel coupled witha  morality system. Yes, not having a morality system helps, but then the problem is even worse. Now, rathar than knowing for a fact you're clicking a "good" choice it's a 100% toss of the dice.

In the Game Informer article that shows the wheel the choices are "I'm right beside you." "Neither can they." and "Then we fight."

There is no indicator of "good bad or neutral"  by any of them. There aren't colored differently. How on Earth do you know what your character will do or say based on itty bitty blurbs like that? 

In Dragon Age, a game without a morality system, it's a more glaring problem. In Mass Effect at least you have a general notion that "I'm always going to click upper right because I'm a good guy" but all nuance of character is gone.

When playing an elf in Dragon Age you could be good...and also  a bit of a bigot against humans. How can you reflect shut subtleties with tiny little blips of words?

The solution is to ALWAYS give players the ability to see EVERYTHING that your character will say and do. Whether this involves putting all the words + tone onscreen, or highlighting them, pushing a button (or leaving it highlighted for a set amount of time) and seeing all the words.

I can't even count the number of times I sat staring at the blurbs in Mass Effect thinking "Well hell, what's going to happen when I click these?" I would agonzie over a decision not because it was morally difficult but because I could not figure out what would happen when I clicked them, which inevitably led to having to look the conversation up online.

That level of disconnect between player and character is bad.

Modifié par 17thknight, 14 juillet 2010 - 09:30 .

[AlanC9]

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Not quite what I was asking about; I was looking for an example of where my character would say that killing was wrong. None of my characters would ever say such a thing. But it's an interesting example nonetheless.

Do you recall what the blurbs were?

[Malanek]

AlanC9 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Not quite what I was asking about; I was looking for an example of where my character would say that killing was wrong. None of my characters would ever say such a thing. But it's an interesting example nonetheless.

Do you recall what the blurbs were?

No, I don't recall exactly what the blurbs were. I think the paragon one was something like "You and me negotiate", but that could be completely wrong. I guess what I was talking about here was how the responses would quickly move out of character.

[AntiChri5]

AlanC9 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Not quite what I was asking about; I was looking for an example of where my character would say that killing was wrong. None of my characters would ever say such a thing. But it's an interesting example nonetheless.

Do you recall what the blurbs were?

The renegade option in that conversation is "nice work with that quarian".

Ample indication that you were approving of what he had done.

[Malanek]

AntiChri5 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Not quite what I was asking about; I was looking for an example of where my character would say that killing was wrong. None of my characters would ever say such a thing. But it's an interesting example nonetheless.

Do you recall what the blurbs were?

The renegade option in that conversation is "nice work with that quarian".

Ample indication that you were approving of what he had done.

I'm still not sure this indicates what is about to be said. The Elcor was forcing the quarian to set his prices higher. Approving with that is not the same as going further and using force to shut the quarian down altogether. And again, other renegade responses are completely against corruption, while this one is endorsing it.

[AntiChri5]

Malanek999 wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
My characters never said anything like that. Even the more Paragonish ones. Could you give an example where a Paragon option might say something like that without me knowing that the character was about to say it?

Off the top of my head, in ME2 when resolving the dispute between the quarian and elcor shopkeepers, the paragon response to the elcor is threatening to break his knees unless he leaves the quarian alone. This seems more what the renegade should be. However the renegade is even worse, it convinces the elcor to permanently and illegally shut down the quarian. This is incosistant with other renegade choices. One moment you are completely against corruption, the next moment you are endorsing it. Now the problem is that none of these outcomes were at all clear from 2 or 3 word blurbs on the dialagoue wheel. This conversation wasn't unique, there were plenty of them.

Not quite what I was asking about; I was looking for an example of where my character would say that killing was wrong. None of my characters would ever say such a thing. But it's an interesting example nonetheless.

Do you recall what the blurbs were?

The renegade option in that conversation is "nice work with that quarian".

Ample indication that you were approving of what he had done.

I'm still not sure this indicates what is about to be said. The Elcor was forcing the quarian to set his prices higher. Approving with that is not the same as going further and using force to shut the quarian down altogether. And again, other renegade responses are completely against corruption, while this one is endorsing it.

He doesnt use force to shut down the quarian, he buys him out.

What do you mean by "corruption"?

There can only be corruption where there are laws.

[17thknight]

AntiChri5 wrote...
The renegade option in that conversation is "nice work with that quarian".

Ample indication that you were approving of what he had done.

Noooooooooooo.......that's way off from what actually ends up happening and is drastically out of character.

This has been complained about by other people to and is not even remotely the only example of your character doing something you did not intend because 3 wordcs dont adequately describe a 5 sentence response that includes actions.

[Untamed_skies]

I'm finding the issues with the wheel to be really nitpicking. When you go play a game do you really want to know word for word what your character is going to say? I'll grant this much with the Mass Effect wheel, the limitations of good/neutral/evil was that you were going to do something that lead to a positive result, you going to do the "meh I don't care," result, or you were probably going to do something very negative. And if you were playing the game just to get the positive or negative points then there is no point in complaining about it because regardless of what it said you were going to pick the paragon response.



As for the list in Dragon age it was the exact same thing. Granted every now and again you had more neutral responses then being really good or evil. Most of the time you'd have The good option on top, and the bad option on bottom. (I'd give examples but unforchantly I'm in the process of getting a new copy, my Dragon Age has the ring of death). Mind I think there were instances where things were kinda switched up, but most of the time in my experience. The top was good, the bottom evil, and in between were intimidates, I don't care, and persuades.



Ignoring the surprising lines that do occasionally happen. The truly real issue that limits ME is the good/evil points they use. It's what limits any game. If you didn't have to pick the positive response to earn points so that the game reflects what it believes a hero is, then you might pay attention to other responses.



So long as DA sticks to the "moral grey" it has done, then there isn't really that much cause for concern. If you want a easier way to regard the wheel then look at it as the idea of how the person Hawke is talking to is going to react. You know they will react good, bad, or maybe either depending on what you pick. What your hero will say shouldn't be the point of the conversation, but rather what happens as a result of it.



Sorry for the huge post, just hard to express my views on a small scale.

[AntiChri5]

17thknight wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...
The renegade option in that conversation is "nice work with that quarian".

Ample indication that you were approving of what he had done.

Noooooooooooo.......that's way off from what actually ends up happening and is drastically out of character.

This has been complained about by other people to and is not even remotely the only example of your character doing something you did not intend because 3 wordcs dont adequately describe a 5 sentence response that includes actions.

That is an exact quote. Go replay that section, if yu are goin to try and discredit what i have said at least make something up and say "It was ..."

Stop exagerating. Its five words, almost twice what you said and amounts to two sentances in game with no actions.

EDIT: No actually, its three sentences.

Modifié par AntiChri5, 14 juillet 2010 - 09:58 .

[AlanC9]

17thknight wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm also not sure this helps your argument. Let's say you're right and most players prefer to just pick the options by alignment. If that's what they actually want to do, then the wheel is an improvement for them since it makes it easier for them to do what they want to do. You'd better hope that I'm right and people don't play that way; if you're right, there's no reason for Bio to ever stop using the wheel.

Just to be clear, I am absolutely not defending ME2's implementation of Persuade and Intimidate, which really does penalize you for not going all out Paragon or Renegade. I think it's Bio's second-worst design decision of all time, actually. But that's a problem with the skill implementation, not the dialog wheel itself. In ME1 you can make any Charm check in the game without being a Paragon.

That's NOT what most players want to do, that's what most players were forced to do by Mass Effect. Hell, I didn't want to do it, but I had to. I often picked choices I didn't want, or ignored ones that I did want, specifically to advance the paragon meter.

Huh? You quoted my second paragraph above. Didn't you read it? Again, you need Paragon points because of bad skill design, not because of the dialog wheel itself.

In the Game Informer article that shows the wheel the choices are "I'm right beside you." "Neither can they." and "Then we fight."

There is no indicator of "good bad or neutral"  by any of them. There aren't colored differently. How on Earth do you know what your character will do or say based on itty bitty blurbs like that? 

Actually, what you're going to do is plain. In all three cases you're going to fight. What you'll say is also pretty obvious. Choice 1 will give some sort of teamwork-inspiring we're-all-in-this-together routine. Choice 2 a we're-going-to-kick-their-asses speech, and Choice 3 gives a fatalistic this-is-the-job-we-signed-up-for line.

In Dragon Age, a game without a morality system, it's a more glaring problem. In Mass Effect at least you have a general notion that "I'm always going to click upper right because I'm a good guy" but all nuance of character is gone.

In DA2 we're going to have icons showing the intent of the line, right?

When playing an elf in Dragon Age you could be good...and also  a bit of a bigot against humans. How can you reflect shut subtleties with tiny little blips of words?

What you actually choose when meeting Cailan at Ostagar is between

1: Can we skip the introductions? It's been a long trip.

2: I am <FirstName/>, your Majesty.

3: I'm no friend of yours, human lord.

4: I highly doubt it, but anything is possible.

All of these are short enough to fit on the wheel as is.

[Jigero]

I found DA's system horrible flawed. You would ask a seemingly harmless question and just get chewed out about it. me: "So Morrigan do you like practicing magic" Morrigan:" Kill your self, mouth breather!" (Morrigan disapproves -10 loyalty) . which was in fact counter to "Role Playing" I couldn't craft a character I wanted with out making a save every 5 feet just in case I ****ed up the ****ty conversation trees and had to reload. On top of that the system was frustrating because you could fix the choices you made with out reloading or even given the chance to maybe fix them. It also made subsequent play troughs annoying because I had to sit there and try to remember everything or do theory craft on what possible response I would get. Also it made me not wanna experiment with the conversation trees because it was time consuming. Where as mass effect I knew exactly what I was asking and what kind of response I was getting. Hell I played through mass effect 2 with 5 replays and never had to reload once because of a conversation tree mishap.