1133 réponses à ce sujet

[TheMadCat]

Vandrayke wrote...

The key being MAKE ME THINK.  The illusion works.  Just like if I took a placebo pill and my headache went away, I wouldn't care that it wasn't actually aspirin.  

And more lines of dialogue then there are NPC responses doesn't create the same illusion even though you really can't know some of them have similar NPC responces without several playthroughs? It should still create an illusion for your first couple of playthroughs.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 20 août 2010 - 04:09 .

[Vandrayke]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

If I don't feel my decisions affect the game world, I lose interest in making those decisions.  I'm interested in whatever can suck me in and make me think that my character is having the impact I want them to have within the context of the world.  Frankly, if what the NPCs did wasn't important, I don't see the point of playing the game to begin with, because then I could just imagine everything myself and write a story or something and not have to deal with someone else's rules at all.  

But can you tell if your decisions don't affect the world?  Or do you have to metagame to do that?

Don't metagame and that problem goes away.  Your character can't see the results of the options he didn't choose.

True enough.  Obviously I'm stretching the point to it's ultimate example but the core idea remains.  

[Vandrayke]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

In an ideal world, I'd of course prefer having a dozen voiced over lines to choose from. But if I had to choose between 10 typed options and 3 fully voiced ones, I'd choose the 3 because they'd feel more tangible to me and I'd probably enjoy the game more.

Though in DA2 the question is do you want to choose among 3 voiced lines the game has decided suit your character, or among the larger number of voiced lines that exist but the game is hiding from you?

That's a good question.  I kind of like the idea that the tonal delivery occurs under the hood.  Although I guess it's not that important to me, when it comes down to it.  If I had all the options in front of me, I'd probably choose the ones that "make sense" with my character 9/10 times anyways.  I guess.  

[Vandrayke]

TheMadCat wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

The key being MAKE ME THINK.  The illusion works.  Just like if I took a placebo pill and my headache went away, I wouldn't care that it wasn't actually aspirin.  

And more lines of dialogue then there are NPC responses doesn't create the same illusion even though you really can't know some of them have similar NPC responces without several playthroughs? It should still create an illusion for your first couple of playthroughs.

Oh for sure.  I did a poor job of fully illustrating this point, but when I think of everything being voiced, I think of it being more difficult to have the same response for multiple options, because you get a better idea of how conversations are supposed to flow. So in essence although I can KIND OF tell when I got a generic response from a text option, I think I might REALLY be able to tell if I got a generic response from a spoken option.  

[Bryy_Miller]

Vandrayke wrote...

People please stop saying that it's "confusing" because somehow we are stupid if we don't care to have 10 dialog options that are only superficially different. It's a matter of preference. I don't see anything wrong with 10 dialog options, but I don't see much value in them if 5 of them give the same response from the NPC anyways. So if I only get 3 different responses from the game to my input, only giving me 3 different inputs instead of 7 won't make me lose any sleep at all.

"10 dialogue options" is only a talking point at this time, anyway, just like "hardcore" and "ME2". People create these grand ideas of DOING EVERYTHING, and forget that they can actually - are supposed to - roleplay in RPGs.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vandrayke wrote...

That's a good question.  I kind of like the idea that the tonal delivery occurs under the hood.  Although I guess it's not that important to me, when it comes down to it.  If I had all the options in front of me, I'd probably choose the ones that "make sense" with my character 9/10 times anyways.  I guess.  

Sure, but aren't you a better judge of what "makes sense" for your character than BioWare is?  BioWare doesn't know your character.

[The Masked Rog]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

That's a good question.  I kind of like the idea that the tonal delivery occurs under the hood.  Although I guess it's not that important to me, when it comes down to it.  If I had all the options in front of me, I'd probably choose the ones that "make sense" with my character 9/10 times anyways.  I guess.  

Sure, but aren't you a better judge of what "makes sense" for your character than BioWare is?  BioWare doesn't know your character.

Sure they know. They wrote every single thing she said and every single action she took.

Modifié par The Masked Rog, 20 août 2010 - 01:59 .

[brain_damage]

I do believe that BioWare wants a cup of coffee, some chocolate chip cookies and a couple of free days for them to rest and relax.

[David Falkayn]

What's that you say? All of these things are done by creative professionals under some kind of contract with the owner of the Batman license? And that these products are then marketed to Batman fans to enjoy or not, as they choose? You're saying that fans of a given character or setting or license or property are not active creators of those stories and games and movies? that they are consumers who "merely" love, consume, empathize with, and perhaps become attached to the character or property?

However, the consumer does have the option to not purchase the product, let's continue with the Bat-Man analogy here--if enough consumers choose to get off the bus because they don't like the current creators' interpretation to where sales drop too much, then upper management has to make a choice. It: (a) stands by its creative staff and eats the losses in the hopes of either gaining a new audience or recouping later--a dangerous option which depends greatly on the patience and how deep the pockets are of owners/investors; or ( changes direction in varying degrees to cater to consumer demands--which has happened frequently not only in the Bat-Man franchise, but also Spider Man (clone saga, for instance). So...while consumers are passive in the sense that they cannot directly influence a creator(s) direction--nor should they be--they are active and in a way possess the ultimate form of activity in that they have the choice of accepting or rejecting the creator's offering.



Having said that, as regards Dragon Age 2--I'm taking a wait and see position. It's too early yet to make judgment calls on whether I'm going to buy or not. As a long time role-player who cut his teeth on first edition D & D, I enjoyed Mass Effect 2--it had enough role playing elements to please me along with an immersive storyline and I enjoy DAO and what little I've seen and read of DA 2 looks good so far, but as more details come out, I'll be able to make a better decision--a lot of good games are coming out in the coming months, so it's going to get some competition for peoples' dollars/euros/pounds/etc.

[Bratt1204]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

That's a good question.  I kind of like the idea that the tonal delivery occurs under the hood.  Although I guess it's not that important to me, when it comes down to it.  If I had all the options in front of me, I'd probably choose the ones that "make sense" with my character 9/10 times anyways.  I guess.  

Sure, but aren't you a better judge of what "makes sense" for your character than BioWare is?  BioWare doesn't know your character.

Of course.

[Vandrayke]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

That's a good question.  I kind of like the idea that the tonal delivery occurs under the hood.  Although I guess it's not that important to me, when it comes down to it.  If I had all the options in front of me, I'd probably choose the ones that "make sense" with my character 9/10 times anyways.  I guess.  

Sure, but aren't you a better judge of what "makes sense" for your character than BioWare is?  BioWare doesn't know your character.

the point being that if my character's a jerk the whole game, I'd pick the "jerk" tone option for neutral dialog, almost every time.  Not the "nice" tone for neutral dialog, which is what the "hidden" dialog options would be, I believe.  I don't think it takes a giant leap of faith to believe that anyone with half a brain could identify the difference between the "jerk" and "nice" options, so I'm fine if they do it for me.  

[pprrff]

I came up with a way to predict whether people's pet 'rpg feature' will survive the gaming development by Bioware or any other maker for that matter. Be they isometric view, stats, lvl build, relationship value, unique origin, inventory, xp grind, karma meter .....

If you can honestly convince yourself that the XYZ feature will improve the game, ie immersion, flow, realism or just bloody fun, then there is a good chance the said feature will survive to even DA XIII,

If the most convincing argument for the XYZ feature is: All rpg should have XYZ because that all rpg that came before it has XYZ, then there is pretty good chance that the feature will probably be jettisoned as the gaming industry moves on.

Modifié par pprrff, 20 août 2010 - 02:37 .

[Biokotor]

reply to interloper:
yes action/rpg's is the same thing as a horse monkey. the sense/emotional experience each type of game gives out is completely different. with the dialog present we cannot imagine ourselves filling the role of the character do u understand? it takes away the very soul of the rpg & gives it an experience similar to that of an action game... where u feel as the 3rd party... not the 1st.

(old thread for reference to prevouis comments)

http://social.biowar...6830/31#4509447

Modifié par Biokotor, 20 août 2010 - 03:27 .

[Vandrayke]

maybe the big thing here is that most of the people who are upset like to pretend THEY are the main character, and the people who are not have always thought they are roleplaying someone else?

[Biokotor]

i'm pretty sure u hit the spot. bioware should really just make a feature where u can take off hawke dialog wheel & hav a classic conversation.
join my group if u hate the dialog wheel & voiced actor
http://social.biowar...oup/2696/#group

Modifié par Biokotor, 20 août 2010 - 03:37 .

[AlanC9]

pprrff wrote...

I came up with a way to predict whether people's pet 'rpg feature' will survive the gaming development by Bioware or any other maker for that matter. Be they isometric view, stats, lvl build, relationship value, unique origin, inventory, xp grind, karma meter .....

If you can honestly convince yourself that the XYZ feature will improve the game, ie immersion, flow, realism or just bloody fun, then there is a good chance the said feature will survive to even DA XIII,

If the most convincing argument for the XYZ feature is: All rpg should have XYZ because that all rpg that came before it has XYZ, then there is pretty good chance that the feature will probably be jettisoned as the gaming industry moves on.

That's an interesting system, but I'm not sure it has any predictive power. People have different tastes in games. One of the things that emerged from the ME2 debates is that some folks just plain like fiddling with inventory, and some folks wouldn't mind at all if the whole system went away.

[pprrff]

AlanC9 wrote...

That's an interesting system, but I'm not sure it has any predictive power. People have different tastes in games. One of the things that emerged from the ME2 debates is that some folks just plain like fiddling with inventory, and some folks wouldn't mind at all if the whole system went away.

I always think drawing up comparison between ME and DA is a bit flawed. I'm not taking side on whether ME is rpg, but I never really went into ME expecting to play anything but a shooter. I can see how backlash can happen if you try to sell people on a shaky premise, I would be disappointed to if I expected KOTOR but got Gears of War.

In context of ME, I welcomed the scrapping of the inventory system, as well as removal of the whole stats business. I mean a gun is a gun, you can argue about how marksmanship can improve over time (despite the fact that Shepard is already a super soldier of some sort), but  how does putting points into weapon skill increase damage? The new weapons upgrade and power brings together story telling and game play much better. Plus why would Shepard go around collecting 50 copy of the same guns and armor like he is some sort of used arms dealer.

I said in anoother thread that things like isometric view, stat and level based improvement and even lack of voice acting is just features of the older games because the lack the technology to do better. Take away all those tings from DA Origin and it still doesn't change some dude/gal becoming warden and fight the blight.

Modifié par pprrff, 20 août 2010 - 04:17 .

[AlanC9]

 But that's exactly my point. Some folks like those things for themselves, rather than because they suit the particular situation. If you look at the "Disappointment with ME2" thread, you'll see that some folks want traditional RPG gameplay even though it doesn't make any sense for Shepard. Yes, they really do want a Shepard who scavenges for his equipment and doesn't know how to aim at the start of ME1

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 août 2010 - 05:01 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

The Masked Rog wrote...

Sure they know. They wrote every single thing she said and every single action she took.

But they don't know what combination of options she chose, or (more importantly) why she chose them.

Your characters motives are knowable only to you.  Any attempt by the game designers to accommodate those motives will necessarily be less successful than you would have been.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vandrayke wrote...

the point being that if my character's a jerk the whole game, I'd pick the "jerk" tone option for neutral dialog, almost every time.  Not the "nice" tone for neutral dialog, which is what the "hidden" dialog options would be, I believe.  I don't think it takes a giant leap of faith to believe that anyone with half a brain could identify the difference between the "jerk" and "nice" options, so I'm fine if they do it for me. 

What if your character concept is more nuanced than that?  I recognise that games like ME limit players to choosing broad archetypes and nothing more, but RPGs traditionally allow for very detailed character design.  Your character might have foibles that have never occurred to BioWare's writers.  Perhaps she gets irrationally angry when people use certain types of arguments.

You can know this.  BioWare can't.  You should get to choose.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

 But that's exactly my point. Some folks like those things for themselves, rather than because they suit the particular situation. If you look at the "Disappointment with ME2" thread, you'll see that some folks want traditional RPG gameplay even though it doesn't make any sense for Shepard. Yes, they really do want a Shepard who scavenges for his equipment and doesn't know how to aim at the start of ME1

While this is true, there are yet some other players who want Shepard always to be a good shot because she is the aforementioned super-soldier.

Unfortunately, she isn't necessarily a good shot.  She's only a good shot if the player is a good shot.  I would much prefer ME's combat if it worked like KotOR's combat.  Or even just had a bit of auto-aim in it (ME2-PC appears to have no aim-assist at all).

[Vandrayke]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

the point being that if my character's a jerk the whole game, I'd pick the "jerk" tone option for neutral dialog, almost every time.  Not the "nice" tone for neutral dialog, which is what the "hidden" dialog options would be, I believe.  I don't think it takes a giant leap of faith to believe that anyone with half a brain could identify the difference between the "jerk" and "nice" options, so I'm fine if they do it for me. 

What if your character concept is more nuanced than that?  I recognise that games like ME limit players to choosing broad archetypes and nothing more, but RPGs traditionally allow for very detailed character design.  Your character might have foibles that have never occurred to BioWare's writers.  Perhaps she gets irrationally angry when people use certain types of arguments.

You can know this.  BioWare can't.  You should get to choose.

Then in situations like that, I'll get mildly irritated and move along.  It's so rare that it isn't worth thinking about at all.  On the list of Things I Care About in Games, not being able to choose one or two tonal deliveries I would have preferred for a character ranks REALLY REALLY LOW.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

Then clearly we have different preferences. Roleplaying is the number one reason why I'm here.

[iTomes]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

 But that's exactly my point. Some folks like those things for themselves, rather than because they suit the particular situation. If you look at the "Disappointment with ME2" thread, you'll see that some folks want traditional RPG gameplay even though it doesn't make any sense for Shepard. Yes, they really do want a Shepard who scavenges for his equipment and doesn't know how to aim at the start of ME1

While this is true, there are yet some other players who want Shepard always to be a good shot because she is the aforementioned super-soldier.

Unfortunately, she isn't necessarily a good shot.  She's only a good shot if the player is a good shot.  I would much prefer ME's combat if it worked like KotOR's combat.  Or even just had a bit of auto-aim in it (ME2-PC appears to have no aim-assist at all).

nah, for ME the combat system it had worked out... i didn't really liked it but that was mainly because it wasn't the best at shooter standards. but still, if i have a giant-big-nasty machine gun i do want to use it. a swordfight on the other hand is much more complex, so a turn based system makes sense here...

[pprrff]

AlanC9 wrote...

 But that's exactly my point. Some folks like those things for themselves, rather than because they suit the particular situation. If you look at the "Disappointment with ME2" thread, you'll see that some folks want traditional RPG gameplay even though it doesn't make any sense for Shepard. Yes, they really do want a Shepard who scavenges for his equipment and doesn't know how to aim at the start of ME1

I see your point. I guess I was trying to say that ME -> ME2 changes are not simply dumbing down, but are actual improvement made to fix some of the quirks brought on by trying to marry RPG with Shooter. So try to draw parallels between that and the DA2 development doesn't make much sense. The argument that "they take out rpg in ME sequel so therefore they will do the same with DAO sequel" doesn't hold much weight.

Modifié par pprrff, 20 août 2010 - 05:38 .