313 réponses à ce sujet

[kraidy1117]

Alexia89 wrote...

uhhhh...yea i kinda like the idea.

Alien love?

[Collider]

Still, if you don't think it's flirty then I give up on the alien lovers, those lovers!

Kraidy, the option was titled "You're hard to compliment," not "I admire your body." Shepard says he admires her body, but the dialog option does not.

[kraidy1117]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

I agree. I often jokingly call femshep "estrus Shep" when she is talking to Jacob. It's easy to get ninjamanced. And I had to reload on my dudeshep playthrough as well because I picked what I thought was a just friendly option with Miranda but Shep said something like "so I can't compliment your body..yada, yada" and I thought "oops, not what I meant at all."

I can't admire your body? How is that friendly..... That is outright flirty,  you people and your alien love, it sickens me!!!!!

The paraphrase doesn't say anything about "admiring your body" so far as I recall.  But I only did it once about a hundred years ago so I could be mistaken. I just looked it up.  The paraphrase is "you are hard to compliment" which is certainly not as obvious as the notorious "I want you Thane" or "I'm interested" or "We could ease stress together."

LIES!!!!! I just replayed the game yesterday!!! My mind is like a dolphin!!! I remember all!

[kraidy1117]

Collider wrote...

Still, if you don't think it's flirty then I give up on the alien lovers, those lovers!

Kraidy, the option was titled "You're hard to compliment," not "I admire your body." Shepard says he admires her body, but the dialog option does not.

All the flirty dialog are at the top!! It's not rocket science!

[Sable Rhapsody]

kraidy1117 wrote...

I can't admire your body? How is that friendly..... That is outright flirty,  you people and your alien love, it sickens me!!!!!

EDIT:  Collider beat me to it.

As for the positions of the flirty dialogue lines, I think your tunnel vision for Miranda's particularly tight catsuit has affected your judgment.  The "top" lines are not necessarily the flirty ones in Garrus or Jacob's relationships.  In fact, the "top" response to some of Garrus's conversations breaks the goddamn romance.

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 21 août 2010 - 07:55 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

Okay, seriously, I'm sorry I brought up ME, please stop...

Duly noted.  Back on topic.

I wonder which dialogue options will have the affected tone, and which ones will not?  Will it be the kind of thing where if you pick a dialogue option blatantly at odds with your previous roleplaying, the line comes out with a different tone?

[Arrtis]

Hawke gets poked by bethany constantly.

You pick the stop poking me choice.

Aggressive:BETHANY!...*Stares*...please stop.

[kraidy1117]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

I can't admire your body? How is that friendly..... That is outright flirty,  you people and your alien love, it sickens me!!!!!

EDIT:  Collider beat me to it.

As for the positions of the flirty dialogue lines, I think your tunnel vision for Miranda's particularly tight catsuit has affected your judgment.  The "top" lines are not necessarily the flirty ones in Garrus or Jacob's relationships.  In fact, the "top" response to some of Garrus's conversations breaks the goddamn romance.

The first option gets you the goddamm dialog so you continue it!!!!

the romances in ME2 wheren't that good anyways compared to the one's in ME, DAO and BG2 anyways.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 21 août 2010 - 08:04 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Arrtis wrote...

Hawke gets poked by bethany constantly.
You pick the stop poking me choice.
Aggressive:BETHANY!...*Stares*...please stop.

Might be more like "You poke me one more time and I swear I'll *fwooshy fire threatening pose*"

Though she's also a fire mage, so it might not work so well on sis there.

[Collider]

If Bethany dies in DA2 I will strangle Bioware's figurative neck.

[kraidy1117]

Collider wrote...

If Bethany dies in DA2 I will strangle Bioware's figurative neck.

She can't die. She is a blue shirt. They have a 99% to survive.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 21 août 2010 - 08:11 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Collider wrote...

If Bethany dies in DA2 I will strangle Bioware's figurative neck.

Given that she's got early marketing exposure as one of Hawke's companions?  Morrigan, Anders, Garrus, Miranda, Jacob, and Alistair were all NPCs with early marketing, and they all survived ok--unless you really f-ed up in the ME2 suicide mission for those characters.  She'll be fine unless Hawke does something malicious or silly.  I hope.

Though I'd rather have her die than have to rescue her.  Psht.  So ten years ago.

[Truedor]

Just read through this thread and I must say this feature sounds intriguing. It's going to be interesting to compare DAO with DA2 as regards the voiced PC and now having a personality spin on responses? I'm all for a richer experience in how my choices effect the game and conversations, this sounds like a really interesting addition to the game.



I'm not sure about the new art style, combat, camera view etc... but this does sound really promising.

[Nowshin]

Personally I think if Bioware manages to pull off this idea properly it will really motivate players like me to replay with different types of characters with different personalities. As long as it's well-executed, I'll be rooting for this.:wizard:

[Amfortas]

as long as it's not too exaggerated, and I still can get violent while being a usually a nice guy, I think this is a great idea.

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

Collider wrote...
This restricts roleplaying.

How, exactly?

(...)

Unless you balk at the idea of a voiced character completely, as in that isn't roleplaying in your estimation, I just don't see how this system-- which lets you develop a personality for your character in those situations where one wouldn't normally be useable-- doesn't allow you to roleplay better. Yet the idea that your character will occasionally be using a tone, something you've already consistently selected throughout the game

Perhaps the problem (to some) is, this system both presumes and relies on the bold part to do it's "magic"? While it's true some people will "consistently select throughout the game" certain tone, there's going to be some who don't, and it's these people who find this concept of "dominant personality" restricting.

Or to put it differently, there's more than one way people roleplay their characters. Some can have their character be mostly nice to everyone, while others may prefer character who reacts more to the situations, being nice to nice people but aggressive to these who are being rude, etc. The system you have does work for the former, but at the same time it can get in a way for the latter, by injecting what it perceives to be "dominant personality" in a manner that goes against the player's intentions at the moment.

(i also realize your answer to the latter group is essentially "well we're just not going to give you such amount of control, sorry"  but i hope you can see how this kind of statement is at odds with the belief "this system doesn't restrict roleplaying". After all the very definition of "restriction" is placing arbitrary limits to what one can do, isn't it?)

Modifié par tmp7704, 21 août 2010 - 04:59 .

[Magus_42]

My problem with this system is that it assumes that people behave consistently in all situations. They don't. A Hawke who is a bully around the poor and powerless might be charming to those in a position of power. Someone who is suspicious and dour amongst strangers might be friendly around family and those he trusts. I had a rogue in DA:O that was very much like the latter, and I thought that the conversation system in that game gave me enough freedom to express that complexity, and this made for probably my most rewarding play through of the game.



This new conversation system seems just as bad as a numerical morality score. Your forcing characters into buckets based on arbitrary choices by the developers, rather giving the player the freedom to determine the meaning of their own actions.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

As far as I can tell, you're referring to BG1... a game that was made over 11 years ago and even then only accidentally meets your ideal, since you seem to think that allowing the player to control a party member to initiate dialogue in that game somehow allowed a greater degree of roleplaying even if everyone spoke to that character as if it was your PC.

I doubt that feature was an accident, given that the manual told you how to use it.

And that was great, but that's not really what I was talking about here.  I'm talking about the PC doing things when I haven;t told him to do them.  I don't recall seeing much of that in KotOR or NWN, either.  Even Jade Empire stayed away from that.  Only with ME and DAO have you started to use the PC as an actor in cutscenes, or have words and actions in dialogue that the player didn't select.  This is what I'm complaining about here.  And I'm complaining about it because there's an easy fix.

I get that you prefer roleplaying that is mostly in your head, and dislike anything in the computer game that infringes on your mental "territory". I get that you don't mind micromanagement, and in fact prefer it.

Given that you're writing this large set of responses, and coding the dialogue to respond to it, I'm suggesting that you let the players have as much control as your writing would allow.  What's being described here is a set of restrictions on the level of player control that adds nothing to the game, and seems to have no techinical limitation behind it.  This isn't like how letting anyone speak screws up translation (because the NPC lines need to be written with an awareness of the relationship between the speaker and listener), or how a grid inventory isn't easily navigable using a console controller.  This is effectively a UI decision (the wheel) limiting how many of the dialogue options we can see, even though the extra dialogue options do actually exist, and if we could select them the game would react appropriately.

I don't care how good your predictive algorithm is; it's guaranteed to fail at least some of the time.  Us choosing from the full set of lines will fail less often.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 21 août 2010 - 09:23 .

[Collider]

I don't care how good your predictive algorithm is; it's guaranteed to fail at least some of the time. Us choosing from teh full set of lines will fail less often.

I agree with that. Need to see the thing for myself before making a final judgment though.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

This is intended to react to your choices, not dictate your personality-- and as I said only applies to lines where you've already indicated your action. No, you can't choose your tone on those, but then you never could even in Origins.

Oh, but we could.  Because the character wasn't voiced we could impart literally any tone we could imagine.  We could even fiddle with the wording.

The voice robs us of this.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

Correct. You're already picking your tone the majority of the time, and your actions the rest of the time. I don't think it needs to get any more complicated than that.

Perhaps it doesn't.  But is there a reason it needs to be that simple?