1279 réponses à ce sujet

[ErichHartmann]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I gave it a chance.  Mass Effect was a gross failure as a game.

And a lot of people are going to disagree with your opinion.  So what does your statement prove?  That you personally don't like the game.  End of story. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I didn't like the game purely as a result of its dialogue system.

[NRO TYN]

Im just going to say what you all are thinking.....Bioware F#*%k up Dragon age 2



Not my opinion * runs and Hide *

[StartatZero]

This has made me even more excited for the release, I'm not sure why it keeps getting compared to mass effect, other than the dialogue system. In KotOR you could only play human male/female with a few class choices. You also had a predetermined identity in the original and the sequel, so it kinda reminds me more of KotOR.
Everything they're are changing does need changing, when they pointed out the flaws of origins, I realized they were right and agreed with them, like the shuffling and slowness of the origins battle system. One thing I am really excited about is the new art style, it looks like they are putting a lot of work into making it more original.
I wish they would take some more time to perfect the game and bug-test it instead of releasing it in March though, nothing's ever perfect but I would like to see this game come close. (also no dlcs to fill in what should have been there originally) I would also hope they try to keep a classic rpg feel that origins had.

Modifié par StartatZero, 20 septembre 2010 - 03:03 .

[SirOccam]

foodstuffs wrote...

I've not played either ME so I can't say anything about them. However:

Let's assume a paraphrase is an acceptable representation of what will be, or what was, said. If that's the case, then I can definitely see why people might have a problem with that system, assuming the above definition is not met.

From what I've been able to gather so far, the following might be acceptable:
Paraphrase: "I like cheese."
Actual statement: "I like dairy products; including cheese, ice cream, milk, and mice."

The following would not be acceptable:
Paraphrase: "I like your clothes"
Actual statement: "Let's head to your tent for the night."

The problem with this, as some seem to have noted, is the writer of the dialog may know what's intended, but the player may have no clue.

Is this an accurate assessment of what's going on here?

Pretty much, yes. Mass Effect was pretty notorious for that. Even when the intent was clear, often it would take it to an extreme. For example there's a reporter who kind of takes your words and spins them. In Mass Effect 2, you encounter her again, but acting like a Renegade there takes it WAY beyond what most people expected.

So the tone icons should really help, but also, as I've been trying to say, the dialogue wheel didn't force the Mass Effect team to make their paraphrases so off. The DA2 team can avoid that, not only because they are a different team altogether and therefore won't necessarily make the same mistakes, but also, I expect they are well aware of the bad reputation ME had in that regard and therefore they have ample motivation to do all they can to avoid it.

In DA2, if you chose "I like your clothes" and there was a little heart by it, you'd at least know you're saying something with a romantic intent. That, already, is an improvement. I only learned of what is now one of my favorite party dialogues recently, because I avoided it out of fear that I'd be flirting with the other person, and that has so far not been my intent with any of my characters. I wish there were a YouTube clip of it somewhere, but it's when you ask Leliana about her "methods."

It includes something like the following (I'm sure I'm butchering it):
"I'm sure I'm immune to your charms."
"I guess we'll never know. I'm not going to test you."
"Maybe I'll use my charms on you instead."
"That would be something to see. He thinks he'll charm me!"
"You know you want me, Leliana."
"Eee! That was awful. Silly boy! Awkward!"

This is all done in a comfortable, joking manner. It was great. It really sounded like romantic overtures, though, which is why it took me so long to find it. I hope there are more conversations like this. What's great is that if there are, I will know ahead of time if I'm hitting on someone or just joking around with them as friends.

Edit: I just recorded and uploaded that scene to YouTube, if anyone wants to see it.

Modifié par SirOccam, 20 septembre 2010 - 05:07 .

[Pritos]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I didn't like the game purely as a result of its dialogue system.

Then you must hate any Zelda games.

[soundchaser721]

It seems to me that the dialogue wheel is either a love/hate thing but the reason its getting a strong reaction (either positive or negative) is because it wasn't implemented in the first game so some people were taken aback and pissed while others were happy and wondered why it wasn't in origins to begin with. I just hope they tweak it in DA2 and make the paraphrase system a little better so you have a better idea of what Hawke will say.

Modifié par soundchaser721, 20 septembre 2010 - 03:21 .

[Riona45]

Well, since the wheel has been around for two games (ME and ME2), BioWare has had plenty of time to evaluate it and see what works and what doesn't. They have a good track record overall (by my reckoning) so I trust that they'll fine tune it.

[Morroian]

foodstuffs wrote...

Is this an accurate assessment of what's going on here?

Well there is also the problem that some are stating that the writing and dialogue in the game will be shallow because of the paraphrases, whereas the writing for the game should be evaluated by whats actually said. There are legitimate reasons for being wary of the paraphrasing system but BW seems to be aware of these concerns and hopefully making sure it works as well as it can. The emoticons are a good addition in this. But saying the game will lack depth because of the system is simply wrong, the game may end up being shallow but it won't be because of this system.

[Monica83]

Well if devs are mercyfull and show us something about the new dialogues system this can made things much more clear.. I'm sayng only that: If Da2 have the same system of dialogue of mass effect.. This is a very problem and i prefear the old style dialogues of Dragon age Origins.. If Dragon age 2 have a dialog wheel well implemented with but with accurate phrases like origins this is really much better...

The icons can help but when you are playng a roleplay game you can't base your answer only by icons click and hope what the character says is what you mean this schematic dialogue systen can be nice for mass effect but no for dragon age series...

[foodstuffs]

I don't like the idea of ending up in someone's tent simply because I complemented her clothing...



Sadly I've never had any drive to play ME, and the more I hear about it ("them," really) the less I want to. I probably will eventually play them, I played JE even though it didn't exactly entice me, but they (ME) will be quite cheap by the time I get around to it. Uh... I do want to play them, I just don't feel the motivation.



Another thread here speaks of marketing. I wanted to buy DA:O at release because it was billed as a "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate." Unfortunately, I don't see that. I was, however, fortunate that someone unexpectedly bought the game for me as a Christmas present, which meant I didn't have to spend my own money.



It's been my experience if I pay 20$ for a disappointment it does not hurt as much as if I were to have paid 60$. Bio is still a company that I might be willing to spend the money at a "release" price, but I need to feel the motivation. Overall, I do not feel it with DA 2.



From what I've been reading about DA 2, I have a bad feeling, but I will wait. I hope I am wrong.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

I disagree, but I don't think we need to get into this particular debate again. I've seen you argue this case before, and we both know no one is ever going to convince you otherwise, but let me just say that any "variability" in DAO dialogue was just in your head.[/quote]
Yes.  That's where roleplaying happens.

Any attempt to make that content explicit within the game can only diminish player agency.[/quote]
We're approaching this from two very different angles. What you see as player agency I see as simply compensating for ignorance on the player's part, ignorance of what the writers intended. In my view, there is a truth. The line was delivered a certain way, and it was received a certain way. If we use the Alistair example again, if you say something you think is a joke and he gets offended, we don't know whether it's because it was simply misunderstood by Alistair or it's because it wasn't a joke in the first place. Something was intended by the writers; we just don't know what it was. It's funny you should mention "player agency," because "roleplaying" in these instances (meaning choosing an explanation) has exactly 0 effect on the story. There is no player agency there. Whatever is meant to happen will happen, regardless of the explanation we imagine.

You see filling in these gaps as a feature; I see it as a chore. To me, roleplaying is choosing what to say, making actual choices that have an actual effect. Deciding what to say is roleplaying, pretending that something was meant one way or the other is not, because it makes no difference. You can't escape what the writers intended to happen.

If that same example happens in DA2, you can at least know that the joke was intended as a joke, and then you'll know that it was maybe a sensitive issue with the other person. That leads to greater insight into that character. In DAO, you could pretend, but as it has no effect on the story, then what's the point? If you choose to believe that Alistair is particularly offended by the subject matter of your joke, then great, but if the writers didn't design him that way, then it will signify nothing. And that just feels so...empty.

[quote]
[quote] Every line was intended to be expressed a particular way, and every line was received in a particular way, all dictated by the writers.[/quote]
Both true.  Neither is relevant to how the line was actually expressed by the PC.[/quote]
I don't see how you can arrive at this conclusion. If the writers intended a line to be expressed a certain way, then it was expressed that way. Not being able to determine the intent does not mean there was no intent. And again, pretending it was expressed a different way leads to nothing, and you can still do this in DA2 anyway, if you really want to.

[quote]
[quote]You can pretend that you said something in an entirely original way, but no matter how hard you imagine, it will always lead to the same response.[/quote]Again, true.  And not relevent to the roleplaying experience.

The roleplaying resides in how your character behaves and why.  how people react to him is immaterial.[/quote]
Yes, but the same gripe you have about paraphrases and ambiguity applies here. You might be thinking he's saying one thing, but he's actually saying something else. I would think that would bother you.

[quote]
[quote]If you think something is a joke, but Alistair gets his feelings hurt over it, it's because it wasn't a joke. Or because Alistair took it the wrong way.[/quote]These things in DAO are available for you to decide.[/quote]
But you're not really "deciding" anything, are you? One or the other explanation is the truth.

[quote]
[quote]You could fill in the blanks in your head, but it doesn't actually affect anything.[/quote]It affects who your character is, which is all that really matters.[/quote]
But it doesn't matter if it never affects anything in the game. I could pretend my character has a lisp, but if no one ever reacts to it, then what value does it have?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not someone who's against roleplaying or doesn't enjoy roleplaying. I can definitely see the value of these things if, say, I were playing a PnP RPG. Then I'd have a DM who would react to these things. They would carry some weight, however minor, in the story.

In a scripted video game, it's different. There is a truth, and no amount of roleplaying is going to affect that truth one iota.

[quote]
[quote]And besides, if you so wish, you can always pretend Hawke says something different in DA2 as well.[/quote]
If I could disable only Hawke's voice, and turn off the subtitles, then this would work.  I've actually asked for this option.[/quote]
It's more of a stretch, but you could still pretend that a hostile response was meant as a joke.

EDIT: fixed quotes

[/quote]

By your logic, why not just remove any sort of dialog choice at all and
make the game a completely linear "developer chosen one size fits all conversation choice?

Not all of us need a voice actor to confirm for us how a particular response line is intended. Syvius is correct, you may as well just remove the term "roleplaying" from the game at that point because you're esentially being hand held and the game's dialog tone is already decided for you.

Whats amazing to me still after all this, is Dragon Age is a game that sat in development for as long as it did, was touted as a throwback to the genre and style that Bioware made its mark in and gained the majority of its long time fans from, and it appears at least from alot of the info on DA2 we've heard so far that it lasted all of one game. Now I'm not going to say thats completely due to the EA buyout, but the new direction of "lets pump a game out every 12-18 months, then nickle and dime the fanbase with subpar DLC" sure does seem like EA's motiff.

And for what? To appeal to the casual console crowd since thats where the money is? To make the EA overlords happy? To cash in on the industry's new money scheme of paid DLC?  D: All of the above?  

[Riona45]

Oh no, not the console vs. PC war...

[SirOccam]

[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

In my view, there is a truth. The line was delivered a certain way, and it was received a certain way.[/quote]
And you're free to believe that all you want, but by choosing that explanation you're limiting your creative freedom.
[quote]If we use the Alistair example again, if you say something you think is a joke and he gets offended, we don't know whether it's because it was simply misunderstood by Alistair or it's because it wasn't a joke in the first place.[/quote]
We can know it was intended as a joke by the speaker because you, for all intents and purposes, are the speaker,  You know what you meant.[/quote]
But you don't have that kind of freedom in a video game. You can't speak into a microphone. You choose from a list of pre-selected responses. Sometimes it's clear what they mean, and sometimes it's not. I don't think that during the times it's not it means that you suddenly have all these choices available. Line A is still going to lead to Response B no matter what.

[quote]
[quote]Something was intended by the writers; we just don't know what it was. It's funny you should mention "player agency," because "roleplaying" in these instances (meaning choosing an explanation) has exactly 0 effect on the story.[/quote]
It has zero effect on the events in-game, but it might colour the protagonist's opinion of an NOC quite a bit, and that's quite important to the story.  If, based on this misunderstanding, the PC no longer trusts Alistair, that will have a large effect on future decisions the protagonist makes.

And those decisions are part of the story.[/quote]
Okay, I see what you mean. I guess I just feel like if the player doesn't grasp the meaning of the line, it's a problem between the player and the game, not between the protagonist and his or her fellow conversant. If they can make the meanings clear to the player, there is still room for misunderstanding. It will just be more in-character. Personally, if I misunderstood something like that, and it affected my (character's) opinion of someone in a way not intended, then I wouldn't think I made a different choice, I would think I was wrong.

Actually, it occurs to me that there is a perfect example: breaking Anora out of Howe's estate. I wasn't paying enough attention, and when Ser Cauthrien et al. stopped me, I said "we're rescuing the queen! Tell them, Anora!" At which point she "betrayed" me. It certainly felt like betrayal at the time. But sometime later I re-read her dialogue where she quite clearly says "even if my own people see me, they'll just take me back to my father." So I betrayed her by exposing her.

Now I know what you're going to say: "that's roleplaying!" Yes, it is very true that my character also could have been zoning out during that conversation. He could just as easily have been like me and naïvely thought that Anora could just explain everything and then we could all go about our business in peace. But it just felt like I got it wrong. It felt like it was my fault, not my character's. I didn't make his decision with all the information at hand.

Now I know what you're going to say again: "the game actually supports this; you can be angry with her back at Eamon's estate and have her imply that you're an idiot for not understanding the point of her being disguised." That is true, but that's also the point. The game supports it. It's not just some random thought I had flitting through my brain. With that knowledge of what the game actually supports, I could choose to betray her if that's what I felt like my story needed. I could play it out that way if I wanted. But that first time, it was ME not understanding that caused it.

So back in the "joke" example, if I don't understand something, I'd rather figure it out than take that as license to put some idea of my own in that wasn't necessarily part of the game. If it later turned out that my misunderstanding is supported (like in the Anora example), then that becomes a valid path. But until then, it feels false, and worse, empty.

[quote]
[quote]You see filling in these gaps as a feature; I see it as a chore. To me, roleplaying is choosing what to say, making actual choices that have an actual effect. Deciding what to say is roleplaying, pretending that something was meant one way or the other is not, because it makes no difference.[/quote]
Roleplaying is deciding what to say (and why), yes, but you're choosing to be limited to those lines and deliveries chosen by the writers, and there's no need for that.  You're choosing to have a lesser experience.[/quote]
But I'm not choosing to be limited...I am limited. I could invent all sorts of things, but if it's not reflected in the gameplay, then it feels like nothing but glorified daydreaming. Not that there's anything wrong with daydreaming, but it sort of defeats the purpose of playing a game with a script.

[quote]
[quote]If that same example happens in DA2, you can at least know that the joke was intended as a joke, and then you'll know that it was maybe a sensitive issue with the other person. That leads to greater insight into that character.[/quote]That would be illusory.  You can't ever really know other people.  You're not in their minds.  You don't know what they think.  All you know is how they behave.[/quote]
Sure you can know people. I feel like I got to know most of my companions in Origins really well. If I didn't, it would make for some pretty shoddy companions. What would be the point of NPCs who have no personal consistency? We know Alistair's personality, so if he does something unexpected, I'd want to know that it's really him behaving unexpectedly, or if I said something that would naturally prompt him to act that way. If it's the former, it could be an interesting plot point, but if it's the latter, it might have just been me zoning out again.

[quote]
[quote]If the writers intended a line to be expressed a certain way, then it was expressed that way.[/quote]
This is where we disagree.  The writers may well have intended a line to be delivered a certain way (they even claim they do).  Why that means the line is then actually delovered in that way I don't understand.  Wy are you drawing that conclusion?

I'm not drawing the conclusion, and in doing so leaving myself a lot more roleplaying flexibility.[/quote]
Put yourself in the shoes of the writer. Say you were writing a dialogue that included the following:

1. Hey Alistair, try to restrain yourself when we pass this lamppost coming up.
Response: "I'll try, but it looks pretty lonely. It may need comforting." (Alistair approves +4)

This is Alistair running with the joke. No offense taken. This is probably what most players would expect, after getting to know Alistair.

But say you actually wrote it like this:
1. Hey Alistair, try to restrain yourself when we pass this lamppost coming up.
Response: "Just leave me alone, you bastard!" (Alistair disapproves -12)

Now this is pretty out-of-character for Alistair, but it is understandable if you imagine your character saying his line with a cruel sneer and a mocking tone. So the question is...how did you say it? Obviously he took offense, but was it because you cruelly mocked him, or because he's sensitive and embarrassed about the virginity talk earlier?

If you're the writer, you obviously meant it in some way. So if you intended for the PC's line to be delivered cruelly, then some player comes along and says "well in my game, I said it in a nice, joking way, but he just misunderstood," you'd probably be thinking "good for you, but no he didn't."

[quote]
[quote]Not being able to determine the intent does not mean there was no intent.[/quote]
Of course not.  But it does mean the intent makes no material difference.  This is true of all implicit content within games.  Presumably the character all go off-screen and sleep at some point.  That we don't know where they do that does not mean they don't do it.[/quote]
Indeed, and imagining that they sleep in hammocks held aloft by dragons doesn't mean they do.

[quote]
[quote]And again, pretending it was expressed a different way leads to nothing, and you can still do this in DA2 anyway, if you really want to.[/quote]
Except that the delivery is now explicit content.  If I can ignore the things the game explicitly tells me are true, why am I playing a game at all?  What part of the game still matters?[/quote]
Those are the questions I'd ask now, about Origins. Why not play text-based games, so you can imagine the scenery too? Why even play a game; why not just write your own story?

[quote]
[quote]Yes, but the same gripe you have about paraphrases and ambiguity applies here. You might be thinking he's saying one thing, but he's actually saying something else. I would think that would bother you.[/quote]
Why would you think he's actually sasying something different?[/quote]
Because again, a writer wrote the line, and also wrote the response to it. But we've been down this path before.

[quote]
[quote]But you're not really "deciding" anything, are you? One or the other explanation is the truth.[/quote]
Some of the content is available for you to decide.  Does your PC like potatoes?  The game never tells you.  But presumably it is either true or it is not that the Warden enjoys eating potatoes.  Do you get to decide that?[/quote]
Sure, but I wouldn't bother unless I'm writing a fanfic or something and such a thing will be significant enough, one way or another, to warrant inclusion.

[quote]This is true of all of the implicit content within the game.  Everytghing game doesn't make explicit you can fiddle with to improve your gaming experience.  That you choose not to do so is not evidence that it isn't possible.

[quote]But it doesn't matter if it never affects anything in the game. I could pretend my character has a lisp, but if no one ever reacts to it, then what value does it have?[/quote]
And this is where I conclude that you're not even trying to roleplay your character.  If it's important to you that your character have a lisp, then give him a lisp.  Then he'll have a lisp, and he'll be a more fully realised representation of your character concept.

That's the whole point of a roleplaying game.  To create and play a role.

If you don't understand why the lisp is important then we have no common ground.[/quote]
I see your point IF we were, say, talking about writing a story. Lots of details can be interesting, provided they contribute to a more complete understanding of a character. If they don't, then they just bog the story down. My character's opinion on potatoes or having a lisp are two of the latter, in my opinion.

But in a game, I don't have creative control of the storyline. I can't make something matter. I go in with the understanding that the writers call the shots. And I'm okay with that.

I don't think that more details always means "better." For example, I can honestly say I don't know if my character can curl his tongue, or whistle, or has any birthmarks. And I don't think making those decisions improves my "character concept." Again, if I were writing a fanfic, I very well might include one or more of those details, if I felt it was noteworthy. But for the purposes of enjoying Dragon Age: Origins, I have to conclude that no, they are not noteworthy.

[quote]
[quote]Don't get me wrong, I'm not someone who's against roleplaying or doesn't enjoy roleplaying. I can definitely see the value of these things if, say, I were playing a PnP RPG. Then I'd have a DM who would react to these things. They would carry some weight, however minor, in the story.[/quote]
There's sufficient off-screen action in a CRPG for you to fill in those minor details yourself.

How they ultimately affect the on-screen action will be limited to how those off-screen events impact your character's decisions.  He might choose to save Redcliffe, or not, based on something that took place off-screen.  That's a pretty big impact.[/quote]
I guess all I can say is I find that entirely unfulfilling and unsatisfying. I do not like the idea one bit of making decisions based on things that might not have come from the game itself.

Maybe it's just me. I am a huge fan of consistency and continuity and things fitting. As it turns out, I am (sort of) writing a story, but it's not about DA. It is a fanfic, but it doesn't use anyone else's characters...it just takes place in a pre-made world. In it, I try to include lots of references to the game upon which it is based as well as other fanfics I've seen because that makes it all feel so much more substantial. The thought that it will fit more-or-less seamlessly into the existing canon makes me feel all warm and tingly. If I were to write some kind of slash fic where my character is an alien from a planet I've just made up and he has super powers and whatever else...sure I suppose a person could enjoy something like that, but I just can't.

It reminds me of a quote from the show Friends which I remember for some unknown reason. Monica says "the rules help control the fun!" I'm with her. There's plenty of room between the lines to have our fun.

Anyway...perhaps it's time to accept the inevitable and "agree to disagree."

Modifié par SirOccam, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:32 .

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Whats amazing to me still after all this, is Dragon Age is a game that sat in development for as long as it did, was touted as a throwback to the genre and style that Bioware made its mark in and gained the majority of its long time fans from, and it appears at least from alot of the info on DA2 we've heard so far that it lasted all of one game.

They never said or promised anything else.

[SirOccam]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

By your logic, why not just remove any sort of dialog choice at all and make the game a completely linear "developer chosen one size fits all conversation choice?

Because then it wouldn't be fun. Why would I possibly be in favor of removing all choices? That's an absurd extrapolation of my argument.

I'm saying I don't have an infinite number of choices, and pretending that I do isn't satisfying. I LOVE having choices. That's why I play RPGs. The only thing is I want my choices to matter.

Not all of us need a voice actor to confirm for us how a particular response line is intended. Syvius is correct, you may as well just remove the term "roleplaying" from the game at that point because you're esentially being hand held and the game's dialog tone is already decided for you.

And my response to that is that the tone is already decided for you anyway. They just don't do a very good job of telling you what it is in some cases. Anything else is just "playing pretend," and that's like playing a PnP RPG by yourself.

[Merced256]

isn't playing pretend ****ing role playing?

[AtreiyaN7]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

By your logic, why not just remove any sort of dialog choice at all and
make the game a completely linear "developer chosen one size fits all conversation choice?

Not all of us need a voice actor to confirm for us how a particular response line is intended. Syvius is correct, you may as well just remove the term "roleplaying" from the game at that point because you're esentially being hand held and the game's dialog tone is already decided for you.

Whats amazing to me still after all this, is Dragon Age is a game that sat in development for as long as it did, was touted as a throwback to the genre and style that Bioware made its mark in and gained the majority of its long time fans from, and it appears at least from alot of the info on DA2 we've heard so far that it lasted all of one game. Now I'm not going to say thats completely due to the EA buyout, but the new direction of "lets pump a game out every 12-18 months, then nickle and dime the fanbase with subpar DLC" sure does seem like EA's motiff.

And for what? To appeal to the casual console crowd since thats where the money is? To make the EA overlords happy? To cash in on the industry's new money scheme of paid DLC?  D: All of the above?  

Your choices were always predetermined in my opinion. The only difference is that in DA:O, you got to read the lines first. Refer to the dev response somewhere earlier on: they wrote the lines in DA:O with specific tones in mind (that sounds like it's pre-determined to me). How much of a difference is there if you read the exact line the developers wrote for you first versus hearing it afterwards anyway? The new system sounds like it will probably be accurate, unlike ME/ME2.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:35 .

[SirOccam]

Merced256 wrote...

isn't playing pretend ****ing role playing?

I would say no, but role playing is playing pretend.

[Monica83]

A roleplay game must have deep dialogues... A player can wrong to choice a response this is roleplay maybe when the player answer don't considered the fact of conseguence this is what happened to you and anora.. In my case i was sure if i don't give her the opportunity to have a chance to get the throne she will betrayed me.. So in the game i talked with Alistair and i persuaded him to marry anora.. This is what happened... Make dialogues more simple using a paraphrases schematic system most time is not accurated even if you are icon for the tone.. And in most way that means less personality for the roleplayer that play the game.. If my character when i click an answer tell a complete different thing of what i mean its a punch in eye of roleplay.. Even if my character after clicking the answer say something similiar of what i mean... The best thing for a roleplay is have a clear written answer.. This because when you read them you have the opportunity to think and select what you mean so when you answer you selected what you have to tell whitout any error.. The question is devs sayd we can build the personality of hawke... but we can also chose how him answer to question completely like in origins? Or we can only select the tone how you tell things? If is it well... Its a Mass Effect with the addiction of voice tone... nothing more.. Im angry because some people ask less dialogues or semplicistic dialogues and more action.. Well this is an "R P G" if you want a pew pew game whith limited interaction and limited dialogue option... Play mass effect...



Joke mode one:



Someone is angry with me because i call dragon age 2 "Dragon Effect" well i'm not the first to tell that.. I think is the marketing.. In fact on the bioware site you see Shepard on the right side and Hawke in the left side..

Just only a combination? Or they really want turn dragon age on a sort of mass effect on middle earth?



Now serious mode:



Dragon age is born like a spiritual successor of Baldur's gate 2..

Baldur's gate 2= Best RPG EVER a legend!

Dragon age in fact is the best roleplay game of 2010

so why now mass effectively the game? Let's keep those two games distinct

[SirOccam]

Monica83 wrote...

A roleplay game must have deep dialogues... A player can wrong to choice a response this is roleplay maybe when the player answer don't considered the fact of conseguence this is what happened to you and anora.. In my case i was sure if i don't give her the opportunity to have a chance to get the throne she will betrayed me.. So in the game i talked with Alistair and i persuaded him to marry anora.. This is what happened... Make dialogues more simple using a paraphrases schematic system most time is not accurated even if you are icon for the tone..

How do you know? How many games have you played that use a paraphrase system that also include a tone icon? The ONLY games I've played (that I can recall) with the paraphrase system are the Mass Effect games. They were pretty inaccurate, but again, they could have solved that by making them NOT INACCURATE.

The Dragon Age writers are not the Mass Effect writers, and they know how dissatisfied people were with Mass Effect's paraphrases.

The question is devs sayd we can build the personality of hawke... but we can also chose how him answer to question completely like in origins? Or we can only select the tone how you tell things? If is it well... Its a Mass Effect with the addiction of voice tone... nothing more..

Fallacy of Division

Not liking Mass Effect does not mean every little piece of Mass Effect was bad. And including one thing that Mass Effect had does not mean the game IS now Mass Effect. Mass Effect also had companions with personal quests...does that mean Dragon Age shouldn't have had them? Sometimes a good idea is just a good idea.

Im angry because some people ask less dialogues or semplicistic dialogues and more action.. Well this is an "R P G" if you want a pew pew game whith limited interaction and limited dialogue option... Play mass effect...

But no one has said they want a pew pew game with limited interaction and limited dialogue options.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

SirOccam wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

A roleplay game must have deep dialogues... A player can wrong to choice a response this is roleplay maybe when the player answer don't considered the fact of conseguence this is what happened to you and anora.. In my case i was sure if i don't give her the opportunity to have a chance to get the throne she will betrayed me.. So in the game i talked with Alistair and i persuaded him to marry anora.. This is what happened... Make dialogues more simple using a paraphrases schematic system most time is not accurated even if you are icon for the tone..

How do you know? How many games have you played that use a paraphrase system that also include a tone icon? The ONLY games I've played (that I can recall) with the paraphrase system are the Mass Effect games. They were pretty inaccurate, but again, they could have solved that by making them NOT INACCURATE.

The Dragon Age writers are not the Mass Effect writers, and they know how dissatisfied people were with Mass Effect's paraphrases.

The question is devs sayd we can build the personality of hawke... but we can also chose how him answer to question completely like in origins? Or we can only select the tone how you tell things? If is it well... Its a Mass Effect with the addiction of voice tone... nothing more..

Fallacy of Division

Not liking Mass Effect does not mean every little piece of Mass Effect was bad. And including one thing that Mass Effect had does not mean the game IS now Mass Effect. Mass Effect also had companions with personal quests...does that mean Dragon Age shouldn't have had them? Sometimes a good idea is just a good idea.

Im angry because some people ask less dialogues or semplicistic dialogues and more action.. Well this is an "R P G" if you want a pew pew game whith limited interaction and limited dialogue option... Play mass effect...

But no one has said they want a pew pew game with limited interaction and limited dialogue options.

The question is do they care that theres a good number of people who were disenchanted with the way ME2 handled dialog? Going by some of the responses Mr Gaider makes to criticism especially involving the questionable conversation system deployed in awakening, I'd question if they care one iota.

A spade is still a spade, when you see just about every preview under the sun make comparisons to ME2 what do you expect people to take from that? That its not at all like ME2?  I don't think you need be a rocket scientist to see why there's alot of concern of them "mass effecting" DA2.

And I'll say it right now, if they've removed customizable companion gear from the game, I'm done with Bioware titles as much as I hate to even consider that.

[Morroian]

Monica83 wrote...
A roleplay game must have deep dialogues... A player can wrong to choice a response this is roleplay maybe when the player answer don't considered the fact of conseguence this is what happened to you and anora.. In my case i was sure if i don't give her the opportunity to have a chance to get the throne she will betrayed me.. So in the game i talked with Alistair and i persuaded him to marry anora.. This is what happened... Make dialogues more simple using a paraphrases schematic system most time is not accurated even if you are icon for the tone..

Once again they aren't making the dialogue simpler, they're simplifying or streamlining the way you choose your dialogue. What the characters actually say is the dialogue.

Monica83 wrote...
And in most way that means less personality for the roleplayer that play the game.. If my character when i click an answer tell a complete different thing of what i mean its a punch in eye of roleplay..

And BW seems to be aware of that.

Monica83 wrote...
Even if my character after clicking the answer say something similiar of what i mean... The best thing for a roleplay is have a clear written answer..

Not IMHO, you don't speak for everyone who likes rpgs. I like good dialogue when I read it but I'm not much of an auditory person I focus more on the emotions therefore I prefer building a character by roleplaying the type of response rarther than the exact words. Plus you also have the issue that with the voiced protagonist it becomes redundant to display teh exact response then have him/her say the same words. 

Monica83 wrote...
This because when you read them you have the opportunity to think and select what you mean so when you answer you selected what you have to tell whitout any error.. The question is devs sayd we can build the personality of hawke... but we can also chose how him answer to question completely like in origins? Or we can only select the tone how you tell things? If is it well... Its a Mass Effect with the addiction of voice tone... nothing more..

Mass Effect is not the only game to use this system.

Monica83 wrote...
Im angry because some people ask less dialogues or semplicistic dialogues and more action.. Well this is an "R P G" if you want a pew pew game whith limited interaction and limited dialogue option... Play mass effect...

Well thats not what you'll be getting. Having a dialogue wheel and choosing paraphrased options doesn't automatically mean the interaction or options will be limited.

Monica83 wrote...
Someone is angry with me because i call dragon age 2 "Dragon Effect" well i'm not the first to tell that.. I think is the marketing.. In fact on the bioware site you see Shepard on the right side and Hawke in the left side..
Just only a combination? Or they really want turn dragon age on a sort of mass effect on middle earth?

People get angry because its not accurate and it keeps getting said time and time again. At this point you're just repeating yourself over and over again. We get it you don't like the system but at least try and come up with some arguments, like say Sylvius does, instead of going over cliched ground again and again.

Monica83 wrote...
Dragon age is born like a spiritual successor of Baldur's gate 2..
Baldur's gate 2= Best RPG EVER a legend!
Dragon age in fact is the best roleplay game of 2010
so why now mass effectively the game? Let's keep those two games distinct

Maybe because its not.

Modifié par Morroian, 20 septembre 2010 - 05:24 .

[Monica83]

The problem is that SirOccram im just wondering if we can select what hawke say's like happened in origin when you read your answer and you select the response.. Paraphrasing implemented like mass effect is too much schematic for a dialogue don't give you really deep interaction this i'm sayng.. I want the control of what my character is going to say.. I want think what answer give...With paraphrasing system this is not possibile.. Even if the system they implemented is perfect... The best way for me is write the entire dialogues options and add tone also... I give you an example

A npc or a party member ask you something:

You can react in many ways:
Violent: 3 different type of lines for violent answer...
Diplomacy: 4 differnt type of diplomatic answer..
Sarcastic:4 different type of sarcastic answer
Investigate: the ability to ask to npc more information...

If this is implemented with well writed answer to select can big a big improve from dragon age... but from what i read it works in this way

Npc: Ask you something
You can choice: Violent,Diplomatic,Sarcastic Answer... then Investigate...
You click an answer and your character says something much longer and different from the answer you chose... This is not mass effect devs sayd we build hawke personality.. In origin a player can carefully select what to say whitout wrong nothing.... Paraphrases are a schematic dialogue yo let you understeand what the character is going to say... But its the character that speack and do an answer not you.. I prefear a voiced dialogue ala The Witcher... Old style dialogues but voiced..

And most important:
Simplify dialogues in a roleplay game its like make a pizza whitout mozzarella and tomato....

Modifié par Monica83, 20 septembre 2010 - 05:28 .

[Riona45]

SirOccam wrote...
But no one has said they want a pew pew game with limited interaction and limited dialogue options.

And it doesn't even accurately describe Mass Effect either (will I be killed for saying that?).