Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
new pcgamer preview
Débuté par
shai-hulud-lama
, sept. 18 2010 03:21
-
Ce sujet est fermé
- Show only BioWare posts
Retour en haut
#427
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:01
The Masked Rog
-
- Members
- 491 messages
Your opinion. Not a fact. Mass Effect did it wrong (for you) != DA2 will do it wrong.Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
#428
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:08
Firky
-
- Members
- 2 140 messages
Is there any chance everyone could stop arguing? I was actually enjoying following this thread because I liked the preview.
Here is some info I learned from it (if that will help change the subject). I like the idea that party members will be off doing their own thing instead of hanging around at camp. Do you suppose you'll have to actually go and collect them when you want them, or still just be able to "reform party" whenever you're in an open sort of area or area transitioning?
EDIT: Also, this does seem a little at odds with the fact there is no 24 hour clock. There is no 24 hour clock, right?
Here is some info I learned from it (if that will help change the subject). I like the idea that party members will be off doing their own thing instead of hanging around at camp. Do you suppose you'll have to actually go and collect them when you want them, or still just be able to "reform party" whenever you're in an open sort of area or area transitioning?
EDIT: Also, this does seem a little at odds with the fact there is no 24 hour clock. There is no 24 hour clock, right?
Modifié par Firky, 20 septembre 2010 - 09:10 .
#429
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:11
AtreiyaN7
-
- Members
- 8 397 messages
Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
ME2 had wonky paraphrasing - everyone has said this. The DA team is well aware of those problems, and the whole point of the icon system is to avoid problems like that weird disconnect you sometimes had between the paraphrased text and the actual dialogue in ME2.
Using poems as an analogy of sorts, would you say that a three-line haiku is less of a poem than some bloated monstrosity with multiple stanzas of five lines each? Is one better just because the poet decided to pour out their feelings in excruciating detail? Is one worse because the poet has decided to distill an idea down to its essence?
Assuming that the meaning and intent are clear AND that we get similarly well-written dialogue to that of DA:O, I'm perfectly willing to see how this new system plays out.
#430
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:19
SirOccam
-
- Members
- 2 645 messages
[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...
[quote]SirOccam wrote...
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.[/quote]
When my character is making decisions when dealing with the other characters, that's all he can consider. I (the player) don't exist. The game doesn't exist.
This is why I don't think RPGs are a subset of games. Games test the player, and you're clearly playing DAO like it's a game. You're acutely aware all of the time that you're a player playing a game.
But that's not how RPGs work. RPGs are a test of the character. The character makes decisions on his own (as directed by you, but that direction takes place outside the game world so it doesn't really exist within the RPG). So naturally, if things transpire that confuse him he'll think that he made a mistake or someone else in the game world made a mistake. He's not going to blame something that doesn't exist (the player).[/quote]
I see what you're driving at, but you can't leave the human player behind completely. As you say, you direct the character in his decision-making (actually I'd argue that YOU make the decisions on his behalf, but it's a fine enough difference and a minor enough point that it's not worth defending right now). Either way, you are involved. So if I make a mistake (like not understanding Anora's point about her disguise), my character is encumbered with that mistake through no willful action on my part. If anything, that's a restriction of player agency, albeit an unconscious one. If I knew the information, I could still choose to say my character didn't hear it, and proceed exactly like before. But without knowing the truth, that those words were spoken, the experience becomes tainted, if you will (that word's probably a bit strong), by the human player's own foibles. And as you say (and I agree with you in general), it shouldn't be about the player, it should be about the character.
[quote]So if I invent a back story for my character, my character knows this story is true. Anything in the game that contradicts this backstory must be wrong, even if the writers (who also don't exist from the character's point of view) intended that it be correct.
A great example of this occurs at the beginning of KotOR. When Trask runs into your room and starts telling you things about yourself, those things can be true, or they can be false, and for each point that is up to you to decide.[/quote]
Here's where we differ greatly. Things simply not being addressed is one thing, but outright contradicted is something else entirely. Although there is some wiggle room for information coming from another NPC (as they can be lying/mistaken/etc.), if it's clear that that's simply the way the designers have chosen to communicate that information to you (and not, say, a biography screen that comes up and tells you out-of-character), then I would be much more inclined to simply take it at face value.
[quote]And that can happen. Sometimes you'll make a decision for your character that you soon realise was out of character. When that happens to me, I always reload and play through that section again, regardless of how long ago it was.[/quote]
Then why can't you reload and play through a dialogue again, if it felt like you acted out-of-character? Do you simply always assume that the miscommunication is on the other conversant's end? I suppose you must; it seems like that's what you've been saying all along. Huh. You know, in some ways, it feels like you're more restrictive (on yourself) than I am.
[quote]
[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?[/quote]
People sometimes behave unpredictably. I'd call that realism. You're a bunch of people all thrown together by circumstance. Is it really that surprising that maybe you wont' get along or be compatible?[/quote]
Yes, but within reason, surely. If I decide something is shouted at the top of my character's lungs, but people respond normally...I mean there's only so much you can chalk up to people being unpredictable. Games simply aren't designed to accommodate as much freedom as you seem to want. It'd be great if they were, but you're always going to be limited to some degree.
[quote]
[quote]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]
And here I think you're reducing replayability.
Different characters of mine have elicted entirely different reactions for the companions, and as such have had very different opinions of them. In one playthrough Alistair might be whiny and petulant, while in another he's fun-loving and self-assured. The writers certainly didn't intend both of those, but those are both impressions the PC can get by acting consistently himself.[/quote]
And this is why we're going to have to agree to disagree. Alistair has the same dialogue every time. You don't have to trigger it all, and of course if you're friendly he'll be more friendly and if you're rude he'll be not so friendly. But it's the same person. He has the same potential every time, and you're always working within the system the developers have designed. Anything you add on your own outside of the game has to remain there. This is clearly acceptable for you, but I'm afraid it just isn't for me. Stuff outside of what the game offers feels insubstantial and arbitrary and pointless to me. I'm not saying it has to be that way for everyone. Clearly you enjoy the game the way you play it, and more power to you. I just enjoy it the way I play. May we never be forced to play the other person's way.
In any case, I definitely understand why you don't like being told the intent. I can only hope you can understand why I think it's the best thing since sliced nug pâté.
It greatly increases the sense of immersion I feel, knowing that I will be communicating on a straightforward level with my fellow Free Marchers. What you describe sometimes sounds like an episode of the Twilight Zone or something, where someone is trying to speak with those around him that look and sound like normal people but they can't communicate on the same wavelength.
[quote]
[quote]If you're the writer, you obviously meant it in some way.[/quote]
This is by no means guaranteed. The DAO writers have said they did write with intent in mind, but that's not a necessary component of game writing.[/quote]
I simply can't wrap my head around this. How could a script have any semblance of direction without including intent? How could you possibly account for the infinite number of ways people can come up with for their character to mean something? I understand you could come at it just from the reaction side, but then how do you know what lines to give the player at all?
Let's say two characters are meeting for the first time. I would think a reasonable choice of options would be like this:
1. Hello, my name is ________. What's yours?
2. Yes? Did you want something?
3. Hi there, what a pleasure it is to meet you.
4. Hey there, hot stuff.
5. This had better be worth my time, worm.
How can you include 4 without intending it to sound flirty? Or 3 without intending it to sound friendly. The only one that sounds neutral, in my opinion, is 1. So if you started with that, then what motivates you to add the others? Can't the player just make #1 sound impatient or friendly or flirty or hostile?
[quote]
[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]
What if it becomes relevant later? You can't know when you design the character what is going to matter or be relevant. If you wait until the question actually comes up in-game, what then? If you decide then your choice will likely be coloured by the expected results of the answer. And is the question about his actual preference, or is someone simply asking leaving you the opportunitiy to lie? Is your character the sort of person who would lie about something that trivial?
If you don't know these answers in advance you're just inventing a persona willy-nilly and not worrying about consistency at all.[/quote]
But you can't possibly plan for everything. If, for example, my character sits down at a table and is given a choice of food, I will then decide what he likes and dislikes based on what's there. If I decide he likes potatoes, he will reach for the potatoes. I don't see a problem with this.
It's funny you should mention consistency though, because I want my character to be consistent with the universe in which he lives. That, to me, is much more important than planning out all these mundane details then never ever retconning myself. Indeed, I sort of need to play through the game a bit so I know what palette I am painting with, so to speak.
If I knew nothing of Thedas, I could choose beforehand that my character is a dragon, for example, but if it is totally contradicted by the game then I think the game wins. It's their world...I just play in it. If it came up short and didn't perform in a way that was satisfying to me as a player, then I'd find another world that did, or make up my own. That's the fun of trying out different RPGs...they all have their own idiosyncracies and details, and using some of those as limitations isn't a bad thing, in my opinion. It makes it more interesting. To return to the art analogy, I'd rather paint my character on a backdrop than have every game be a blank canvas. Otherwise one RPG is as good as the next.
[quote]
[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.[/quote]
Then why does the game need you? What do you bring to the game?
If the game unfolds the same way regardless of who plays it, then my input ceases to be special. And if my input isn't special, my input is no longer worth my time.[/quote]
The game needs me because I make the decisions. It doesn't run by itself. I control the protagonist. My (and your) input IS special, it's just that there are bounds on what that input is. And that's not a bad thing.
If you're going to ignore the game's rules and established canon so utterly, then I would ask you, "why do you need the game?"
[quote]SirOccam wrote...
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.[/quote]
When my character is making decisions when dealing with the other characters, that's all he can consider. I (the player) don't exist. The game doesn't exist.
This is why I don't think RPGs are a subset of games. Games test the player, and you're clearly playing DAO like it's a game. You're acutely aware all of the time that you're a player playing a game.
But that's not how RPGs work. RPGs are a test of the character. The character makes decisions on his own (as directed by you, but that direction takes place outside the game world so it doesn't really exist within the RPG). So naturally, if things transpire that confuse him he'll think that he made a mistake or someone else in the game world made a mistake. He's not going to blame something that doesn't exist (the player).[/quote]
I see what you're driving at, but you can't leave the human player behind completely. As you say, you direct the character in his decision-making (actually I'd argue that YOU make the decisions on his behalf, but it's a fine enough difference and a minor enough point that it's not worth defending right now). Either way, you are involved. So if I make a mistake (like not understanding Anora's point about her disguise), my character is encumbered with that mistake through no willful action on my part. If anything, that's a restriction of player agency, albeit an unconscious one. If I knew the information, I could still choose to say my character didn't hear it, and proceed exactly like before. But without knowing the truth, that those words were spoken, the experience becomes tainted, if you will (that word's probably a bit strong), by the human player's own foibles. And as you say (and I agree with you in general), it shouldn't be about the player, it should be about the character.
[quote]So if I invent a back story for my character, my character knows this story is true. Anything in the game that contradicts this backstory must be wrong, even if the writers (who also don't exist from the character's point of view) intended that it be correct.
A great example of this occurs at the beginning of KotOR. When Trask runs into your room and starts telling you things about yourself, those things can be true, or they can be false, and for each point that is up to you to decide.[/quote]
Here's where we differ greatly. Things simply not being addressed is one thing, but outright contradicted is something else entirely. Although there is some wiggle room for information coming from another NPC (as they can be lying/mistaken/etc.), if it's clear that that's simply the way the designers have chosen to communicate that information to you (and not, say, a biography screen that comes up and tells you out-of-character), then I would be much more inclined to simply take it at face value.
[quote]And that can happen. Sometimes you'll make a decision for your character that you soon realise was out of character. When that happens to me, I always reload and play through that section again, regardless of how long ago it was.[/quote]
Then why can't you reload and play through a dialogue again, if it felt like you acted out-of-character? Do you simply always assume that the miscommunication is on the other conversant's end? I suppose you must; it seems like that's what you've been saying all along. Huh. You know, in some ways, it feels like you're more restrictive (on yourself) than I am.
[quote]
[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?[/quote]
People sometimes behave unpredictably. I'd call that realism. You're a bunch of people all thrown together by circumstance. Is it really that surprising that maybe you wont' get along or be compatible?[/quote]
Yes, but within reason, surely. If I decide something is shouted at the top of my character's lungs, but people respond normally...I mean there's only so much you can chalk up to people being unpredictable. Games simply aren't designed to accommodate as much freedom as you seem to want. It'd be great if they were, but you're always going to be limited to some degree.
[quote]
[quote]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]
And here I think you're reducing replayability.
Different characters of mine have elicted entirely different reactions for the companions, and as such have had very different opinions of them. In one playthrough Alistair might be whiny and petulant, while in another he's fun-loving and self-assured. The writers certainly didn't intend both of those, but those are both impressions the PC can get by acting consistently himself.[/quote]
And this is why we're going to have to agree to disagree. Alistair has the same dialogue every time. You don't have to trigger it all, and of course if you're friendly he'll be more friendly and if you're rude he'll be not so friendly. But it's the same person. He has the same potential every time, and you're always working within the system the developers have designed. Anything you add on your own outside of the game has to remain there. This is clearly acceptable for you, but I'm afraid it just isn't for me. Stuff outside of what the game offers feels insubstantial and arbitrary and pointless to me. I'm not saying it has to be that way for everyone. Clearly you enjoy the game the way you play it, and more power to you. I just enjoy it the way I play. May we never be forced to play the other person's way.
In any case, I definitely understand why you don't like being told the intent. I can only hope you can understand why I think it's the best thing since sliced nug pâté.
It greatly increases the sense of immersion I feel, knowing that I will be communicating on a straightforward level with my fellow Free Marchers. What you describe sometimes sounds like an episode of the Twilight Zone or something, where someone is trying to speak with those around him that look and sound like normal people but they can't communicate on the same wavelength.
[quote]
[quote]If you're the writer, you obviously meant it in some way.[/quote]
This is by no means guaranteed. The DAO writers have said they did write with intent in mind, but that's not a necessary component of game writing.[/quote]
I simply can't wrap my head around this. How could a script have any semblance of direction without including intent? How could you possibly account for the infinite number of ways people can come up with for their character to mean something? I understand you could come at it just from the reaction side, but then how do you know what lines to give the player at all?
Let's say two characters are meeting for the first time. I would think a reasonable choice of options would be like this:
1. Hello, my name is ________. What's yours?
2. Yes? Did you want something?
3. Hi there, what a pleasure it is to meet you.
4. Hey there, hot stuff.
5. This had better be worth my time, worm.
How can you include 4 without intending it to sound flirty? Or 3 without intending it to sound friendly. The only one that sounds neutral, in my opinion, is 1. So if you started with that, then what motivates you to add the others? Can't the player just make #1 sound impatient or friendly or flirty or hostile?
[quote]
[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]
What if it becomes relevant later? You can't know when you design the character what is going to matter or be relevant. If you wait until the question actually comes up in-game, what then? If you decide then your choice will likely be coloured by the expected results of the answer. And is the question about his actual preference, or is someone simply asking leaving you the opportunitiy to lie? Is your character the sort of person who would lie about something that trivial?
If you don't know these answers in advance you're just inventing a persona willy-nilly and not worrying about consistency at all.[/quote]
But you can't possibly plan for everything. If, for example, my character sits down at a table and is given a choice of food, I will then decide what he likes and dislikes based on what's there. If I decide he likes potatoes, he will reach for the potatoes. I don't see a problem with this.
It's funny you should mention consistency though, because I want my character to be consistent with the universe in which he lives. That, to me, is much more important than planning out all these mundane details then never ever retconning myself. Indeed, I sort of need to play through the game a bit so I know what palette I am painting with, so to speak.
If I knew nothing of Thedas, I could choose beforehand that my character is a dragon, for example, but if it is totally contradicted by the game then I think the game wins. It's their world...I just play in it. If it came up short and didn't perform in a way that was satisfying to me as a player, then I'd find another world that did, or make up my own. That's the fun of trying out different RPGs...they all have their own idiosyncracies and details, and using some of those as limitations isn't a bad thing, in my opinion. It makes it more interesting. To return to the art analogy, I'd rather paint my character on a backdrop than have every game be a blank canvas. Otherwise one RPG is as good as the next.
[quote]
[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.[/quote]
Then why does the game need you? What do you bring to the game?
If the game unfolds the same way regardless of who plays it, then my input ceases to be special. And if my input isn't special, my input is no longer worth my time.[/quote]
The game needs me because I make the decisions. It doesn't run by itself. I control the protagonist. My (and your) input IS special, it's just that there are bounds on what that input is. And that's not a bad thing.
If you're going to ignore the game's rules and established canon so utterly, then I would ask you, "why do you need the game?"
Modifié par SirOccam, 20 septembre 2010 - 09:38 .
#431
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:19
MDarwin
-
- Members
- 342 messages
Amioran wrote...
foodstuffs wrote...
Right, because a person's opinion is entirely irrelevent, especially if they disagree with you, at which point you attack while stating absolutely nothing useful.
You can have your opinion, naturally, will that however automatically make the opinion correct? Obviously not. Since there are many PROOFS that what you say is completely inaccurate, in many forms and mediums (going from literature to cinema to teathre), it is obvious that your "opinion" is concerned only by what you want to see, discarding all the rest.
**Naturally you have the right to do so, however it is still inaccurate and biased, so it is not a real opinion, but just a bunch of emotional sprut, based on no objective point.
Don't forget opinions "vary" so much.
My opinion is my opinion. Your opinion is yours. 
A matter of fact opinion can only be wrong, if my opinion has been proven wrong.Let's say my opinion is, that the world is flat. Now you can "really" prove that my opinion was, or is wrong.
**But in that case your argument fails.
I hope your not just a troll. If not, sorry.
#432
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:20
foodstuffs
-
- Members
- 133 messages
Amioran wrote...
foodstuffs wrote...
Right, because a person's opinion is entirely irrelevent, especially if they disagree with you, at which point you attack while stating absolutely nothing useful.
You can have your opinion, naturally, will that however automatically make the opinion correct? Obviously not. Since there are many PROOFS that what you say is completely inaccurate, in many forms and mediums (going from literature to cinema to teathre), it is obvious that your "opinion" is concerned only by what you want to see, discarding all the rest.
Naturally you have the right to do so, however it is still inaccurate and biased, so it is not a real opinion, but just a bunch of emotional sprut, based on no objective point.
#433
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:24
MDarwin
-
- Members
- 342 messages
Firky wrote...
Is there any chance everyone could stop arguing? I was actually enjoying following this thread because I liked the preview.
Here is some info I learned from it (if that will help change the subject). I like the idea that party members will be off doing their own thing instead of hanging around at camp. Do you suppose you'll have to actually go and collect them when you want them, or still just be able to "reform party" whenever you're in an open sort of area or area transitioning?
EDIT: Also, this does seem a little at odds with the fact there is no 24 hour clock. There is no 24 hour clock, right?
It would be good if you need to pick up one of your sidekicks from his/her favourit "waterhole".
And get in to a pub brawl. :happy:
#434
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:24
Monica83
-
- Members
- 1 849 messages
The Masked Rog wrote...
Your opinion. Not a fact. Mass Effect did it wrong (for you) != DA2 will do it wrong.Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
For many people its seems... How much time you click somenthing to answer and you character talks in different way of you meaned? (this happens in mass effect)
The old style is much more accurated you can't wrong because you have the entire answer written... (see? logical!)
#435
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:28
SirOccam
-
- Members
- 2 645 messages
Because one is not better than the other. That's my whole point.foodstuffs wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
I don't see why people have to choose sides and declare that one is better than the other. They both have their own strengths and weaknesses. Much like the Dragon Age and Mass Effect series.
If one is indeed better than the other then why would people not declare that?
Obviously people can think one or the other is better, but:
1. That does not make it so
2. It still doesn't explain why they feel like they can't appreciate the other despite its flaws
3. It doesn't explain why they have to trash people who like the other one better.
Thank you, and I yours. I can only hope for your sake that you are pleasantly surprised by how it turns out.Monica83 wrote...
I agree completely with Fiery and i respect your point of wiew sir Occram
#436
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:28
The Masked Rog
-
- Members
- 491 messages
Monica83 wrote...
For many people its seems... How much time you click somenthing to answer and you character talks in different way of you meaned? (this happens in mass effect)The Masked Rog wrote...
Your opinion. Not a fact. Mass Effect did it wrong (for you) != DA2 will do it wrong.Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
The old style is much more accurated you can't wrong because you have the entire answer written... (see? logical!)
Actually you can because you don't know what is meant by the phrase you have in front of you. Sometimes you says someting thinking you mean it in a joking way and the other char takes it as a grave offense. In DA" this wouldn't happen. See, the new style is much more accurate.
#437
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:31
Firky
-
- Members
- 2 140 messages
MDarwin wrote...
It would be good if you need to pick up one of your sidekicks from his/her favourit "waterhole".
Oh hooray.
That sounds like The Copper Coronet in BG2. Maybe your companion could be drunk and try to beat you up? Or his friends try to beat you up? Or you beat people up for money. Now it sounds like The Witcher. But I agree, as a good place to pick up a companion in an RPG, my money is also on pub.
#438
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:31
SirOccam
-
- Members
- 2 645 messages
If you have a car and the brakes keep failing, does that mean that your next car will have the same problem?Monica83 wrote...
The Masked Rog wrote...
Your opinion. Not a fact. Mass Effect did it wrong (for you) != DA2 will do it wrong.Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
For many people its seems... How much time you click somenthing to answer and you character talks in different way of you meaned? (this happens in mass effect)
The old style is much more accurated you can't wrong because you have the entire answer written... (see? logical!)
Mass Effect and Dragon Age are two different
#439
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:38
Monica83
-
- Members
- 1 849 messages
Its not because if i have as answers some schematic paraphrase and the character when talks say much mor things is much easy the character go away from your character in terms of roleplay... If i want to create a character i want the complete control of what answer give... If not have no sense make your character... The adding of tones help but this don't change things.. Schematic Paraphrases are good if you have a premade character not if you create your own character.. From what i read dragon age 2 allows you to create your character and make your decisions.. But it's a trick if your character answers are maded with paraphrase because you can control the tone but you have not the complete control of what character says... And this is not only a point of wiew its logical!....
In Origin you can read the full answer and decide to use it.. Paraphrase sistem don't allows it you select only a general line of what you want to say.. And this is bad if you want to create you character...
You can control the tone.. But your character have is way to answer not the one you gived to him...
In Origin you can read the full answer and decide to use it.. Paraphrase sistem don't allows it you select only a general line of what you want to say.. And this is bad if you want to create you character...
You can control the tone.. But your character have is way to answer not the one you gived to him...
#440
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:42
foodstuffs
-
- Members
- 133 messages
SirOccam wrote...
If you have a car and the brakes keep failing, does that mean that your next car will have the same problem?
If the car's breaks kept failing because of manufacturer error I would naturally assume the next car I might buy from that company might possess the same defect. Although I recognize the fact that the next car I might buy from said company does not have to be flawed it is not outside of reason to assume the possibility.
When companies continue to fail, however, people will continue to assume those companies will continue to fail.
#441
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:43
MDarwin
-
- Members
- 342 messages
Firky wrote...
MDarwin wrote...
It would be good if you need to pick up one of your sidekicks from his/her favourit "waterhole".
Oh hooray.
That sounds like The Copper Coronet in BG2. Maybe your companion could be drunk and try to beat you up? Or his friends try to beat you up? Or you beat people up for money. Now it sounds like The Witcher. But I agree, as a good place to pick up a companion in an RPG, my money is also on pub.
Then again, a "Pleasure Palace" would be a nice setting as well.
Imagine the story one could "live" in there, to free your sidekick from the clutches of the "Pleasure Ladys/Mens. 
#442
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:45
SirOccam
-
- Members
- 2 645 messages
Yes but in this analogy, you might as well be talking about a Ford vs. a Chevrolet.foodstuffs wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
If you have a car and the brakes keep failing, does that mean that your next car will have the same problem?
If the car's breaks kept failing because of manufacturer error I would naturally assume the next car I might buy from that company might possess the same defect. Although I recognize the fact that the next car I might buy from said company does not have to be flawed it is not outside of reason to assume the possibility.
When companies continue to fail, however, people will continue to assume those companies will continue to fail.
Both games might be made by BioWare, but the teams responsible for them are completely different. And I doubt it's a BW company policy that paraphrases should be misleading.
#443
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:47
Firky
-
- Members
- 2 140 messages
MDarwin wrote...
Then again, a "Pleasure Palace" would be a nice setting as well.
That's an odd thought. I'm picturing what they would say when you "unrecruit" them. "Oh well, back to the grind."
#444
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:48
Aradace
-
- Members
- 4 359 messages
I dont see what the problem is with this article. All I see so far is an awesome game that we are months away from being able to play. At this point, if you're one of the "zomg they're not making it like Origins so it's going to suck..." people then you really do, need to just stfu, accept the fact that your precious DA:O is over and done with, build a bridge with that wood you were using for your soap boxes, and get over it.
You have two choices at this point: Either get on board with DA2 and be hopeful for it and anticipate playing it, or Dont get on board, stop your whining, and move on with your lives. Ive been telling these people for a while that their complaining was pointless and now, it seems yet again, I was right. Wave goodbye to your "crpg" and say hello to DA2. It's a fact of life, now get over it.
You have two choices at this point: Either get on board with DA2 and be hopeful for it and anticipate playing it, or Dont get on board, stop your whining, and move on with your lives. Ive been telling these people for a while that their complaining was pointless and now, it seems yet again, I was right. Wave goodbye to your "crpg" and say hello to DA2. It's a fact of life, now get over it.
#445
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:48
foodstuffs
-
- Members
- 133 messages
SirOccam wrote...
Yes but in this analogy, you might as well be talking about a Ford vs. a Chevrolet.
Both games might be made by BioWare, but the teams responsible for them are completely different. And I doubt it's a BW company policy that paraphrases should be misleading.
Policies don't dictate actuality:P
#446
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:50
SirOccam
-
- Members
- 2 645 messages
So even if it was a policy, it wouldn't have any effect? That only strengthens my point.foodstuffs wrote...
SirOccam wrote...
Yes but in this analogy, you might as well be talking about a Ford vs. a Chevrolet.
Both games might be made by BioWare, but the teams responsible for them are completely different. And I doubt it's a BW company policy that paraphrases should be misleading.
Policies don't dictate actuality:P
I'm saying that the only thing that ties the teams together (being part of the same company) has no relevance to the subject of how the paraphrases are written.
#447
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:51
foodstuffs
-
- Members
- 133 messages
Firky wrote...
MDarwin wrote...
Then again, a "Pleasure Palace" would be a nice setting as well.
That's an odd thought. I'm picturing what they would say when you "unrecruit" them. "Oh well, back to the grind."
Naughty!
#448
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 09:56
Amioran
-
- Members
- 1 416 messages
Monica83 wrote...
Its not subjective is logical paraphrases sistem alla mass effect are inaccurate and easily break immersion nothing more to say
I already told you but since you don't understand...
"Paraphrase (pronounced /ˈpærəfreɪz/) is restatement of a text or passages, using other words. The term "paraphrase" derives via the Latin "paraphrasis" from the Greek para phraseïn, meaning "additional manner of expression". The act of paraphrasing is also called "paraphrasis.""
ALSO WRITTEN DIALOGUE IS PARAPHRASE. Stop using words you don't understand the meaning, please.
Then, as for breaking immersion I already explained to you that that medium used well should cause MORE immersion just because you can build up tension. The type of immersion given is different, only this. You can like one more than another but your "objective" truths are just idiocies, firstly because you clearly don't either get what you are trying to prove, and secondly because you just discard all that you simply don't want to know, period.
#449
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 10:01
Amioran
-
- Members
- 1 416 messages
MDarwin wrote...
Don't forget opinions "vary" so much.
In fact this particular opinion is proven wrong in many cases. An opinion is just that "opinion", it always depends if it is funded on something or not. Having an opinion doesn't make the same automatically correct.
Let's say my opinion is, that the world is flat. Now you can "really" prove that my opinion was, or is wrong.
**But in that case your argument fails.
I already proven many times why that opinion is incorrect. The "building up tension without understanding what course will take the dialogue" has been used many times in literature, cinema, theatre with great effect and by great authors. Godard based all his settings on that, Artaud created an "animated theatre" just for that, symbolic poetry (above all on Mallarmé) has based poetry on that parameters. Burroughs and Kafka have done the same with prose, etc. etc.
So, as you can see, THAT opinion is clearly wrong.
Modifié par Amioran, 20 septembre 2010 - 10:03 .
#450
Posté 20 septembre 2010 - 10:01
Monica83
-
- Members
- 1 849 messages
Aradace wrote...
I dont see what the problem is with this article. All I see so far is an awesome game that we are months away from being able to play. At this point, if you're one of the "zomg they're not making it like Origins so it's going to suck..." people then you really do, need to just stfu, accept the fact that your precious DA:O is over and done with, build a bridge with that wood you were using for your soap boxes, and get over it.
You have two choices at this point: Either get on board with DA2 and be hopeful for it and anticipate playing it, or Dont get on board, stop your whining, and move on with your lives. Ive been telling these people for a while that their complaining was pointless and now, it seems yet again, I was right. Wave goodbye to your "crpg" and say hello to DA2. It's a fact of life, now get over it.
Silly haters...
Anyway i express logical reasons...And seems i'm not alone to don't want paraphrase system in DA2 but many others... So i'm not the evil witch that want ruin anything..
Theatre Letterature Movies are not RPG.. so what you saying don't have any sense
Modifié par Monica83, 20 septembre 2010 - 10:03 .
