885 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'll give paraphrasing those options a try, using the rules as described by David Gaider (no repetition of words actually in the line)

1) You have doubts?
2) He isn't worried.
3) I'm not convinced.

Some of those paraphrases could be changed if I could remember what the preceding line was, especially #3.

I think 1 works, and 2 does too, but I'm not sure 3 accurately conveys what the PC might not be convinced about. It summarizes the line but it doesn't tip you off.

[upsettingshorts]

In Exile wrote...

but I'm not sure 3 accurately conveys what the PC might not be convinced about. It summarizes the line but it doesn't tip you off.

That's what I meant about the previous line.  If it specifically mentions the Blight being a big deal, it will work.  If it doesn't, then I'd have to change it.  It's difficult to come up with an alternative without actually saying "Blight" but my second choice was:

3) Maybe it's nothing.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:10 .

[In Exile]

TJPags wrote...

IMO, the very fact that we now have 2* attempts at paraphrasing (and as someone said, it's not really paraphrasing, but I don't know what else to call it) and disagreements and doubts about which is good and which is bad just seems to demonstrate it's not a great idea.

*edit - 3

Do you think that the line itself is just one writing just excrete something on paper once? I'm pretty sure dialogue goes through a lot of revisions.

Yeah, two random not writers with 0 experience writing video-game dialogue did a poor job. Clearly this system is af failure!

Modifié par In Exile, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:08 .

[TheMufflon]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'll give paraphrasing those options a try, using the rules as described by David Gaider (no repetition of words actually in the line)

1) You have doubts?
2) He isn't worried.
3) I'm not convinced.

The third one is very ambiguous as to what the warden isn't convinced of; it might just as easily be taken to mean that he isn't convinced that Cailan is right, which is pretty much the opposite of the intent.

[In Exile]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's what I meant about the previous line.  If it specifically mentions the Blight being a big deal, it will work.  If it doesn't, then I'd have to change it.  It's difficult to come up with an alternative without actually saying "Blight" but my second choice was:

3) Maybe it's nothing.

Why not:

He could be right.
I think he's right.

Cailan was talking about it not being a blight, so...

[TJPags]

In Exile wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IMO, the very fact that we now have 2* attempts at paraphrasing (and as someone said, it's not really paraphrasing, but I don't know what else to call it) and disagreements and doubts about which is good and which is bad just seems to demonstrate it's not a great idea.

*edit - 3

Do you think that the line itself is just one writing just excrete something on paper once? I'm pretty sure dialogue goes through a lot of revisions.

Yeah, two random not writers with 0 experience writing video-game dialogue did a poor job. Clearly this system is af failure!

Writing - good writing- goes through many revisions.  I'm well aware of that.  I write often for work.

What we're doing here, and talking about, isn't even writing, IMO.  Writing is creating the line that's actually said.  This is - for lack of a better term - paraphrasing, summarizes, what-have-you.  Trying, in as few words as possible, to explain what an as yet unrevealed line will be.

Two random people in 3 tries have yet to do so to the satisfaction of even a majority of the few people who have chimed in, and we're all familiar with the topic.  Do you really think that this system doesn't have flaws, or do you think that professional writers will be able to do a perfect job?

And if the latter, why does it seem like so many people had a problem with this in ME1 and ME2?

[upsettingshorts]

TheMufflon wrote...

The third one is very ambiguous as to what the warden isn't convinced of; it might just as easily be taken to mean that he isn't convinced that Cailan is right, which is pretty much the opposite of the intent.

Yep, I think I corrected it above though.  Using "it's" in that context refers to the situation pretty unambiguously.  "You" would be Duncan, "he" would be the King.  

In Exile wrote...

He could be right.

Cailan was talking about it not being a blight, so...

That'd work if the line where Cailan said, "I'm not convinced this is a true Blight" happened just before then, so yep - that would fit.

Edit: The problem is though neither really distinguishes itself from option #2 that well, does it?  Maybe go with your #3 and change #2 to "He is naive" as I got the impression the Warden was being dismissive in that line in DA:O.

TJPags wrote...

Do you really think that this system doesn't have flaws, or do you think that professional writers will be able to do a perfect job?

And if the latter, why does it seem like so many people had a problem with this in ME1 and ME2?

It does have flaws, but to me it has significant benefits - quite literally to the extent that I hope it replaces more traditional dialogue interfaces entirely.  As far as professional writing goes, I think they learn and get better - sort of like In Exile and I are doing in this thread, but on a much larger and more professional scale.

I can't explain why people had problems that I didn't experience.  My problems with ME1-2's system are with the writing, not the paraphrasing and dialogue wheel.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:20 .

[In Exile]

TJPags wrote...
What we're doing here, and talking about, isn't even writing, IMO.  Writing is creating the line that's actually said.  This is - for lack of a better term - paraphrasing, summarizes, what-have-you.  Trying, in as few words as possible, to explain what an as yet unrevealed line will be.

How is that not writing?

Two random people in 3 tries have yet to do so to the satisfaction of even a majority of the few people who have chimed in, and we're all familiar with the topic.  Do you really think that this system doesn't have flaws, or do you think that professional writers will be able to do a perfect job?

What majority of people. Right now it's me, you, shorts and mufflon, and shorts, myself and mufflon just seem to have agreed that shorts handled 1&2 well, meaning a majority agreed.

And if the latter, why does it seem like so many people had a problem with this in ME1 and ME2?

How many is many people? People had problems with silent VO in DA:O too. What's the acceptable ratio.

[Maria Caliban]

I'm comfortable with shotgun conversations. As long as it hits around what I assume it to mean, I'll be happy. In ME 1, there was only one conversation where it failed and in ME 2, there weren't any.

[philbo1965uk]

Lool ...very good banter .



Mufflon ..impressive

[TJPags]

In Exile wrote...

TJPags wrote...
What we're doing here, and talking about, isn't even writing, IMO.  Writing is creating the line that's actually said.  This is - for lack of a better term - paraphrasing, summarizes, what-have-you.  Trying, in as few words as possible, to explain what an as yet unrevealed line will be.

How is that not writing?

Two random people in 3 tries have yet to do so to the satisfaction of even a majority of the few people who have chimed in, and we're all familiar with the topic.  Do you really think that this system doesn't have flaws, or do you think that professional writers will be able to do a perfect job?

What majority of people. Right now it's me, you, shorts and mufflon, and shorts, myself and mufflon just seem to have agreed that shorts handled 1&2 well, meaning a majority agreed.

And if the latter, why does it seem like so many people had a problem with this in ME1 and ME2?

How many is many people? People had problems with silent VO in DA:O too. What's the acceptable ratio.

Yea, you came to that agreement now, after some more reworking.  We're not writing - we're giving a book report in 2-5 words of what someone else wrote.  But this isn't really worth fighting about, whether it's writing or not.

People had problems with the fact that it was silent, or that the choices didn't contain one they would have chosen.  Now, problem 1 is out the window with the voiced character.  Problem 2 is always going to remain, and will be true in any game, any book, movie, tv show, play, etc.  By making a paraphrase be what you have to choose from, you're adding to the possible problem - bad paraphrase that doesn't indicate well enough what the next dialogue will be, on top of whether we actually like the dialogue or not.

What's an acceptable ratio?  I have no idea.  But I'm not a game designer, developer, marketer, reviewer or writer.  I am, at best, a casual gamer who is simply pointing out that this system has the potential for more problems then giving us the line itself and letting us choose it.

[Ryzaki]

Man the paraphrasing..gah. I hated ME2 paraphrasing. They might as well put a "Oh by the way Shep might contradict himself without you knowing he's about to so don't worry about that!" Gah! *pulls hair*

"Mordin you murderer! You made the genophage!!!"

"Nooo Mordin! Don't kill him! You're not a murderer!"

Lol wut?

Paragon Shepard is retarded.

Please note the diatribe about him being a murder comes from the paraphrase "The genophage was wrong." I did not expect Shep to spew such ignorant bile when he said that. But he did...oh he did.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:36 .

[philbo1965uk]

TJPags is right...



Why over-complicate the damn thing ,when the previous sytem although limited...worked.



Bioware must be confident the paraphrasing is adaquate...and good.

[AlanC9]

TJPags wrote...
People had problems with the fact that it was silent, or that the choices didn't contain one they would have chosen.  Now, problem 1 is out the window with the voiced character.  Problem 2 is always going to remain, and will be true in any game, any book, movie, tv show, play, etc.  By making a paraphrase be what you have to choose from, you're adding to the possible problem - bad paraphrase that doesn't indicate well enough what the next dialogue will be, on top of whether we actually like the dialogue or not.

I'd add problem 3 : limiting the PC's lines to whatever will fit on the interface. Even in an IE game where there was no technical limit, there was a tendency to keep PC lines short to avoid the wall of text effect, and in any event you can't do a WoT on the consoles because of legibility issues. So either the PC's lines are short or you paraphrase.

[Jshay512]

Hmm I am pretty sure the writers will think up better lines than what people are right now on the forum... Your guys work wasn't terrible but i mean they are payed to do this and do it much better haha

[Jshay512]

I am kinda curious though what kinda interactions our guy will have with our party members. So will our guy actually talk like he was a part of the conversation or will he just randomly say something and then not talk the rest of the conv.

[TMZuk]

Dave of Canada wrote...

philbo1965uk wrote...

The industry has a philosophy of fear...always change !   as change even for change sake means upwards....standing still can only mean you go down,get left behind. It isn't true of course but thats the perception.

It IS true. Japanese game developers are dying because they refuse to change, they refuse to "get with the times".

People on these forums firmly believe that Baldur's Gate 2 is the most amazing thing ever, however the sales of Baldur's Gate 2 wouldn't be enough to keep Bioware going in today's world. You can only cater to a niche audience for so long before you need to change things.

Nostalgia can only get one so far before it becomes stale and bland.

Baldur's Gate 2 sold more than three million copies. On PC alone! I just thought you might like to know that. In fact, I saw the whole BG series with all the expansions in my local gameshope last I visited, collected on a DVD. Ten years after the last game in the series was released. The only other game that old they sell is Starcraft. So please....

[Jshay512]

Ok again, TMZuk, please try to stay talking about DA:2 and or things related to the chat system...

[Stick668]

Russalka wrote...

Let Bioware experiment. Are there any other games out there that would include a dialogue system similar to what we will see in Dragon Age 2?

The Witcher sequel.

I "always" thought that made perfect sense - Geralt was fully voice in the first game, and it got weird picking a line and hearing it word for word. (The Big Damn Sheriff speech just before the Burnydeath Dog being a prime example. There were two choices, each comprising half a dozen freaking lines...)

That time in DA:O where you played Morrigan, Wynne or Jowan. 

The DA:O Leliana DLC. (Were there any complains about that, incidentally?)

I think Deus Ex did it "halfways" at times. You'd pick a line, get it word for word, and then JC would go on for a bit with stuff you never explicitly chose. Or maybe I'm remembering it wrong

Oh, and if you play a Malkavian in VTM: Bloodlines, you really get to stretch your "what the hell am I saying?" muscles.

Modifié par Stick668, 21 novembre 2010 - 01:48 .

[Dave of Canada]

TMZuk wrote...

Baldur's Gate 2 sold more than three million copies. On PC alone! I just thought you might like to know that. In fact, I saw the whole BG series with all the expansions in my local gameshope last I visited, collected on a DVD. Ten years after the last game in the series was released. The only other game that old they sell is Starcraft. So please....

I'm actually referencing to something Gaider said, "So please....".

[Blastback]

Dave of Canada wrote...

TMZuk wrote...

Baldur's Gate 2 sold more than three million copies. On PC alone! I just thought you might like to know that. In fact, I saw the whole BG series with all the expansions in my local gameshope last I visited, collected on a DVD. Ten years after the last game in the series was released. The only other game that old they sell is Starcraft. So please....

I'm actually referencing to something Gaider said, "So please....".

By no means were Baldur's Gate's sales insignifigant, but Bioware has grown alot since then.  They probably could have stayed more niche if they hadn't grown, but that's not a realistic option. 

[Dave of Canada]

Blastback wrote...

By no means were Baldur's Gate's sales insignifigant, but Bioware has grown alot since then.  They probably could have stayed more niche if they hadn't grown, but that's not a realistic option. 

I never said they were insignifigant, I was just saying it wouldn't be able to sustain Bioware in it's current state.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 novembre 2010 - 02:08 .

[Blastback]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Blastback wrote...

By no means were Baldur's Gate's sales insignifigant, but Bioware has grown alot since then.  They probably could have stayed more niche if they hadn't grown, but that's not a realistic option. 

I never said they were insignifigant, however it wouldn't be able to sustain Bioware in it's current state.

Sorry, I meant that in support of your point.

[Hollingdale]

The problem with paraphrasing is overstated on theese boards. Especially considering I've yet to hear a single alternative spoken of (apart from simply not having a voiced PC, *sigh*) that can hold up to that which is employed in the Mass Effect franchise and will also be used in Dragon Age 2.



That being said I think that, regarding the OP's question that for me personally voiceovers aren't worth it. I find that having a voiced PC necessarily has a pretty impact on what type of game there will be.



Some pros and cons about voiceovers:



+Immersion/realism.

+Complex movielike cutscenes are possible which could not have been pulled off with a silent PC.

+The level of reactivity expected from other characters and npc's or whatever is raised with a voiced PC.

+Constant suspense lol! If you don't mind the unpredictability then I can imagine paraphrased conversation options being quite exiting never knowing just exactly what the main character will do and what scene will play out. Although I imagine this must sound hideous on theese boards.





-Shorter game (voicing and the way voicing is utilized is very costly)

-Pre determinded personality for the main character limits roleplaying

-Paraphrasing is necessary, seriously If you'd ever tried playing say Risen (bad example maybe because the game sucks in general) you'd know how terribly dull it is to pick a dialogue alternative and then have the character repeat that exact line, trust me you'll end up hitting skip a lot after a while.

-Depth, since each line of dialogue involving the main character costs at least twice as much if he/she is voiced there is naturally less dialogues avaible and also less choices in the dialogues available.

-Quirky and/or humourous lines are left out because they would sound ridiculous if delivered (and probably also because they cost)



Please feel free to enlighten me about more pro's, I don't think I did a very good job coming up with so few :/



In general though, a game with a voiced PC will as I see it, in general be shorter but more intense and shallower but more immersive kinda.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Hollingdale wrote...

The problem with paraphrasing is overstated on theese boards. Especially considering I've yet to hear a single alternative spoken of (apart from simply not having a voiced PC, *sigh*) that can hold up to that which is employed in the Mass Effect franchise and will also be used in Dragon Age 2.