81 réponses à ce sujet

[redzin]

Lumikki wrote...
Okey, but how you gonna do it?

I ask, because persuation skill does not do that, it does the opposite, it allows bypass all roles and create one super positive role where players allways gets what they want, without any consequences. Meaning if there is situation with npcs, player can allways bypass (solve) that situation with persuation.

A brilliant example of how to do that is the ending in Dragon Age. I won't spoil it here for people who havn't played it, but basicly there are 4 different endings, and non of them are strictly possitive. It doesn't matter what you do, you'll have to make a desicion that has some "sad" consequences. Some of those endings can only be reached if you have a high charisma (persuasion) skill.

That is what I mean when I say that the consequences should be part of the script.

Also, the sort of completely free roleplaying that you're trying to describe is fairly impossible in a single player game. If you want the quality of voice acting and writing that is present in bioware games, then most of it will be predefined; that doesn't mean that the entire game should be one long predefined path (or 2 paths, as is the case in ME2). The best option is to allow people to choose their own combination of the many smaller predefined choices that are presented throughout the game.

For example:

A player is forced to take a position regarding the genophage. This might have 2 predefined outcomes; either the Krogan will be cured, or they will stay (almost) infertile. At another point in the game the player has to decide whether to destroy or reprogramme the heretic-Geth. Again, this might have 2 different outcomes.

The problem with the ME2 system is that these 2 seperate events are connected by the morality system; you need to either support the genophage AND the destruction of the Geth, or you need to do the opposit in both situations. You can't support the genophage while also wanting to reprogramme the Geth, because that would reward a mix of renegade and paragon points. If you could freely decide what you want in each of these situations, that would be much closer to true roleplaying. That is not the case due to the morality/persuasion system in ME2.

Basicly what I would like to see in ME3 is a system that doesn't reduce the players desicion making throughout the entire game to remembering whether you decided to be the red or the blue guy when you made your character. That is not role-playing, that's just having 2 story-lines in one package.

Modifié par redzin, 08 janvier 2011 - 05:33 .

[Evil Johnny 666]

Lumikki wrote...
Okey, but how you gonna do it?

I ask, because persuation skill does not do that, it does the opposite, it allows bypass all roles and create one super positive role where players allways gets what they want, without any consequences. Meaning if there is situation with npcs, player can allways bypass (solve) that situation with persuation.

Not true. In order to put persuation skills somewhere, you need to overlook other skills. That's the consequences. In real life, anyone can decide to train like crazy to be persuasive, anyone can train like crazy to be an actor, why would that be different in a video game? There IS a consequence, that is that with all the time I practice getting a good actor, I have less time to do anything else. It's a non-issue really. Otherwise according to your logic anyone can be a sniper expert so it sucks... You just have to allocate the points which means you have less to put somewhere, it's the same damn thing for every skill.

Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 08 janvier 2011 - 05:37 .

[Slavka13748]

james1976 wrote...

I'm not sure what the correction solution is here. I know in ME1 I had 100% of the Paragon bar and 0% of the Renegade, but in ME2 I had 100% of Paragon bar AND nearly 20% of the Renegade bar....which seemed really odd. In other BioWare games I remember a good and evil scale that adjusted. so 100/20 would have been impossible. I suppose that is good for a character who might swing either way depending on the situation. Maybe even make that character seem more real as I am sure we aren't all one or the other.

This happened to me as well, but was particularly strange because I played full Paragon. I seemed to be getting Renegade points randomly, no matter what I did. Guess that's another kink to work out if they're keeping the morality system the same.

OT: Like most people, it seems, I prefer the persuasion skill to be separate from morality. Failing that, I'd prefer it if the persuade options were not 'free passes', so to speak. It seems odd that my Renegade can get away without any consequences for his actions but my Renegon can't.

[Lumikki]

Player puts gun to npc face. "Give me the technogy"

NPC:

1. Sure, you don't need threat me, I will give it. (This is persuation or fear of players reputation)
2. Sorry, but I don't think you gonna kill me, you aren't that kind of person. (This conflict with reputation and action)
3. Why would I give it to you, what's it for me? (This is where npc believes there is deal to make)

What defines how npc behave?

There is different between 100% guaranteed result and trying something. That's where reputation counting comes in or pre-define alignment role. Does npcs believe you mean what you say. It's based role what you play and it affects that. Persuation other hand just bypass npcs mind (choise 1) and gives what ever player wanted allways 100% guaranteed. It did not matter what role player had, nor what kind of past player has or what player has done before.

Someone sayed that doesn't persuation just open one more choise for player? Sure it does, should that be good thing? No, because it doesn't just open new choise, it opens superior choise, the only good choise to make. To have choises they have to be "equal" good. If one choise is better than others, it's not anymore choises to make.

Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 janvier 2011 - 06:05 .

[xentar]

redzin wrote...
The problem with the ME2 system is that these 2 seperate events are connected by the morality system; you need to either support the genophage AND the destruction of the Geth, or you need to do the opposit in both situations. You can't support the genophage while also wanting to reprogramme the Geth, because that would reward a mix of renegade and paragon points. If you could freely decide what you want in each of these situations, that would be much closer to true roleplaying. That is not the case due to the morality/persuasion system in ME2.

Not to dismiss the point, of course, but you might be exaggerating a bit here. At least with an imported character a certain tendency is enough. For example, with a 100% paragon/40% renegade I did exactly what you described and still have the blue options but I will never be able to intimidate anyone for the rest of the game, no matter what. Exaggeration, though, serves a purpose of illustrating the system's flaws rather well.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Lumikki wrote...

Player puts gun to npc face. "Give me the technogy"

NPC:

1. Sure, you don't need threat me, I will give it. (This is persuation or fear of players reputation)
2. Sorry, but I don't think you gonna kill me, you aren't that kind of person. (This conflict with reputation and action)
3. Why would I give it to you, what's it for me? (This is where npc believes there is deal to make)

What defines how npc behave?

There is different between 100% guaranteed result and trying something. That's where reputation counting comes in or pre-define alignment role. Does npcs believe you mean what you say. It's based role what you play and it affects that. Persuation other hand just bypass npcs mind (choise 1) and gives what ever player wanted allways 100% guaranteed. It did not matter what role player had, nor what kind of past player has or what player has done before. There's not just better choices for a certain situation too obviously.

Someone sayed that doesn't persuation just open one more choise for player? Sure it does, should that be good thing? No, because it doesn't just open new choise, it opens superior choise, the only good choise to make. To have choises they have to be "equal" good. If one choise is better than others, it's not anymore choises to make.

Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

Meh, if the NPC doesn't believe you, that's his problem, he'll just lie dead. Reputation =/= personality. You may be seen as a nice dude, but I wouldn't bet my life on it, I wouldn't bet anything really.

There are always superior choices no matter what you know, that's life. It depends on the situation. If one of these "superior" choices can be obtained through the use of a certain skill (as in real life), well that's it. But you have to train on that skill, disregarding others, or not being as good as with others. Real life.

Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 08 janvier 2011 - 06:09 .

[Big stupid jellyfish]

Lumikki wrote...

Someone sayed that doesn't persuation just open one more choise for player? Sure it does, should that be good thing? No, because it doesn't just open new choise, it opens superior choise, the only good choise to make. To have choises they have to be "equal" good. If one choise is better than others, it's not anymore choises to make.

I see your point. But --

Big stupid jellyfish wrote...

But if you roleplay it may be so that you won't choose the option to persuade because your character is edgy when it comes to this particular quest, or because persuasion here sounds too OOC, or whatever. But the opportunity is here so you can look through all the options available and choose the one that fits the character most.

In both ME1 and ME2 I had sometimes chosen 'non-persuade' and even neutral options despite persuade options being available to me. Yay roleplaying!

Lumikki wrote...

Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

Don't invest (enough) points into skill = don't get all options that grant you 100% result.

Invest points into persuasion = less points for battle skills, fights are more difficult.

Though I agree with you regarding 100% guaranteed positive results: even persuasion shouldn't be able to always grant you 100% result. Also, shades of gray are always welcome even if you're using paragon/renegade persuasion options.

[Lumikki]

Yeah, but that's not the point. Different roles should end in different result. Superior skill what bypass all roles isn't good choise in roleplaying games.

[redzin]

Lumikki wrote...

Player puts gun to npc face. "Give me the technogy"

NPC:

1. Sure, you don't need threat me, I will give it. (This is persuation or fear of players reputation)
2. Sorry, but I don't think you gonna kill me, you aren't that kind of person. (This conflict with reputation and action)
3. Why would I give it to you, what's it for me? (This is where npc believes there is deal to make)

What defines how npc behave?

There is different between 100% guaranteed result and trying something. That's where reputation counting comes in or pre-define alignment role. Does npcs believe you mean what you say. It's based role what you play and it affects that. Persuation other hand just bypass npcs mind (choise 1) and gives what ever player wanted allways 100% guaranteed. It did not matter what role player had, nor what kind of past player has or what player has done before.

Someone sayed that doesn't persuation just open one more choise for player? Sure it does, should that be good thing? No, because it doesn't just open new choise, it opens superior choise, the only good choise to make. To have choises they have to be "equal" good. If one choise is better than others, it's not anymore choises to make.

Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

But that is not at all how the ME2 morality system works. The ME2 system doesn't affect how NPC's behave, only how your own character is able to respond.

Besides, what the "100% possitive choice" (as you call it) actually is, will vary from person to person and from playthrough to playthrough. When deciding whether to support or reject the genophage, what is the 100% positive answer? There is none, it's just a personal assessment that is going to vary.

I'm not gonna bother repeating myself anymore, you keep ignoring my arguments.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Big stupid jellyfish wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Someone sayed that doesn't persuation just open one more choise for player? Sure it does, should that be good thing? No, because it doesn't just open new choise, it opens superior choise, the only good choise to make. To have choises they have to be "equal" good. If one choise is better than others, it's not anymore choises to make.

I see your point. But --

Big stupid jellyfish wrote...

But if you roleplay it may be so that you won't choose the option to persuade because your character is edgy when it comes to this particular quest, or because persuasion here sounds too OOC, or whatever. But the opportunity is here so you can look through all the options available and choose the one that fits the character most.

In both ME1 and ME2 I had sometimes chosen 'non-persuade' and even neutral options despite persuade options being available to me. Yay roleplaying!

Lumikki wrote...

Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

Don't invest (enough) points into skill = don't get all options that grant you 100% result.

Invest points into persuasion = less points for battle skills, fights are more difficult.

Though I agree with you regarding 100% guaranteed positive results: even persuasion shouldn't be able to always grant you 100% result. Also, shades of gray are always welcome even if you're using paragon/renegade persuasion options.

This. Personally, I too often not choose the persuasion option even if it was available, I just try to choose what suit mosts my character as possible, unfortunately it's both very hard and awkard because everything is tied to a morale. I never could tell Jacob I trust him without telling him he worked for the wrong person, even if I was "renegade" by telling TIM I felt good and would do what he told me to do. But, to make things more fun and take out the possibility of 100% positive results, there can be different skills regarding persuasion; rhetoric, acting, threats, etc. Then if you want 100% positive results, it will have even bigger consequences on your abilities.

[xentar]

Lumikki wrote...
There is different between 100% guaranteed result and trying something. That's where reputation counting comes in or pre-define alignment role. Does npcs believe you mean what you say. It's based role what you play and it affects that. Persuation other hand just bypass npcs mind (choise 1) and gives what ever player wanted allways 100% guaranteed. It did not matter what role player had, nor what kind of past player has or what player has done before. 

Now you are exaggerating it. The persuasion checks only work if you invested enough into it. If it's well balanced, whether to invest into persuasion skills can be an interesting choice. I don't see what's wrong with being able to persuade people in spite of having a wrong reputation.

Lumikki wrote...
Point here is not to restrict player posibility try to do something. But do restrict players possibility get allways that 100% guaranteed positive result from it.

As stated above, you don't get these results for free, you do it at the expense of your other valuable abilities.

So, here's how I see the "extended" version of your conversation:

Player puts gun to npc face. "Give me the technogy"

NPC [possibly depending on your reputation]:

1. Sure, you don't need threat me, I will give it. (This is persuation or fear of players reputation)
2. Sorry, but I don't think you gonna kill me, you aren't that kind of person. (This conflict with reputation and action)
 2.1 [Intimidation skill check] Think again.
 2.2 ["Bottom right" option, no skills required] Shoot the guy, get the tech and some badass reputation.
3. Why would I give it to you, what's it for me? (This is where npc believes there is deal to make)
 3.1 [Intimidation skill check] Integrity of your limbs.
 3.2 [Charm skill check]  (Something charming)
 3.3 ["Middle right" option, no skills required] What are you interested in?

Modifié par xentar, 08 janvier 2011 - 06:41 .

[ObserverStatus]

In ME1 you still needed a ceratin amount of paragon and renegade to max out charm and intimidate. ME3 should just have a neutral "persuade" skill like the Fallout series. After all, why can't villains be charming and heroes be intimidating?

[Evil Johnny 666]

Lumikki wrote...

Yeah, but that's not the point. Different roles should end in different result. Superior skill what bypass all roles isn't good choise in roleplaying games.

It depends on the nature of your role and the situation. Different characters could get the same results, but not always. I don't see how the existence of a persuasion skill makes different roles impossible, there's plenty of role possibilities with no persuasion skills or of different levels (so you can persuade in some occasions and in others not). You know, the existence of persuasion skills doesn't necessarily mean you'll be a master persuader if you put a couple of points there. Again, if you want to be a master persuader, what's the problem? It's your role? You seem like wanting to limit roleplaying. I agree different outcomes is a good thing, but there will ALWAYS be better choices for some occasion, choices which will be better for your character, choices which can be made feasible via persuasion. And if you want to be able to do those choices as often as possible, it's your choice and the consequences attached. If I want to be a good actor, I'll won't be able to do all the same things I usually do, it's part of role playing. Again, I can understand you want different outcomes, but this has more to do with making a more complex system rather than scrapping something very legit out of it.

[Lumikki]

xentar wrote...

As stated above, you don't get these results for free, you do it at the expense of your other valuable abilities.

It doesn't matter, because it's superior choise and it will override all other possible roles.

Example some of you complain how paragon and renegade system lures players to only these two roles. I agree, it does that. Same ways persuation skills lures you only this one "persuation" role.

[Evil Johnny 666]

xentar wrote...

So, here's how I see the "extended" version of your conversation:

Player puts gun to npc face. "Give me the technogy"

NPC [possibly depending on your reputation]:

1. Sure, you don't need threat me, I will give it. (This is persuation or fear of players reputation)
2. Sorry, but I don't think you gonna kill me, you aren't that kind of person. (This conflict with reputation and action)
 2.1 [Intimidation skill check] Think again.
 2.2 ["Bottom right" option, no skills required] Shoot the guy, get the tech and some badass reputation.
3. Why would I give it to you, what's it for me? (This is where npc believes there is deal to make)
 3.1 [Intimidation skill check] Integrity of your limbs.
 3.2 [Charm skill check]
 3.3 ["Middle right" option, no skills required] What are you interested in?

This really shows how ME2 system is both bare-bones and makes no sense. If you want a reputation system, it CAN'T work alone, it makes no sense. Like I said, I wouldn't bet my life or money on how I feel someone may be. I'm not even sure I fully know some friends you know, imagine a complete stranger and worse, a figurehead! Would you bet anything on how Obama would react to something? What he might do regarding some situations, if he truly does everything because he wants to? I wouldn't. Same thing with Shepard, reputation could be in the equation, but only lightly, certainly not THE thing about the whole dialogue system.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Lumikki wrote...

xentar wrote...

As stated above, you don't get these results for free, you do it at the expense of your other valuable abilities.

It doesn't matter, because it's superior choise and it will override all other possible roles.

Example some of you complain how paragon and renegade system lures players to only these two roles. I agree, it does that. Same ways persuation skills lures you only this one "persuation" role.

It won't override other roles. It's PART of the role. It's like real life. There are always "superior" choices, and they can be obtained via different ways. Okay only one persuasion skill is bare-bones, but you're certainly not for more as I can see. One is still better than none, one is still more realistic than none. If you always want to be 100% persuasive, you can work toward it, no matter what your role is. There's no such thing as overriding...

Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 08 janvier 2011 - 06:36 .

[General_Mayhem]

I'm honestly from removing persuasion skills and morality bars from your ability to choose dialog options in this game.



When I played the first Mass Effect, I poured points into both charm and intimidate simply because I wanted to always have all the options available to me. This was a stupid way to play and it severely weakened my character. I hated the persuasion skill system as it forced me into a specific role just as much as ME2 did, by making my select one skill and run with it if I wanted to feel like I was building and even semi-viable character.



ME2 I haven't had as many problems with, I try to make the choices I would and for the most part this makes me pretty solidly paragon, but it still bothers me that when I make a renegade choice I feel like I'm missing out on something. It also drives me nuts when I want to intimidate some character I hate and the option is grayed out.



My tentative suggestion is to make all dialogue options available at all times. I don't think this would really take anything from the game. I never felt a sense of accomplishment from being able to choose a dialogue option because I had a high paragon score or had poured points into a skill. It would make the game a lot more gratifying to be able to make the choices I wanted, when I wanted, without constraints.



The other option I would consider would be not high-lighting charm and intimidate choices. It makes it easier, sure, but the conversation system could be more interesting if you actually had to listen and react with choices that made sense and were persuasive, this could bring a real element of triumph and accomplishment into the ME3 conversation system.



I'm sure there's problems with it, but that's my basic suggestion. Let me be who I wanna be when I wanna be Bioware. Let me be kind to wounded workers and mean to manipulating criminals.

[xentar]

Lumikki wrote...

xentar wrote...

As stated above, you don't get these results for free, you do it at the expense of your other valuable abilities.

It doesn't matter, because it's superior choise and it will override all other possible roles.

Example some of you complain how paragon and renegade system lures players to only these two roles. I agree, it does that. Same ways persuation skills lures you only this one "persuation" role.

That may be a problem of balance. Persuasion checks might be overused in ME2, they are also marked, so, you know what option to select to get a guranteed result. If the skills are sufficiently expensive and aren't abused/don't solve everything they don't override anything.

[james1976]

Slavka13748 wrote...

james1976 wrote...

I'm not sure what the correction solution is here. I know in ME1 I had 100% of the Paragon bar and 0% of the Renegade, but in ME2 I had 100% of Paragon bar AND nearly 20% of the Renegade bar....which seemed really odd. In other BioWare games I remember a good and evil scale that adjusted. so 100/20 would have been impossible. I suppose that is good for a character who might swing either way depending on the situation. Maybe even make that character seem more real as I am sure we aren't all one or the other.

This happened to me as well, but was particularly strange because I played full Paragon. I seemed to be getting Renegade points randomly, no matter what I did. Guess that's another kink to work out if they're keeping the morality system the same.

OT: Like most people, it seems, I prefer the persuasion skill to be separate from morality. Failing that, I'd prefer it if the persuade options were not 'free passes', so to speak. It seems odd that my Renegade can get away without any consequences for his actions but my Renegon can't.

I found the lack of a talk-based skill interesting as well.  I am certainly not used to such a system.  There were some situations I got what seemed to be random Renegade points as well even though it seemed it should be the opposite.  There was also a few times when the decision seemed like a lesser or two evils and it was a matter of deciding which was less evil.  I'm not gonna complain about that though.  It fits into the hard morale choices for this kind of game we expect.

[redzin]

Lumikki wrote...

xentar wrote...

As stated above, you don't get these results for free, you do it at the expense of your other valuable abilities.

It doesn't matter, because it's superior choise and it will override all other possible roles.

Example some of you complain how paragon and renegade system lures players to only these two roles. I agree, it does that. Same ways persuation skills lures you only this one "persuation" role.

So what is this persuasion role? Does the persuasion role want to cure the genophage? Yes, no? Does it want to save the Rachni? Does it like Cerberus?

It's bull****, having a persuasion system that is disconnected from the morality system doesn't make "one role" it opens up an infinite amount of roles.

Modifié par redzin, 08 janvier 2011 - 07:02 .

[redzin]

xentar wrote...

redzin wrote...
The problem with the ME2 system is that these 2 seperate events are connected by the morality system; you need to either support the genophage AND the destruction of the Geth, or you need to do the opposit in both situations. You can't support the genophage while also wanting to reprogramme the Geth, because that would reward a mix of renegade and paragon points. If you could freely decide what you want in each of these situations, that would be much closer to true roleplaying. That is not the case due to the morality/persuasion system in ME2.

Not to dismiss the point, of course, but you might be exaggerating a bit here. At least with an imported character a certain tendency is enough. For example, with a 100% paragon/40% renegade I did exactly what you described and still have the blue options but I will never be able to intimidate anyone for the rest of the game, no matter what. Exaggeration, though, serves a purpose of illustrating the system's flaws rather well.

It's only an exageration if you look at just 2 specific options. If you consider that the game has dozens, perhaps hundreds of these decisions then it's not really an exageration. All these hundreds of decisions are already decided when you choose to be the red or the blue guy. It doesn't really allow for much variation.

Modifié par redzin, 08 janvier 2011 - 07:01 .

[Uszi]

Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice Choice

It's spelled with a "c" goddammit. Stop spelling it with an "s."  My brain is hurting.

The system is super, super easy to fix:
Do not make the difficulty of the persuasions increase relative to total available paragon/renegade points. Make them have set difficulties, i.e. if I am 80% Renegade I will always successfully talk Miranda and Jack down.

This is how the players assume it works anyway. This way is a more transparent, intuitive design.

The system of scaling is poorly thought out, and unintelligently designed. It punishes players for no reason---or rather, the arbitrary reason that the creators felt we needed to be forced to play a certain way. This system as it stands is indefensible.

Modifié par Uszi, 08 janvier 2011 - 08:40 .

[Uszi]

General_Mayhem wrote...

My tentative suggestion is to make all dialogue options available at all times. I don't think this would really take anything from the game. I never felt a sense of accomplishment from being able to choose a dialogue option because I had a high paragon score or had poured points into a skill.

Exactly!  No one sits there like, "Oh I'm such a badass because I have this dialogue option," especially because you wouldn't know that it was a difficult persuasion attempt until you've failed it.

Then, when you do fail, you're just S.O.L and irritated.  Failing doesn't feel good, Bioware.  We don't like it -- especially when we've left Jack/Miranda as our last loyalty mission before going to the derelict reaper and we've now pooched our entire playthrough without knowing we were secrectly being shiested by this system.

If we want it to be available all the time, it also doesn't have to be a sure thing:
Why not make it so that we always have a paragon/renagade score, and we have a % chance to successfully intimidate or charm our conversation partner based on our aggregate total?  So a 20% renegade player could attempt to intimidate Jack and Miranda down, but they would just get pissed and laugh at him and you'd navigate back to the dialogue tree to make a new selection.

Modifié par Uszi, 08 janvier 2011 - 08:50 .

[redzin]

Uszi wrote...
The system is super, super easy to fix:
Do not make the difficulty of the persuasions increase relative to total available paragon/renegade points. Make them have set difficulties, i.e. if I am 80% Renegade I will always successfully talk Miranda and Jack down.

That wouldn't fix the problem entirely; it would still encourage people to polarize themselves heavily. A fix is only a fix if it would allow people to choose freely when faced with seperate, unrelated choices.

Uszi wrote...

General_Mayhem wrote...

My
tentative suggestion is to make all dialogue options available at all
times. I don't think this would really take anything from the game. I
never felt a sense of accomplishment from being able to choose a
dialogue option because I had a high paragon score or had poured points
into a skill.

Exactly!

I absolutely agree with this.