518 réponses à ce sujet

[Xewaka]

AlanC9 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
It would be better, though not by much. A paraphrased intention still gives far too little detail about what your character intends. All the subtle nuances of intent are lost in the paraphrase.

So what? I don't mean to be flip there, but since we can only pick one of the three or so lines that have already been written by the devs, how much difference would the subtleties make?

The content of the phrase is defined by the subtleties.

Different enough so I'd wish I'd chosen one of the other lines? Example, please.
Edit: rather, so you'd wish you'd chosen another line. I may have different standards than you have.

Let's keep with the example that spawned this discussion: [aggresive] Shut up!
Original phrase: I am in command. You do as I say.
Phrase I'd expect: Quit whining and shut your hole.
You will notice that the phrase I expect has a hint of frustation and a command for silence, whereas the original phrase has neither. It has a statement of hierarchy and a reminder.
If I want to express something, I will choose the wording that best approaches the idea I want to convey. In this case, since "Shut up!" does not content command, I might consider choosing "Now is not the time", as it approaches the sense of urgency I'm seeking.

[maxernst]

vallore wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...

It would be better, though not by much. A paraphrased intention still gives far too little detail about what your character intends. All the subtle nuances of intent are lost in the paraphrase.

So what? I don't mean to be flip there, but since we can only pick one of the three or so lines that have already been written by the devs, how much difference would the subtleties make?

Because character coherence matters. With full text you can choose what option suits better the kind of character you want to portrait, based in the limited options available.


With the paraphrase you just guess, with greater or lesser accuracy, what choice is more suitable for the type of character you want to create.

Now, unless you are a very, very patient person, checking every option that may give some doubts about their meaning by playing the dialogue, repeatedly, will grow annoying quickly, meaning that a player in that situation will likely, in a short while, settle with less satisfactory answers than others potentially available, (but hidden, thanks to the paraphrase) . As a result, the game becomes a less enjoyable experience that it could be.

Or you may just avoid lines when you're not sure of their intent, much like I avoided the entire interrupt system in ME2.  I'll admit I sometimes avoided unclear dialogue options even with the full text of DA:O (intent icon probably would have helped there) but did more often in ME.

[Ziggeh]

Xewaka wrote...
 In this case, since "Shut up!" does not content command, I might consider choosing "Now is not the time", as it approaches the sense of urgency I'm seeking.

I suspect this argument is taking on a particularly circular shape, but I would say that "shut up" is quite literally a command, and so does/could indeed imply authority.

[AlanC9]

Ziggeh wrote...

Xewaka wrote...
 In this case, since "Shut up!" does not content command, I might consider choosing "Now is not the time", as it approaches the sense of urgency I'm seeking.

I suspect this argument is taking on a particularly circular shape, but I would say that "shut up" is quite literally a command, and so does/could indeed imply authority.

I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Consider a type of integrational statistical analysis. You become familiar enough with the tredns between inputs and outputs of diffeferent kinds and after a while you are able to predict the output without much concious thought.
In short: practice.

Yes, but you could do that with conscious thought.

So what's the process?

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Consider a type of integrational statistical analysis. You become familiar enough with the tredns between inputs and outputs of diffeferent kinds and after a while you are able to predict the output without much concious thought.
In short: practice.

Yes, but you could do that with conscious thought.

So what's the process?

The process is just taking the time to develop the familiarity with the particular style of exchange. Read the words, watch the reaction. Rinse. Repeat. Rinse. Repeat. And so on and so on. Do it over and over until most of the time what you anticipate is what does happen. As much as you seem to invest in creating characters and making these dialog choices, I am honestly surprised that you're not already really good at accurately anticipating reactions.

[Sylvius the Mad]

vallore wrote...

Because character coherence matters.

I might go so far as to argue that character coherence is all that matters.

maxernst wrote...

Or you may just avoid lines when you're not sure of their intent, much like I avoided the entire interrupt system in ME2.

But the actions stemming from those interrupts weren't available through any subsequent dialogue, so you're basically choosing to limit what sort of character you can play.

We're limited enough already within a CRPG.  Having the user-interface randomly limit us further is a terrible design.

AlanC9 wrote...

I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

Unless he says it playfully.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

The process is just taking the time to develop the familiarity with the particular style of exchange. Read the words, watch the reaction. Rinse. Repeat. Rinse. Repeat. And so on and so on. Do it over and over until most of the time what you anticipate is what does happen. As much as you seem to invest in creating characters and making these dialog choices, I am honestly surprised that you're not already really good at accurately anticipating reactions.

You just broke your own analogy.

Intergrational statistical analysis can be done by someone without the familiarity stemming from practice you describe.  It can be done simply by doing the math.

So what's the math?

And, it's not the reactions I care about.  It's what the PC actually says and does.  How the NPCs react to that doesn't matter at all.

[the_one_54321]

I said that it's like integrational statistical analysis. I didn't say they worked exactly the same. You're drawing from a sum of experiences. Also replace "predict reactions" with "interpret character's intent."

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I said that it's like integrational statistical analysis. I didn't say they worked exactly the same.

But it does.  Everything does.  You are following a process, which you're simply refusing to describe.

That you don't need to pay conscious attention to the process doesn't mean it isn't there.

Also replace "predict reactions" with "interpret character's intent."

How about "predict character behaviour".  I don't need to predict the intent, as I'm the source of the intent.  The intent is always my creation.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
I said that it's like integrational statistical analysis. I didn't say they worked exactly the same.

But it does.  Everything does.  You are following a process, which you're simply refusing to describe.

That you don't need to pay conscious attention to the process doesn't mean it isn't there.

Also replace "predict reactions" with "interpret character's intent."

How about "predict character behaviour".  I don't need to predict the intent, as I'm the source of the intent.  The intent is always my creation.

Then predict character behavior. The part where you want the dude on the screen to actually do what you intended him to do. And you figure out which dialog option will do this the most accurately by drawing on your experience with such dialog choices in the past.

[vallore]

maxernst wrote...

vallore wrote...

Because character coherence matters. With full text you can choose what option suits better the kind of character you want to portrait, based in the limited options available.


With the paraphrase you just guess, with greater or lesser accuracy, what choice is more suitable for the type of character you want to create.

Now, unless you are a very, very patient person, checking every option that may give some doubts about their meaning by playing the dialogue, repeatedly, will grow annoying quickly, meaning that a player in that situation will likely, in a short while, settle with less satisfactory answers than others potentially available, (but hidden, thanks to the paraphrase) . As a result, the game becomes a less enjoyable experience that it could be.

Or you may just avoid lines when you're not sure of their intent, much like I avoided the entire interrupt system in ME2.  I'll admit I sometimes avoided unclear dialogue options even with the full text of DA:O (intent icon probably would have helped there) but did more often in ME.

Indeed,but, the end result would still be similar: a less satisfying game than the potential allowed, as the player would be now limiting his own options from an already (quite) limited base and, as a result, would have considerable less options to define his character.

Personally; I believe the level of ambiguity of ME, deserves a closer look of the process from the devs. Perhaps they will do so in ME3 and, more importantly for this forum;perhaps this will be achieved with the changes being implemented for DA2. I certainly hope so, as I am somewhat worried with my previous experience with it and, with the apparent lack of clarity of the one example we know of it, in this game.

[vallore]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Xewaka wrote...
 In this case, since "Shut up!" does not content command, I might consider choosing "Now is not the time", as it approaches the sense of urgency I'm seeking.

I suspect this argument is taking on a particularly circular shape, but I would say that "shut up" is quite literally a command, and so does/could indeed imply authority.

I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

However it is obvious that, for significant number of people, this supposed transparency of intent was not obvious, quite the contrary.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

Unless he says it playfully.

Sure, but I figured that was out-of-scope for a paraphrase.

[AlanC9]

vallore wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

However it is obvious that, for significant number of people, this supposed transparency of intent was not obvious, quite the contrary.

Sure. I'm curious about how the problem comes up -- I'm not trying to deny that people are having one.

More specifically, I'm curious why some people have problems and other people do not. It isn't random.

Modifié par AlanC9, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:08 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

And you figure out which dialog option will do this the most accurately by drawing on your experience with such dialog choices in the past.

So when you do that, what does your experience tell you?

You're still not answering the question.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
And you figure out which dialog option will do this the most accurately by drawing on your experience with such dialog choices in the past.

So when you do that, what does your experience tell you?

You're still not answering the question.

Your experience tells you, accurately, how to get the guy on the screen to do what you want him to do, or at least as close as possible. If it's not, then you need more experience. That's the answer. I actually really don't know what else to say.

Edit: you guess over and over until you get really good at guessing right.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:13 .

[AlanC9]

I accidentally skipped this post.

Xewaka wrote...


Let's keep with the example that spawned this discussion: [aggresive] Shut up!
Original phrase: I am in command. You do as I say.
Phrase I'd expect: Quit whining and shut your hole.
You will notice that the phrase I expect has a hint of frustation and a command for silence, whereas the original phrase has neither. It has a statement of hierarchy and a reminder.
If I want to express something, I will choose the wording that best approaches the idea I want to convey. In this case, since "Shut up!" does not content command, I might consider choosing "Now is not the time", as it approaches the sense of urgency I'm seeking.

But "Now is not the time" isn't an option there. Your other choices are "This isn't helping" or 'You're right, but settle down."

Also note that it's a noncombat situation; I'm not sure urgency is going to apply.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Edit: you guess over and over until you get really good at guessing right.

That would require an enormous dataset and some terrific record-keeping.

[Malanek]

AlanC9 wrote...

But "Now is not the time" isn't an option there. Your other choices are "This isn't helping"

You may well find that "This isn't helping" ends up being "Now is not the time" or "We don't have time to discuss this now."

It would actually be an interesting exercise. What do people think the other two paraphrases will lead to?

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

Did developers explained somewhere why the dialogue wheel is better than white text on black screen? I can only think of like 2 reasons - easer manipulation for console players and some kind.. I dunno.. "guessing thing", so a gamer would reload much more and.. um.. no, can't see any logic in here. Why do you think they think the wheel is better?

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Edit: you guess over and over until you get really good at guessing right.

That would require an enormous dataset and some terrific record-keeping.

It's internalized. Like a msucle memory. That's why I say it takes practice.

And stirctly speaking, your data set already should be huge.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:42 .

[Nighteye2]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
I
think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an
adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The
other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel
obedience through threat, typically violence.

Unless he says it playfully.

Sure, but I figured that was out-of-scope for a paraphrase.

Which is part of the problem with paraphrases.

AlanC9 wrote...

vallore wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
I think I said that upthread. There are only two situations where an adult says "shut up." One is where he's got some sort of authority. The other is where he doesn't have authority but figures he can compel obedience through threat, typically violence.

However it is obvious that, for significant number of people, this supposed transparency of intent was not obvious, quite the contrary.

Sure. I'm curious about how the problem comes up -- I'm not trying to deny that people are having one.

More specifically, I'm curious why some people have problems and other people do not. It isn't random.

Some people want to be role playing when playing a role playing game. Other people see the game more like a book, and care more about the story than about any role playing aspects.

[Malanek]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

Did developers explained somewhere why the dialogue wheel is better than white text on black screen? I can only think of like 2 reasons - easer manipulation for console players and some kind.. I dunno.. "guessing thing", so a gamer would reload much more and.. um.. no, can't see any logic in here. Why do you think they think the wheel is better?

The wheel does have some benefits. It is in the middle of the screen which is better prenetation for short paraphrases. Having short paraphrases means that the player does not have to read as much leading to more realistically paced conversations. It also means that the player can become familiar with which option is most likely what they want ie in me it was paragon up the top, reneaged down the bottom, charm top left, intimidate bottom left.

[maxernst]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Edit: you guess over and over until you get really good at guessing right.

That would require an enormous dataset and some terrific record-keeping.

It's internalized. Like a msucle memory. That's why I say it takes practice.

And stirctly speaking, your data set already should be huge.

Not for the level of precision that Sylvius is seeking, I suspect.  The crux of the problem is, I suspect, that what you consider "really good at guessing right"  is not good enough for Sylvius.  And he probably can't get good enough at it with the number of conversation choices available in a single game.  And you can't carry over experience to other games unless the paraphrasing and dialogue are  written by the same person.