518 réponses à ce sujet

[Ortaya Alevli]

Even after all these threads I've followed thus far, I still can't find anything defensible in this whole paraphrasing idea.

What was wrong with The Witcher style anyway?

[eucatastrophe]

What I *adored* about DA:O was how much of an interactive book it was. I haven't had any experience with a dialog wheel but I must say I'm dreading it.

[The Lesser Evil]

I guess I'm one of the few people who sees absolutely no problem with paraphrasing. For one, I'm estatic that my Hawke will actually have a voice, and since he does I'm happy that he won't just repeat the exact same line I just read when I made a choice in dialogue. With both text AND an icon to indicate what Hawke will say, I don't really worry that it won't fit with the direction I intended to take. I never really had that problem in Mass Effect, and there were no intent-icons there.

I mean, the only time I really had an "Uh, I am not so sure about this" moment is when I talked to Thane, and the option "I want you, Thane" came up just after he finished talking about his deceased wife. That had some major "awkward!" potential, but turned out fine.

[Snoteye]

In DA3, characters will communicate with sign language and dialogue will be written in Braille using Comic Sans MS.

In Exile wrote...

The line is designed to end any and all objections from Hawke. "I'm in charge" establishes authority; "Do as I say" rejects any appeals to a decision. Since Hawke already made a decision, the line effectively tells Carver to stop trying to make any contribution, i.e. shut up.

This is not the first time you say that "I'm in charge, do as I say!" => "shut up!" Nobody disputed that. The issue is that "shut up!" !=> "I'm in charge, do as I say!" I maintain that the paraphrase is not commanding, since Hawke doesn't actually care if Carver speaks as long as he doesn't question Hawke's decisions (or whatever is going on in that scene) -- supported by the fact that Carver does not, in fact, shut up.

[Snoteye]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

What was wrong with The Witcher style anyway?

The main objection seems to be that you are first spending time reading, the wasting time listening to the VO. That objection also seems to only be made by people who prefer voiced protagonists, so that's not so surprising. Personally, as long as I can skip dialogue it doesn't bother me, there is much more to conversation than just the words (though I don't prefer VO, I don't especially mind it on its own). Meanwhile, it is difficult for me to skip through dialogue in ME because I have to wait till I can recognize the conversation before it's safe to skip.

[Xewaka]

Gabey5 wrote...
think mass effect.
that is all

Mass Effect's dialogue system was loathsome. Hitting the paraphrases at random netted a better result than attempting to guess what Shepard would say in a given case.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Snoteye wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

What was wrong with The Witcher style anyway?

The main objection seems to be that you are first spending time reading, the wasting time listening to the VO. That objection also seems to only be made by people who prefer voiced protagonists, so that's not so surprising. Personally, as long as I can skip dialogue it doesn't bother me, there is much more to conversation than just the words (though I don't prefer VO, I don't especially mind it on its own). Meanwhile, it is difficult for me to skip through dialogue in ME because I have to wait till I can recognize the conversation before it's safe to skip.

"Spending time reading" is a fun excuse I have trouble taking seriously. How many miliseconds does it take to read a line? On the other hand, one wastes much more time worrying about what they would end up saying and if it would match the character they are trying to shape.

In the example we watch in the video, I know I would choose the line "Shut up!" to have Carver cease his whining, but without trying to dominate him. What Hawke gives instead is practically a "fall in line" speech. My Hawke would end up an imposing personality instead of someone who has no time for Carver's (or anyone else's) unfair lack of empathy, and I would hate that and simply press F9 as soon as the conversation ended.

[Merci357]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
"Spending time reading" is a fun excuse I have trouble taking seriously. How many miliseconds does it take to read a line? On the other hand, one wastes much more time worrying about what they would end up saying and if it would match the character they are trying to shape.

The point is not that I spent a split second reading the line(s) - the point is, I listen to the very same line I read already, and that takes quite a bit longer. Mike Laidlaw said this, which this option enabled (full transcript) people skip dialogue far more often. And they don't want people to skip.

Besides, it's no excuse, fun or otherwise. It's my preference. You may not agree with it, that's fine. But given all possible options, for me an (as accurate as possible) paraphrasing system with a voiced PC is the prefered game experience.

Modifié par Merci357, 11 janvier 2011 - 04:09 .

[Wyndham711]

I hope the Human Revolution way of doing this works well and is well received and appreciated so that there may be a chance of BioWare adopting it in the future. Yes, have yet to play a game where I would have enjoyed paraphrasing.

[Snoteye]

Merci357 wrote...

Mike Laidlaw said this, which this option enabled (full transcript) people skip dialogue far more often. And they don't want people to skip.

I've seen that argument. It's useless. You don't skip dialogue if you don't know what your character is going to say, and the paraphrases don't let you know. I skip dialogue because I don't want to sit through it, not to save time, and I do so whether the protagonist is voiced or not. ME's system forces me to sit through it and that's a Bad Thing™.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Merci357 wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
"Spending time reading" is a fun excuse I have trouble taking seriously. How many miliseconds does it take to read a line? On the other hand, one wastes much more time worrying about what they would end up saying and if it would match the character they are trying to shape.

The point is not that I spent a split second reading the line(s) - the point is, I listen to the very same line I read already, and that takes quite a bit longer. Mike Laidlaw said this, which this option enabled (full transcript) people skip dialogue far more often. And they don't want people to skip.

Besides, it's no excuse, fun or otherwise. It's my preference. You may not agree with it, that's fine. But given all possible options, for me an (as accurate as possible) paraphrasing system with a voiced PC is the prefered game experience.

Well, you will listen to that line either way anyways. The listening part will take up the exact same amount of time. If you claim you would be bored to go through the same speech twice, I can understand that. But even then, the alternative we are presented is the element of surprise; it is difficult to paraphrase a line in a few words without making it any less ambiguous than what The Bard's Tale (or, as a more recent example, Alpha Protocol) did, and this kind of ambiguity only serves to widen the gap between Hawke and the player, unless the player is only interested in whether the game registers them as sarcastic/aggressive/whatever, or in the case of Mass Effect, racking up Paragon/Renegade points.

Favoring the paraphrase solution over full text is a preference. I may or may not agree with it, but I respect it all the same. "Spending time reading," however, is not a preference but indeed an excuse. By stating that I find it fun, I am only speaking my mind, without any intention of condescending.

[The Lesser Evil]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
a preference.

This pretty much sums up why people will never, ever agree on the whole 'paraphrasing versus written out dialogue' discussion. Everyone has their own preference, and it would be impossible for Bioware to satisfy 100% of their customer base with one solution. They chose the paraphrasing because it allows for dialogue to flow more smoothly (as one paraphrased line can lead to more than just one line of dialogue in the same vein). If they hadn't, the people who prefer paraphrasing would have been up in arms.

[In Exile]

Snoteye wrote...
This is not the first time you say that "I'm in charge, do as I say!" => "shut up!" Nobody disputed that. The issue is that "shut up!" !=> "I'm in charge, do as I say!" I maintain that the paraphrase is not commanding, since Hawke doesn't actually care if Carver speaks as long as he doesn't question Hawke's decisions (or whatever is going on in that scene) -- supported by the fact that Carver does not, in fact, shut up.

To clarify, what I am saying is "I'm in charge, do as I say!" <=> "Shut up!", i.e. the line is equivalent in meaning and intent, and "Shut up!" is a very good cue for what Hawke wants to do.

I don't know what was going on in the scene - I avoid videos to avoid spoilers.

What I am saying, though, is that "I'm in charge, do as I say!" is a good way of telling someone to shut up. So if you want to say shut up, saying that line is a good way of doing it, i.e. the paraphrase is a good cue for the line.

[In Exile]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
Well, you will listen to that line either way anyways. The listening part will take up the exact same amount of time. If you claim you would be bored to go through the same speech twice, I can understand that. But even then, the alternative we are presented is the element of surprise; it is difficult to paraphrase a line in a few words without making it any less ambiguous than what The Bard's Tale (or, as a more recent example, Alpha Protocol) did, and this kind of ambiguity only serves to widen the gap between Hawke and the player, unless the player is only interested in whether the game registers them as sarcastic/aggressive/whatever, or in the case of Mass Effect, racking up Paragon/Renegade points.

Favoring the paraphrase solution over full text is a preference. I may or may not agree with it, but I respect it all the same. "Spending time reading," however, is not a preference but indeed an excuse. By stating that I find it fun, I am only speaking my mind, without any intention of condescending.

That's a weird excuse. My issue with the writing is that it detracts from my experience. It's like reading the screenplay before watching the movie. It's not the same thing, and imagining the script is not like watchign a movie (especially if it's something like Avatar).

As for the distance between the player and the PC, as I said, it depends very strongly on how you see the text itself and how you see content as a means of expression. To me the effect is more important than what is said.

Take your objection to the paraphras- it doesn't let you present the right kind of Hawke.

Let's say the option as "Shut up!" and Hawke said camly and politely "Carver, please stop talking right now." Even if the literal meaning is close, the way it is being said still wouldn't capture the right kind of Hawke you want.

[Snoteye]

The Lesser Evil wrote...

Everyone has their own preference, and it would be impossible for Bioware to satisfy 100% of their customer base with one solution.

They don't have to satisfy 100% of their customer base, they just have to satisfy me.

In Exile wrote...

To clarify, what I am saying is "I'm in charge, do as I say!" "Shut up!", i.e. the line is equivalent in meaning and intent...

I know, and I disagree.

In Exile wrote...

I don't know what was going on in the scene - I avoid videos to avoid spoilers.

If you have seen the dev diary you know as much as I do. If not, the only thing to go by is tone of voice (Carver's). The build-up is removed and we don't see any other characters.

In Exile wrote...

What I am saying, though, is that "I'm in charge, do as I say!" is a good way of telling someone to shut up.

I agree with that.

In Exile wrote...

So if you want to say shut up, saying that line is a good way of doing it, i.e. the paraphrase is a good cue for the line.

This is what I disagree with. While the outcome is indubitably the same, Hawke's line asserts authority where saying "shut up!" wouldn't have necessarily done so (cf. Ortaya's "fall in line"). Ultimately this example isn't all that bad, but it is clearly bad enough to have spurred discussion and we know from ME how bad it can sometimes get.

In Exile wrote...

It's like reading the screenplay before watching the movie. It's not the same thing, and imagining the script is not like watchign a movie (especially if it's something like Avatar).

I could understand that, if not for the fact that you are the "movie." Or the director, I guess. Or writer. Whatever. But you have to take an active role, unlike movies where you can lean back in your couch and shut off your brain.

Modifié par Snoteye, 11 janvier 2011 - 04:50 .

[Kimarous]

1) How do we know that wasn't just a snippet of the whole scene? For all we know, they cut out the actual "Shut up!" part.



2) Don't forget that Hawke's personality develops with the choices you prefer. If Hawke was played more aggressively before that point, he might say it in a more aggressive manner.

[Snoteye]

Kimarous wrote...

1) How do we know that wasn't just a snippet of the whole scene? For all we know, they cut out the actual "Shut up!" part.

Carver says something, Hawke shuts him up, and Carver complies. This particular exchange is finished, but the dialogue itself might continue (I forget if we see it end). There is enough to justify this thread.

Kimarous wrote...

2) Don't forget that Hawke's personality develops with the choices you prefer. If Hawke was played more aggressively before that point, he might say it in a more aggressive manner.

The objection is less to the tone than the specific line itself.

[Ortaya Alevli]

In Exile wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
Well, you will listen to that line either way anyways. The listening part will take up the exact same amount of time. If you claim you would be bored to go through the same speech twice, I can understand that. But even then, the alternative we are presented is the element of surprise; it is difficult to paraphrase a line in a few words without making it any less ambiguous than what The Bard's Tale (or, as a more recent example, Alpha Protocol) did, and this kind of ambiguity only serves to widen the gap between Hawke and the player, unless the player is only interested in whether the game registers them as sarcastic/aggressive/whatever, or in the case of Mass Effect, racking up Paragon/Renegade points.

Favoring the paraphrase solution over full text is a preference. I may or may not agree with it, but I respect it all the same. "Spending time reading," however, is not a preference but indeed an excuse. By stating that I find it fun, I am only speaking my mind, without any intention of condescending.

That's a weird excuse. My issue with the writing is that it detracts from my experience. It's like reading the screenplay before watching the movie. It's not the same thing, and imagining the script is not like watchign a movie (especially if it's something like Avatar).

This is more about how much "screenplay" a videogame should have, in other words, how close it should deliver an experience to that of a movie. You may not want the "twice over" to interfere; I prefer it over paraphrasing because it at least allows me to be mindful of what I am saying.

As for the distance between the player and the PC, as I said, it depends very strongly on how you see the text itself and how you see content as a means of expression. To me the effect is more important than what is said.

The effect is important to me, too. That is exactly the reason why I do not want to taken by surprise and create an effect I do not wish to, e.g. unintentionally bossing Carver in a most literal sense while all I want Hawke to say is just shut up.

Take your objection to the paraphras- it doesn't let you present the right kind of Hawke.

Let's say the option as "Shut up!" and Hawke said camly and politely "Carver, please stop talking right now." Even if the literal meaning is close, the way it is being said still wouldn't capture the right kind of Hawke you want.

I simply prefer Hawke to say "Shut up!" and carry on, that is what I am saying. Of course, I can still quick-load if I do not like what I got out of this lottery, just like I do in any other RPG, but that is not what I am getting at.

[mr_luga]

Paraphrasing is such a horrible idea, I really dont like it, becouse I never know what those other lines might be, they might acually fit me better, but I got no idea unless I acually CHOOSE it, but then I'd have to re-load my save file after every conversation to be able to figure it out, which just kills immersion hardcore.



I had this issue in mass effect, and im sad to see it in Dragon age.

Should definatly be a middle ground, or both, like in Deus ex.



Or The Longest Journey: Dreamfall

[The Big Nothing]

OP, you cannot say this without knowing the other spoken responses; you need context. Perhaps it goes likes this:



This isn't helping. - "We're all in this together, brother."

You're right, but settle down. - "I know, but that changes nothing. We need to stay focused."

Shut up! - "I'm in charge; you do what I say."



The third option is a lot more dismissive than the first two. Rather than addressing or even acknowledging his companion's concern, he refuses to listen. "Shut up" implies that you have no desire to listen, and the paraphrase conveys that accurately, I think.

[Chaia]

I don't know if someone has pointed this out, in reguards to "why can't DA2 have a system like The Witcher", The Witcher 2 now has a shortened dialogue system simailer to DA2 but instead of putting the words around a wheel, the different options are stuck on the right hand of the screen; so it looks like it wasn't just the BioWare team that thought putting down everything that the character will say before hand isn't such a good idea.

But I suppose to each is own, personally I prefer it this way but only if the words you pick is actully paraphrased and matches up to what Hawke says, otherwise its going to end up like in ME1&2 were I had to quick save often just in case Shepard says something ridiculous that I didn't quite pick.

[DavidSims]

The reason the paraphrase doesn’t exactly match the spoken line, or use exact words that are in the spoken line, is that we don’t want it to be redundant with the spoken line. More than just not be redundant though, a good paraphrase will flow naturally into the spoken line, so when the player reads one then hears the other they blend into a single phrase.

If you find yourself troubled by a disconnect between the paraphrase and the spoken line, try imagining that Hawke is actually saying both, and we’re just cutting past the paraphrase because you’ve already heard it. I think you’ll find the way the NPCs react is consistent with this approach. At least that’s been my experience.

Like the origins system where some people found the lack of PC VO very jarring in the previews but much less so while playing because they filled the gaps with what they read, the DA2 experience isn’t perfectly replicated by watching videos. Reading and selecting a paraphrase is an important part of experiencing the conversation.

Modifié par DavidSims, 11 janvier 2011 - 05:22 .

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

I swear I heard this exact same critique when they announced the system...



But yes its' a valid point, and a big problem with the paraphrasing approach. Sadly, Biowares made it evident they're adamant about this system (among others) despite the criticism that we continuously give them.

[mr_luga]

I wish you guys(Bioware) would come up with something better for your future game though, look at The Longest Journey: Dreamfall, or Deus ex, to have both (though dreamfall got something entirely diffrent)



I know it's too late to do anything about it now, so I'm not going to ask that of you, but I hope you'll look into more options for the future.



Becouse this, for someone like me that likes to know all options of things I can say, I have to reload after every convo to check what he says on them all since I can't read it out entirely.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I've thought about this, and I one issue between us (putting aside the philosophical debate about dialogue we sometimes have, because I think this is an interest mechanics track to go down) is how we approach dialogue to begin with. That is, even with silent PC, to me dialogue always had to first be deciphered before being picked.

I would agree.  But I don't think the paraphrase gives us anywhere near enough information to decipher the options effectively.

And, this approach also destroys BioWare's stated objective of having the conversation flow naturally, so this can't really be what they intend.

What the PC wants differs from PC to PC. But what the writer designed the line to say, i.e. its measurable consequence in the game (this, again, from a design and so player perspective who can see all playthroughs, not a PC RP perspective) is the same. Since it is the effect on the world that matters, what the PC picks is the intented consequence of the phrase, not the wording.

Sure, what the writer designed the line to say doesn't change, but there's no way for the player to know what that intended meaning was except in hindsight.

The relevant connection between "Shut up!" and "i'm in charge," isn't visible to the player until he's seen both lines, and then it's too late.

Essentially, I would now say I think the task of picking dialogue is separable as a player task and a PC task.

This removes the ability of the PC to be trying to accomplish specific things unknown to the writers, though.  Like if he doesn't want to reveal his opinion to his audience.  With the paraphrase, there's no way for the player to know whether the PC will reveal some relevant detail until after he's done it.  With the full text this is made obvious (because the detail is either in the line or it isn't).

Put it this way: when you played a game that we can both agree allowed you to create the whole party (e.g. IWD) you presumably had any PC speak for the party.

That process invovled you as the player picking the appropriate PC, then one level lower, picking the line for the PC.

This is the same kind of idea, though applied differently.

The actual process would be context cue + paraphrase + intent => consequence, and then with that, you pick the particular line. Silent VO changes this to context cue + full text => consequence. I, of course, argue that paraphrase + intent is superior to full text as a cue for determining the consequence, but that's (at least for now) a side part of our debate.

Right, because I don't care about the cosequence, and you think it's the reason you're choosing an option at all.

The line is designed to end any and all objections from Hawke.

Yes, but how it does that reflects very differently on Hawke.

"Shut up!" is a command.  It's an explicit order to Carver to do something.

"I'm in charge" is an observation of the state of the hierarchy, leaving it to Carver to determine that any further objection on his part is pointless.

One option is aggressively confrontational.  The other is passive-aggressive, and arguably condescending.

Those are very different.  Is your character the sort of person who would be condescending in that moment, or commanding?  If I'm playing a condescending character, I'd never select the "Shut up!" option because that sort of command doesn't suit my character.

DavidSims wrote...

The reason the paraphrase doesn’t exactly match the spoken line, or use exact words that are in the spoken line, is that we don’t want it to be redundant with the spoken line. More than just not be redundant though, a good paraphrase will flow naturally into the spoken line, so when the player reads one then hears the other they blend into a single phrase.

If that's the intent, you should make that explicit in the game's documentation, because that approach never would have occurred to me.  The options on the wheel are a UI element; I would never have just assumed that those words were actually being uttered.

If you find yourself troubled by a disconnect between the paraphrase and the spoken line, try imagining that Hawke is actually saying both, and we’re just cutting past the paraphrase because you’ve already heard it. I think you’ll find the way the NPCs react is consistent with this approach. At least that’s been my experience.

That's a good suggestion, and I'll try it.

And given that, that suggests I might be able to get away with ignoring the spoken line entirely, which would solve all of my dialogue complaints.

Like the origins system where some people found the lack of PC VO very jarring in the previews but much less so while playing because they filled the gaps with what they read...

Which is why the DAO approach didn't need fixing.