518 réponses à ce sujet

[Brockololly]

The Big Nothing wrote...

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

Thats part of my problem with the whole paraphrase system though as compared to full text is that you aren't getting the full view of all the dialogue options in one go without saving and trying each option to see what the PC actually says in each instance.

With the full text you're able to see the full array of choices in their entirety whereas if the paraphrases aren't matching up with the spoken lines, its impossible to make a fully informed decision on what your PC is actually going to say. Maybe the shut up paraphrase seems good until you hear the full line, but wihout reloading you'll never know if maybe the full text of the middle option wouldn't have been a better choice for your PC.

Modifié par Brockololly, 11 janvier 2011 - 05:47 .

[Pacifien]

I think the art of paraphrasing is an ongoing process that hasn't been mastered by any game yet. This is because one phrase can be interpreted in a multitude of ways based on each player's individual perception of the entire universe. And the whole point of paraphrasing is to use as few words as possible such that the player can read it quickly, get a sense of its meaning, and continue with the conversation with little pause.

"Shut up!" "Shut up." "Quiet." - Those are three phrases that on the surface seem to be saying the same thing, but how they're interpreted by the a person will likely give all three phrases different intent. And that's before you even determine if that phrase conveys proper intent to what is being said.

I always wondered if maybe they shouldn't be taking the paraphrase approach and should focus on conveying intent. In which case "Shut up!" could have been "End debate." That's essentially what Hawke seems to be doing.

But like I said, the whole thing seems to be some kind of art that needs to be mastered. BioWare improves with each game, I'll give them that. I didn't accidentally have sex with an asari once during Mass Effect 2, afterall.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Pacifien wrote...

And the whole point of paraphrasing is to use as few words as possible such that the player can read it quickly, get a sense of its meaning, and continue with the conversation with little pause.

There is no paraphrase in the world that makes this possible.

[Loc'n'lol]

DavidSims wrote...
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.

Good advice...

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Pacifien wrote...

I think the art of paraphrasing is an ongoing process that hasn't been mastered by any game yet. This is because one phrase can be interpreted in a multitude of ways based on each player's individual perception of the entire universe. And the whole point of paraphrasing is to use as few words as possible such that the player can read it quickly, get a sense of its meaning, and continue with the conversation with little pause.

"Shut up!" "Shut up." "Quiet." - Those are three phrases that on the surface seem to be saying the same thing, but how they're interpreted by the a person will likely give all three phrases different intent. And that's before you even determine if that phrase conveys proper intent to what is being said.

I always wondered if maybe they shouldn't be taking the paraphrase approach and should focus on conveying intent. In which case "Shut up!" could have been "End debate." That's essentially what Hawke seems to be doing.

But like I said, the whole thing seems to be some kind of art that needs to be mastered. BioWare improves with each game, I'll give them that. I didn't accidentally have sex with an asari once during Mass Effect 2, afterall.

The "art" of paraphrasing hasn't been mastered yet because paraphrasing is inefficient by nature. It's barely acceptable in logical discussion, let alone fiction or narrative.

[Xewaka]

Pacifien wrote...
I think the art of paraphrasing is an ongoing process that hasn't been mastered by any game yet. This is because one phrase can be interpreted in a multitude of ways based on each player's individual perception of the entire universe. And the whole point of paraphrasing is to use as few words as possible such that the player can read it quickly, get a sense of its meaning, and continue with the conversation with little pause.

Then, by its nature, the paraphrase system is doomed to fail, as there is no way it can convey it's intent in a form which causes no divergence of interpretations. I'd rather have the rest of the developers take note of David Sims advice: Have the paraphrase be said, then go on from there. Better yet, have at least one of the following phrases on the options, and pick up from there.
I'll be reading subtitles and skipping the voiceover anyway, because there is no spanish vo for DA2. So all the supposed advantages of the method are irrelevant to me. And I bet I'm not the only one in this situation.

Pacifien wrote...
But like I said, the whole thing seems to be some kind of art that needs to be mastered. BioWare improves with each game, I'll give them that. I didn't accidentally have sex with an asari once during Mass Effect 2, afterall.

It seems you haven't been acquainted by "surprise sexual predator" fem!shep.
Granted, the advances were on Jacob, not an Asari, but the point remains.

Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2011 - 06:51 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

Xewaka wrote...

Pacifien wrote...
But like I said, the whole thing seems to be some kind of art that needs to be mastered. BioWare improves with each game, I'll give them that. I didn't accidentally have sex with an asari once during Mass Effect 2, afterall.

It seems you haven't been acquainted by "surprise sexual predator" fem!shep.
Granted, the advances were on Jacob, not an Asari, but the point remains.

Dude, I'm still having nightmares because of this.

[DarthCaine]

Gabey5 wrote...

think mass effect.

that is all

That's bascially the problem. In ME 90% of the time what I chose and what Shepard actually said was completely different. I had to replay each dialogue a dozen times

[Siansonea]

The only reason I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2 was because of the voiced protagonist and Mass Effect-style dialogue trees. I am NOT a fan of the long lines of verbatim text in 'traditional' (i.e.: old) RPGs. I like the cinematic and spontaneous feel of the Mass Effect system, and since I'm not the kind of person who painstakingly pre-plans my own utterances, I certainly don't feel I need to micromanage a video game character's speech.

[Xewaka]

Siansonea II wrote...
The only reason I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2 was because of the voiced protagonist and Mass Effect-style dialogue trees. I am NOT a fan of the long lines of verbatim text in 'traditional' (i.e.: old) RPGs. I like the cinematic and spontaneous feel of the Mass Effect system, and since I'm not the kind of person who painstakingly pre-plans my own utterances, I certainly don't feel I need to micromanage a video game character's speech.

I guess asking for the character to say what the player intends it to say registers as "painstakingly preplanning utterances" instead of "playing the game" to some people.

[wyvernix]

This is why I'm so aprehensive about pre-ordering the game. I don't want a middle-aged Mass Effect. If I wanted to play a Mass Effect game with dialogue wheels, I would play Mass Effect, not a butchered clone with a different setting. Essentially, it feels like they're taking the "RP" out of "RPG" just to appeal to the masses and get a higher sale rating, and thats what scares me with the direction they're going with the franchise. What made Origins unique is that it took a different spin on the old-school RPG setting, and attracted those who were unfamiliar with strategic/roleplaying-type gaming into a more streamlined genre. It also allowed for flexibility, mostly with dialogue. You didn't have to be ultra-good or ultra-evil, you could coerce your way out of situations, persuade, extort, bribe in some cases, lie, cheat, and otherwise. With little choices ingame, you can hardly call DA2 an RPG, more-so a successor to the previous game. It just feels like it's going to be an interactive action game with straightforth white/grey/black choices(Such as ME was an interactive Third person shooter), not truly an RPG.

Modifié par wyvernix, 11 janvier 2011 - 07:09 .

[David Gaider]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
The "art" of paraphrasing hasn't been mastered yet because paraphrasing is inefficient by nature. It's barely acceptable in logical discussion, let alone fiction or narrative.

Uh-huh.

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

There are things that paraphrasing simply does that are stronger, and those are the advantages we're interested in when it comes to having a voiced player. And "well don't do that, then" is not an option. If someone has feedback about how to better implement the system, that's awesome (barring the fact that nobody's actually played DA2's version of it, yet, and arguing over one line out of context is hardly useful). Feedback about how you just don't want something and reject it utterly -- less awesome, but knock yourself out.

[TheRevelator]

David Gaider wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
The "art" of paraphrasing hasn't been mastered yet because paraphrasing is inefficient by nature. It's barely acceptable in logical discussion, let alone fiction or narrative.

Uh-huh.

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

There are things that paraphrasing simply does that are stronger, and those are the advantages we're interested in when it comes to having a voiced player. And "well don't do that, then" is not an option. If someone has feedback about how to better implement the system, that's awesome (barring the fact that nobody's actually played DA2's version of it, yet, and arguing over one line out of context is hardly useful). Feedback about how you just don't want something and reject it utterly -- less awesome, but knock yourself out.

I've had issues with the paraphrasing in Mass Effect, but hopefully knowing the intent of what Hawke wants to say will help that.

[Xewaka]

David Gaider wrote...
Uh-huh.

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

There are things that paraphrasing simply does that are stronger, and those are the advantages we're interested in when it comes to having a voiced player. And "well don't do that, then" is not an option. If someone has feedback about how to better implement the system, that's awesome (barring the fact that nobody's actually played DA2's version of it, yet, and arguing over one line out of context is hardly useful). Feedback about how you just don't want something and reject it utterly -- less awesome, but knock yourself out.

I still don't understand how does one "micromanage" dialog. To me, that would require allow the playet to choose from a string of verbs/nouns/adverbs/adjectives to make his own dialog choice. We are picking options from a given list. On a paraphrase -which is still picking from a list-, information on what does each option mean is neglected to the player. Or, if you rather, the amount of information is reduced.

I know Dragon Age and Mass Effect have different teams so the approach to the paraphrase might be different. So far the only difference we have been shown is the tone icons; tone in mass effect can usually be inferred from the position of the paraphrase in the wheel. So far we have no information that proves that the system has been improved over its former iterations: we have been shown it still leads to the same misunderstandings.

Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2011 - 07:16 .

[Monica83]

oh good another mass effect sway of dialogues...

[Beerfish]

I have no real problem with this overall. In Mass Effect(s) there was maybe one or two times in all that I didn't think the wheel choice fit the spoken word. Most of the times I was happy with the responses that my character gave.



One benefit or perhaps this is a necessity for these games now is that it keeps written dialogue short and to the point and allows more flowery verbal speech.



As others have stated the writers and game makers have to be careful, especially at key decision making times that they don't mislead the player.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Siansonea II wrote...

The only reason I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2 was because of the voiced protagonist and Mass Effect-style dialogue trees. I am NOT a fan of the long lines of verbatim text in 'traditional' (i.e.: old) RPGs. I like the cinematic and spontaneous feel of the Mass Effect system, and since I'm not the kind of person who painstakingly pre-plans my own utterances, I certainly don't feel I need to micromanage a video game character's speech.

Re: Cinematic

But I submit that it shouldn't be considered praise. I've said this before: Why do games try to be like films? Whenever a film has been adapted from a game, it has, without exception, resulted in something so hideous that only rampant fun-haters from the planet Puritan could tolerate it to exist. This is because storytelling in linear entertainment and storytelling in non-linear entertainment are incompatible. This is something many people, including game developers, claim to be well aware of. So why do games keep doing the equivalent and taking cues from filmmakers?

David Gaider wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
The "art" of paraphrasing hasn't been mastered yet because paraphrasing is inefficient by nature. It's barely acceptable in logical discussion, let alone fiction or narrative.

Uh-huh.

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

There are things that paraphrasing simply does that are stronger, and those are the advantages we're interested in when it comes to having a voiced player. And "well don't do that, then" is not an option. If someone has feedback about how to better implement the system, that's awesome (barring the fact that nobody's actually played DA2's version of it, yet, and arguing over one line out of context is hardly useful). Feedback about how you just don't want something and reject it utterly -- less awesome, but knock yourself out. 

I think you're confused. I wasn't assaulting the system implemented in DA2, I was assaulting the very nature of paraphrasing.


I also find it inappropriate on this subject to say "We haven't played it yet" when we have played something very similar, by many a previewers own words, Mass Effect.

But would you care to specify some things that paraphrasing does stronger? I'm curious as to the merits you place on it. I guess the best one I've seen is Sim's argument that it'd be redundant to read it, and then hear the character voice it, but surely that alone hasn't earned enough critique to warrant a change this drastic in such a core aspect of the game.


Edit: For the record, I've already accepted that DA2 most likely won't work for me. Right now I'm just on the edge teetering back and forth whether I wish to buy it, and support actions that I disagree with, setting an economic precedent, on the reputation of Bioware, or whether to spend my money elsewhere.

That's a discussion for another topic though, and irrelevant to this thread, so I won't get into it first.

Modifié par TonyTheBossDanza123, 11 janvier 2011 - 07:23 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

Granted that some of us want different things from the dialogue system (and thus don't see those "weaknesses" of the full line systems as weaknesses at all - indeed some of them are strengths, I think), I'm not thrilled with your use of the term "micro-manage".

I don't see how wanting to choose not to say specific things is micro-management.  If I have a character who wouldn't do something, and the option exists in the game for him not to do it, it seems to me simply to be ordinary gameplay to be able to select that option rather than have it be hidden from me.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I think you might have to accept that the system's just not going to work for you. My impression is that the more someone feels the need to micro-manage their responses, the more they're going to view the paraphrases as a loss of control -- even though the "full line" system comes with its own (albeit different) weaknesses.

Granted that some of us want different things from the dialogue system (and thus don't see those "weaknesses" of the full line systems as weaknesses at all - indeed some of them are strengths, I think), I'm not thrilled with your use of the term "micro-manage".

I don't see how wanting to choose not to say specific things is micro-management.  If I have a character who wouldn't do something, and the option exists in the game for him not to do it, it seems to me simply to be ordinary gameplay to be able to select that option rather than have it be hidden from me.

I think that was just a poor choice of wording on his part, as opposed to a statement of his opinion. I don't think it's possible to micro manage something as straightforward as dialogue.

[s0meguy6665]

David Gaider wrote...
 If someone has feedback about how to better implement the system, that's awesome

Here's an amazing idea. Make the dialogue options even slightly correspond to what is being said?

[Monica83]

Bioware are too proud to admit they maked a bad decision... Paraphrasing ala mass effect in a game like dragon age can have a only result: Disaster..

The best way if allow the player to see what the character is going to say.. Its much more accurate and you can't wrong with it... Anyways wecome in the EA's Bioware

[David Gaider]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
I think you're confused. I wasn't assaulting the system implemented in DA2, I was assaulting the very nature of paraphrasing.

I also find it inappropriate on this subject to say "We haven't played it yet" when we have played something very similar, by many a previewers own words, Mass Effect.

Sorry, but you're confused. The only thing that somebody playing DA2's implementation of the dialogue system will help is with their feedback. If your feedback is "the very nature of paraphrasing" because you personally see no value in it (or in voiced dialogue, I assume), then that's grand-- but utterly useless to us. If you don't care about being useful, that's fine, but we're hardly going to cater to someone who wants something fundamentally different than what we're making. Sorry.

But would you care to specify some things that paraphrasing does stronger? I'm curious as to the merits you place on it.

Yeah... no, I'm not going to get into an argument about it, especially in a thread where everyone's mind is already made up and now they're just going to make sweeping declarations about it. Feel free to carry on with your discussion, however.

Modifié par David Gaider, 11 janvier 2011 - 07:37 .

[tmelange]

*shrug* I found the paraphrasing in the ME series to be fun. Occasionally, I was surprised, but that added to the ambiance of the game. I would get bored very quickly if I read a line and then simply heard someone say it. Inevitably, I'd end up skipping past the voiceover as repetitious, which, I suppose, would undermine the whole purpose of having the voice actor. I know this is a big issue for some people but, for me, if my character has to be voiced I'd rather the dialogue be a natural extension of the dialogue wheel text rather than a verbatim recitation. But that's just me. YMMV.

[Xewaka]

David Gaider wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
I think you're confused. I wasn't assaulting the system implemented in DA2, I was assaulting the very nature of paraphrasing.
I also find it inappropriate on this subject to say "We haven't played it yet" when we have played something very similar, by many a previewers own words, Mass Effect.

Sorry, but you're confused. The only thing that somebody playing DA2's implementation of the dialogue system will help is with their feedback. If your feedback is "the very nature of paraphrasing" because you personally see no value in it (or in voiced dialogue, I assume), then that's grand-- but utterly useless to us. If you don't care about being useful, that's fine, but we're hardly going to cater to someone who wants something fundamentally different than what we're making. Sorry.

I don't mind voiced dialogue. It is useless to me as english is not my native language and there is no spanish voice acting in DA:2 - if the precedents are anything to go by -, but I can understand it adds to other people's experience. However, removing information from the player is never a good move in an interactive medium which requires the player to act based on the input given. Paraphrasing does that. It reduces the amount of information the player receives.
Voice acting does not need to be tied to a paraphrase.

David Gaider wrote...

But would you care to specify some things that paraphrasing does stronger? I'm curious as to the merits you place on it.

Yeah... no, I'm not going to get into an argument about it, especially in a thread where everyone's mind is already made up and now they're just going to make sweeping declarations about it. Feel free to carry on with your discussion, however.

If no new data is inputted, then there is no possibility of revisiting former opinions. In other words, we cannot change our minds if we aren't given something new to consider. Which ties neatly with the lack of information problem I mentioned before. You cannot expect us to have a proper picture of something if we lack the proper information.

Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2011 - 07:49 .

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

David Gaider wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...
I think you're confused. I wasn't assaulting the system implemented in DA2, I was assaulting the very nature of paraphrasing.

I also find it inappropriate on this subject to say "We haven't played it yet" when we have played something very similar, by many a previewers own words, Mass Effect.

Sorry, but you're confused. The only thing that somebody playing DA2's implementation of the dialogue system will help is with their feedback. If your feedback is "the very nature of paraphrasing" because you personally see no value in it (or in voiced dialogue, I assume), then that's grand-- but utterly useless to us. If you don't care about being useful, that's fine, but we're hardly going to cater to someone who wants something fundamentally different than what we're making. Sorry.

But would you care to specify some things that paraphrasing does stronger? I'm curious as to the merits you place on it.

Yeah... no, I'm not going to get into an argument about it, especially in a thread where everyone's mind is already made up and now they're just going to make sweeping declarations about it. Feel free to carry on with your discussion, however.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed today....