518 réponses à ce sujet

[wyvernix]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

I don't think this is how it is intended to work at all. The paraphrase is a shortened statement to give the player the meaning of what Hawke will say. Not something Hawke says first (with no voice) before moving onto something else. Hawke does not say the "Shut up" at all unless it is voiced.

Developer David Sims disagrees.  Check out page 4 of this thread.

I stand corrected. Not sure what to make of that at all. It certainly didn't work that way in ME. That does mean that Hawke always opens his dialogue with a three or four word sentence which is pretty weird.

Edit: The other problem with this is now we have no idea what your character is going to say at all other than the tone. In ME you could quite often (although not always) work out roughly what would be said, but now with the paraphrase effectively being spoken, and then what Hawke says afterwards not tied to it, well....almost anything could be said.

Edit 2: Reading it again that is not what David Sims actually says...

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.

The key word is imagine. Hawkes never actually says the Shut up. Just listening to this I'm becoming even more dubious of this approach.

And yet they assured us earlier on it was going to make much more sense in what the paraphrase said and what Hawke actually speaks. So much for that.

Simply put having the PC's character voiced, limits role playing period. You as a player don't set a tone, you don't even get to pick what is said to begin with.  Terrible design decision imo and sadly it seems there's no going back now. Bioware is so dead set on trying to make their games be hollywood movies at this point to begin with. Roleplaying be damned.

This is exactly the point I was trying to bring up earlier. Dialogue was fine as it is before, in my opinion. Having it voiced now limits the type of character you wish to portray or come off as in the game world. You can't be a snide, unscrupulous opportunist in a conversation if your only options are: A.Try to Reason, B. Walk Away, or C. Punch him in the face. While in origins, you could aproach situations in different ways, either by a multitude different dialogue choices alone, skill checks(cunning, etc), persuation/coercion, etc. By limiting dialogue by adding voices, you're essentially killing off a pretty big chunk of what made the previous game great: The roleplaying aspect. But, I suppose its too late for that now.

Modifié par wyvernix, 11 janvier 2011 - 10:28 .

[Nighteye2]

Alodar wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Alodar wrote...

And I'm uncertain why you think that "Shut up!"  is a poor paraphrase. The full line states that PC Hawke isn't interested in Carver Hawke's opinion. Hawke is in charge so Carver can just shut up.

"Shut up!" is a simple command that offers no justification for itself.

"I'm in charge" is itself justification.

That's a siginificant and relevant difference.

Okaaaaaay.

So the paraphrase has the intent/tone of the line and the actual line has the justification.

And this is wrong because ?





Alodar

Because the justification is indicative of the PC's character, a defining element, even. And it determines how other characters will react to the PC in the future.

In this case, Carver may fire back at some point in the future exclaiming 'but you said you were in charge!' -  when you try to avoid making a decision or something similar.

[Jaduggar]

Snoteye wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Unless you are like me and the wheel itself annoys the crap outta you.

The wheel is atrocious. Mice were not designed for circular motions.

"But it's made for consoles!"

Just... go away.

You propose the wheel is not the greatest invention since the wheel?

[MortalEngines]

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.

I love reading, however, reading a full line of dialogue only to hear the VA repeat it is the equivalent of reading a line in a book and having the narrator read it out for you 3 seconds later, if I already know what's going to happen, why do I have to go through it again?

Also, I don't know about you but I read much faster than I can listen and even in Origins with no VO for the main character, I skipped through so much dialogue from other characters as I had subtitles up and could read the line well before they finished speaking, leaving me no more reason to watch the scene.

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
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.

I think it's too much to based an entire argument on the game's paraphrasing using one line as evidence, for all we know there are outlying factors that could effect this. If what Laidlaw and Gaider said about how you speak earlier in the game effect the later tone of the character is true than without knowing the context of what happened in the game BEFORE that, we can't possible bash the game's system.

Not to mention that this could be the exception rather than the rule, it might be that only a few irrelevant paraphrases are perhaps misleading whereas the majority are perfectly acceptable.

I could go on but then I would just be rehashing arguments, I personally found the paraphrasing conjunctive to the spoken dialogue. The "shut up" implies Hawke wants Carver to stop talking, "I'm in charge, you'll do as I say" is effectively telling Carver to shut up without making Hawke seem out of character. 

[Kevin Lynch]

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 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.

This is probably something that I can get behind as a good way to approach the paraphrasing in DA2 if it's consistent, and I'm glad you explained it in that way. One of my suggestions was to have "Shut up!" (from the example I gave) be part of the spoken lines, but your suggestion that they blend together into one dialogue, with unspoken and spoken parts, makes sense to me. In which case, it's not so much a paraphrase but a lead-in to the rest of the lines.

Now I'll be looking to see if the choice phrases blend into the spoken lines properly for that to work.

[-flashblade-]

I agree completely with Silvius. I can't imagine that anyone here who defends the paraphrase system has ever played a roleplaying game. What I mean by that is sat down at a table and played with friends, pen and paper how it is meant to be and the most fun. If they actually did they knew that you can NEVER be surprised by what your character is saying. Why? Because you are putting the words he or she is going to say in his or her mouth, nobody else does. As soon as your character surpises you, which should be impossible, how is it your character? The answer is, it is not. Roleplaying ended the moment you were surprised, because there is a disconnection, whether you mind that disconnection doesn't matter, it is there.

Thats why in another roleplaying game the worst situation I have ever seen in a so called roleplaying game happened. I am looking at you Tali romance scene. What an offender to actually let the player blatantly know that he is seperated from his character.

I wonder what BioWare wants to develop roleplaying games or interactive movies? As I see it,  its interactive movies with roleplaying elements, because I see obvious parallels here with Wing Commander 3, 4 and 5. In dialogues you could also choose responses to affect the outcome of the conversation and the game. Guess what they utilised a paraphrase system to achieve this since they had, as some might know, real movie scenes.  I guess if you want to go down this road then DAO was your last rpg. A crying shame really.

[Nighteye2]

nijnij wrote...
I might be dumb, but to me, "I'm in charge, you do what I say" is clearly a way to shut Carver up.

Yes, but far from the only way. How you do something matters as much as what you do. Knowing in advance that picking the 'shut up' option leads to the 'I'm in charge' motivation, I might want to pick a different dialogue option because that motivation does not fit the Hawke I'm trying to play.

[Morroian]

wyvernix wrote...

This is exactly the point I was trying to bring up earlier. Dialogue was fine as it is before, in my opinion. Having it voiced now limits the type of character you wish to portray or come off as in the game world. You can't be a snide, unscrupulous opportunist in a conversation if your only options are: A.Try to Reason, B. Walk Away, or C. Punch him in the face. While in origins, you could aproach situations in different ways, either by a multitude different dialogue choices alone,

The number of dialogue options in DA2 will be similar to DAO. It won't be just 3 options all the time. It will be up to 6 and DAO rarely had more than 6 options.

[Nighteye2]

wyvernix wrote...
This is exactly the point I was
trying to bring up earlier. Dialogue was fine as it is before, in my
opinion. Having it voiced now limits the type of character you wish to
portray or come off as in the game world. You can't be a snide,
unscrupulous opportunist in a conversation if your only options are:
A.Try to Reason, B. Walk Away, or C. Punch him in the face. While in
origins, you could aproach situations in different ways, either by a
multitude different dialogue choices alone, skill checks(cunning, etc),
persuation/coercion, etc. By limiting dialogue by adding voices, you're
essentially killing off a pretty big chunk of what made the previous
game great: The roleplaying aspect. But, I suppose its too late for that
now.

For DA2, yes, unfortunately. The only thing we can hope is that they go back to the superior DA:O system for DA3...[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

Jaduggar wrote...

Snoteye wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
Unless you are like me and the wheel itself annoys the crap outta you.

The wheel is atrocious. Mice were not designed for circular motions.

"But it's made for consoles!"

Just... go away.

You propose the wheel is not the greatest invention since the wheel?

Numbered lists are far superior, and much easier to control with the keyboard. Not too mention that, for RSI-avoiding reasons, I don't want to be using the mouse the entire time. Switching between mouse and keyboard for conversations is healthier as well as more convenient.

[Nighteye2]

MortalEngines 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.

I love reading, however, reading a full line of dialogue only to hear the VA repeat it is the equivalent of reading a line in a book and having the narrator read it out for you 3 seconds later, if I already know what's going to happen, why do I have to go through it again?

If that's a problem, just leave out the VO. I won't be missing it, and having full-text options to choose from is far more important than having VO. The player should NEVER be surprised by the PC, as also stated by Sylvius. Player agency is one of the, if not THE most important feature of any RPG.

The whole paraphrase system removes a great deal of player agency, offering very little in return. DA:O was still an RPG, with enough player agency. From the looks of it, DA2 will not be an RPG, but no more than an interactive movie with RPG elements.

I sincerely hope DA3 will be better.

[Loc'n'lol]

What is an RPG ?

[the_one_54321]

-flashblade- wrote...
I agree completely with Silvius. I can't imagine that anyone here who defends the paraphrase system has ever played a roleplaying game. What I mean by that is sat down at a table and played with friends, pen and paper how it is meant to be and the most fun. If they actually did they knew that you can NEVER be surprised by what your character is saying. Why? Because you are putting the words he or she is going to say in his or her mouth, nobody else does. As soon as your character surpises you, which should be impossible, how is it your character? The answer is, it is not. Roleplaying ended the moment you were surprised, because there is a disconnection, whether you mind that disconnection doesn't matter, it is there.

Thats why in another roleplaying game the worst situation I have ever seen in a so called roleplaying game happened. I am looking at you Tali romance scene. What an offender to actually let the player blatantly know that he is seperated from his character.

I wonder what BioWare wants to develop roleplaying games or interactive movies? As I see it,  its interactive movies with roleplaying elements, because I see obvious parallels here with Wing Commander 3, 4 and 5. In dialogues you could also choose responses to affect the outcome of the conversation and the game. Guess what they utilised a paraphrase system to achieve this since they had, as some might know, real movie scenes.  I guess if you want to go down this road then DAO was your last rpg. A crying shame really.

I can roleplay without also creating the character. The falacy in this stems from the assertion that "imprefect roleplaying does not exist." It does.

[Morroian]

Nighteye2 wrote...
The whole paraphrase system removes a great deal of player agency, offering very little in return. DA:O was still an RPG, with enough player agency. From the looks of it, DA2 will not be an RPG, but no more than an interactive movie with RPG elements.

Oh please, will role playing options be more restricted? Yes. Does that make it not an rpg? No. Many many other games are designated rpgs or action rpgs with clearly less options for role playing.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Morroian wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
The whole paraphrase system removes a great deal of player agency, offering very little in return. DA:O was still an RPG, with enough player agency. From the looks of it, DA2 will not be an RPG, but no more than an interactive movie with RPG elements.

Oh please, will role playing options be more restricted? Yes. Does that make it not an rpg? No. Many many other games are designated rpgs or action rpgs with clearly less options for role playing.

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

[Merci357]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

So are you saying just because you call it an interactive game with RPG elements doesn't make it one? Your very own remark swings both ways, you know? <_<

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Merci357 wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

So are you saying just because you call it an interactive game with RPG elements doesn't make it one? Your very own remark swings both ways, you know? <_<

No, but if it IS an interactive game with RPG elements....

[Morroian]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

Genres are defined by the consensus view, if its defined as an rpg by the majority its an rpg. It still has large role playing elements even if they're more restricted than DAO. 

Why should an entire genre be defined by one persons personal ideas? Why can't it be simply an rpg that you don't like?

[-flashblade-]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I can roleplay without also creating the character. The falacy in this
stems from the assertion that "imprefect roleplaying does not exist." It
does.

Sure if we stay with pnp here, you could play a pregenerated character with a background somebody else created, a beginners choice. Still as soon as you take control of that character it will never surprise you, it simply can't because YOU are controling the action and interaction. As soon as you do not know how your character is going to act in a specific situation, you are not roleplaying him or her. I don't see anything to discuss here. Its only a question of are you willing to accept that or not. A roleplayer who is looking for a roleplaying game will have a tough time with that.

The central element of roleplaying is that YOU control a protagonist in a story. It has always been like that. If that is not present or constricted than you don't have roleplay, simple as that. Partial roleplaying does not exist. There is only do or do not, there is no try.

Modifié par -flashblade-, 11 janvier 2011 - 11:21 .

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

Morroian wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

Genres are defined by the consensus view

That's absurd. Not only because majority rules can't change facts, but also because there's no way to get a true consensus. Go to Codex and ask them what an RPG is. Then go to GameFAQ's and ask them what an RPG is. I bet you $50 you get 2 very different answers. Just because some people are more vocal than others doesn't change that fact.

[Lord Gremlin]

-flashblade- wrote...

I agree completely with Silvius. I can't imagine that anyone here who defends the paraphrase system has ever played a roleplaying game. What I mean by that is sat down at a table and played with friends, pen and paper how it is meant to be and the most fun. If they actually did they knew that you can NEVER be surprised by what your character is saying. Why? Because you are putting the words he or she is going to say in his or her mouth, nobody else does. As soon as your character surpises you, which should be impossible, how is it your character? The answer is, it is not. Roleplaying ended the moment you were surprised, because there is a disconnection, whether you mind that disconnection doesn't matter, it is there.

Thats why in another roleplaying game the worst situation I have ever seen in a so called roleplaying game happened. I am looking at you Tali romance scene. What an offender to actually let the player blatantly know that he is seperated from his character.

I wonder what BioWare wants to develop roleplaying games or interactive movies? As I see it,  its interactive movies with roleplaying elements, because I see obvious parallels here with Wing Commander 3, 4 and 5. In dialogues you could also choose responses to affect the outcome of the conversation and the game. Guess what they utilised a paraphrase system to achieve this since they had, as some might know, real movie scenes.  I guess if you want to go down this road then DAO was your last rpg. A crying shame really.

Very good point. Although I don't care about pen & paper games. It worth mentioning that while in a game you have only set number of dialogue choices you can still role-play by choosing the ones you consider fitting as long as you know what they are.
Actually you've just nailed the main idea: paraphrasing is ok as long as Hawke actual dialogue never surprises you. And I definitely can see it working - for example if "Shut up" translates into something like "Shut up already, you idiot" you won't be surprised. The problem is, I fear devs will screw this. Mass Effect is not an RPG after all. It's a story-based action-shooter.

[Nighteye2]

Morroian wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
The whole paraphrase system removes a great deal of player agency, offering very little in return. DA:O was still an RPG, with enough player agency. From the looks of it, DA2 will not be an RPG, but no more than an interactive movie with RPG elements.

Oh please, will role playing options be more restricted? Yes. Does that make it not an rpg? No. Many many other games are designated rpgs or action rpgs with clearly less options for role playing.

Except they're not restricting role playing options, they're taking them away.

Restricting role playing options was what DA:O did: you could pick exactly what you wanted your warden to say, with the only restriction that you had to pick from a predefined list of options.

DA2 no longer gives you that choice, instead asking for a general direction and then playing the role for you.


When the game itself is doing the role playing, instead of the player, it's no longer an RPG. How can it be a role playing game if the player is no longer able to play a role, being limited to giving only vague directions and hoping the character will do what the player expects?

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...
The whole paraphrase system removes a great deal of player agency, offering very little in return. DA:O was still an RPG, with enough player agency. From the looks of it, DA2 will not be an RPG, but no more than an interactive movie with RPG elements.

Oh please, will role playing options be more restricted? Yes. Does that make it not an rpg? No. Many many other games are designated rpgs or action rpgs with clearly less options for role playing.

You yourself are saying rp options will be more restricted while advocating for voice overs. Why people advocate for any sort of removal of RP options in an RPG just baffles the hell out of me.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Kevin Lynch wrote...

This is probably something that I can get behind as a good way to approach the paraphrasing in DA2 if it's consistent, and I'm glad you explained it in that way. One of my suggestions was to have "Shut up!" (from the example I gave) be part of the spoken lines, but your suggestion that they blend together into one dialogue, with unspoken and spoken parts, makes sense to me. In which case, it's not so much a paraphrase but a lead-in to the rest of the lines.

Indeed, if this is how it works them it basically is doing what Deus Ex is doing.  The paraphrase is the first line of the PC's utterance.

[Merci357]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Just because some people are more vocal than others doesn't change that fact.

And again - just because YOU are very vocal here, and voice your opinions in a certain way (and you have every right to do so, don't get me wrong), doesn't make YOUR opinion any more right or wrong then mine.

[Lord Gremlin]

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Merci357 wrote...

TonyTheBossDanza123 wrote...

Yea and China's called the Peoples Republic but thats one thing it sure as hell ain't. Just because stuff is called something doesn't make it something.

So are you saying just because you call it an interactive game with RPG elements doesn't make it one? Your very own remark swings both ways, you know? <_<

No, but if it IS an interactive game with RPG elements....

Like God of War 3. You play as Kratos, collect experience, level up, upgrade weapons and search for artifacts - godly posessions. But.. It's not an RPG. If I want action I play action.