406 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

The fact that you sometimes choose to ignore the goal of the end game does not imply that the goal does not exist. There is no rule that says you aren't allowed to do that. The goal of the end game still exists.

I could use the same reasoning.  That you imagine the game is telling you things doesn't make it so.

[Hollingdale]

Sylvius: Why should people bother discussing with you when it all boils down to the fact that you missuse terms by narrowing their meaning down to create some kind of tautology that means you will allways be right?

[Harid]

I disagree with the OP, but I have to suppose that Bioware is happy to hear so many with this wrong opinion.



Look, till the day comes where I can choose the voice of my PC, voiced PC's will always present a problem for me given the voice direction chosen by the video game industry. Voiced characters in games where I can model my PC always break immersion the second my voiced character starts to talk. I'd rather make up the voice in my head or have a limited talking PC role till the videogame industry has the resources to match the diction I require from the characters I make.



I suppose I'd almost prefer a set character you could not change over a voiced character you can at this point, if it weren't for the generic brown haired, 5 o clock shadow having white guy that is the default main character in videogaming at the moment, though I suppose it's pretty sweet for generic brown haired white guys.

[TheMadCat]

In Exile wrote...

Like I described above . With each other? Not so often. With the environment? Pretty often.

It's not an insurmountable obstacle, but it is an obstacle and it requires an explanation of how we can do it, not just a claim we can.

You're starting to lose me here, now we're on interacting with the enviorment? Exactly what does this have to really do with having conversations in first person and why is creating a cut scene to show whatever action you're speaking of an obstacle when BioWare usually throws a million in their games already?

But it is difficult.

For you and me, certainly. For a hundred talented people with millions of $$$ at their disposal no, it's not.

Let's look at two things:

1) Physical Contact through cut-scene or facial expressions

The complain here is obvious: why is my PC a particular kind of emotion I might not want my PC to have? If Morrigain calls me handsome, why is the camera showing my PC smirking instead of being disgusted?

The same with contact. Maybe I want my PC to be terrified of physical contact - why is my PC reacting a certain way?

If the complaint against VO is that it predefines the PC, then the same applies to gestures or actions in a cut-scene.

And you really lost me here. You ask me how to show how player interactions could work with a first person based dialogue system, I give you an example and stated two different ways you could do it. Either concealing the players face with low shots or over the shoulder shots or focusing on the player to show emotions, neither of which require any dialogue to be spoken it written and designed well and when the PC needs to speak the camera cuts back into dialogue mode, similar approach to how BioWare does it just it foes to first person rather then shot-reverse-shot to handle the dialogue.

So yeah, why are you now commenting about a complaint I've never seen before. The big complaint is that the PC showed really no emotion in Dragon Age, not that he showed an emotion they don't think fit their Warden. Both problems can be alievated by my examples though.

2) The schizoid camera cuts

It's easy to say that ''in principle'' the camera can just show the PC in a 3rd person view while some interaction is going on, but to avoid the camera jumping around like crazy, then interactions have to be reduced. You can certainly script the NPCs to act in lots of natural ways (that just requires a lot of zots per conversation) but the PC is (in first person) is just reduced to a screen that's at the right height for the posture.

Reduced interactions compared to what? The bare minimum we have in all BioWare games already? And I don't really understand what you're saying. Reduced to a screen that's at the right height as posture? You mean like how BioWare sets it up in their shot-reverse-shot camera work? I don't understand what correlation you're trying to draw. What does locking the dialogue exchange in first person have to do with schizoid camera work and reduced interactions?

Remember I was answering your question about how you can show player interactions so I'm not really sure if this is a contiuation of the same direction or if you're going someplace else.

[FieryDove]

Hollingdale wrote...

Sylvius: Why should people bother discussing with you when it all boils down to the fact that you missuse terms by narrowing their meaning down to create some kind of tautology that means you will allways be right?

Because he is always right?

[Harid]

I have no idea why people conflate the emotionless stare the PC had in Origins with the silent protagonist system, when they are wholly separate events.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

The fact that you sometimes choose to ignore the goal of the end game does not imply that the goal does not exist. There is no rule that says you aren't allowed to do that. The goal of the end game still exists.

I could use the same reasoning.  That you imagine the game is telling you things doesn't make it so.

You can't say he "imagined" the game giving hin goals.  From very early on, characters tell you to do things, you have a quest log that tells you to do things.  Whether or not you do any of that stuff is certainly up to the player, but the direction is definetly there, whether it comes from character exposition or a built-in goal informing system.

[TheMadCat]

Harid wrote...

I have no idea why people conflate the emotionless stare the PC had in Origins with the silent protagonist system, when they are wholly separate events.

Awesome, someone finally get's that they're two totally different aspects that have nothing to actually do with each other. A voiced PC is just as likely to emotionless stare and demeanor as a silent PC. Better camera work or doing a better job with the PC's facial expressions could have quelled a lot of the complaints.

[FieryDove]

Harid wrote...

I have no idea why people conflate the emotionless stare the PC had in Origins with the silent protagonist system, when they are wholly separate events.

This is true. In JE for example I could smile, frown or make angry face just fine. Oh well.

[Morning808]

I don't really care if my character is voiced or not but all I know is that when they are silent I can have a lot more dialog options with that character while the voice character gives me more of a connection...so all in all I'm in the middle since I can handle both without complaining

Modifié par Morning808, 01 février 2011 - 01:19 .

[In Exile]

TheMadCat wrote...
You're starting to lose me here, now we're on interacting with the enviorment? Exactly what does this have to really do with having conversations in first person and why is creating a cut scene to show whatever action you're speaking of an obstacle when BioWare usually throws a million in their games already?

Interacting with the environment is part of the dynamic interaction cinematic presentation without first-person allows us to see. What you're conflating is what Bioware has done with what I believe Bioware should do.

ME2 was a step in the right direction. DA2 seems to move further in that direction. We're not there yet, and I believe that first-person is a step back.

Your initial point was that the lack of emotive PCs can be avoided with silent VO by using a first person view. I pointed out that interacting with the environment is a desirable feature that creates precisely this emotional link.

If you remove the PC from the window (pan the camera exclusively on the NPC) then you're effectively removing the PC from the scene. This creates a new problem - the character cannot interact with the PC.

For you and me, certainly. For a hundred talented people with millions of $$$ at their disposal no, it's not.

That's shoddy reasoning. What you and I can't do is implement anything - we're not game designers. But we can certaintly speak about what could be implemented. That isn't particularly deep or complicated.

And you really lost me here. You ask me how to show how player interactions could work with a first person based dialogue system, I give you an example and stated two different ways you could do it. Either concealing the players face with low shots or over the shoulder shots or focusing on the player to show emotions, neither of which require any dialogue to be spoken it written and designed well and when the PC needs to speak the camera cuts back into dialogue mode, similar approach to how BioWare does it just it foes to first person rather then shot-reverse-shot to handle the dialogue.

So yeah, why are you now commenting about a complaint I've never seen before. The big complaint is that the PC showed really no emotion in Dragon Age, not that he showed an emotion they don't think fit their Warden. Both problems can be alievated by my examples though.

One major complaint against PC VO is that it forces a predefined character on the players. The lack of emotion complaint is done against silent VO.

What you offered is a case where we could avoid the problem of a lack of emotion... by creating a more predefined PC. It seems to me to be the case that this is at odds with the goal of having a silent PC - which is lots of freedom by the player to imagine whatever content the player wants.

We could avoid dialogue in these situations... but that would be a matter of trying to use clever camera angles and cutting to cut-scenes, which leads to objection 2). 

Reduced interactions compared to what? The bare minimum we have in all BioWare games already?

Compared to what they should be. I'm not sure why you think that I think Bioware is doing the best possible job right now. It's better than what we had in the past, but by no means is it a good job by a hypothetical possible standard.

And I don't really understand what you're saying. Reduced to a screen that's at the right height as posture? You mean like how BioWare sets it up in their shot-reverse-shot camera work? I don't understand what correlation you're trying to draw. What does locking the dialogue exchange in first person have to do with schizoid camera work and reduced interactions?

If you sit down and are in first person, the camera just pans down. If developers want, they could show your posture, which leads to objection #1, or otherwise to forcing your character to sit in a particular way that might not be consistent with your character.

Though now I get the impression that you're not against VO because it predefines and fixes the character, so I'm not sure why you like silent VO.

As for the schizoid camera - if you want to do a good job, then you need very frequent cuts to the interaction.

Remember I was answering your question about how you can show player interactions so I'm not really sure if this is a contiuation of the same direction or if you're going someplace else.

This is a continuation. But you seem to want to say that you can use FPS to do what other RPGs are doing now (which I think is a poor job, aside from Bioware that's done a barely passable job) which to me isn't at all good, and if it were up to the standard I would think is good... I'm listing the problems I would see with it.

[In Exile]

Harid wrote...

I have no idea why people conflate the emotionless stare the PC had in Origins with the silent protagonist system, when they are wholly separate events.

They aren't - not really. Silent PC as a feature in itself just means not having a voice for the PC. But what people really seem to want with a silent PC is RP freedom, i.e. not a predefined character. Insofar as that is concerned, the emotionless state is 100% tied to silent VO.

If people were ok with a predefined PC... I'm not seeing why they would object to PC VO in the fist place.

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

They aren't - not really. Silent PC as a feature in itself just means not having a voice for the PC. But what people really seem to want with a silent PC is RP freedom, i.e. not a predefined character. Insofar as that is concerned, the emotionless state is 100% tied to silent VO.

This isn't necessarily true -- picking a friendly dialogue line by all means can and should have the character smile or otherwise appear friendly for example, angry line can make the character frown, choosing a *hug* action by all means should have the character perform the hug and actually appear like they're into it. I think it's not as much about "emotionless state" but about having ability to choose the emotion in question, with selection covering as wide as possible range of choices.

It's quite different from being forced to put up with single voice that may be not to your liking and/or not fit the character you're playing.

[MDarwin]

In Exile wrote...

Harid wrote...

I have no idea why people conflate the emotionless stare the PC had in Origins with the silent protagonist system, when they are wholly separate events.

They aren't - not really. Silent PC as a feature in itself just means not having a voice for the PC. But what people really seem to want with a silent PC is RP freedom, i.e. not a predefined character. Insofar as that is concerned, the emotionless state is 100% tied to silent VO.

If people were ok with a predefined PC... I'm not seeing why they would object to PC VO in the fist place.

In one or two cutscenes the PC showed "emotion". Wynne quest is one. There are "default Gestures" in game which can be applied as well to the PC, as far as I know.

So one should ask the Dev's, why they choose not to give the PC emotion/animation in every dialogs/cutscenes.

[RohanD]

you could easily say "Books are a dated medium, it's time to move on" but bookstores still exist don't they? People still love and enjoy them. So your point is invalid.

[TheMadCat]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

Interacting with the environment is part of the dynamic interaction cinematic presentation without first-person allows us to see. What you're conflating is what Bioware has done with what I believe Bioware should do.

ME2 was a step in the right direction. DA2 seems to move further in that direction. We're not there yet, and I believe that first-person is a step back. [/quote]

First person in dialogue exchange and various camera angles in third person for more cinematic scenes is a step back how? What does doing dialogue in first person have to do with the cinematic presentation? 

[quote]Your initial point was that the lack of emotive PCs can be avoided with silent VO by using a first person view. I pointed out that interacting with the environment is a desirable feature that creates precisely this emotional link. [/quote]

Again, how does shifting to first person during dialogue echange restrict enviorment interactions which can be done in seperate cutscenes?

[quote]If you remove the PC from the window (pan the camera exclusively on the NPC) then you're effectively removing the PC from the scene. This creates a new problem - the character cannot interact with the PC. [/quote]

Again, they can. Any interaction that goes beyond the word selection from the PC can be done through a cutscene with the NPC speaking during said cutscene if necessary.

[quote]
That's shoddy reasoning. What you and I can't do is implement anything - we're not game designers. But we can certaintly speak about what could be implemented. That isn't particularly deep or complicated.[/quote]

Eh? I'm talking about making cut scenes and shifting the camera from first person to third person (Which has been done), not cure cancer or put a man on Mars. 

[quote]One major complaint against PC VO is that it forces a predefined character on the players. The lack of emotion complaint is done against silent VO.[/quote]

Right, neither of which has anything to do with my first statement which was one way to alievate the problem of the silent PC lack of emotion is greatly restrict showing the PC, namely through first person dialogue and over the shoulder shots and other back angle shots through the cutscenes.

[quote]What you offered is a case where we could avoid the problem of a lack of emotion... by creating a more predefined PC. It seems to me to be the case that this is at odds with the goal of having a silent PC - which is lots of freedom by the player to imagine whatever content the player wants. [/quote]

How does showing less of the PC's face and their emotional reactions create a more pre-defined PC?


[quote]


Compared to what they should be. I'm not sure why you think that I think Bioware is doing the best possible job right now. It's better than what we had in the past, but by no means is it a good job by a hypothetical possible standard. [/quote]

I didn't make any claim, I was trying to guage what you're holding as the standard of acceptable. I can't read minds so I'm not sure what you think they should be.


[quote]If you sit down and are in first person, the camera just pans down. If developers want, they could show your posture, which leads to objection #1, or otherwise to forcing your character to sit in a particular way that might not be consistent with your character. [/quote]

Can't this be the case with any view or angle though? Having the PC doing something that you find inconsistent with your character? Don't see how that's unique to what I've said.

[quote]Though now I get the impression that you're not against VO because it predefines and fixes the character, so I'm not sure why you like silent VO. [/quote]

How does anything I stated create a more pre-defined character? You've danced with that notion but haven't really shown how it directly results. Dialogue exchange is done in a first person perspective, physical interactions are done through cut scenes. All that would really change from Origins is during dialogue exchanges, you're in a first person perspective rather then doing the whole shot-reverse-shot thing where we constantly saw the emotionless PC people complain about.

[quote]As for the schizoid camera - if you want to do a good job, then you need very frequent cuts to the interaction.[/quote]

Ok, is that your definition of a schizoid camera? When there are frequest shifts in the shot? Like in every movie, TV show, or game ever made? How many times do you see a shot actually manage to hold for more then 5 seconds in the first place?

[quote][/quote][quote]This is a continuation. But you seem to want to say that you can use FPS to do what other RPGs are doing now (which I think is a poor job, aside from Bioware that's done a barely passable job) which to me isn't at all good, and if it were up to the standard I would think is good... I'm listing the problems I would see with it.

[/quote]

I'm honestly not sure what you're looking for? I'm guessing you want visuals and stuff done more along the lines of Fahrenheit.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

For me, as long as the dialogue is silent, it's in my mind and exactly what I want.
Voice Over it and I'll start thinking why am I not the actor behind the character. If I hear Britney Spears voice then that character belong to Britney Spears. Just like Morrigan belong to Claudia Black. Much of persona lies inside a person's voice whether you realize it or not. I wouldn't mind If I play VO adventure games. In fact, I would love to have Mark Richard Hamill to voice over Luke Skywalker character. But will it make me feel that I'm the one who behind the character? Certainly No. My character must not be strictly defined by others including writer/developer and enough room to mirror my ownself. Else, there is only "He/she". There is no "Me".

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 01 février 2011 - 04:57 .

[Morning808]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

For me, as long as the dialogue is silent, it's in my mind and exactly what I want.
Voice Over it and I'll start thinking why am I not the actor behind the character. If I hear Britney Spears voice then that character belong to Britney Spears. Just like Morrigan belong to Claudia Black. Much of persona lies inside a person's voice whether you realize it or not. I wouldn't mind If I play VO adventure games. In fact, I would love to have Mark Richard Hamill to voice over Luke Skywalker character. But will it make me feel that I'm the one who behind the character? Certainly No. My character must not be strictly defined by others including writer/developer and enough room to mirror my ownself. Else, there is only "He/she". There is no "Me".

I think you are the type of person who would love to be in a video game  and I'm not saying it in a mean why since I too love have MY own character

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Morning808 wrote...
I think you are the type of person who would love to be in a video game  and I'm not saying it in a mean why since I too love have MY own character

Yes you are correct. My RPG is always about myself and be myself. Then and only then I can truly immerse myself into the world and not feel like a storybook character or cinema hero created by others. 

[errant_knight]

Zjarcal wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Voiced characters diminish roleplay for me. I don't want my reactions handed to me by an actor. I wouldn't mind as much if the dialogue was the same as origins, though. The dialogue wheel is a worse thing for me than having it voice acted. It puts an interface between me and conversation and makes the whole thing a minigame rather than realistic seeming communication.

Is it because of the paraphrasing?

Partly, in that we aren't responding by exchanging words with someone, but by picking an emotion and hoping for the best. That's really not a converstion. It's also about the mechanics of it all, though. It's an extra piece of interface between me and the conversation that doesn't have to be there. It's a bit like texting someone who's standing right next to you, only I have a slot machine instead if a blackberry. Instead of just 'saying' the words, I have the GUI reminding me at every moment that this isn't a conversation, now just push a button and see what I get. I find it horrible for immersion.

Modifié par errant_knight, 01 février 2011 - 06:37 .

[Morroian]

errant_knight wrote...

Partly, in that we aren't responding by exchanging words with someone, but by picking an emotion and hoping for the best. That's really not a converstion. It's also about the mechanics of it all, though. It's an extra piece of interface between me and the conversation that doesn't have to be there. It's a bit like texting someone who's standing right next to you. Instead of just 'saying' the words, I have the GUI reminding me at every moment that this isn't a conversation, now just push a button and see what I get. I find it horrible for immersion.

How is that different from picking from 5-6 pre-written lines? Why does that not remind you that it isn't a conversation?

[errant_knight]

Morroian wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Partly, in that we aren't responding by exchanging words with someone, but by picking an emotion and hoping for the best. That's really not a converstion. It's also about the mechanics of it all, though. It's an extra piece of interface between me and the conversation that doesn't have to be there. It's a bit like texting someone who's standing right next to you. Instead of just 'saying' the words, I have the GUI reminding me at every moment that this isn't a conversation, now just push a button and see what I get. I find it horrible for immersion.

How is that different from picking from 5-6 pre-written lines? Why does that not remind you that it isn't a conversation?

Nope. Because that's choosing my words. It's fairly easy to imagine a conversation when one knows what one is going to say, and there's rarely  a case where there isn't a response that I can roleplay. Rolplaying that I don't know what I'm going to say except 'this will be nice' or 'this will be snarky' is something else entirely. But as I say, it's also the physical use of the GUI in order to do so. When you look at words, they can be as thoughts occurring to you. A circular interface with icons, not so much.

Modifié par errant_knight, 01 février 2011 - 06:43 .

[Sjofn]

 A great example of the "whoa, what the heck" of the dialogue wheel happens in ME1. You're talking to Avina and she says something about "lesser races" or something. The hint was "Lesser races?" and I picked that thinking MANSHEP was going to ask politely what she meant by that. Instead he goes ALL CAPS ANGRY, telling a talking computer she was PRETTY DAMN ARROGANT. Or heck, talking to the Consort. You do her quest, she's all, "Here's my reward, some WORDS." The hint? "That's it?" The result? ASARI SEX.

I do think the icons will help, along with not having the paragon/renegade divide, but there's still going to be moments like that in DA2, and it's going to annoy me. And probably errant_knight too. 

Modifié par Sjofn, 01 février 2011 - 06:48 .

[ThatDancingTurian]

Sjofn wrote...

 A great example of the "whoa, what the heck" of the dialogue wheel happens in ME1. You're talking to Avina and she says something about "lesser races" or something. The hint was "Lesser races?" and I picked that thinking MANSHEP was going to ask politely what she meant by that. Instead he goes ALL CAPS ANGRY, telling a talking computer she was PRETTY DAMN ARROGANT. Or heck, talking to the Consort. You do her quest, she's all, "Here's my reward, some WORDS." The hint? "That's it?" The result? ASARI SEX.

I do think the icons will help, along with not having the paragon/renegade divide, but there's still going to be moments like that in DA2, and it's going to annoy me. And probably errant_knight too. 

Meredith: [stops Hawke and crew at the Kirkwall gates] I'm sorry, you cannot come into this city.

[DIALOGUE OPTION CHOSEN: "I see your point."]

Hawke: I see your point. Now let me show you mine. [stabs Meredith]

Meredith: [takes the blade in the shoulder] Argh! Templars, attack!!

[Bloody battle ensues]

Player: Wh-.. What just happened?

[errant_knight]

Sjofn wrote...

 A great example of the "whoa, what the heck" of the dialogue wheel happens in ME1. You're talking to Avina and she says something about "lesser races" or something. The hint was "Lesser races?" and I picked that thinking MANSHEP was going to ask politely what she meant by that. Instead he goes ALL CAPS ANGRY, telling a talking computer she was PRETTY DAMN ARROGANT. Or heck, talking to the Consort. You do her quest, she's all, "Here's my reward, some WORDS." The hint? "That's it?" The result? ASARI SEX.

I do think the icons will help, along with not having the paragon/renegade divide, but there's still going to be moments like that in DA2, and it's going to annoy me. And probably errant_knight too. 

I'm guessing that you're probably right.

I didn't get far enough into ME1 to run into  those problems. I felt completely distanced from my character and just gave up.

Modifié par errant_knight, 01 février 2011 - 07:12 .