299 réponses à ce sujet

[Taleroth]

Ziggeh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Throughout the whole game, there would be a wide variety of different types of humour, and the player could choose only those options which made sense for that particular Hawke.

They could do that in the current system. Text is the only way you're going to convey the nuances of something as complex as a sense of humour, though I concede you could have board catagories, like sarcasm, but again, the text can convey these reasonably well.

I agree that they could, they just do not necessarily.  Does this not lean to asking for text with more details?  Seems a concession, not a contest.

[lrrose]

Erika T wrote...

BeardedNinja wrote...

Look, I'm sorry people hate the way the dialog is handled in this game, and quite frankly no, I never had much trouble at all the the wheel from ME at all. You get good, neutral, bad choices on one side and exploratory stuff on the other, simple. And DA:O's system I found overly cluttered w/ over 5 choices that weren't plain, what if I didnt want to stab that guy. So now we get the best of both worlds w/ intent icons, something I hope crosses over into ME3. Really there's no use complaining about it because thats the way the game is going to be, but its you right so have at fun complaing about not understanding sarcasm

erm.. sorry, i thought this was a forum?  you know, a place for people to express their opinions and listen to others'? 

I think the ME wheel is for people who dont want to think and give it real thought, they just want to go and shoot or combat etc.  which is perfectly fine, and it looks like these people are a majority, and I said I accept that people like it, so to quote my female noble warden, can I get you a ladder...??

You're making us into strawmen.  The best way to win a debate is to argue against your opponent's ideas, not to insult your opponent.

[Erika T]

Ziggeh wrote...

Erika T wrote...
erm.. sorry, i thought this was a forum?  you know, a place for people to express their opinions and listen to others'? 

I think the ME wheel is for people who dont want to think

Sorry, but "I'm free to express my opinion" isn't terribly solid grounds to attempt to belittle the opposing argument with ad hominem.

Only if you interpret it as belittling.  Sometimes just going and shooting everything can be quite therapeutic, without thinking, and I do that too - see Fallout 3 or New Vegas.  It's just a different style of playing the game and this is how I meant it - of course this only transpires if you copy and paste the whole sentence, not just the beginning... 

[JrayM16]

Erika T wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Erika T wrote...
erm.. sorry, i thought this was a forum?  you know, a place for people to express their opinions and listen to others'? 

I think the ME wheel is for people who dont want to think

Sorry, but "I'm free to express my opinion" isn't terribly solid grounds to attempt to belittle the opposing argument with ad hominem.

Only if you interpret it as belittling.  Sometimes just going and shooting everything can be quite therapeutic, without thinking, and I do that too - see Fallout 3 or New Vegas.  It's just a different style of playing the game and this is how I meant it - of course this only transpires if you copy and paste the whole sentence, not just the beginning... 

Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

[Erika T]

lrrose wrote...

Erika T wrote...

BeardedNinja wrote...

Look, I'm sorry people hate the way the dialog is handled in this game, and quite frankly no, I never had much trouble at all the the wheel from ME at all. You get good, neutral, bad choices on one side and exploratory stuff on the other, simple. And DA:O's system I found overly cluttered w/ over 5 choices that weren't plain, what if I didnt want to stab that guy. So now we get the best of both worlds w/ intent icons, something I hope crosses over into ME3. Really there's no use complaining about it because thats the way the game is going to be, but its you right so have at fun complaing about not understanding sarcasm

erm.. sorry, i thought this was a forum?  you know, a place for people to express their opinions and listen to others'? 

I think the ME wheel is for people who dont want to think and give it real thought, they just want to go and shoot or combat etc.  which is perfectly fine, and it looks like these people are a majority, and I said I accept that people like it, so to quote my female noble warden, can I get you a ladder...??

You're making us into strawmen.  The best way to win a debate is to argue against your opponent's ideas, not to insult your opponent.

See my previous answer, with the addition that if you look at what I responded to, you'll see that it was I who was criticised (as opposed to my idea) for "complaining", by someone who probably didn't even bother to read WHY i started this thread (ie - I didnt know a thing about the dialogue system and was looking for clarification). 

[AlanC9]

Erika T wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
No, I haven't.

Why do I suddenly feel the need to put in ME2 and come up with a dozen examples?  the only one I can remember was something around romancing Jacob (but there were much more) the wheel saying something like "I like you too", and Shepard saying something like "You're cool Jacob. We should get it on" or something like that.  Well that's not what I want to say!  I wanted to say "That's very sweet Jacob.  I feel the same".  Does it make sense at all?  Like in DAO, where you can have 3 "I like you too" romance lines, but each different.  

Having never played the romance track with Jacob, I'll take your word for whatever happened there.

You could have 3 romance+ lines in DAO. You didn't always. And there's no reason that couldn't be done in DA2's system either.

On the more general point, I think we've got different approaches to dialog in RPGs here. A little while ago, you said:

  for me, personally, the joy of the game is reading through the dialogue options, mulling over, deciding, trying different options

That's fine for you, but I don't approach dialogs like that. To the extent I have to analyze the choices presented, that dialog node has already failed for me. In a traditional/DAO system, ideally, one of the choices will suit my character so well that I don't have to think about it any more than I think about what I'm going to say when I'm in a RW conversation.

And of course, neither system will give me this all the time. What happens when it doesn't? Well, the question isn't whether one of the lines fits perfectly. The question is whether I've selected the best of the available lines, or whether one I didn't pick would have been better. In ME, I simply haven't found any cases where a different available line would have suited my character better. So for me, VO vs. non-VO is a wash, unless DA2 has a lot fewer dialog options than DAO did.

[Erika T]

JrayM16 wrote...


Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

If i run on the threadmill for an hour with thumping music in my ears because I just want to switch my brain off and not think, does it mean I am stupid?  No, it means that I prefer the activity I am doing being one that's engaging my instincts and  senses more than it's engaging my thinking brain.  And for the third time, there is nothing wrong with it, it's just not how I personally play DAO, therefore I would have preferred to keep the proper, long, readable dialogue options.  

Not quite sure how much more do I have to spell it out for people not to take offense.  

The other reason being me liking to know what my character will say.  With the wheel I do not know.  Therefore it's not my character.   

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

Why would what you ahve said be a measure of conversation success? That would indicate that getting the words out of your mouth was the only purpose and goal of the conversation.

It's the part I can control.  Judging my success based on things I can't influence would be crazy.

Here's a hypothetical scenario. You and your significant other are having an argument about something. At the end of the conversation, despite whatever you said, she is still angry and storms out of the house. Let's say you said everything you intended to say and it just didn't work out.

Would you think of this conversation a success?

I would think I had been successful, yes.  I did everything I could.

The only way to improve the situation further would be to change the other person's method of reasoning.

What would you think of the conversation had something you said made her more angry or caused her to storm out?

I can't know what made her angry or caused her to storm out.

[JrayM16]

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...


Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

If i run on the threadmill for an hour with thumping music in my ears because I just want to switch my brain off and not think, does it mean I am stupid?  No, it means that I prefer the activity I am doing being one that's engaging my instincts and  senses more than it's engaging my thinking brain.  And for the third time, there is nothing wrong with it, it's just not how I personally play DAO, therefore I would have preferred to keep the proper, long, readable dialogue options.  

Not quite sure how much more do I have to spell it out for people not to take offense.  

The other reason being me liking to know what my character will say.  With the wheel I do not know.  Therefore it's not my character.   

But you must realize that the way you phrase it will imply things.  When you say, "the wheel is for people who don't like to think" most people's thoughts will immediately jumpt to "stupid".

Ironic that this misunderstanding occurred in a thread discussing whether or not the dialogue wheel makes people misinterpret what they're about to say....

[Erika T]

AlanC9 wrote...

Erika T wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
No, I haven't.

Why do I suddenly feel the need to put in ME2 and come up with a dozen examples?  the only one I can remember was something around romancing Jacob (but there were much more) the wheel saying something like "I like you too", and Shepard saying something like "You're cool Jacob. We should get it on" or something like that.  Well that's not what I want to say!  I wanted to say "That's very sweet Jacob.  I feel the same".  Does it make sense at all?  Like in DAO, where you can have 3 "I like you too" romance lines, but each different.  

Having never played the romance track with Jacob, I'll take your word for whatever happened there.

You could have 3 romance+ lines in DAO. You didn't always. And there's no reason that couldn't be done in DA2's system either.

On the more general point, I think we've got different approaches to dialog in RPGs here. A little while ago, you said:

  for me, personally, the joy of the game is reading through the dialogue options, mulling over, deciding, trying different options

That's fine for you, but I don't approach dialogs like that. To the extent I have to analyze the choices presented, that dialog node has already failed for me. In a traditional/DAO system, ideally, one of the choices will suit my character so well that I don't have to think about it any more than I think about what I'm going to say when I'm in a RW conversation.

And of course, neither system will give me this all the time. What happens when it doesn't? Well, the question isn't whether one of the lines fits perfectly. The question is whether I've selected the best of the available lines, or whether one I didn't pick would have been better. In ME, I simply haven't found any cases where a different available line would have suited my character better. So for me, VO vs. non-VO is a wash, unless DA2 has a lot fewer dialog options than DAO did.

That's fair enough, but I have a question for you.  What happens if your character ends up saying something that you would not have said that way?  this is what I dont want.  A RPG for me is my character being MINE and saying what I want.  

Now you may argue that this can happen in DAO too.  It's true.  But then you at least know what your other options are and can choose the closest to what you think is best.  with the new DA2 system, my understanding is that you don't know what will be said until it's too late to undo it.  You might be a generally "good" character, but what if knowing the "good answer and the "bad answer" lines, in that one situation, you would rather opt for the other line because it feels a bit more "right"?  You don't know what you're missing out on, by not replying differently.  You cannot play it through 600 times to check out every option, and you cannot keep saving and reloading, it would be insane.

Not sure if this makes sense, this is how i see it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Erika T wrote...

Now you may argue that this can happen in DAO too.  It's true.  But then you at least know what your other options are and can choose the closest to what you think is best.  with the new DA2 system, my understanding is that you don't know what will be said until it's too late to undo it.  You might be a generally "good" character, but what if knowing the "good answer and the "bad answer" lines, in that one situation, you would rather opt for the other line because it feels a bit more "right"?  You don't know what you're missing out on, by not replying differently.  You cannot play it through 600 times to check out every option, and you cannot keep saving and reloading, it would be insane.

I agree with you, Erika.

In DAO, even if none of the available options worked for your character, you could at least wrap your head around why your character might say one of those things (and since the game didn't assign tone, you had a lot of wiggle room there) before you actually chose it, so then you could interpret the NPC reaction appropriately.

Now, in DA2, we have to try to figure out why Hawke said something after he has said it, and possibly miss a whole series of NPC lines as a result (unless conversations are pausable - they haven't told us that yet), and even then we'll have to reload a lot to avoid lines that just flat-out break our characters.

[Erika T]

JrayM16 wrote...

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...


Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

If i run on the threadmill for an hour with thumping music in my ears because I just want to switch my brain off and not think, does it mean I am stupid?  No, it means that I prefer the activity I am doing being one that's engaging my instincts and  senses more than it's engaging my thinking brain.  And for the third time, there is nothing wrong with it, it's just not how I personally play DAO, therefore I would have preferred to keep the proper, long, readable dialogue options.  

Not quite sure how much more do I have to spell it out for people not to take offense.  

The other reason being me liking to know what my character will say.  With the wheel I do not know.  Therefore it's not my character.   

But you must realize that the way you phrase it will imply things.  When you say, "the wheel is for people who don't like to think" most people's thoughts will immediately jumpt to "stupid".

Ironic that this misunderstanding occurred in a thread discussing whether or not the dialogue wheel makes people misinterpret what they're about to say....

It is ironic indeed.  Proves my point then? 

As to your first paragraph, I don't know.  I did not mean it in a derogatory way and I believe I explained clearly how I meant it. I think if it's about a video game, there's nothing wrong with "not wanting to think".   /Its a form of entertainment, relaxation (for most of us) for gods sake.  Everyone approaches these things differently.  How much thinking goes into playing a racing game?  next to nothing.  Are people who play racing games stupid?  No.  But if I have not yet made myself clear then no amount of further explaining will do it. 

The fact that some people started to jump at my throat says more about them than about me, really.  

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Why would what you ahve said be a measure of conversation success? That would indicate that getting the words out of your mouth was the only purpose and goal of the conversation.

It's the part I can control.  Judging my success based on things I can't influence would be crazy.

Here's a hypothetical scenario. You and your significant other are having an argument about something. At the end of the conversation, despite whatever you said, she is still angry and storms out of the house. Let's say you said everything you intended to say and it just didn't work out.

Would you think of this conversation a success?

I would think I had been successful, yes.  I did everything I could.

The only way to improve the situation further would be to change the other person's method of reasoning.

What would you think of the conversation had something you said made her more angry or caused her to storm out?

I can't know what made her angry or caused her to storm out.

Ah, I think I understand how you think now.  Note: What I am about to say is not meant to offend, I simply believe it ads depth to the discussion of dialogue.

When you talk, it is in a sense, all about you.  You take everything you say as a prepared speech of sorts, say waht you plan to say and take reactions separately and later. 

Whereas I view conversations as an interaction, reactive, evolving.  I can't prepare because I don't have time and I always have a goal in mind when talking. 

Take for instance, a conversation I had today.  I was asking someone about a class and whether I should take it.  It came up naturally, as he mentioned the class in question without prompt from me, and I seized the opportunity, since I had been meaning to ask someone about the class.

I asked him a few questions which he answered, giving me all the information I needed to decide.  The conversation was a success because I gathered information without derailing the discussion or annoying any of my friends.  At that point, "what I said" was inconsequential, my words had the desired effect and I was done with that line of talk. 

[AlanC9]

JrayM16 wrote...

Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

Hey, I'm not taking offense.

[JrayM16]

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...


Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

If i run on the threadmill for an hour with thumping music in my ears because I just want to switch my brain off and not think, does it mean I am stupid?  No, it means that I prefer the activity I am doing being one that's engaging my instincts and  senses more than it's engaging my thinking brain.  And for the third time, there is nothing wrong with it, it's just not how I personally play DAO, therefore I would have preferred to keep the proper, long, readable dialogue options.  

Not quite sure how much more do I have to spell it out for people not to take offense.  

The other reason being me liking to know what my character will say.  With the wheel I do not know.  Therefore it's not my character.   

But you must realize that the way you phrase it will imply things.  When you say, "the wheel is for people who don't like to think" most people's thoughts will immediately jumpt to "stupid".

Ironic that this misunderstanding occurred in a thread discussing whether or not the dialogue wheel makes people misinterpret what they're about to say....

It is ironic indeed.  Proves my point then? 

As to your first paragraph, I don't know.  I did not mean it in a derogatory way and I believe I explained clearly how I meant it. I think if it's about a video game, there's nothing wrong with "not wanting to think".   /Its a form of entertainment, relaxation (for most of us) for gods sake.  Everyone approaches these things differently.  How much thinking goes into playing a racing game?  next to nothing.  Are people who play racing games stupid?  No.  But if I have not yet made myself clear then no amount of further explaining will do it. 

The fact that some people started to jump at my throat says more about them than about me, really.  

After talking with Sylvius just now about conversation, I can't help but woner if those who find the dialogue wheel easier to understand are more semantically focused in conversation, that is more concerned with reactions than those who don't get the dialogue wheel.  Given your misunderstanding just now and Sylvius's conclusions on the goals of speech, I think it kinda matches up. 

[Erika T]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Erika T wrote...

Now you may argue that this can happen in DAO too.  It's true.  But then you at least know what your other options are and can choose the closest to what you think is best.  with the new DA2 system, my understanding is that you don't know what will be said until it's too late to undo it.  You might be a generally "good" character, but what if knowing the "good answer and the "bad answer" lines, in that one situation, you would rather opt for the other line because it feels a bit more "right"?  You don't know what you're missing out on, by not replying differently.  You cannot play it through 600 times to check out every option, and you cannot keep saving and reloading, it would be insane.

I agree with you, Erika.

In DAO, even if none of the available options worked for your character, you could at least wrap your head around why your character might say one of those things (and since the game didn't assign tone, you had a lot of wiggle room there) before you actually chose it, so then you could interpret the NPC reaction appropriately.

Now, in DA2, we have to try to figure out why Hawke said something after he has said it, and possibly miss a whole series of NPC lines as a result (unless conversations are pausable - they haven't told us that yet), and even then we'll have to reload a lot to avoid lines that just flat-out break our characters.

Yeah.. and as I said I will be the happiest person if I find that the wheel is working well and DA2 is just as enjoyable as DAO.  And I promise if this is the case I'll come back and say I was wrong. 

I am just afraid that I'll end up with another "shepard" champion who, honestly, i really disliked as she was nothing like me, no matter how much I tried to personalise her and give her nice answers... 

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

I asked him a few questions which he answered, giving me all the information I needed to decide.  The conversation was a success because I gathered information without derailing the discussion or annoying any of my friends.  At that point, "what I said" was inconsequential, my words had the desired effect and I was done with that line of talk. 

Right, but you had control over everything you said.

Using the DA2 dialogue system, you miht have been able to tell the game you wanted to learn about a specific class, and the game would have given you that information.  But what else did you say?  Did you tell your friend why you wanted to know about the class?  If you did, did you want to?

In the real world, you have the ability to divulge and withhold specific details as you see fit.  DA2 does not allow this, because it hides the content of the line from us.  In this way, DA2's dialogue is different in kind from real-world dialogue, and that difference is one that didn't exist in DAO.

[BeardedNinja]

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Erika T wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...


Well, you are essentially saying that people who like the wheel don't want to think, which is one step removed from calling them stupid.  Surely you can see people taking offense to that?

If i run on the threadmill for an hour with thumping music in my ears because I just want to switch my brain off and not think, does it mean I am stupid?  No, it means that I prefer the activity I am doing being one that's engaging my instincts and  senses more than it's engaging my thinking brain.  And for the third time, there is nothing wrong with it, it's just not how I personally play DAO, therefore I would have preferred to keep the proper, long, readable dialogue options.  

Not quite sure how much more do I have to spell it out for people not to take offense.  

The other reason being me liking to know what my character will say.  With the wheel I do not know.  Therefore it's not my character.   

But you must realize that the way you phrase it will imply things.  When you say, "the wheel is for people who don't like to think" most people's thoughts will immediately jumpt to "stupid".

Ironic that this misunderstanding occurred in a thread discussing whether or not the dialogue wheel makes people misinterpret what they're about to say....

It is ironic indeed.  Proves my point then? 

As to your first paragraph, I don't know.  I did not mean it in a derogatory way and I believe I explained clearly how I meant it. I think if it's about a video game, there's nothing wrong with "not wanting to think".   /Its a form of entertainment, relaxation (for most of us) for gods sake.  Everyone approaches these things differently.  How much thinking goes into playing a racing game?  next to nothing.  Are people who play racing games stupid?  No.  But if I have not yet made myself clear then no amount of further explaining will do it. 

The fact that some people started to jump at my throat says more about them than about me, really.  

Really it just means your not as clear as you hink you are, as I took offenese at it and needed you to explain your self about how all us dialog wheel loving stabby shooty people dont like to think,  as did others.  go figure.....

[Erika T]

JrayM16 wrote...


After talking with Sylvius just now about conversation, I can't help but woner if those who find the dialogue wheel easier to understand are more semantically focused in conversation, that is more concerned with reactions than those who don't get the dialogue wheel.  Given your misunderstanding just now and Sylvius's conclusions on the goals of speech, I think it kinda matches up. 

I agree.   Make sense.  I am the kind of player (person? ) who concentrates on what she says being right and true to character, maybe even at the expense of sacrificing the desired reaction.    

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

I asked him a few questions which he answered, giving me all the information I needed to decide.  The conversation was a success because I gathered information without derailing the discussion or annoying any of my friends.  At that point, "what I said" was inconsequential, my words had the desired effect and I was done with that line of talk. 

Right, but you had control over everything you said.

Using the DA2 dialogue system, you miht have been able to tell the game you wanted to learn about a specific class, and the game would have given you that information.  But what else did you say?  Did you tell your friend why you wanted to know about the class?  If you did, did you want to?

In the real world, you have the ability to divulge and withhold specific details as you see fit.  DA2 does not allow this, because it hides the content of the line from us.  In this way, DA2's dialogue is different in kind from real-world dialogue, and that difference is one that didn't exist in DAO.

I think both systems have huge shortcomings in this respect.  The wheel prevents selection of detail and DA:O style lists inhibit selection of tone without meta-gaming.  I think the wheel is the lesser of the two evils because tone is ultimately more important in eliciting reaction.

If selection of detail in a game is wrong then I'm annoyed.  If tone is wrong then the game has betrayed me on the level of role-playing.

[Erika T]

BeardedNinja wrote...


Really it just means your not as clear as you hink you are, as I took offenese at it and needed you to explain your self about how all us dialog wheel loving stabby shooty people dont like to think,  as did others.  go figure.....

Since you started talking to me you have not said anything even remotely of substance (ie about the game or your pros and cons on the wheel), instead kept on criticising my opinion and me as a person, so surely you'll excuse me if I consider this conversation closed with you.  

[ThatGamerWithSouvlaki285]

I don't mind either way wethere the use the wheel or the list. However, what bothered me in DAO and in other games using the list system is that you character turns in to a statue in order to speak to somebody! This was on of the reason i liked mass effect and am happy that same system is used in DA2, it turns a dialogue into a proper conversation between two people with gestures and interaction with enviroments rather ouya person and a telepathic fighting robot.
I don't understand the problem people have with interpereting the options given in the dialogue wheel. I have no proplem with it.  Do you really need to have each option to be spelled out to the letter? So the PC doesn't say something exactly the  way you expected it to do so, the meaning is still there.  

Modifié par steph285, 08 février 2011 - 10:34 .

[Ziggeh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Why would what you ahve said be a measure of conversation success? That would indicate that getting the words out of your mouth was the only purpose and goal of the conversation.

It's the part I can control.  Judging my success based on things I can't influence would be crazy.

I think I would concede that the approach I take is not like actual conversation. That I see the sentences as conveying a concept from one character to the other, which involves controlling their ability to understand, which much as we might like to, we don't in actual conversation.

However, as the system lacks the ability to rephrase and correct, I feel that you either accept the dialogue system either as a sort of abstraction, where the concept is always conveyed (mulitple ways one could accept this, narrative convenience being mine) or you accept misunderstandings. I can't do the latter, and I imagine you can't the former.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 08 février 2011 - 10:17 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Erika T wrote...

I agree.   Make sense.  I am the kind of player (person? ) who concentrates on what she says being right and true to character, maybe even at the expense of sacrificing the desired reaction.    

No, that's what they want you to think, but that's an oversimplification.

When I'm roleplaying a character, he wants to elicit a specific reaction from another character.  But how does he do that?  When playing him, I'll choose the options that suit his attempts to elicit those reactions.  A different character might choose different options when seeking exactly the same outcome.

What the DA2 system does by having us choose the desired outcome rather than the means to achieve that outcome is force our characters to use whatever means that BioWare foresaw us wanting to use to do that.

DAO's dialogue required us to choose dialogue options BioWare wrote (and thus foresaw us wanting), but it didn't require that we choose them for the reasons BioWare anticipated us having.

So, if your character in DAO wants to find out from some thug who hired him, you (the player) can choose any of the available dialogue options to do that.  Some of them might not work, but that's a roleplaying consequence.  The character you designed didn't happen to be able to elicit the reaction he wanted.

Whereas, when your DA2 character wants to do the same thing, you're forced to figure out which paraphrase+icon combination indicates that outcome, and then Hawke will behave in whatever way BioWare wants him to to produce that outcome.  Whether he succeeds or fails is entirely pre-determined, and has nothing to do with your character design.  Your input was limited to what Hawke wanted to know, now how he did it or whether he was successful.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

I think both systems have huge shortcomings in this respect.  The wheel prevents selection of detail and DA:O style lists inhibit selection of tone without meta-gaming.  I think the wheel is the lesser of the two evils because tone is ultimately more important in eliciting reaction..

I don't think DAO's system inhibits tone selection at all.  It just disconnects that tone selection from the reaction, which I don't see as a problem.