299 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

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.

Whereas, I want the options to give me enough information to allow me to think about them as much as I think about a RW response, which is a lot.

In ME, I simply haven't found any cases where a different available line would have suited my character better.

And I found many.  But more importantly, almost all of ManShep's lines would have suited my character better if they hadn't been voiced.

[BeardedNinja]

Erika T wrote...

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.  

Actually, I have voiced my opinion of the wheel and the pros and the cons of the this game, ME, and DA:O. You dismmissed it all claimed I criticised you for being on a forum, then went on the unthinking comment. Look to accuse me of being off topic.
 Look at page 9, all very concise and viewpont stating, but anyway this has gone on long enough, you have your views I have mine.

Modifié par BeardedNinja, 08 février 2011 - 10:25 .

[Erika T]

Sylvius, I just cannot imagine enjoying "saying" something that I actually did not choose to say. If I have Alistair in camp for example, and I want to say "I like you", I want to know if my character will say "Ooh you being a bastard prince does it for me big time, care for a quickie?" or "That's a lovely sentiment, I feel the same way Alistair. Care to join me in my tent?" Because if it's the former, I do not want to push that button. I would rather opt for saying nothing!

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

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.

Whereas I do.  It's one thing for someone to misinterpret my words, but to mininterpret tone is a fundamental disconnect of enormous magnitude, bordering on socially inept. 

I would select tone to elicit a reaction(if I want to argue then I use an angry tone etc.) so what is the point of assigning a tone myself if the reaction is predetermined and I have no opportunity to correct myself? 

Not only is the conversation a failure at that point, the system has failed me.  How is my problem different from your problem with the wheel?  They are the same problem brought on by different role-playing styles and system shortcomings.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Erika T wrote...

Sylvius, I just cannot imagine enjoying "saying" something that I actually did not choose to say. If I have Alistair in camp for example, and I want to say "I like you", I want to know if my character will say "Ooh you being a bastard prince does it for me big time, care for a quickie?" or "That's a lovely sentiment, I feel the same way Alistair. Care to join me in my tent?" Because if it's the former, I do not want to push that button. I would rather opt for saying nothing!

Exactly right.

How your character says something is often far more important than why he says it.  If DA2's wheel is designed to accept inputs based on intent rather than content, then it cannot satisfy us.

I hope that isn't the case.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

Whereas I do.  It's one thing for someone to misinterpret my words, but to mininterpret tone is a fundamental disconnect of enormous magnitude, bordering on socially inept. 

I think the opposite is true.

If someone misinterprets my words, then he either doesn't speak the language well or he's a moron.  But tone gets misinterpreted so often as to make it a useless tool.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Whereas I do.  It's one thing for someone to misinterpret my words, but to mininterpret tone is a fundamental disconnect of enormous magnitude, bordering on socially inept. 

I think the opposite is true.

If someone misinterprets my words, then he either doesn't speak the language well or he's a moron.  But tone gets misinterpreted so often as to make it a useless tool.

Words can be tricky, phrases more so, especially in delciate topics.

Tone is supposed to send up a flag telling the person the nature of the conversation.  A word can change the meaning of a sentence.  So can tone.

People operate on different reasoning systems.  That is something that I believe we ahve to work with in conversation rather than largely ignore.  I adjust my speech and tone depending on whom I am talking to because I know that if what I say is more compatible with their reasoning then we have a greater chance of connecting with eachother.  Otherwise, conversation is pointless.  It's empathy, man.

[Taleroth]

Tone and how people respond to it. You know what that reminds me of? Morality systems. Companion influence. Same song, same dance. I wouldn't be sad to see it go. It took us long enough to be rid of the one yoke, and we're still not entirely free. I'm awaiting when we rid ourselves of the other.



If a NPC needs to know how to respond to my character, let it be on his actions. His words merely give him the option to be polite or petulant. That wasn't worth morality systems, it isn't worth this.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

People operate on different reasoning systems.  That is something that I believe we ahve to work with in conversation rather than largely ignore.  I adjust my speech and tone depending on whom I am talking to because I know that if what I say is more compatible with their reasoning then we have a greater chance of connecting with eachother. 

In DA2, shouldn't we get to decide how Hawke does that, though?  Different Hawke's will have different ways of dealing with other people.  Different ideas of what works.  Different levels of social skills.

It's empathy, man.

There's no such thing as empathy.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

People operate on different reasoning systems.  That is something that I believe we ahve to work with in conversation rather than largely ignore.  I adjust my speech and tone depending on whom I am talking to because I know that if what I say is more compatible with their reasoning then we have a greater chance of connecting with eachother. 

In DA2, shouldn't we get to decide how Hawke does that, though?  Different Hawke's will have different ways of dealing with other people.  Different ideas of what works.  Different levels of social skills.

It's empathy, man.

There's no such thing as empathy.

Are you human?  Like, seriously.  The notion that there are people who can't emotionally connect with others is very frightening to me.  I can understand putting the self first, that's sensible, but no empathy?  Do you mean to tell me you've never felt sad when something bad happened exclusively to a friend and not to you?  Or happy for a friend when something good happened to them which will not benefit you directly?

If so, then I kinda feel sorry for you.  In my opinion, empathy is one of the cornerstones of the human condition.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

Are you human?  Like, seriously.  The notion that there are people who can't emotionally connect with others is very frightening to me.  I can understand putting the self first, that's sensible, but no empathy?  Do you mean to tell me you've never felt sad when something bad happened exclusively to a friend and not to you?  Or happy for a friend when something good happened to them which will not benefit you directly?

That's not empathy.  That's me experiencing how I would feel in their place and projecting it onto them.

The actual perception of how they feel - that's empathy, and it doesn't work.

And anyway, a bad thing happening to a friend does impact me, because it would affect his behaviour.  Sure, if a friend's mother died, I'd think about how sad I'd be if my mother died, but I'd also wonder if this meant that he couldn't make it to the concert were were going to attend and be anoyed at the timing.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 08 février 2011 - 10:52 .

[Ziggeh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's me experiencing how I would feel in their place and projecting it onto them.

That would be my definition of empathy. The literal transfer of feelings would be magic.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 08 février 2011 - 10:55 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ziggeh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That's me experiencing how I would feel in their place and projecting it onto them.

That would be my definition of empathy. The literal transfer of feelings would be magic.

But if you're not relevantly similar to the other person, then how you would feel is different from how they feel.

Empathy is defined as the ability to recognise and share the emotional state of another, and I don't think it works.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Are you human?  Like, seriously.  The notion that there are people who can't emotionally connect with others is very frightening to me.  I can understand putting the self first, that's sensible, but no empathy?  Do you mean to tell me you've never felt sad when something bad happened exclusively to a friend and not to you?  Or happy for a friend when something good happened to them which will not benefit you directly?

That's not empathy.  That's me experiencing how I would feel in their place and projecting it onto them.

The actual perception of how they feel - that's empathy, and it doesn't work.

And anyway, a bad thing happening to a friend does impact me, because it would affect his behaviour.  Sure, if a friend's mother died, I'd think about how sad I'd be if my mother died, but I'd also wonder if this meant that he couldn't make it to the concert were were going to attend and be anoyed at the timing.

Firstly, you're describing, sympathy, not empathy.  Second, you're missing the ofrest for the trees of my question by rationalizing.  Ofourse soemthing happening to your friend would affect you, it's a hypothetical question I'm asking.

Empathy is always going to be limited, one can never truly perceive another's feelings but that doesn't render it non-existant.

If not for empathy and it's upgraded sibling compassion, then why do people do random things to help people they don't know?  Or do know, for that matter?  Empathy exists, I've felt it.  If you can't take my word ofr it then fine, that's your thing.

[AlanC9]

Erika T wrote...

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.  

As you predicted, the exact same thing as happens in DAO -- my character says something that isn't ideal.

Edit: the only way to get an RPG where your character actually says what you want is to go to a TES-style keyword system and let the player make up what the actual words are for himself.

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.

You may believe that one of the lines you didn't see might be better than the one you chose, but this belief doesn't seem to be based on any sort of evidence; all you've got there is a "what if". The few ME conversations I've actually tried all options for only confirmed that my first impressions have been correct, and that there never have been any lines that I would have picked if I had only known the full texts beforehand.

Of course, not knowing what the other lines are may be more bothersome to you than it is to me. 

Modifié par AlanC9, 08 février 2011 - 11:07 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

If not for empathy and it's upgraded sibling compassion, then why do people do random things to help people they don't know?

Because it makes them feel good compared to how they'd feel if they didn't do it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

You may believe that one of the lines you didn't see might be better than the one you chose, but this belief doesn't seem to be based on any sort of evidence; all you've got there is a "what if". The few ME conversations I've actually tried all options for only confirmed that my first impressions have been correct, and that there never have been any lines that I would have picked if I had only known the full texts beforehand.

Of course, not knowing what the other lines are may be more bothersome to you than it is to me. 

My problem is that, upon seeing the paraphrase options, I choose the one that best suits my character, and I work out exactly why he's choosing to say that.

And then I choose it only to have my character say something different, and now my justification no longer applies.  In that moment, I don't know why my character said that.  That's a huge problem.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

If not for empathy and it's upgraded sibling compassion, then why do people do random things to help people they don't know?

Because it makes them feel good compared to how they'd feel if they didn't do it.

But why does the act of making people happier make us happy?  Think about it for a second.  What possible reason apart from some limited form of empathy?  The act of giving away my money doesn't make me happy, it's seeing that it made someone else happy, which I soak up, and I am happier for it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

Firstly, you're describing, sympathy, not empathy.  Second, you're missing the ofrest for the trees of my question by rationalizing.  Ofourse soemthing happening to your friend would affect you, it's a hypothetical question I'm asking.

That it's a friend matters, though.

If it were a stranger, arguably empathy should work there, too, but it clearly doesn't.  People I don't know die every day.  All of the time.  Near me, far from me, all over the world people I don't know are dying.  There goes another one.

And I don't care.  Neither do you.

[Ziggeh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But if you're not relevantly similar to the other person, then how you would feel is different from how they feel.

Empathy is defined as the ability to recognise and share the emotional state of another, and I don't think it works.

I don't think it needs to be exact to be described as empathy, indeed it would be a poor definition if it described something that only exists in fiction.

I udnerstand what you mean though, and this is off topic pedantry on my part, so point taken.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 08 février 2011 - 11:11 .

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

Firstly, you're describing, sympathy, not empathy.  Second, you're missing the ofrest for the trees of my question by rationalizing.  Ofourse soemthing happening to your friend would affect you, it's a hypothetical question I'm asking.

That it's a friend matters, though.

If it were a stranger, arguably empathy should work there, too, but it clearly doesn't.  People I don't know die every day.  All of the time.  Near me, far from me, all over the world people I don't know are dying.  There goes another one.

And I don't care.  Neither do you.

Empathy doesn't have to be universal.  I know someone is dying right now through logic, I ahve no sensory impression of them.  It's when I hear more specific things describes to me, genocide, murder,starvation, or I see film of such things.  That's when empathy kicks in. 

And it might go away after a while, maybe I block it out, maybe I don't think about it, and limited viewing of events over time will degrade empathy.  For example, last week I saw a video about genocide in Sudan.  I felt really sad and angry then.  One week later, I haven't watched any such video nor heard such news since, like any emotion, without additional stimuli, my emapthy goes away.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

But why does the act of making people happier make us happy?

Personal preference.  Why do you like rice pudding (or not, as the case may be)?

There's no justification for personal preferences.

Think about it for a second.  What possible reason apart from some limited form of empathy?  The act of giving away my money doesn't make me happy, it's seeing that it made someone else happy, which I soak up, and I am happier for it.

Sure, because that's something you enjoy.  Some people don't.  Again, personal preference.

I don't give away money.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

My problem is that, upon seeing the paraphrase options, I choose the one that best suits my character, and I work out exactly why he's choosing to say that.

And then I choose it only to have my character say something different, and now my justification no longer applies.  In that moment, I don't know why my character said that.  That's a huge problem.

I simply don't do the italicized part until I've heard the line, and even then only if I actually need to think about it.

In both cases the character must be shaped around the dialog system to a certain extent. In DA2 you do this before you push the button, and in DA2 you do it after you've heard the line.

Edit: of course, this works for me because I have a high degree of confidence that the line picked is the best available one for my character. Others may have a much higher error rate.

Modifié par AlanC9, 08 février 2011 - 11:22 .

[Amfortas]

I saw this morning in one of the gameplay videos that sometimes Hawke speaks by himself a la Shepard. Are people fine with that?

I personally find it much more irritating than paraphrases and the dialog wheel.

[Merci357]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But if you're not relevantly similar to the other person, then how you would feel is different from how they feel.

Empathy is defined as the ability to recognise and share the emotional state of another, and I don't think it works.

Of course it has it's limitations. I can't share the emotions of someone who is faced with their arachnophobia, for example, because I don't understand why anyone is frightened by a little spider. But I can very well recognise the emotional state someone is in, due to many (mostly non verbal) cues. The fact that I am aware of someones emotional state does make me empathic, sometimes more, sometimes less. Not everyone is a peoples person, tough.