299 réponses à ce sujet

[John Epler]

The system is similar to the Mass Effect system, in that there are paraphrases expressing the 'intent' of what you say and then, upon selecting a line, your character speaks the actual line associated with that paraphrase. One of the significant differences, however, is the addition of an 'intent' icon - this tells you what sort of category/delivery you can expect for the line.



Personally, I got to do my first playthrough of the game over the past week and a half, and I haven't really been surprised by anything my character said. The intent icons generally help you avoid situations where you take a far more 'extreme' stance than you expected, and the more 'action' moments are marked clearly enough that I've yet to accidentally stab someone, for example



Of course, your mileage may vary in the finished product, but I feel that the surprise is more in the exact wording this time around, rather than the 'concept' of what you're going to say/do. If that makes sense.

[SammyJB17]

Thank you Mr.Epler, very nice description. On average, how many options are given? Mass Effect Standard of at least 2 and at most 6?

[FieryDove]

JohnEpler wrote...

The system is similar to the Mass Effect system, in that there are paraphrases expressing the 'intent' of what you say and then, upon selecting a line, your character speaks the actual line associated with that paraphrase. One of the significant differences, however, is the addition of an 'intent' icon - this tells you what sort of category/delivery you can expect for the line.

.

Thank you for that. Is the icon on every line? Or only some conversations?

[John Epler]

SammyJB17 wrote...

Thank you Mr.Epler, very nice description. On average, how many options are given? Mass Effect Standard of at least 2 and at most 6?

It's difficult to quantify, actually, because the way conversations are divided is different than in DA:O. Where in DA:O you often had 'information mining' dialogue choices in the main menu (that would lead to other questions, etc.), those are now divided into Investigate hubs, much like ME/ME2.

So I guess this is my way of saying 'not really sure', though I'd say that the amount of dialogue/dialogue choices per conversation feels about the same as an average DA:O conversation. Though again, this is based off my spotty memory of the conversations I played through

[Sjofn]

JohnEpler wrote...

Personally, I got to do my first playthrough of the game over the past week and a half, and I haven't really been surprised by anything my character said. The intent icons generally help you avoid situations where you take a far more 'extreme' stance than you expected, and the more 'action' moments are marked clearly enough that I've yet to accidentally stab someone, for example

Of course, your mileage may vary in the finished product, but I feel that the surprise is more in the exact wording this time around, rather than the 'concept' of what you're going to say/do. If that makes sense.

I was hoping the "intent" icons would have that effect! That makes me feel a lot better about it all, thank you. 

[Big Blue Car]

Often when I replayed through A:O conversations, choosing different responses often had no effect at all how the NPC replied, and very rarely changed the course of the conversation at all. Does the DA2 system make the conversations more reactive, or is it still 'choose how you reply' instead of 'choose what you reply with'?

[KawaiiKatie]

JohnEpler wrote...
The intent icons generally help you avoid situations where you take a far more 'extreme' stance than you expected, and the more 'action' moments are marked clearly enough that I've yet to accidentally stab someone, for example

Oh, that's good! I'm really glad to hear that. Because if that happened, I'd probably freak out. ("OMG, I JUST STABBED THAT GUY, I WAS JUST SAYING HELLO!") But then again, I'm easily startled...

What about "accidental" romances? Have those been cleared up, as far as you know?

Modifié par KawaiiKatie, 02 février 2011 - 12:05 .

[Xewaka]

JohnEpler wrote...
Of course, your mileage may vary in the finished product, but I feel that the surprise is more in the exact wording this time around, rather than the 'concept' of what you're going to say/do. If that makes sense.

That is still worse than allowing us to see the full content of the phrase. But it's your choice to make.

[John Epler]

Big Blue Car wrote...

Often when I replayed through A:O conversations, choosing different responses often had no effect at all how the NPC replied, and very rarely changed the course of the conversation at all. Does the DA2 system make the conversations more reactive, or is it still 'choose how you reply' instead of 'choose what you reply with'?

There's always a bit of a tradeoff - the more you let the player respond, the more you have to use the 'how you reply', for no other reason than it can be prohibitvely expensive to add separate content for each player response. In general, though, I think there are more choices in the DA2 dialogues that fall in the second category.

[Chansel]

About these ‘intent icons’, they sound really great.



Is there any info yet about how many intent icons there are and what kind they are? By which I mean do you have options like ‘flirty’ and ‘sarcastic’ etc? Or are they going to be like ‘kind’ and ‘mean’ etc?



Thanks in advance for anyone who knows more about this.

[megaz635]

Your kidding me.



You should be glad they put in the wheel because most of those dialouge options in origins always led to 3 or 2 choices.

[Lord_Saulot]

megaz635 wrote...

Your kidding me.

You should be glad they put in the wheel because most of those dialouge options in origins always led to 3 or 2 choices.

Why does dialogue options being funneled mean we should be glad for a dialogue wheel?

[Big Blue Car]

JohnEpler wrote...
There's always a bit of a tradeoff - the more you let the player respond, the more you have to use the 'how you reply', for no other reason than it can be prohibitvely expensive to add separate content for each player response. In general, though, I think there are more choices in the DA2 dialogues that fall in the second category.

Obviously branching content like that takes a huge amount of resources, seeing even a few dialogue choices have no effect whatsoever on a conversation is just jarring, even if it's something you'd only even know about on a second playthrough.

What I'm hoping is that Hawke's writing and voice acting is entertaining enough that the different choices are worth choosing just for hearing what Hawke says. I can already see myself being torn between 'good guy' options and 'snarky bastard' options just to see what mean Hawke does next...

[Ndutz]

From top to bottom:
Diplomatic
Sarcastic
Agressive/Assertive

[Sylvius the Mad]

JohnEpler wrote...

Of course, your mileage may vary in the finished product, but I feel that the surprise is more in the exact wording this time around, rather than the 'concept' of what you're going to say/do. If that makes sense.

Since it's the "exact wording" that expresses the "concept", no, that doesn't really make sense.

I understand what you're trying to say (since other developers have said much the same thing), but it seems absurd on its face.

[John Epler]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Of course, your mileage may vary in the finished product, but I feel that the surprise is more in the exact wording this time around, rather than the 'concept' of what you're going to say/do. If that makes sense.

Since it's the "exact wording" that expresses the "concept", no, that doesn't really make sense.

I understand what you're trying to say (since other developers have said much the same thing), but it seems absurd on its face.

Sylvius, I respect your opinion and certainly understand where you're coming from, but this is a debate I have no interest in engaging in. Sorry. I think we just have fundamentally different views of how these sorts of systems can and should work. Which isn't to say you're wrong, but simply that I don't think we're going to agree on any fundamental points.

[Guitar-Hero]

Xewaka wrote...

KawaiiKatie wrote...
Apparently the dialogue choices were vague enough that some men were "tricked" into a romance with Zevran, and it really pissed them off. The dialogue wheel is supposed to get rid of this complication.

I rest my case.

(strip authored by Yuko Ota and Annath Pangariya at http://www.johnnywander.com)

That one made me laugh..
But now we have icons to show the intent of our conversation, which should clear up those mishaps

Modifié par Steffen, 02 février 2011 - 12:27 .

[FieryDove]

megaz635 wrote...

Your kidding me.

You should be glad they put in the wheel because most of those dialouge options in origins always led to 3 or 2 choices.

The wheel is ebil.

[Felfenix]

I wanna know if most dialogue will be Diplomatic/Sarcastic/Aggressive the way ME was mostly Paragon/Neutral/Renegade, or if it'll be a lot more varied and not so formulaic.

Modifié par Felfenix, 02 février 2011 - 12:27 .

[ejoslin]

emile_the_devil wrote...

KawaiiKatie wrote...

Additionally, I've heard it said that Bioware wanted to avoid future "Zevran-like" misunderstandings. Apparently the dialogue choices were vague enough that some men were "tricked" into a romance with Zevran, and it really pissed them off. The dialogue wheel is supposed to get rid of this complication.

Really? Lol, I thought all of his were pretty obvious. Usually I hear more about that happening with Leliana.

Leliana has a bug that auto-starts her romance with a very non-obvious conversation choice.  There was also an auto-breakup under a certain circumstance even if there was no active romance.  Leliana just had major bugs.

The only people who were "tricked" into Zevran's romance weren't paying attention to the lines and the confirming responses where Zevran asked if that was really what they meant -- they just worried about approval and replayed lines until they got a high approval.

I mean, people complained about being "tricked" into the tent -- the only way THAT could happen is if you totally skipped his dialog and closed your eyes to your responses.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JohnEpler wrote...

Sylvius, I respect your opinion and certainly understand where you're coming from, but this is a debate I have no interest in engaging in. Sorry. I think we just have fundamentally different views of how these sorts of systems can and should work. Which isn't to say you're wrong, but simply that I don't think we're going to agree on any fundamental points.

I wasn't trying to argue with you.

I just don't understand how you guys actually think it's going to work.  I have no idea how we're supposed to be able to work out what the lines say based on the paraphrases.

But we can't really talk about it now, because there's nothing yet we can discuss.  I'll be back after release with specific examples of any problems I'm having trying to interpret the wheel.  Maybe then one of you will be able to point me in the right direction.

[Monica83]

mh another of the bad things in this "Sequel" paraphrasing ala mass effect... this is a shame... Paraphrasing is an imperfect system.. and a kick on the face at who wants to roleplay a character... Parhaprasing force you to be a spectator in the end the character is not yours you give only the appearance or the gender..but nothing else...



I always remember the best question asked to david look on my quote...

A question that david don't answer

[Killroyomega]

JohnEpler wrote...

SammyJB17 wrote...

Thank you Mr.Epler, very nice description. On average, how many options are given? Mass Effect Standard of at least 2 and at most 6?

It's difficult to quantify, actually, because the way conversations are divided is different than in DA:O. Where in DA:O you often had 'information mining' dialogue choices in the main menu (that would lead to other questions, etc.), those are now divided into Investigate hubs, much like ME/ME2.

That's really good to hear.

I hated how hard it was to differentiate between the 'informational' repsonses and the responses that moved the dialogue forward in Origins.

Personally I don't really mind about the paraphrasing much, because it is more about the intent of the speech and the result more than anything.

Modifié par Killroyomega, 02 février 2011 - 12:33 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Killroyomega wrote...

I hated how hard it was to differentiate between the 'informational' repsonses and the responses that moved the dialogue forward in Origins.

Whereas, I liked that, because that struck me as a more realistic representation of how conversation works.  It worked more like actually talking to someone and less like navigating a puzzle.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I wasn't trying to argue with you.

I just don't understand how you guys actually think it's going to work.  I have no idea how we're supposed to be able to work out what the lines say based on the paraphrases.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I liked that, because that struck me as a more realistic representation of how conversation works.  It worked more like actually talking to someone and less like navigating a puzzle.

Have you considered the possibility that your brain processes and interprets human interaction in an unusual or atypical way?

And no, I'm not asking that question to the group of people who dislike the paraphrased dialogue wheel, just Sylvius.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 février 2011 - 12:35 .