992 réponses à ce sujet

[Anzer]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

Zalekanzer wrote...

I love the new dialogue system.
In fact, I love it so much that my feelings negate everyone else's feelings on this system. Yes, my feelings are so strong that they make all of your feelings on this matter inadequate. I'm sorry if this fact offends you, but you're welcome to have a cookie!
(:

So I guess you are a firm believer in utilitarianism.

I guess you're a firm believer in eating this delicious cookie. (: 

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

and as they have gone the other route in the sequel one could make the argument that the writers understood it was a failure on their part to convey the intent to the player via the old system as they have chosen a new system which effectively does convey the intent to the player. otherwise if it was really a problem with just a minority and it was our faults for not understanding then they would have kept the old system.

In which case keep the intent icons (or use *gasp* words) and allow the player to see the full text.  If they did this then I'd be a lot happier.

its funny you said this since i just wrote a similar reply to bob....so i guess you can read that for your response

[Galad22]

Saibh wrote...

Oh well. That's not what they're doing. The game is finished, and you haven't even played it. It's up there with complaining about a voiced protagonist. This is what they're doing. This is the game they are making. You don't like the game they are making. That's fine for you. But complaining that you don't like it is needless, because many more are probably going to be fine with it, and it comes down to your personal preference, not it being any worse or better.

Yes indeed nothing that can be done about it now, but perhaps if they understand why there are people who don't like dialogue wheel and reasons for it there is a change, small though it propably is that they put back da:o dialogue tree if they ever do DA3.

People can hope I am sure.

[Nomen Mendax]

Zalekanzer wrote...

Nomen Mendax wrote...

Zalekanzer wrote...

I love the new dialogue system.
In fact, I love it so much that my feelings negate everyone else's feelings on this system. Yes, my feelings are so strong that they make all of your feelings on this matter inadequate. I'm sorry if this fact offends you, but you're welcome to have a cookie!
(:

So I guess you are a firm believer in utilitarianism.

I guess you're a firm believer in eating this delicious cookie. (: 

mmm chocolatey (it wasn't poisoned was it?)

[Kingthlayer]

I like this system better then the I win system of DA:O. The Landsmeet is nothing if you put points into Coercion because you know exactly what to say without even reading the lines because it tells you it's the option to chose.

[Saibh]

Wulfram wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Going to the chantry is hunting him down.  It's a fairly straightforward case of murder on Isabela's part.

They agreed to a duel to the death and he betrayed her by sending waves of men after her instead. It is absolutely not murder, because he wants her dead and they already agreed to duel. She's just forcing him to fulfill his part of the bargain.

Except she doesn't fight him in a duel.  She has Hawke and friends help her kill him.

To me, it seems like Hawke is hired as a bodyguard and ends up acting as a hitman.

What is it that you're missing here? Did you just not listen to what was said?

1. Isabela and the slaver agree to a duel
2. Isabela suspects there might be foul play
3. Asks Hawke if he'll come with her to back her up if something goes wrong
4. Something goes wrong. The slaver sends a group of men to kill Isabela (whom they thought would be alone), and you kill them. The duel is not rescinded, and it's quite clear the slaver wants Isabela dead.
5. You search the bodies to find that he is in the Chantry.
6. You go to the Chantry, because there's still a duel to be had, and because Isabela's life is threatened while the slaver lives.
7. You may choose to try and reason, but he always makes it clear whether or not you do, that he's only out to kill Isabela.
8. Isabela strikes first, and the fight breaks out.

He was not interested in dueling her. Only murdering her.

I honestly don't get where you're not understanding this.

[Maconbar]

Galad22 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Oh well. That's not what they're doing. The game is finished, and you haven't even played it. It's up there with complaining about a voiced protagonist. This is what they're doing. This is the game they are making. You don't like the game they are making. That's fine for you. But complaining that you don't like it is needless, because many more are probably going to be fine with it, and it comes down to your personal preference, not it being any worse or better.

Yes indeed nothing that can be done about it now, but perhaps if they understand why there are people who don't like dialogue wheel and reasons for it there is a change, small though it propably is that they put back da:o dialogue tree if they ever do DA3.

People can hope I am sure.

Judging by Gaider's numerous posts, it seems very clear that BW understands that this change isn't for everyone.

[Threeparts]

David Gaider wrote...

Threeparts wrote...
Mr Gaider (or anyone else in the know), if you're still reading this, can you please answer a quick question? I know the toolset won't be ready for a while, but when/if it is, will it be physically possible for modders to transcribe the dialogue choices and replace the paraphrased text in the game? If so, I'm betting we'll see a new top download on mod sites before the year is out.

The toolset warns you if you go over the length limit, but I don't believe it stops you. What effect that would have, however, I don't know. There is probably a practical limitation of what can actually fit onto the GUI, though it might still fit (and just look really bad). Assuming that any of that is possible, good luck with it.

Thanks for the reply! Even if it's a more thorough paraphrase to keep within the length limit, it might soothe some of those riled by the change. I like the element of mystery that the current system has, but I can sympathise with those that see it as a loss of control.

I'm guessing that there will also be a way to replace Hawke's sound files with empty ones to bring back the silent protagonist for those that really want Origins v.2. Never fear, DA:O community, you won't have to adapt or evolve along with the game if you're really set on keeping things as they were! 

[Junri]

I'm quite happy with what they did, since we are not forced to go a certain path as a character. I liked the old system, but this system is also good because I at least know what the tone is going to be like. Honestly, this system seems much more complex then it is at first glance, especially when you consider friendship and rivalry points. Just because you act friendly doesn't mean it'll net you friendship points for one character at that point, but in another point acting friendly could actually net you friendship points for that same character.



Also, there were games that the 3 path system worked okay for, Mass Effect and The Witcher being an example. Although, The Witcher's system was mostly based on who you side with not morality. Still the same in the end though :S



DA2's system is just a streamlined version of DA:O's system so... honestly no complaints here.

[Wulfram]

Saibh wrote...

6. You go to the Chantry, because there's still a duel to be had, and because Isabela's life is threatened while the slaver lives.

This is the point where I have a problem.  Defending her from attackers at the duelling site is one thing, hunting down her enemy is another.  Particularly since Hawke doesn't appear to have any idea what the dispute is.

[Anzer]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

Zalekanzer wrote...

Nomen Mendax wrote...

So I guess you are a firm believer in utilitarianism.

I guess you're a firm believer in eating this delicious cookie. (: 

mmm chocolatey (it wasn't poisoned was it?)

Absolutely not! I would never poison delicious cookies; then they would no longer be delicious.

[AlanC9]

BobSmith101 wrote...

That's not really the point I was making. I was saying that by adding icons you remove even the need to read the keywords. And that reading the keywords is hit and miss anyway because of the dialogue missmatch.

So you don't need the keywords, except that you do need them?

[Phate Phoenix]

Personally, I love the wheel, paraphrasing, icons, and all. However, I understand why some absolutely hate the paraphrasing. It's similar to why I love the tone icons: it minimizes the chance of my Hawke saying something I don't intend. With teh parapharsing, it's a leap of chance--you know the tone, but you can only guess what's going to come out of Hawke's mouth.

I imagine that'd be very frustrating. Granted, I find that little bit of unknown actually adds to my own gaming experience, but different strokes for different folks.

[Saibh]

My understanding of the paraphrases is this:

Top-right: Positive. You'll say something upbeat, agreeing, kind, but generally in the "let's all get along" category. As you can see from this screenshot:



--the "good" option is to be okay with blood magic. That's because the top-right option is getting along, not because it is the morally correct thing to do.

The middle-right option is still neutral, but with a sarcastic/joking flair to make it not as obscenely boring as Shepard's neutral option. In the demo, you rarely agree or disagree.

The bottom-right is a tad more nuanced, because of the two main icons (). This is really where mashing one of the options on the dialogue wheel is the less intelligent thing to do. The first icon is aggressive--it's not that you agree or disagree (that's up to the paraphrase), it's that you're belligerent. The second is serious and cool. Firm. This option might be the "right" thing to do, because you might get angry at someone for doing something stupid. Like summoning a demon. It's is a negative thing to do, and something the top-right wouldn't.

This is my understand of the three main options.

Modifié par Saibh, 24 février 2011 - 06:55 .

[bambooxfox]

Phate Phoenix wrote...

Personally, I love the wheel, paraphrasing, icons, and all. However, I understand why some absolutely hate the paraphrasing. It's similar to why I love the tone icons: it minimizes the chance of my Hawke saying something I don't intend. With teh parapharsing, it's a leap of chance--you know the tone, but you can only guess what's going to come out of Hawke's mouth.

I imagine that'd be very frustrating. Granted, I find that little bit of unknown actually adds to my own gaming experience, but different strokes for different folks.

This. I like "discovering" the dialogue each paraphrase actually leads to. That's fun for me. It might not be fun for others, and I understand that.

[Deviana]

I'm neutral on the dialogue system for now. Demo was enough to show new combat system, a bit of new graphics and a general feel for the game, but in my opinion, it wasn't nearly long enough to give an actual idea of how well/poorly dialogue wheel would perform in game as a whole.

Come on, March 8th, hurry up!

[Saibh]

Wulfram wrote...
This is the point where I have a problem.  Defending her from attackers at the duelling site is one thing, hunting down her enemy is another.  Particularly since Hawke doesn't appear to have any idea what the dispute is.

Isabela tells you what the dispute is--but she leaves information out. Not only that, but as I already pointed out, you agreed to help her if things go awry. If the duel had went as plan, you wouldn't be needed. But because it didn't, you are doing exactly what you said you'd do. If you don't want to, don't agree to do it.

[AkiKishi]

Autolycus wrote...

As Shehard would say...
You just had to give them good advice didn't you BobSmith

Yes I really should stop half joking on game message boards...

[Heather Cline]

I think the new DA2 dialogue wheel is pretty cool. It's better than the ME dialogue wheel by far. You don't have to hold left or right on the control stick while pressing A to accept a dialogue option. Instead you just tap left or right and the choice stays highlighted then you press A. Furthermore it maybe a bit simplified but reading through several long sentences of options is kind of a chore. So I enjoy it for what it is.

[Wulfram]

Saibh wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
This is the point where I have a problem.  Defending her from attackers at the duelling site is one thing, hunting down her enemy is another.  Particularly since Hawke doesn't appear to have any idea what the dispute is.

Isabela tells you what the dispute is--but she leaves information out. Not only that, but as I already pointed out, you agreed to help her if things go awry. If the duel had went as plan, you wouldn't be needed. But because it didn't, you are doing exactly what you said you'd do. If you don't want to, don't agree to do it.

My definition of help includes "defend you if attacked" but doesn't necessarily include "hunt him down and kill him".  One is murder, and one isn't.

[zazei]

While the devs and others said the number of options are the same as with the old system the question I been wondering about is if the dialog wheel is made with the intention that we pick one path and stick with it? If so we really do have fewer options since if we ever jump from one path to another the whole thing will end up sounding horribly wrong and break the natural flow of the conversation.



This happen a few times in the demo sadly. Some might say It might not make sense to go from happy to help to hostile a few moments later but I would argue there are tons of situations where this might just happen (When we find out someone lied to us or places where the situation change after something been revealed). So my point is that even if we might have the same number of options available it won't matter if the game try encourage us to take one path and stick with it unless we want a story that isn't consistent or make any kind of sense.

[Mage One]

I honestly don't see it as very different. I also don't think it's accurate when people say they want to be able to chose exactly what they say like in Origins. You couldn't chose exactly what you said in Origins. You had to chose from pre-determined responses they presented you with, same as here. In fact, I generally find this system to be more accurate, because while you may not always be able to predict the precise words you'll say, you'll always be clear on your dialogue's intent, intonation, and for the most part, it's reception. I had occasional missteps in DA:O from expecting something would be said differently, e.g. I occasionally though a line was going to be serious, but it was meant to be sarcastic and visa-versa. Here, the worst such problem I can imagine is you don't say exactly what you thought you would, but the game more or less reacts as though you had.

[Saibh]

Wulfram wrote...

My definition of help includes "defend you if attacked" but doesn't necessarily include "hunt him down and kill him".  One is murder, and one isn't.

The point of what you're trying to do is to help defend Isabela if the duel goes wrong.

You promised to help with the slaver.

You did not say "Oh, well, after he betrays you, I'll defend myself and leave".

Modifié par Saibh, 24 février 2011 - 07:01 .

[Kusy]

The choices aren't clear at all. What's the diffrence between making a joke and cheering someone up here? Both have the same icon and you would have to be a retard to joke when someone is bleeding out in front of you or your brother just died.



What troubles me the most is that BioWare seems to unify their games. They slowly remove diversity as I see it, next 4 installments of both universes and Dragon Age games will be exacly the same as Mass Effect games just in a diffrent lore.



Mass Effect wheel should be now called BioWare wheel because every game BioWare is releasing this year will incorporate that feature. TOR, ME3, and DA2.