992 réponses à ce sujet

[Saibh]

Merced652 wrote...

I kind of figured writers would appreciate people using their work in any way they found enjoyable so long as it wasn't abusive. Kind of like the whole fanfic sensation. Saibh just makes them sound like complete douchebags.

[Dr. wonderful]

David Gaider wrote...

Zigzaggy wrote...
Would say that a vast majority of DAO fans don't like the paraphrase wheel...don't see any topics in the archives of fans requesting it be implemented into the franchise.

That's quite an assumption to make.

The people that liked DAO best are going to number among the people who spend time on its forums. That shouldn't be particularly surprising. They're also going to be resistant to changes-- at best many of the fans would have liked iterations. "Keep everything the same but also give us new stuff". A tall order, especially if it's not the direction we want to do.

To take that and say "a vast majority of DAO fans don't like the paraphrase wheel" is to go too far, however. Just because you'll hear the most negative people on these forums doesn't mean they speak for the majority of DAO fans. Even the most casual poll on these forums, with only voluntary respondants, show that the majority of people -- on these forums, even -- don't agree with the negative sentiment. That doesn't mean that the majority of all fans like the changes, either, but it sure doesn't mean the opposite.

I can see how it's made development much simpler,less complex and from a players perspective 'dumbed down'  .We cannot avoid that unfortunately people experience 4-5-6 choices of response as more complex than 3

Err... no.

Origins had 6 choices max on the list. If we needed to have more, we had to break it out into a seperate hub, which we occasionally did. The vast majority of the time, however, you had three basic sorts of tones to reply with-- the exact three we have in DA2. Any others on the same list were investigate questions.

Then you had times when you actually made choices about what to do. Sometimes there we had to break investigates out onto a separate wheel if the total was more than 6, but generally speaking there was never more than 3 actual "action choices" in the list. All actions were written in one specific tone, a tone that we writers chose.

In DA2 you have up to 10 options possible on 2 seperate wheels, 5 of them investigate. The number is not less, it's simply a different layout.

If you really want to talk about how it's "less complex" and "dumbed down", you might not want to start from a point of ignorance. I really do get that not everyone likes the changes-- and some people are simply going to conflate all the changes together (ie. "I liked Origins so therefore everything that Origins did was good and anything that changes from that is clearly lesser") but taking that sentiment to imply "everyone who likes the changes is dumb and likes less complex things" is taking it too far.

Perhaps you don't want to actually convince anyone (or us devs) of anything. That's entirely possible. Just expressing your displeasure is perfectly valid -- and not getting the sequel I'd wanted would cause me some displeasure, as well. But if you do, making less generalizations and invalid assumptions would go a long way to helping it.

That makes bloody sense.

Thanks

[Wulfram]

Saibh wrote...

I already told you many, many, many, many, many times that you did.

Have you seen something that isn't included in this demo?  Because in this demo, you didn't.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

KotOR was different from anything Bio had ever done before. Jade Empire was too. Mass Effect was different as well, and the sequel went even further. DAO was a throwback to an earlier style.

You missed NWN.  And while single-player NWN was arguably a lot like KotOR, NWN's core feature wasn't the single-player game.

Just filling in a blank for you.

Well, I wasn't so much missing it as starting after it. But you're right, NWN1 definitely wasn't BG3.

Edit: now that I think about it, the howls that greeted NWN1 on release were worse than anything we've seen about DA2 so far.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 février 2011 - 07:50 .

[AtreiyaN7]

wowpwnslol wrote...

It's worse. Made for ADD kids too lazy to read, so they even added pictures. I hate ME style dialogue "wheel" it screams console oversimplification.

I have neither a short attention span nor ADHD, and I'm fine with the new system. Your vaunted dialogue choices in DA:O often led to the same exact responses from characters in any case. I don't see it as some great loss when the responses that  I got from Alistair were identical despite trying out two (or more) different dialogue options.

It takes out some of the redundancy, and the "pictures" you're whinging about were a modification implemented because people complained in ME about some of the paraphrases not always being entirely accurate. Frankly, your post seems more ADHD than the new paraphrase system.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 24 février 2011 - 07:38 .

[Nomen Mendax]

Saibh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

How can you say that?  I clearly did have the choice.  I could intend a line however I wanted.  It worked brilliantly.

Why do you think it didn't?  What evidence could you possibly have?

Because the writers--the people who made the game--had an intention. Their word is greater than yours.

Again, you are pretending you had the option. You had the benefit of not being contradicted, but that doesn't mean you were ever right.

And it's because the writers clearly didn't intend it that I need to come here and jump up and down pointing it out.  They were accommodating an entire playstyle seemingly without knowing it.  If no one ever tells them, then they might throw it away without ever noticing.

I'm sure they're well aware that some people play outside the parameters they set. After all, we have whole websites devoted to mods to do just that.

But that doesn't change the fact that they had a vision, and they are simply clarifying and consolidating it now. It interferes with your perception of how you played the game, but that's not an issue to them, because you were always playing something that they didn't intend for you.

When they made the box for the game, I'm sure they didn't intend for me to use it to kill spiders. And if they then decide to make it digital download, I'd be wrong to say that they are taking away my bug-swatting capabilities, because I was inventing a use for it that they never promised us.

Just as you pretend that they are right.  What makes your way more accurate?

Because the writers intended it that way.

That's a really depressing post.  Firstly you claim that Sylvius' personal experience of playing the game is wrong, which seems incredibly condescending.  Actually, you really seem to be making Sylvius' point for him.  Your "clarifying and consolidating" is reducing people's ability to roleplay within the game.  

Frankly I think we should be commending Sylvius for his ability to fit some of the cooperative storytelling of PnP into a CRPG.  Instead you seem to be saying "too bad, its not what the writer wanted, and we should be playing their story rather than trying to make our own".

[Saibh]

Wulfram wrote...

Saibh wrote...

I already told you many, many, many, many, many times that you did.

Have you seen something that isn't included in this demo?  Because in this demo, you didn't.

You didn't watch the livechat?

[Wulfram]

Saibh wrote...

You didn't watch the livechat?

No

[JohnstonMR]

Galad22 wrote...

JohnstonMR wrote...

You may have missed something--you're on a computer (or a console).  Computer RPGs have NEVER been about "roleplaying" more than "playing as someone else."  Even in BG and BG2, you choose from a set list of options the writers gave you--at NO TIME in the game can you just say what you want. 

In BG2, when you first talk to Minsc, there are three choices of response about Boo, his hamster.  NONE of those choices was what I wanted to say, which was "You have a space hamster! That's awesome!"  You could either insult him or brush it aside.  That's not "roleplaying" in the classic sense, it's playing as another character and choosing his responses. 

True roleplaying, in the sense you mean it, happens at a table or a LARP event, with real people playing all the characters.   It doesn't happen even in the best Computer RPGs. 

For you it doesn't it seems. You are not in any way qualified to say if it does or doesn't happen to me.

You assume that because I recognize the limited nature of computer roleplaying, I don't somewhat live in the character's head.  That would be an incorrect assumption.  But if you are trying to say that a CRPG gives you the same roleplaying experience that I get playing at the table with my wife and friends, then I will just nod and back away, because we will never agree there. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Saibh wrote...

Because the writers--the people who made the game--had an intention. Their word is greater than yours.

Neither word matters.  What matters is whether the feature was there.

And it was.

Again, you are pretending you had the option. You had the benefit of not being contradicted, but that doesn't mean you were ever right.

I'm demonstrably right.  The option was there because I could choose it.  I did.

If the option wasn't available, I wouldn't have been able to choose it.

It's like you're saying that it wasn't possible to go Void Rangering in Daggerfall.  Clearly the designers didn't intend it, but it was certainly possible.

I'm sure they're well aware that some people play outside the parameters they set. After all, we have whole websites devoted to mods to do just that.

But that doesn't change the fact that they had a vision, and they are simply clarifying and consolidating it now. It interferes with your perception of how you played the game, but that's not an issue to them, because you were always playing something that they didn't intend for you.

When they made the box for the game, I'm sure they didn't intend for me to use it to kill spiders. And if they then decide to make it digital download, I'd be wrong to say that they are taking away my bug-swatting capabilities, because I was inventing a use for it that they never promised us.

You wouldn't be wrong at all.  You'd be absolutely correct.

I've seen complaints that the switch the smaller manuals deprives the buys of bathroom reading.  It's a sensible and credible complaint.

[Doveberry]

wowpwnslol wrote...

It's worse. Made for ADD kids too lazy to read, so they even added pictures. I hate ME style dialogue "wheel" it screams console oversimplification.

This is fascinating. Apparently I'm now supposed to be unable to read because I have ADD. For those interested, I have an average reading speed of 1400 words per minute (an adult person usually reads at about 250 words per minute). I still love the conversation wheel. Not because there is less to read, but because it allows for more naturally flowing conversation sequences.

Oh, and I would appreciate it if you didn't use "ADD" as a synonym for "stupid". I actually found that very offensive, believe it or not.

Modifié par Doveberry, 24 février 2011 - 07:48 .

[Melness]

That's a really depressing post. Firstly you claim that Sylvius' personal experience of playing the game is wrong, which seems incredibly condescending.

You have 3 lines, one of them is Hi.



You pick Hi, and while you do so you can pretend that it was a:



Loud, happy hi.



A flirty hi.



A gruff hi.



A sad hi.



No matter how many portfolios you add to the list, the other characters will react to the 'Hi' in the same way - meaning that this so called 'wide variety of tones' never existed and may as well as be reduced to one.



This is how it was in DA:O. In DA:2, you'll engage in a completely equal system with one crucial difference: you'll also pick the intent behind the line, with the added bonus of your character actually having facial expressions.

[Saibh]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

That's a really depressing post.  Firstly you claim that Sylvius' personal experience of playing the game is wrong, which seems incredibly condescending.  Actually, you really seem to be making Sylvius' point for him.  Your "clarifying and consolidating" is reducing people's ability to roleplay within the game.  

Frankly I think we should be commending Sylvius for his ability to fit some of the cooperative storytelling of PnP into a CRPG.  Instead you seem to be saying "too bad, its not what the writer wanted, and we should be playing their story rather than trying to make our own".

He's not wrong but he's definitely not right. He's playing his illusion of the game, and he's been lucky that it wasn't interfered with in DAO. But trying to say that the writer's are taking something away because they're now telling you how Hawke is intending what he says is silly. There was only your illusion of how it was said. They have taken nothing away but your illusion.

If you prefer your illusion, again, that's fine. But it's never anything that you actually had. If they removed choice altogether, I can see complaints: you always had some amount of choice.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Melness wrote...

That's exactly what people call an illusion. Your perception of how things went depends on how much vague the intent of the writers was, but the former does not change the latter.

But the vagueness means that the writer's intent didn't actually make it into the game.  It's not there at all, so there's nothing for me to change.

I'm just filling in the gaps.  Losing those gaps is a bad thing.

[Saibh]

Wulfram wrote...

No

Aaaaaah. Okay. I assumed you had. More about the situation is explained there.

[falconlord5]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

You wouldn't be wrong at all.  You'd be absolutely correct.

I've seen complaints that the switch the smaller manuals deprives the buys of bathroom reading.  It's a sensible and credible complaint.

Syl, are you actually complaining about this stuff, or are you just living up to your name? Or is there a difference?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

That's a really depressing post. 

You, I like.

Saibh wrote...

He's not wrong but he's definitely not right.

Truth has an excluded middle.  I have to be one or the other.

[Melness]

double post.

Modifié par Melness, 24 février 2011 - 07:54 .

[Saibh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Neither word matters.  What matters is whether the feature was there.

And it was.

Only because you pretend you are playing your game. But you never have. You are playing their game.

I'm demonstrably right.

You've said that a lot, but this always melts down into "My illusion was not challenged, therefore these features I invented are really there."

The option was there because I could choose it.  I did.

You did not. You made separate rules for the game.

For all intents and purposes you "modded" the game. You simply did so in your head, instead of altering code. It'd be like claiming you never defeated the Archdemon, and that that was a figment of your Warden's imagination. Fine and dandy, but you're contradicting the story they want to tell. The only person accountable for that is you.

You wouldn't be wrong at all.  You'd be absolutely correct.

I've seen complaints that the switch the smaller manuals deprives the buys of bathroom reading.  It's a sensible and credible complaint.

No, it's not. And I think you are being deliberately obtuse.

[falconlord5]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Nomen Mendax wrote...

That's a really depressing post. 

You, I like.

Saibh wrote...

He's not wrong but he's definitely not right.

Truth has an excluded middle.  I have to be one or the other.

When it comes to a subjective experience? No, because the subjective nature of that truth forces the truth to have degrees.

[Galad22]

JohnstonMR wrote...

You assume that because I recognize the limited nature of computer roleplaying, I don't somewhat live in the character's head.  That would be an incorrect assumption.  But if you are trying to say that a CRPG gives you the same roleplaying experience that I get playing at the table with my wife and friends, then I will just nod and back away, because we will never agree there. 

I am saying you shouldn't try telling me what roleplaying means to me thanks. I do find it little insulting.

Of course it doesn't give same sort of roleplaying experience than larp, for example gives. But it does immerse me into the game more if I can tell exactly what I am saying to people in games.

Da:o gave me at least some sort of roleplaying experience, playing as Shepard in ME never did. I don't really see why this is some sort of problem to you.

Modifié par Galad22, 24 février 2011 - 07:52 .

[The-Sapient]

I, for one, strongly prefer the new system over the old. I find it far more immersive.

I also like that I can read all the text in this thread without any indicators of tone. This way I can role play that everyone who disagrees with me is using a voice filled with uncertainty, sarcasm, or plain stupidity.

Modifié par The-Sapient, 24 février 2011 - 07:53 .

[Melness]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Melness wrote...

That's exactly what people call an illusion. Your perception of how things went depends on how much vague the intent of the writers was, but the former does not change the latter.

But the vagueness means that the writer's intent didn't actually make it into the game.  It's not there at all, so there's nothing for me to change.

I'm just filling in the gaps.  Losing those gaps is a bad thing.

Filling those gaps is what the wheel and its intent images intend to do and, sincerely, they are quite efficient in this regard.

Both the DA:O and the DA:2 systems had their problems and arguable advantages, but the latter can evolve.

[AkiKishi]

Saibh wrote...

He's not wrong but he's definitely not right. He's playing his illusion of the game, and he's been lucky that it wasn't interfered with in DAO. But trying to say that the writer's are taking something away because they're now telling you how Hawke is intending what he says is silly. There was only your illusion of how it was said. They have taken nothing away but your illusion.

In DA all the writers know is that you will be playing a Grey Warden. That's the story hook. In DA2 they give you a character to play. Someone called "Hawke" you may get to choose how they look, but that will make no difference in the game. Your class will probably have a bit more impact, but that was the case in DA as well.

Your not roleplaying "Hawke" as much as you are choosing things that appeal to you. Like people playing ME for a Paragon play or Renegade play. The outcome is the only thing that matters because no choice is a wrong one for a pre-generated character.

It's kind of like how I read a post earlier about how Hawke reacts to the death of their sibling, well that's how they react, there is no need for a variable outcome with only 1 character.

The bad thing is, that you get really bad character development under this system. Because the character is required to not be too much of any one thing.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 24 février 2011 - 07:55 .

[Black-Xero]

I like it.