992 réponses à ce sujet

[Vahe]

Gaider, while you're here can you talk about the sibling death scene discrepancy between the demo and the newest trailer? The one in the demo has no emotional impact whatsoever, while in the trailer Hawke falls to his knees with grief.

[Wulfram]

Adhin wrote...

tmp that's partially a good example but 'diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive' aren't the only 3 intents allowed. That's just the over-arching category and personalities things tie into. There's neutral options for all 3, and could of easily been applied to that situation given. As for the 4th 'do you have business here human' could easily be a left investigate option (with out swapping to a new page).

The demo seemed pretty heavily commited to diplomatic, sarcastic or aggressive.

[tmp7704]

Maconbar wrote...

Except that DA:2 doesn't use the 3 tone icons for each dialogue. You won't always get polite, snarky, and aggresive. There is a diplomatic icon available for some convos.

It seems to offer three personality modes, which is the amount confirmed by the devs. These are colour-coded as far as i can tell: blue (polite or diplomatic), purple (snarky or charming), red (aggressive or firm)   So that's three tones, each with two variants... but it doesn't change the fact there isn't "neutral" tone which was present in the earlier title

[Naltair]

Galad22 wrote...
Then why did you change layout. I really doubt there were that many people asking for wheel here, since not everyone like it in mass effect either.

If it was essentially the same why couldn't you just stick with it.

For some like me it was better. Because this really does effect my roleplaying experience which DA2 is supposed to be about. And it affects it to a worse direction.

Wheel for me in ME was fine because it was there from the start and that series felt like it had different focus.
Now you are pushing that focus into DA series which really doesn't need any of that because DA could stand on its own two feets quite well already.

See I feel differently I think the Wheel is a good direction I don't really want tons of lines of text at the bottom of my screen especially when it's easy to see that many of the choices are saying the same thing just with diffrent wording.  I love to role play and I don't really see much changing besides the aesthetics.

[Marionetten]

I don't dislike the system as much as I dislike the repercussions of it. If you pick sarcastic three times and aggressive two times your character ends up being sarcastic. This is far too similar to alignment in my eyes.

[Kappa Neko]

LadyBri wrote...
There were plenty of times in Origins that I messed up my response in a conversation because I thought a certain reply had a specific intent only to find out I was wrong and the NPC misinterpreted my meaning.  I look forward to this game where my intent/tone becomes a part of my response because I feel it will give me more control in conversations to steer the dialogue down the path I am envisioning.  I don't think it's laziness to have such icons - in fact, I think it allows us more control and input to RP with greater effectiveness.

I enjoyed that, actually. Having to figure out what to say to my companions, only to get flamed for being wrong. I didn't mind having to reload over and over again because I I failed to understand what works with Sten. I tried every answer anyway just to see how the character would react.

What I'm hoping for to save the interactions from becoming another ME lobotomy is that you will still be required to figure out how to talk to people. In ME both approaches would lead to success. If coming across too much of a goody two shoes pisses off certain people and only being aggressive will get things done, it won't be that different to DAO and I'll make peace with the dialogue wheel. We'll find out soon how it plays out.

[Naltair]

Adhin wrote...

Almost every review pointed it out, plenty of people before it was released and after wished there was fully voiced PC. They basically changed it because, all of others whining and reviews aside - they felt it would better fit and immerse people into the game.

A silent protagonist stands out in a highly voiced and cinematic experience especially when people are reacting to a silent, emotionless puppet.

[MasterSamson88]

The dialogue wheel in DAII from what I can tell is pretty much the same as DA:O. The intent on all the messages is just as clear as well. The Paraphrasing works as well because it gives you the idea of what it means so you can quickly choose it and then have the cut scene move on.



Lots of people mentioning getting Zevrend'd XD I mean this is part of the reason they made it.

[Marionetten]

Naltair wrote...

Adhin wrote...

Almost every review pointed it out, plenty of people before it was released and after wished there was fully voiced PC. They basically changed it because, all of others whining and reviews aside - they felt it would better fit and immerse people into the game.

A silent protagonist stands out in a highly voiced and cinematic experience especially when people are reacting to a silent, emotionless puppet.

A voiced protagonist stands out far more if the voiced line doesn't fit the scene. This was a rather frequent occurance in the demo.

[Galad22]

Naltair wrote...

See I feel differently I think the Wheel is a good direction I don't really want tons of lines of text at the bottom of my screen especially when it's easy to see that many of the choices are saying the same thing just with diffrent wording.  I love to role play and I don't really see much changing besides the aesthetics.

Yes indeed, I don't doubt many people like it too, but mass effect has it already. Can't see why mass effect can't have that wheel for other people and DA something else for those who actually like to see what they are going to say.

[David Gaider]

tmp7704 wrote...
I was actually expecting it to be "not as different" based on the earlier dev comments, but must say that in practice --at least as far as the glimpse we get in the demo-- it feels quite different and somewhat more limited.

Maybe it's because i was making pretty liberal use of what would be equivalent of "neutral" option and this one isn't really present in DA2, and instead i'm given option to be a wisecracking jackass who generally fails to make anyone in Thedas as much as smirk at his/her antics

For example, encounter with Duncan in CE origin right from the start has:

Duncan: Good day. I understand congratulations are in order for your impending wedding.
1: You're not wanted here. This is a private ceremony.
2: Let's talk about your impending beating.
3: Thanks, but please go. I'd rather avoid any unpleasantness.
4: Do you have business here, human?

while it's similar, right from the start this deviates from the DA2 model, because rather than polite, snarky, aggressive (+ investigate) you have polite, aggressive and neutral. And that neutral is quite believable line to pick, given the situation. In DA2 however this option would seemingly be gone and if i didn't want the character to be snarky i'd only have option of kissing butt or seeking trouble. Neither being very appealing.

Part of it could be also, being able to read the choices exactly as they were i didn't have to choose based on the vague summary. In the DA2 demo i catch myself constantly second-guessing and stalling before i actually commit, and in the end just clicking the lines based on the tone icon because the paraphrases confuse me more about what the character is going to say, than help. For some unexplained reason this is quite more frustrating in DA2 than in ME, where the paraphrases didn't really give me that problem.

edit: on second thought, i suppose these three options in the example could be interpreted differently -- 1 as aggressive, 2 snarky and 3 polite. That would match the DA2 model (if i overlook that "snarky" is also pretty aggressive, something the icon wouldn't really warn me about) but then i suspect the paraphrase thing would bite me in the back as it happens in DA2 demo, and i'd wind up getting too influenced by the "aggressive" icon for the option 1 and as result hesitate to pick it.

I get what you're saying, but having written many of those dialogues in DAO I can say that the "neutral" option was the exception and not the rule.

On the other hand, when we wrote the "action" choices, the neutral tone practically became required.

For DA2, we have the same option to have more than 3 basic choices if we choose -- there's still room for two more "special" options on the left side of wheel, aside from the Investigates. Like Origins, however, those are the exceptions and not the rule.

[Zigzaggy]

Adhin wrote...

Zig thats usually because people who don't like something are more vocal about it. Most of us who are happy with the change don't just go around constantly making posts about how much we enjoy it. Back with DAO, before it was even out, this was all reversed. Buncha people wanted it to be a wheel and, I didn't care (cause I like both systems honeslty). I prefer the wheel method, more so with there new twist on it with there not being a path and the intent made obvious.
Game got flack for your char being silent in a game full of voice over work. I know it made me feel a bit... disconnected but I still loved it. Either way wheels in, tables turned, some other vocal minority is whining. Majority don't care enough to actually come on these forums and **** about it.

Thanks Adhin.

Always refreshing reading another perons views.Sure it's a given the vast majority do not come to the forum.Nevertheless the forum concept is the only way a company can garner a consensus of feeling positive/negative.

I don't object to you being vocal in support of paraphrasing nor a voiced protaganist.Most of you whom are happy with the system do post constantly and troll those that don't agree.So we'll take no direction from you.

What does interest me is the reasoning behind why you/others like the paraphrase wheel.You are  role playing when you haven't the foggiest clue of what you are about to say/may not like what is said.How is that more immersive and rewarding.To a sensible person it's counter intuitive.In all my years at drama school no actor has been trained to adlib through a movie.
When you roleplay you need to know in advance the choices you make...to have the game go in the direction you want.It's not roleplaying to accept "oh did i say that witty remark when I wanted to be earnest and sincere..oh well"

I've never had a satisfactory answer for paraphrasing being ' better'  more advantageous than just selecting the damn line you want. Same goes for a Voiced protaganist.

[Adhin]

The demo actually has I think 5-6 intent icons used. but yeah most of em are the base 3. Keep in mind though its a demo, and not just that but a demo of the INTRO (which is there to introduce systems). The things also an older build. There's plenty of things that'll be different in the main game from what your seeing in that, its just a good example of the flow of combat.

[Merced652]

Marionetten wrote...

I don't dislike the system as much as I dislike the repercussions of it. If you pick sarcastic three times and aggressive two times your character ends up being sarcastic. This is far too similar to alignment in my eyes.

Indeed, maybe that line that is opened up for use by your overriding personality is actually the best choice in a given situation for someone who is not that overriding personality? Its almost like they arbitrarily limited our options to accommodate the wheel and came up with this half assed personality system to use extra VO work in.

[Brawne]

I like it, it's even better then ME black/white wheel. They should implement same system into ME3.

[Threeparts]

tmp7704 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

You may not like that the layout is different from Origins, but it's truly not as different as some people seem to want everyone to believe.

For example, encounter with Duncan in CE origin right from the start has:

Duncan: Good day. I understand congratulations are in order for your impending wedding.
1: You're not wanted here. This is a private ceremony.
2: Let's talk about your impending beating.
3: Thanks, but please go. I'd rather avoid any unpleasantness.
4: Do you have business here, human?

while it's similar, right from the start this deviates from the DA2 model, because rather than polite, snarky, aggressive (+ investigate) you have polite, aggressive and neutral. And that neutral is quite believable line to pick, given the situation. In DA2 however this option would seemingly be gone and if i didn't want the character to be snarky i'd only have option of kissing butt or seeking trouble. Neither being very appealing.

I'd say this is actually a good example of how much it hasn't changed. I would consider option 1 to be agressive, 2 to be snarky, 3 to be polite, and 4 to be Investigate. And the fact that we perceive the tones of each line so differently means that there is already a case for having intent icons.

I'm not saying you're wrong to hold the opinion you hold, just that personal perceptions play a big part in how the changes are received. 

Modifié par Threeparts, 24 février 2011 - 05:28 .

[Adhin]

It's because I roleplay on live Persistent Worlds Zig. I don't sit there, making everyone wait awhile while I decide what Im going to say. I have to talk in real time in response to situations in that setting. The way the conversation wheel works is FAR more inline with how people think and hold real conversations then directly writen out dialog. Its, ultimately to me, feels more like im roleplaying a character when I have pre-set things my character can say.

Think about it for a bit, have you ever been in a conversation (perhaps a heated one) that, when you say something your, in your mind, while your saying it (or just after) going to your self - wtf did I just say. People do that rather often then, 'stick to there guns' so to speak. No one actually sits there in there head really piecing together sentence, it flows out naturally. So that's how I view about it anyways. Keeps it feeling more natural to me.

Now 'better'? I'm not saying its better. I just like it more personally. Its all personal preference in the end.

[Merced652]

Threeparts wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

You may not like that the layout is different from Origins, but it's truly not as different as some people seem to want everyone to believe.

For example, encounter with Duncan in CE origin right from the start has:

Duncan: Good day. I understand congratulations are in order for your impending wedding.
1: You're not wanted here. This is a private ceremony.
2: Let's talk about your impending beating.
3: Thanks, but please go. I'd rather avoid any unpleasantness.
4: Do you have business here, human?

while it's similar, right from the start this deviates from the DA2 model, because rather than polite, snarky, aggressive (+ investigate) you have polite, aggressive and neutral. And that neutral is quite believable line to pick, given the situation. In DA2 however this option would seemingly be gone and if i didn't want the character to be snarky i'd only have option of kissing butt or seeking trouble. Neither being very appealing.

I'd say this is actually a good example of how much it hasn't changed. To me, I would consider option 1 to be agressive, 2 to be snarky, 3 to be polite, and 4 to be Investigate. And the fact that we perceive the tones of each line so differently means that there is already a case for having intent icons. 

But then you're metagaming based on intent instead of roleplaying your charc... nvm. No one RPs.

[Naltair]

Marionetten wrote...

Naltair wrote...

Adhin wrote...

Almost every review pointed it out, plenty of people before it was released and after wished there was fully voiced PC. They basically changed it because, all of others whining and reviews aside - they felt it would better fit and immerse people into the game.

A silent protagonist stands out in a highly voiced and cinematic experience especially when people are reacting to a silent, emotionless puppet.

A voiced protagonist stands out far more if the voiced line doesn't fit the scene. This was a rather frequent occurance in the demo.

It is step in a good direction though.  Voice Acting will alays be contentious.

[Naltair]

Merced652 wrote...

But then you're metagaming based on intent instead of roleplaying your charc... nvm. No one RPs.

I think much of RPing has some meta gaming and if anyone ever reloads after screwing up a conversation then you meta-gamed.  No big deal just have fun, if that is how you have fun then what ios the problem with that?

[Zerakus]

I like it... especially after having spent my last couple of playthroughs reading on the DA wiki what option this-ot-that did. I'd go with an option for Zevran which I thought was a joke and fitted his personality well, and instead he takes offense, for example.



Sten, in particular was difficult to figure out at first, and had to zig-zag between different personalities to even keep my team together. This and the friendship/rivalry system are both leaps ahead, imo.

[LadyBri]

Merced652 wrote...

LadyBri wrote...
 in fact, I think it allows us more control and input to RP with greater effectiveness.

RPing with other peoples very limited choice of words, and even more limited intent. Its far easier to RP with the fact that they misunderstood you. But your desire to metagame pretty much torpedoed that from the start, so i'm not sure why you'd even bother.

But I will not be metagaming my first playthrough because that would be impossible.  Sure, any of us who has followed the plot/characters on the forums has a tiny clue into some aspects of the game but we don't know everything...not even close.  

It is because of this that intent will be truly helpful because I know already what type of Hawke I want to start with, and I want to be able to support that by not accidentally choosing a phrase that the character completely misinterprets.  Also, the wheel is paraphrased so even then I may surprise myself by having the intent that runs with my type of Hawke, but maybe it will still come out different than I envisioned.  Either way, I like knowing that what I say is for the most part interpreted properly by the NPCs, and I think that is an important part of playing an RPG because your choice and intent is what develops your character and his/her relationships with others.

[Nomen Mendax]

David Gaider wrote...
This is exactly the case.

In Origins we had instances of these kinds of "personality" hubs, as outlined above, where it's more about how you're saying something that making actual decisions on what to do. They, too, had the same three basic options-- something we've done in variations since Baldur's Gate.

Then there are "choice" hubs where you are deciding what to do, and there are no icons except for those actions that need clarification on the intent, such as "this will lead to combat" and "this is asking for money".

Again, no different than in Origins.

If the intent from someone is to imply that moving the investigate options into a seperate wheel (rather than having them as part of the main list, as in Origins) or adding an icon to clarify tone (which, no, was not self-evident to everyone who played Origins) somehow makes it simpler rather than different from Origins is very much missing the point.

You may not like that the layout is different from Origins, but it's truly not as different as some people seem to want everyone to believe. Not liking something doesn't make it "for dumb people", which is the implication that some people keep making. Which is too bad, as I'd hate for someone's love of Origins-- a sentiment I share-- predispose them to disliking something based only on the fact that it's not Origins.

The big difference to me is the paraphrase, I want to be able to know what my character is going to say not a vague hint and an indication of tone.  I really don't understand why you decided to go with this route.  I'm also not very fond of the dialogue wheel as a conversation widget since it doesn't (at least to me) do anything that can't be done with a (boring) rectangle with lines of text in it. The rectangle also has the huge advantage that it allows you to put the full text in if you wanted to, or even allow the user to choose between full text and the paraphrase.

I know this is all water under the bridge but it seems like you (the design team) decided that paraphrase versus full text was the way to go because you wanted to force the users to experience the conversation in a particular way.  While you obviously have to make design choices this, to me, is something that is more personal and based on how a particular person likes to play.  Some people like the surprise of finding out what their character is going to say because it is more "cinematic".  Others, like me, prefer to feel that it is their character so want to be as much in control over what they are going to say.  

And before anyone points it out I'm aware I would be having the same choices in the old system, but I really want to avoid the feeling of "I didn't know I was going to say that" which I find very immersion breaking. 

Modifié par Nomen Mendax, 24 février 2011 - 05:33 .

[Merced652]

Naltair wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

But then you're metagaming based on intent instead of roleplaying your charc... nvm. No one RPs.

I think much of RPing has some meta gaming and if anyone ever reloads after screwing up a conversation then you meta-gamed.  No big deal just have fun, if that is how you have fun then what ios the problem with that?

Because as has been said more times than can be counted; theres no room for rp in the current system.

edit: My bad, there is no room to rp outside of A B C.

Modifié par Merced652, 24 février 2011 - 05:33 .