992 réponses à ce sujet

[Gerudan]

I like the new system, because it makes more diverse answers possible. You may "fantasize" about how your DA: character would have said something, but it didn't really matter, since the game didn't knew. Now the game can recognize the tone of your answer and the writer could write the further dialog accordingly.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

I would like to know how people feel that the game is dumbed down???? because i just dont see it.

[Adhin]

Oh I roleplay Merceds, I've made plenty of choices in game because its what I felt like my character would do.

Oh and Zig there is 1 thing (not the wheel specifically) I think is an actual direct 'betterment' of the conversation system in general. The intent icons I think are great and regardless of if the player is voiced, or its in a wheel or whatever. Having intent icons to go along with the phase helps a lot. Books do this, minus the icon, they write it out instead but pictures in a game can be much simpler and save screen space.

[Galad22]

Merced652 wrote...

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.

And it also seems that creators don't see any problems with it. Which is funny considering they still call their games rpgs.

[Adhin]

TGFKAMAdmaX - simple, delusional insanity. Yup. That or blatantly ignoring the added stats and just ****ing for the sake of ****ing.

[AkiKishi]

Naltair wrote...

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

That's not really the biggest problem with voice acting. The biggest problem is it removes choce. That's why you only have one character in ME and DA2.

Ideally several fully voiced options would be available but that's just not practical. But I don't see the single protanist as a great step forward either. Especially when development is still poor compared to RPGs which remove the branching paths.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 24 février 2011 - 05:36 .

[Threeparts]

Merced652 wrote...

Threeparts wrote...

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.

I do RP, actually. Quite a lot, both in DA and other games.
But how do you see it as metagaming? If I have a City Elf character whose personality dictates that she would make an aggressive response to a human, but I choose a line that turns out to be more humourous than I'd like, is it really metagaming to reload and choose a different option the next time around? I'd consider it being more true to the character, since I had no voice to indicate if she was saying something I thought would be aggressive in a tone that was actually just sarcastic.
With the intent icons I don't need to go through that process of "oh, crap, I wasn't trying to be funny, I was trying to threaten you!", I can already tell that the tone my character will take is the one I intend, regardless of how other characters respond to her.

[LadyBri]

Kappa Neko wrote...

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.

I can totally understand that, as well.  Granted, we've only got the demo and not the full game, but even in the demo when trying out different tones I picked what I thought would be appropriate only to think to myself that maybe another tone may have worked better after all.  I think because this wheel is paraphrased, we will still find some surprises in dialogue - but, I still think it's nice that we are generally more aware of the tone of what we are saying even if it ends up not being the tone/phrase that an NPC responds to in the intended manner.

[Adhin]

There's room for RP its just not as open, and never can be as open as PnP or some online community where you, personally, type out what your going to say. And then have 'real' people RP there characters in response. It's as roleplay as games can get ultimately. I, for one, am grateful Bioware is out there making games like these of the quality they do. Just isn't enough of that out there.

[Naltair]

Merced652 wrote...
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.

If this is comparing DA2 to DA:O then you couldn't reall role play beyond A, B, or C in that game as well.  You are just slecting what the writers chose to put in situation X, Y, and/or Z and it may not exactly fit how you would role play those situations.  Not sure what you want unless you want total freedom to respond how you want exactly as you want.

Don't think we are there yet buddy.

[Gerudan]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

I would like to know how people feel that the game is dumbed down???? because i just dont see it.

Because making things easier to understand and more comfortable to use always means, to dumb them down. 

---- 


Oh, I forgot I wanted to post the following in every "the dumbed DA down" threads, I see: 

http://www.escapistm.../22-The-Witcher

[MasterSamson88]

Gerudan wrote...

I like the new system, because it makes more diverse answers possible. You may "fantasize" about how your DA: character would have said something, but it didn't really matter, since the game didn't knew. Now the game can recognize the tone of your answer and the writer could write the further dialog accordingly.

Totally agree.

[My_Decemberling]

I don't think its that different from Origins. As stated by man other people the system in Origins was a list of six, 3 answers with different tones, and three investagatory questions, and now its just split over two hubs. The only thing I really see as being different is the fact that you dont know what the whole is when you read the paraphrase, and you aren't reading it with your own inflection, rather a voice actor speaks the line. I think at first it made me think that I wasn't able to RP as well, but then I realized the only thing that made me feel more like I was RPing in origins was the fact that I was reading the lines and adding my own tone and inflection to them. At this point, however, it doesn't really matter to me, I can see the benfits of both systems.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Galad22 wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

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.

And it also seems that creators don't see any problems with it. Which is funny considering they still call their games rpgs.

Really??? just wow....People can still roleplay with the new system. YOU just fail too. and somehow because YOU fail to it is somehow true of all people who play the game...right???

[Zigzaggy]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

Hardly any instances of neutrality in DAO...neutral tone is really a necersary requirement ...hardly any instances of neutrality in DA2.

Is what David is saying.However we already have the full dialogue from DAO and can dismiss his claims of neutral tone being an exception....it's there in abundance.

Let's have a wager David.....I prove my point with 50 instances and you give me £100..confident?

[AkiKishi]

Threeparts wrote...
I do RP, actually. Quite a lot, both in DA and other games.
But how do you see it as metagaming? If I have a City Elf character whose personality dictates that she would make an aggressive response to a human, but I choose a line that turns out to be more humourous than I'd like, is it really metagaming to reload and choose a different option the next time around? I'd consider it being more true to the character, since I had no voice to indicate if she was saying something I thought would be aggressive in a tone that was actually just sarcastic.
With the intent icons I don't need to go through that process of "oh, crap, I wasn't trying to be funny, I was trying to threaten you!", I can already tell that the tone my character will take is the one I intend, regardless of how other characters respond to her.

My city elf loathed humans especially human nobles, but was very nice to everyone else.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Adhin wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX - simple, delusional insanity. Yup. That or blatantly ignoring the added stats and just ****ing for the sake of ****ing.

Thats what i thought....shame really. And before this thread i still had faith in humanity

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

Hmm well this isn't really something that i can really argue about with the writer so i'll accept that's the case   Perhaps then, these exceptions were present in the dialogues exactly when i'd wish for one, and so i ended using a decent amount of them. And now that DA2 doesn't seem to provide them, this lack feels acute.

I suspect having full content on the line rather than the preview could make it quite easier to select my responses faster and with less second-guessing, too -- i really wouldn't mind the tradeoff of effectively getting to experience the lines twice. But given a toggle to allow that seems to be pretty much out of question... well. Guess will just have to put up with how it is.

[Galad22]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

I would like to know how people feel that the game is dumbed down???? because i just dont see it.

Did you know that diplomacy is apparently gone for good. So do you suppose you can talk your way out of any fights?

Considering how often you can do that in ME2 I doubt you can talk your way out of anything in DA2.

Also every other non combat skills are gone.

[Adhin]

LadyBri wrote...
I can totally understand that, as well.  Granted, we've only got the demo and not the full game, but even in the demo when trying out different tones I picked what I thought would be appropriate only to think to myself that maybe another tone may have worked better after all.  I think because this wheel is paraphrased, we will still find some surprises in dialogue - but, I still think it's nice that we are generally more aware of the tone of what we are saying even if it ends up not being the tone/phrase that an NPC responds to in the intended manner.

I agree with this. Though I'd lke to add that knowing the intent, you can be 100% sure they don't respondfavoribly because thats just who they are. Not that you missinterrupted the intent hehe. That way we can be sure that we just don't agree with said NPC and can be ok argueing. 

And with Rivalry now with companions its even less to worry about, I'm looking forword to that system too either way.

[Merced652]

Threeparts wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

Threeparts wrote...

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.

I do RP, actually. Quite a lot, both in DA and other games.
But how do you see it as metagaming? If I have a City Elf character whose personality dictates that she would make an aggressive response to a human, but I choose a line that turns out to be more humourous than I'd like, is it really metagaming to reload and choose a different option the next time around? I'd consider it being more true to the character, since I had no voice to indicate if she was saying something I thought would be aggressive in a tone that was actually just sarcastic.
With the intent icons I don't need to go through that process of "oh, crap, I wasn't trying to be funny, I was trying to threaten you!", I can already tell that the tone my character will take is the one I intend, regardless of how other characters respond to her.

Yes it is metagaming. You RP like as i described in another thread. With one overreaching event or attitude in mind. Your sole point of reference is "yo i was a slave" so therefore everything is done by your character because you were a slave and its apparently had some huge effect on everything.

Far be it for me to tell you how to RP, but this system forces you in to picking lines not by content(because LOLWHEEL) but by intent because you'll never know what you're actually saying. Thats pretty criminal to me because maybe my character might make an aggressive comment but wouldn't say it so horribly. At least when the intent is unknown and the NPC takes what you thought was an aggressive comment as a joke your character would have to react to that misunderstanding.

[viking135]

I love the ME style dialogs system we got a protagonist who speaks why whud we have to read what hes going to say ? The wheel gives a simple and quick way of making a choice and it also helps you make the choice you wanna make. As in you will know the tone of your answer.

Makes the game more immersive and thats a good thing.

[Zigzaggy]

Adhin wrote...

Oh I roleplay Merceds, I've made plenty of choices in game because its what I felt like my character would do.
Oh and Zig there is 1 thing (not the wheel specifically) I think is an actual direct 'betterment' of the conversation system in general. The intent icons I think are great and regardless of if the player is voiced, or its in a wheel or whatever. Having intent icons to go along with the phase helps a lot. Books do this, minus the icon, they write it out instead but pictures in a game can be much simpler and save screen space.

Thanks Adhin . I would like to respond though.

Of course lots of these little clues help alot in gaining some sort of impression of what you are about to say.It's a little hard to make a case of 'betterment' as you say when it's glaringly obvious it is inferior to chosing the exact lines you want from lines of text.

It just is and isn't open to interpretation or opinion , anymore than say being presented with the written dialogue in a silent movie as opposed to lipreading .

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Gerudan wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

I would like to know how people feel that the game is dumbed down???? because i just dont see it.

Because making things easier to understand and more comfortable to use always means, to dumb them down. 

---- 


Oh, I forgot I wanted to post the following in every "the dumbed DA down" threads, I see: 

http://www.escapistm.../22-The-Witcher

I will never understand. The wheel accomplishes the same thing. Instead of the lists in DA comprising of like 6 choices they split it for DA2. Th investigate options of DA are on the left side of the wheel...and the choices that progress the convo are on the right side of the wheel. Only now they have added icons to help understand the tone prior to choosing. I know i am not the only one who accidentally led someone on because i misread the tone. So by them actually imrpoving the old system by making it much more understandable and less bulky it is becoming dumb???

[Pavise87]

Don't know why people would really care about the dialogue wheel, its pretty much exactly the same as origins, but in a different format.



What do you want? To read the sentence choices and then select one for the character to say, the exact thing that you just read? I don't think so, because that would be plain stupid.



In Origins you had five or so choices, however did not, on most occasions, three of them lead to the exact same conversation? I also recall some set of choices that made absolutely no difference to what the npc would say, so it appeared you had choices, but actually didn't.



We have the investigate options also, so I don't really understand the big deal. I remember people calling out for a voiced character, so I don't really understand how anyone didn't expect this.