992 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Threeparts wrote...

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. 

I have added edit to my post meantime since i've realized such interpretation is possible, too   Just one thing to point out, the "snarky" option would be actually snarky + aggressive (because isn't just joking around but actually threatening the person you talk to) i.e. something i don't think the DA2 model really supports as it could lead to confusion -- if i select a line with trollface icon that has "i'll beat you to death" then is the character going to say something that makes it obviously a joke, or is he/she going to be a smartass while actually threatening with violence? Things like that.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Merced652 wrote...

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.

That is overlooking the problems with the old system. because you never knew the intent of the old lines some gamer would make chocies they never intended to which would effectively break the roleplaying.

[Mykel54]

I just can´t get my head around why it is so bad to have the written phrases match the actual dialogue, maybe it is because i am not a native speaker, but i really hate when people say that "reading something and then watching it said loud is annoying". I think that is incredibly nitpicky, it would have been a lot better for understanding what hawke is going to say, if we had both the intent icons AND the dialogue text. I really hope that bioware does something about this in the future, i come from playing western rpgs like the gothic series (up until risen) and they use a system like in DAO, but with voice acting, and i really get nothing of this "frustration" people speak when watching my character say something i have picked, and readed.

Modifié par Mykel54, 24 février 2011 - 05:51 .

[Gerudan]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

So by them actually imrpoving the old system by making it much more understandable and less bulky it is becoming dumb???

Don't ask me, I was just ironic and don't get the whining either. 

[Brockololly]

tmp7704 wrote...
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.

I completely agree- I found myself reading the paraphrase then looking at the icons and just getting stumped in the demo. It definitely took me more time to decide a response in DA2 than either ME games or DAO where you can clearly see the full text. And I thought that part of the shtick with the dialogue wheel and paraphrases was that it made conversations more fluid and natural? I wonder if thats something they could track via telemetry?

I'd gladly sacrifice any "cinematic experience" for the chance to know what the PC was actually going to say.

Modifié par Brockololly, 24 février 2011 - 05:50 .

[Merced652]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

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???

Which is actually, to me, a incredibly good thing because this happends IRL, and its hard and not often written to intentionally happen. This is RPing in the details rather than "i was a slave."

[Naltair]

Submit to the wheel.

[David Gaider]

Galad22 wrote...
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.

The lack of non-combat skills does not mean you can't talk your way out of fights.

You get bonus dialogue options based on your personality choices-- so someone who's diplomatic most often will occasionally have such options appear. And that's when you aren't already getting choices that can lead to a peaceful resolution regardless of your personality.

But you're free to jump to conclusions, if you wish.

[Gerudan]

Mykel54 wrote...

I just can´t get my head around why it is so bad to have the written phrases match the actual dialogue, maybe it is because i am not a native speaker, but i really hate when people say that "reading something and then watching it said loud is annoying". I think that is incredibly nitpicky, it would have been a lot better for understanding what hawke is going to say, if we had both the intent icons AND the dialogue text. I really hope that bioware does something about this in the future.

I like the phrases, because they lead to a very natural flow of the dialogs without long pauses. 

And I'm no native speaker either. 

[Merced652]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

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.

That is overlooking the problems with the old system. because you never knew the intent of the old lines some gamer would make chocies they never intended to which would effectively break the roleplaying.

LOL. That doesn't break the roleplaying, THAT MAKES IT. This is why i'm utterly convinced no one RPs because if so then there is absolutely no way you can say that.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Galad22 wrote...

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.

i havent heard diplomacy is gone for good. I have heard that now certain choices in convos can be done based on attributes which makes more sense given that attributes are like traits for your character. And i have heard that the noncombat skills are not gone. They just have been integrated into different parts of the game.

[FieryDove]

Brockololly wrote...

I completely agree- I found myself reading the paraphrase then looking at the icons and just getting stumped in the demo. It definitely took me more time to decide a response in DA2 than either ME games or DAO where you can clearly see the full text.

I'd gladly sacrifice any "cinematic experience" for the chance to know what the PC was actually going to say.

Just pick door #1, door #2 or door #3.

Um the numbers will be in the full game yes?

[Merced652]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

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.

i havent heard diplomacy is gone for good. I have heard that now certain choices in convos can be done based on attributes which makes more sense given that attributes are like traits for your character. And i have heard that the noncombat skills are not gone. They just have been integrated into different parts of the game.

Like how ME2's inventory wasn't gone, just streamlined.

[Brockololly]

David Gaider wrote...

The lack of non-combat skills does not mean you can't talk your way out of fights.
 

When I got to the Hayder fight in the demo, I was practically begging for a damned speech/dialogue/skill check there. Instead we got slo-mo Michael Bay dagger throw. Suggestion for DA3 then: bring back and make non-combat skills more robust:wizard:

Modifié par Brockololly, 24 février 2011 - 05:54 .

[Adhin]

Zig: List vs Wheel, Voice vs No-Voice, or any combination there I said was irrelevant to what I was saying I think is 'an improvement'. I wasn't talking about the layout, the style of small quip vs full text or voiced or whatever. I was simply saying the INTENT icon, even if applied to a listed out like it was in DAO, would of made DAO a better experience for me. Period.

Now that out of the way the response and argument (which wasn't what I was talking about but, you argued about it anyways I guess). I'm confused a bit. Are you saying because you prefer lists of text over quips with voice in a wheel, that other peoples opinions on it don't matter at all and your way is obviously the factual better way? Cause I mean if so, then no. In that way your wrong. That's a 100% personal preference and its totally awesome you have yours, as I and others have theirs.

Anyways I just meant the Intent Icons are a great improvement, regardless of the base style of conversation implementation. Like I said - books also employ this but via text. They're often write out the inflections in peoples voice, explain the intent in some fancy wording. It gives the whole thing more color and ensures everyone has a better idea of what said person is trying to do or get across.

[Zigzaggy]

viking135 wrote...

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.

And I am happy for you.

The only issue i have is a satisfactory answer to the claims of a more immersive experience.It's apparent you think only having an inkling as to what you will say...somehow adds to your enjoyment which is fair enough.But this an RPG and it's always prudent to take the direction you want in advance no suprises.

"No..Mother..please don't die "   (we need to go now)    "You can mourn the old apostate bag later she was past her sell by date anyway,now quickly lets flee darkspawn.  "

I fail to see how paraphrasing is of any benefit..

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Merced652 wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

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.

That is overlooking the problems with the old system. because you never knew the intent of the old lines some gamer would make chocies they never intended to which would effectively break the roleplaying.

LOL. That doesn't break the roleplaying, THAT MAKES IT. This is why i'm utterly convinced no one RPs because if so then there is absolutely no way you can say that.

that does break the roleplaying. There were times in the game where i would make a dialouge choice and apparently my chracter (that i was role playing as) would say the given dialouge in a diifferent manner than i intended. Now i dont know about you, but in the real world i have full control over my mind. so when i say something i know the intent of what im saying. i understand what i am trying to convey to the person i am talking to. Which means that if i am playing as a character in a rpg i should understand the intent of all chocies in order to effectively role play.

[Galad22]

David Gaider wrote...

Galad22 wrote...
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.

The lack of non-combat skills does not mean you can't talk your way out of fights.

You get bonus dialogue options based on your personality choices-- so someone who's diplomatic most often will occasionally have such options appear. And that's when you aren't already getting choices that can lead to a peaceful resolution regardless of your personality.

But you're free to jump to conclusions, if you wish.

Well that was more based on my experience on ME2, also I liked diplomacy as a skill and stuff.

So what I am saying that I am sorry for jumping to conclusions. Really I am sorry for whining like this as well I am just little upset about the demo. Doesn't mean I don't love your company.

[Merced652]

Adhin wrote...

Zig: List vs Wheel, Voice vs No-Voice, or any combination there I said was irrelevant to what I was saying I think is 'an improvement'. I wasn't talking about the layout, the style of small quip vs full text or voiced or whatever. I was simply saying the INTENT icon, even if applied to a listed out like it was in DAO, would of made DAO a better experience for me. Period.
Now that out of the way the response and argument (which wasn't what I was talking about but, you argued about it anyways I guess). I'm confused a bit. Are you saying because you prefer lists of text over quips with voice in a wheel, that other peoples opinions on it don't matter at all and your way is obviously the factual better way? Cause I mean if so, then no. In that way your wrong. That's a 100% personal preference and its totally awesome you have yours, as I and others have theirs.
Anyways I just meant the Intent Icons are a great improvement, regardless of the base style of conversation implementation. Like I said - books also employ this but via text. They're often write out the inflections in peoples voice, explain the intent in some fancy wording. It gives the whole thing more color and ensures everyone has a better idea of what said person is trying to do or get across.

No one roleplays books though, well outside of those really bad pick your ending ones. A movie is a book in visual form, what is me2? A movie you can interact with. You aren't roleplaying in any of them.

[Naltair]

Merced652 wrote...
LOL. That doesn't break the roleplaying, THAT MAKES IT. This is why i'm utterly convinced no one RPs because if so then there is absolutely no way you can say that.

I don't think we can really comment on playstyle, how you choose to apporach the ssytem is an individual choice.  I won't lie I look at the overall story and will reload if I feel that the choice I made does not fit the story I am trying to build.

[Ziggeh]

Zigzaggy wrote...

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 .

That's only true of certain approachs to the game. The manner in whIch I play means that both the phrase and paraphrase have similar issues of misinterpretation, yet the paraphrase allows for interactions I prefer to engage in, and so for me is strictly superior.

That doesn't mean that it is superior, it means that it is open to interpretation.

[Wulfram]

Brockololly wrote...

When I got to the Hayder fight in the demo, I was practically begging for a damned speech/dialogue/skill check there. Instead we got slo-mo Michael Bay dagger throw. Suggestion for DA3 then: bring back and make non-combat skills more robust:wizard:

That's just because Isabella wants him dead.

What I found a bit annoying was Hawke having to go along with it.  Maybe it'll make more sense in the full game, but I'd find it a bit of a jump from making sure someone plays fair in a duel to hunting down and killing someone in a church.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

Merced652 wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

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.

i havent heard diplomacy is gone for good. I have heard that now certain choices in convos can be done based on attributes which makes more sense given that attributes are like traits for your character. And i have heard that the noncombat skills are not gone. They just have been integrated into different parts of the game.

Like how ME2's inventory wasn't gone, just streamlined.

Making less comlicated and easier to understand doesnt = dumb. The system in the second game accomplished the same in the first but was much more appealing to a wider audience because it was less bulky

[Merced652]

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

TGFKAMAdmaX wrote...

Merced652 wrote...

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.

That is overlooking the problems with the old system. because you never knew the intent of the old lines some gamer would make chocies they never intended to which would effectively break the roleplaying.

LOL. That doesn't break the roleplaying, THAT MAKES IT. This is why i'm utterly convinced no one RPs because if so then there is absolutely no way you can say that.

that does break the roleplaying. There were times in the game where i would make a dialouge choice and apparently my chracter (that i was role playing as) would say the given dialouge in a diifferent manner than i intended. Now i dont know about you, but in the real world i have full control over my mind. so when i say something i know the intent of what im saying. i understand what i am trying to convey to the person i am talking to. Which means that if i am playing as a character in a rpg i should understand the intent of all chocies in order to effectively role play.

So no one has every missunderstood something you were saying to them or misintepreted your intentions? Wondering what planet you live on.