5 réponses à ce sujet

[KratosAuron]

I think that Bioware should think about adding Hawke (or the next protaganist for that matter) to the party banter. They gave Hawke a voice so they expect me to believe that my companions will only talk randomly amongst each other and only include Hawke when they want something. It happened so rarely in DA:O. and it was always a full blown conversation. I just think it would add to the realism and connection I am supposed to feel for Hawke and my companions.

What do you think?

[David Gaider]

KratosAuron wrote...
I think that Bioware should think about adding Hawke (or the next protaganist for that matter) to the party banter. They gave Hawke a voice so they expect me to believe that my companions will only talk randomly amongst each other and only include Hawke when they want something. It happened so rarely in DA:O. and it was always a full blown conversation. I just think it would add to the realism and connection I am supposed to feel for Hawke and my companions.

What do you think?

We didn't do a great deal of that in DA2, but we're playing with the idea a bit more now. The thing is primarily to avoid the line where we cross into a "full-blown conversation" where the player's character is saying things they would never say and instead have a situation where the party member is doing the majority of the talking... but it's still at least them talking to the player as opposed to simply another party member, with the player's responses dictated by their dominant personality.

[David Gaider]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It's good to know you're keeping that pitfall in mind.

I think your bar of "things my character would never say" is set in a far different place from where we set it, however. You want to micromanage every single word out of your character's mouth, and that's not going to happen anytime soon. That said, having the player character express beliefs or opinions that the player didn't choose (outside of flavor provided by the player's chosen tone)... yes, that would definitely cross a line.

[David Gaider]

Filament wrote...
Isn't that sort of what happens when you walk over a trigger and a conversation starts automatically? (like "Wait... where are we going?")

No. Banter is ambient (as in non-cinematic) dialogue... meaning you continue to move about and do whatever else you're doing while the conversation is taking place. We cannot bring up the dialogue wheel during such conversations (yet, anyhow).

[David Gaider]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
DA2's done.  I couldn't possibly be trying to change it.

But future games haven't yet been designed.

I think I can safely tell you that we will never design a game the way you would like, and indeed never have, except purely by accident. About all you've convinced me of to date, anyhow, is that your views are idiosyncratic.

[David Gaider]

Filament wrote...
I'm not saying it would fit the way you define banter, per se, just that, if a companion is going to start a "banter" with the PC, the best way to achieve that IMO would simply be via a triggered conversation.

That's not banter. That's just adding more conversations.

Which we can (and do) have. But it's not the same thing. It's also, incidentally, more expensive as it requires cinematics attention-- and barring the "yes, moar conversations! Moar!" idea of dialogue in general being good, there's a limit to how often you want to force the player to stop what they're doing in order to pay attention to a random and optional dialogue. That's a lesson we learned way back in BG2.