323 réponses à ce sujet

[jds1bio]

I read on the forums today that BioWare is unlikely to have "rambling", party-camp style conversations in a Dragon Age game again.  They do not deem it a requirement to have such "reams of expository dialogue" in order for the player to feel connected to the character.

The words in quotes are taken from the quote, and the quote from BioWare can be found in this thread, you can see the quote for yourself:

social.bioware.com/forums/forum/1/topic/305/index/7154827/1

So here is my off-topic response from that thread, updated to be on-topic, and for more public consumption:

Is expository dialogue required to be connected to a character in any way? No, we can empathize with characters, reach out to them, step in their shoes, etc. without it. 

But we don't conduct our real-life social conversations this way.  We don't excise expository dialogue and use only the most pertinent words or the most concise sentences, except when we're learning to speak or we're too weak to talk.  Some of these "reams" of expository dialogue we create end up being the beginning of a romantic relationship, or a long-overdue reconciliation between siblings, or simply our most-cherished memories. 

When it comes to games I would argue that we're not too young OR too weak to handle natural conversations as part of the gaming experience.  How would Mass Effect 2's life-or-death decisions weigh on us if we didn't converse at length with Thane about his profession or illness, or Grunt's purpose in life, or Mordin's scientific work.  After more than a year since I played ME2, I can't remember every single battle I fought, but these are the things that have stuck with me about the experience and make me want to go back and revisit the game. 

As far as DA2 goes, with the time skips the conversations don't get much of a progression of depth.  I think this is partly because the game took away from the player the responsibility of "checking in" with your companions if you want to know more about them.  Instead they are waiting for you to speak with them less frequently at convenient points in the game.  I know that this gives some overall guidance to some players, but veterans of BioWare games expected to be able to converse more with their companions on their own, rather than have to catch up with them through a codex.

Still, DA2 is not without its memorable conversational moments.  I'll always remember Knight-Captain Cullen speaking with Hawke in a conversation earlier in the game where he says that the mages would just as soon use the statues in the gallows, the symbols of slavery, to satisfy their own ends.  And yet it is Meredith, not the mages, who ends up using the statues after all.  I may be wrong here, but I don't recall that conversation being one of the required ones to have.  If it is part of a required conversation, then I am glad, because I hope everyone gets a chance to be part of it.

So, while I agree in principle (it is not REQUIRED), I still think having these social conversations is somewhat NECESSARY as part of the full interaction experience with the character.  To me, this is part of WHY we play videogames with stories, they give us something extra we don't always get from other mediums.  Getting to frequently interact with a character outside of combat is usually considered a good thing, whether central to the main plot or no.  And this is part of the reason why BioWare games stand out in the minds of many.

Thank you for your attention.

Modifié par jds1bio, 23 avril 2011 - 12:23 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Long drawn out expositionary dialogue trees are probably gone. That doesn't necessarily mean that they can't or won't improve the existing system or come up with something new, it just means that you probably won't have huge conversation trees to navigate anymore.

[LobselVith8]

It's unfortunate. You don't really get as much insight into the DA2 characters that you did with the Origins characters.

[bleetman]

It depends. I'd tend to compare the Origins method against that of Mass Effect 2. With Origins, interaction came by the bucket load via conversation, and whilst each had a personal quest of some description or other, it was generally a short affair with limited insight. You'd help them deal with an issue and possibly walk away with a greater understanding of a particular aspect than previously. The rest was filled in via conversation.

In ME2's case, dialogue with companions was far lighter for the most part (I'm looking at you, Garrus Vakarian), but it instead offered extensive, personalized character quests for each one. You'd learn what was important them, what motivated them, and generally walk away from each with a solid feel for each character. Everything you need to know about, say, Jack, is represented superbly without the need to ever really exchange words. DA2 seemed to attempt the replicate this, and got close for the most part, but never quite got there for me.

Of the two? I'd possibly prefer the latter, provided it doesn't coincide with an alarming absence of dialogue - I still do want to be able to talk to characters on occasion, rather than having them tell me how Sandal is watching them ad infinitum.

Modifié par bleetman, 23 avril 2011 - 12:59 .

[Riona45]

bleetman wrote...
Of the two? I'd possibly prefer the latter, provided it doesn't coincide with an alarming absence of dialogue - I still do want to be able to talk to characters on occasion, rather than having them tell me how Sandal is watching them ad infinitum.

I agree with that.  Show, don't tell.

[88mphSlayer]

the banter was great but i also wish we could ask questions anytime, ie: everytime i walked in on varric having a conversation with one of your companions my reaction was "why can't i jump in the conversation?"

[Plaintiff]

I'm happy to do away with lengthy dialogues if it means I get more stuff to actually DO. Don't get me wrong, I love interacting with the characters, very much so. I think DA2 has mostly the right idea, it just needed MORE. More dialogue wheel options (i felt pretty limited at times) and more quests.

[TJPags]

Are "reams of expository dialogue" necessary for me to feel connected with a character? Nope.

But whatever it was they did in DA2 sure didn't make me feel connected to the characters.

So, maybe they should rethink that whole "ain't ever gonna happen again" approach, unless they got something else up their sleeves.

[_Aine_]

If they decide to rehash the style of DA2 in terms of (non-existent) companion dialogue outside of quests (all initiated by the companion might I add!) then they should at least make the combat more interesting since that is the only real area we have any control. There are a lot of great games out there that do combat better and a story decently. Bioware's *thing* was story and companion interaction. Giving me companion initiated quests on a pre-determined schedule that quickly becomes predictable and doesn't allow me to interact naturally with them.... well, there are games that do that better than DA2.

Perhaps they have an even *better* way in DA3. I'm thinking the " ain't gonna happen' vibe means that they are already too far into making DA3 to change it now. Or they like it ME2 style. :/

"Rambling dialogue" seemed to be just a way of saying they didn't like the way DA:O was in compariosn to DA2 while many of us ( not all though ) are saying the opposite.

Keeping my companions away from being truly known through making them *untouchable* except for their quests.... was isolating. I now know how the unpopular kids must have felt at school when I was younger, on the outside looking in and only overhearing the excitement in my companions lives. What fun did i get? Delivering body parts, underwear and killing wave after wave of similar mobs..... *joy* /sarcasm

Ever since I read the original post about the dialog, I have been hoping I misunderstood it, even though I don't think I did. It seems clear that this new cookie-cutter, methodical and rigid way is the way they like it. Yes, within those rigid pieces, the dialog is good, great even. But you can't hide the methodical way it is brought forward ...can't make it personal, truly feel involved and not just a character-car on a story-line monorail....

If I ever wanted to be wrong in my life, now is the time.

Modifié par shantisands, 23 avril 2011 - 02:30 .

[jds1bio]

TJPags wrote...

Are "reams of expository dialogue" necessary for me to feel connected with a character? Nope.

But whatever it was they did in DA2 sure didn't make me feel connected to the characters.

So, maybe they should rethink that whole "ain't ever gonna happen again" approach, unless they got something else up their sleeves.

Perhaps more show, don't tell, like was mentioned about about the ME2 loyalty missions.  Perhaps some conversations that make you do something while you're conversing, whether it's travelling to a main quest, or maybe taking care of a task for your party (like reserving rooms at an inn), or even just a minigame.

But please, no more codex "while you were away..." updates.

[jds1bio]

shantisands wrote...

...

"Rambling dialogue" seemed to be just a way of saying they didn't like the way DA:O was in compariosn to DA2 while many of us ( not all though ) are saying the opposite.

...

Ever since I read the original post about the dialog, I have been hoping I misunderstood it, even though I don't think I did. It seems clear that this new cookie-cutter, methodical and rigid way is the way they like it. Yes, within those rigid pieces, the dialog is good, great even. But you can't hide the methodical way it is brought forward ...can't make it personal, truly feel involved and not just a character-car on a story-line monorail....

If I ever wanted to be wrong in my life, now is the time.

I mused similarly over the original post.  It could be an underlying "DA:O bad, DA2 good" preference, and it could be "something new" they're working on now.  But it did sound like they were satisfied overall with what was there, which is their prerogative.  But I wonder sometimes if any playtesting was done with long-time BioWare and DA players in addition to players coming into the game "cold".  Someone must have said something about this, no?

[TJPags]

jds1bio wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Are "reams of expository dialogue" necessary for me to feel connected with a character? Nope.

But whatever it was they did in DA2 sure didn't make me feel connected to the characters.

So, maybe they should rethink that whole "ain't ever gonna happen again" approach, unless they got something else up their sleeves.

Perhaps more show, don't tell, like was mentioned about about the ME2 loyalty missions.  Perhaps some conversations that make you do something while you're conversing, whether it's travelling to a main quest, or maybe taking care of a task for your party (like reserving rooms at an inn), or even just a minigame.

But please, no more codex "while you were away..." updates.

I've never played ME or ME2, so your comment about it means nothing to me.

I did like some of what they did in DA2 - companions having a home, the idea of companions sending you a note when they wanted to talk, those I liked.  But the talking was almost exclusively limited to requesting you to help with a quest, and was not initiated by Hawke, except when first meeting them.  There was the error.

Let me ask companions questions about things, rather than simply running errands for them.  Honestly, all this "Hawke, can you do me a favor?" nonsense had me asking "Why should I?  What exactly do I know about you again?"

I agree it shouldn't be ALL talking, but then I don't think DAO was that way.  But for crying out loud, I'm supposed to be friends with these people, and over the course of 7 years, I only talk to them when they want something.  And I'm supposed to care?
 
I almost see this comment by DG as another Origins bashing thing from Bioware.

[Karma]

They do not deem it a requirement to have such "reams of expository dialogue" in order for the player to feel connected to the character.

Reams are not necessary. More options on the dialog wheel are not necessary. Conversations while out-and-about in town are not necessary. But more conversations while companions are at home are necessary. This game is supposed to span 10 years? I think we'd have more than 10 conversations with our friends and especially our lovers in that time period.  I don't want to read about what my friends have been up to in the codex - it's like medieval Facebook. Give me a real conversation please. Two more chit-chat type conversations per act plus one more romance conversation per act should just about do it. And while you're at it, bring back whoever wrote the banter from DAO... because that was actually funny. I'd rather walk in silence than hear Anders and Fenris harping on Merrill one more time.

Modifié par satans_karma, 23 avril 2011 - 03:14 .

[Crossroads_Wanderer]

 Y'know, I've been thinking about this. I used to think that I'd like all the campfire talking to come back, but I've realized that the companion dialogues in DA:O that most interested me and made me feel connected to the characters were the banter and the companion reactions to events in the story. The campfire stuff was nice and revealed more about the companions' past, but companions can reveal bits of their past without you questioning them directly. I found that after talking to most of my companions enough to make them like me, I mostly just talked to my LI in camp. And even then, after a while, the only things I could initiate were kissing and retiring to my tent.

The thing is, it's far more fascinating to see the characters interact with one another, not just react to your questions. I'd rather have story-dependent banter, such as Wynne ribbing Alistair about watching the Warden's swaying hips when they're romantically involved. I'd rather have important revelations as the story progresses, such as the conversation wherein Alistair reveals he's a royal bastard (*snicker*). Those were by far the more engaging conversations.

I've also thought about my views on the characters themselves. A lot of people complain about the characters in DA2, but I've come to realize that, while they may not be realistic in some regards (all of the LIs are rather extreme), they are more defined and maybe even more interesting than the characters in DA:O. I liked the characters in DA:O, but there was little conflict of personality if you played the nice guy/gal with a sense of humor. Morrigan was basically the only character who took issue with you being the selfless heroic type. In DA2, you're going to have personality clashes with your teammates, regardless of how you play your character.

I think I would have come to feel more strongly for the DA2 characters if the story had only been longer and maybe had a bit more banter. Really, I think the banter was the biggest problem. I kept hearing repeating banter, which takes away from the immersion because you'd think your companions would remember having had that conversation. I think there needs to a greater ratio of banter to gameplay time next time around and possibly some programming to remove conversations that have been done from the pool of banter options. None of this is to say that I didn't feel strongly about the characters, though. The romances felt slightly lacking in comparison to DA:O and I can't quite put my finger yet on why, but I did have 'awww' moments and moments of frustration with most of the characters. Merrill was really the only one I felt pretty apathetic about. And I've heard plenty of love and hate for her on the forums, so I think it's just that I personally don't connect with her, not that she's a failed character.

Ultimately, I think I'd like to see characters and character interaction more like that of DA2 in DA3, but simply with more story-relevant interaction. Maybe throw in a character like Alistair for some comedy (I think I had an idiotic grin on my face every time I talked to Alistair because he was adorable and funny ), but I don't want everyone in my party to get along perfectly and I want to hear their opinions about your actions and the actions of other characters.

Modifié par Crossroads_Wanderer, 23 avril 2011 - 03:22 .

[jds1bio]

Crossroads_Wanderer wrote...

 Y'know, I've been thinking about this. I used to think that I'd like all the campfire talking to come back, but I've realized that the companion dialogues in DA:O that most interested me and made me feel connected to the characters were the banter and the companion reactions to events in the story. The campfire stuff was nice and revealed more about the companions' past, but companions can reveal bits of their past without you questioning them directly. I found that after talking to most of my companions enough to make them like me, I mostly just talked to my LI in camp. And even then, after a while, the only things I could initiate were kissing and retiring to my tent.

The thing is, it's far more fascinating to see the characters interact with one another, not just react to your questions. I'd rather have story-dependent banter, such as Wynne ribbing Alistair about watching the Warden's swaying hips when they're romantically involved. I'd rather have important revelations as the story progresses, such as the conversation wherein Alistair reveals he's a royal bastard (*snicker*). Those were by far the more engaging conversations.

Very interesting observation.  I've thought about places where companion conversations could be occuring more often.  Perhaps over a minigame or a party you throw for your companions.  Or when a quest comes up, and perhaps certain party members actually are reluctant to join you rather than just go along but shower you with rivalry points.  Maybe you have to convince each party member to join you, through conversation.  You may learn about why they don't like elves, or who affected their childhood, or whatever.

Modifié par jds1bio, 23 avril 2011 - 05:12 .

[haroldhardluck]

jds1bio wrote...

I read on the forums today that BioWare is unlikely to have "rambling", party-camp style conversations in a Dragon Age game again.  They do not deem it a requirement to have such "reams of expository dialogue" in order for the player to feel connected to the character.

It also stops the game in its tracks in DAO. In DA2 the camp style dialogs are broken into quests spread throughout the game. They are short and to the point. More importantly you no longer have to initiate dialog over and over again until the game decides it is time for a Meaningful Dialog and you finally get something interesting.

Also much of the background material that you had to pry out of a character in DAO can be triggered by quests. If you take Fenris to the Gallows, he will remark about how different this is from Tevinter. This gives you a short dialog tree where you find out about how the Circle works in Tevinter. At the end of Fenris' two personal quests, there is a short dialog tree which gives information about his past plus a followup dialog quest at his home.

So rather than having one huge dialog tree in camp, DA2 spreads the dialog branches throughout the game. I think this is much better.

Harold

[Oneiropolos]

I felt connected to the characters in DA2... But I WILL say I was frustrated by elements. Things would get mentioned offhand, and it'd SEEM like we could ask about it, but we weren't really going to get an answer. And then the limited nature of it...look, Fenris, I think it's nice you apologized. THREE YEARS LATER. However, I'd have much rather hunted you down and shoved you into a corner and told you to tell me what the heck was going on BACK THEN as opposed to helplessly watching you walk off and then have you staying with me until you felt like apologizing and discussing it. And Fenris even says, "We never discussed what happened three years ago..." and Hawke says "You never seemed like you wanted to" (paraphrasing). SCREW THAT. I don't care if he doesn't seem like he wanted to! No self-respecting person would tolerate three years of the person they love NOT EXPLAINING WHY THEY WALKED OFF ON THEM yet having that person -right there-. It's not like Fenris left town. There's nothing indicating he was not beside Hawke all that time. The subject just does not get broached for three years.

And ugh. The codex styles of "Fenris-The last three years" made me want to hit something. I BEG the writing staff to not do a game needlessly spread across 6 years again and devise that -so much time- has passed between interactions. I don't want to read about what my companions have been doing the last three years. My companions are supposed to be my friends. Being able to attend the wedding of Donnic and Aveline and getting ribbed by other companions at the party about when I'm getting married? Okay. That might be a bit too much like real life.. but still! It'd be ripe for character development. Please, in the next game, if you want time to pass, let us at least see snippets of it, and not make us read codex files to find out radical changes.

And I understand not doing the repeating dialogue, and DAII really does handle it TONS better than ME2. But I would like more opportunities to talk with companions. It felt like so many things in DAII were "If you take this path, you'll NEVER have a chance to learn about ____" but you couldn't know that without meta gaming or lucking into it. Conversations got cut almost bizarrely short in some cases. And I also wanted to corner Fenris over what he thought was in the damn box in Bait and Switch.

That's where I felt things were seriously lacking in DAII in the conversation department. DAO, I could discuss almost everything under the sun with everyone. I understand if that's too cumbersome, but DAII's conversation was too lean. I DID still feel connected, but it was... well, honestly more of an affection like I would in a book. Or one of those Japanese romance simulations (I have one of the few actually commercially translated to English for females one). Where it's just a matter of figuring out which way to get the guy, but you're more just kinda doing a choose your adventure type thing as opposed to living a character like you. Which is fine for those games, but Dragon Age is so much more. I don't want to have to find out how Aveline's love life is going because Isabella is pestering her. Why can't I have a couple options to sit and have girl talk with Aveline myself?

I guess what I'm rambling about is, I just think the DAII system needs extension. It doesn't need to be as intricate as the dialogues in DA:O (though I loved them and don't hesitate to say I loved them) but I think it would benefit a lot from allowing us to actually stop and chat. We can get quest notifications in our journal like we do now when it's a 'plot changing element'. But it'd be nice if we could chose to click on a companion and converse with them without having to visit their house. Or if we're in their house, see if they have anything they're willing to talk.

Oh! I know! An example of what I mean that is actually okay about this is Cullen. How you can visit him and he updates occasionally what he's saying, you can ask him about the quanari, warn him about the threat to the chantry, ask him what he thinks about Meredith...as they're happening. I can't even turn to Fenris and go "Uh...should...I be worried that Anders wants me to distract the Grand Cleric while he's doing something?" That's what seems so horribly unrealistic.

[Sabariel]

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's unfortunate. You don't really get as much insight into the DA2 characters that you did with the Origins characters.

TJPags wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Are "reams of expository dialogue" necessary for me to feel connected with a character? Nope.

But whatever it was they did in DA2 sure didn't make me feel connected to the characters.

So, maybe they should rethink that whole "ain't ever gonna happen again" approach, unless they got something else up their sleeves.

Perhaps more show, don't tell, like was mentioned about about the ME2 loyalty missions.  Perhaps some conversations that make you do something while you're conversing, whether it's travelling to a main quest, or maybe taking care of a task for your party (like reserving rooms at an inn), or even just a minigame.

But please, no more codex "while you were away..." updates.

I've never played ME or ME2, so your comment about it means nothing to me.

I did like some of what they did in DA2 - companions having a home, the idea of companions sending you a note when they wanted to talk, those I liked.  But the talking was almost exclusively limited to requesting you to help with a quest, and was not initiated by Hawke, except when first meeting them.  There was the error.

Let me ask companions questions about things, rather than simply running errands for them.  Honestly, all this "Hawke, can you do me a favor?" nonsense had me asking "Why should I?  What exactly do I know about you again?"

I agree it shouldn't be ALL talking, but then I don't think DAO was that way.  But for crying out loud, I'm supposed to be friends with these people, and over the course of 7 years, I only talk to them when they want something.  And I'm supposed to care?
 
I almost see this comment by DG as another Origins bashing thing from Bioware.

100% agreement.

[SexBomb]

TJPags wrote...

I've never played ME or ME2, so your comment about it means nothing to me.

I did like some of what they did in DA2 - companions having a home, the idea of companions sending you a note when they wanted to talk, those I liked.  But the talking was almost exclusively limited to requesting you to help with a quest, and was not initiated by Hawke, except when first meeting them.  There was the error.

Let me ask companions questions about things, rather than simply running errands for them.  Honestly, all this "Hawke, can you do me a favor?" nonsense had me asking "Why should I?  What exactly do I know about you again?"

I agree it shouldn't be ALL talking, but then I don't think DAO was that way.  But for crying out loud, I'm supposed to be friends with these people, and over the course of 7 years, I only talk to them when they want something.  And I'm supposed to care?
 
I almost see this comment by DG as another Origins bashing thing from Bioware.

This is exactly how I felt.  Thanks to the lack of interaction with them, I felt all the characters were flat and uninteresting.

I play games predominantly for the storyline and characters, so it was a major disappointment not being able to chat with my compantions about anything that wasn't quest related.  Making it through DAII was hard enough for me, If they deleted all hope for party banter/character interation in future games, it pains me to say it, but I'd be done with bioware completely.

[Ulicus]

I was happy enough with the direction they went with companion interaction (and the companions themselves) in DA2, though I do wish there had been more of it.

TJPags wrote...

I agree it shouldn't be ALL talking, but
then I don't think DAO was that way.  But for crying out loud, I'm
supposed to be friends with these people, and over the course of 7
years, I only talk to them when they want something.  And I'm supposed
to care?

I never felt like this at all.

While it was true that most of my interaction with them as a player involved the companion in question asking me to do them a favour (or whatever) it was made pretty clear through the banters and other asides that these characters had forged proper friendships with Hawke (and in some cases each other) over the course of the timeskips.

Modifié par Ulicus, 23 avril 2011 - 12:12 .

[Giltspur]

Oneiropolos wrote...

That's where I felt things were seriously lacking in DAII in the conversation department. DAO, I could discuss almost everything under the sun with everyone. I understand if that's too cumbersome, but DAII's conversation was too lean. I DID still feel connected, but it was... well, honestly more of an affection like I would in a book.

It's interesting that you mention books and character affection as I've been puzzling over the differences between writing and experiencing movies, novels and video games.  One of the things I like about novels over movies is that you get to see their thoughts (in words) and can get inside their head more than if you simply see the performance by an actor.  All those reams of expository dialogue helped me get into the head of a character in DAO--like in a novel as opposed to in a movie.

Of course, you suggest that connections can be deeper in games than novels.  And it seems to, in my mind at least, dovetail with this comment...

jds1bio wrote...

Is expository dialogue required to be connected to a character in any way? No, we can empathize with characters, reach out to them, step in their shoes, etc. without it.

But we don't conduct our real-life social conversations this way.  We don't excise expository dialogue and use only the most pertinent words or the most concise sentences, except when we're learning to speak or we're too weak to talk.  Some of these "reams" of expository dialogue we create end up being the beginning of a romantic relationship, or a long-overdue reconciliation between siblings, or simply our most-cherished memories.

This reminds me of comments made in the previous thread about the need for casual conversation to feel more connected with characters.  One difference between novels, movies and games is that you're the character in the game.  It's true that yout control over such a character is limited, but you still see things through some combination of the character's eyes and mind.  So, the experience of a player isn't usually third-person so much as it's a combination of first-person and second-person narratives. And the writers mostly guide you but sometimes surrender control to you.

Being able to surrender control to the gamer is a strength of gaming in that it makes game writing a distinct artform. (Then again, even novelists surrender control to their readers.  After all, the reader creates the world in his mind using the writer's words as a guide.  So the writing and reading of a novel remains collaborative and not entirely dictated by the novelist.  Video games are more explicit about that collaboration though.)

At any rate, what's my point? It's often cool to trim exposition and to show not tell.  But that's not what relationships are like in the real world.  Bioware NPC's are at their best when they're fully realized creations, like in DAO (and DA2, for that matter) and not plot accessories like they were in Awakenings.  Well, fully realized characters have pasts.  Sometimes they're broody former slaves from Tevinter, apostate temptresses that don't understand eye contact or assassins that remember the smell of leather in Antiva.  Romances in the real world are heavy on expository dialogue. Romances aren't a series of dates.  They're also conversations in bed while not falling asleep. 

Why's that important to feeling connected in a "Dragon Age" game?  I think it goes back to what Oneiropolos said about DAO having a deeper connection than she was used to in books.  And I think that's tied to how games vasicillate between first- and second-person narrative in their feel to the gamer.  And I think that's tied to your comment about how things are in the real world as opposed to in stories.  Because the player is a more active participant in a game than in a book, what's realistic is important to creating a feeling of connection.  "Show not tell" is often great advice.  But it's still a cliche and not a hard counter that applies in all situations. Sometimes you leave things to inference to move a story along or to make sure that there's still brevity so that there can still be wit.  But you don't leave everything to inference.  Consider a woman wondering why a man never says he loves her.  He could say that he thought she already knew and that there was all sorts of evidence to suggest it anyway.  But he'd be missing the point and missing an opportunity to connect.  A game can connect to its audience and adjust its story to the audience given that feedback.  Really, this is what I want Bioware to evolve--not the combat. That interaction, that connection is, for me, the promise of "Dragon Age".  

Modifié par Giltspur, 23 avril 2011 - 01:49 .

[_Aine_]

Oneiropolos wrote...

Oh! I know! An example of what I mean that is actually okay about this is Cullen. How you can visit him and he updates occasionally what he's saying, you can ask him about the quanari, warn him about the threat to the chantry, ask him what he thinks about Meredith...as they're happening. I can't even turn to Fenris and go "Uh...should...I be worried that Anders wants me to distract the Grand Cleric while he's doing something?" That's what seems so horribly unrealistic.

Cullen still does things the old way    Throwback to his Ferelden ties?  hehe  Still, that is exactly the difference I meant too. The dialogue is hardly rambling or ridiculous either, and yet, you *can* end up feeling like Cullen is more willing to talk to you then your 7-year friends!  Really?!?!

IF they have real-life people testing  for them, I find it *extremely* hard to believe that no-one mentioned this sort of thing to them.   And why they think that normal dialogue needs to be used IN PLACE of or solely for character development is beyond me.  That isn't accurate in any way, shape or form.

That was a great example between the differences, btw.  

In movies, if you are watching a good mystery, it is not just the crime and investigation that gets you involved. It is usually the characters stuff with each other, with the lead, etc.  It *is* the extra stuff that makes things real and immersive.  Even books don't have the plot stand alone with real life stripped out. Why should a video game?

Modifié par shantisands, 23 avril 2011 - 01:50 .

[TJPags]

Ulicus wrote...

I was happy enough with the direction they went with companion interaction (and the companions themselves) in DA2, though I do wish there had been more of it.

TJPags wrote...

I agree it shouldn't be ALL talking, but
then I don't think DAO was that way.  But for crying out loud, I'm
supposed to be friends with these people, and over the course of 7
years, I only talk to them when they want something.  And I'm supposed
to care?

I never felt like this at all.

While it was true that most of my interaction with them as a player involved the companion in question asking me to do them a favour (or whatever) it was made pretty clear through the banters and other asides that these characters had forged proper friendships with Hawke (and in some cases each other) over the course of the timeskips.

Yes, I understand - now and as I was playing - that this was supposed to be happening.  Not only with Hawke, but between the companions, too - poker night with Donnic, all the conversations I walked into my companions having, etc.

Problem was, it didn't work for me at all.  Sort of like, a friend of your friend.  You see them occassionally at some parties, maybe some family thing of your friend that you go to, but really, you don't talk to this prson otherwise.  That's kind of how the companions seemed to me.  Friends of friends - I'd see them occassionally, got along fine, we'd chat a bit and catch up, then . . . not see them again for several months.

When this type of guy calls me up all of a sudden to ask me to help him move his furniture, I kind of think "you don't have anyone else to ask?".

I really think they need to work in some kind of combination of DAO and DA2 the next time.  Although, to be clear, I have no problem with the way DAO worked.  It could be better, but IMO, it was a LOT better than what we got in DA2.

[Giltspur]

Conversations and Companion Interaction

The Good
Companion quests were much improved over DAO's. 
Moving conversations out of camp to new locations is a good thing. 

The Bad
Less connection to characters than in DAO.

The Puzzle
Why was there more connection in DAO?

Attempt #1 to Solve the Puzzle: Give an Example and Think About It
I liked Merrill a lot.  Though, I felt less connected to Merrill than to Morrigan, Leliana, Jaheira, Viconia. 
Why do I like Merrill?  Well, I like that she's a stammering doofus whose words get out of synch with her mind as her mind races past her common sense.  She's like a whimsical Mordin with even less social intelligence.  She also has some of the best banter--her line about "No S*** there I was" to Varric is my favorite bit of party banter.  And there are nice moments--like when she cheerily brings up muggings in the street.  If you react with shock at her light treatment of such an event she deflects it with her humor.  I see that and think this is how she deals with a yet another situation where she's on a different wavelength than the person she's talking to.  So being able to infer that from a moment and see that play out in her reactions to others reinforces the belief she's a "full" character.
Why do I feel I didn't know her?  Well, why was she obsessed with that mirror?  I can infer the answer to that question.  She feels she's smarter than everyone else.  (And there are a couple of reasons to believe this 1) She has a better understanding of spirits and demons than Anders does as you can see in their banter 2) She's about the only blood mage in thin-veiled Kirkwall not to become an abomination.)  She's a Dalish and feels like the past can't be lost because her proud people should not always be a bunch of clowns on the run with theirs wagons and wooden deer statues.  She says something along those lines but, unfortunately, doesn't mention clowns.  And I would guess that somewhere along the line she decided that a lot of people are cowards and that it's up to someone like her or someone that's capable of being a keeper to be brave and that might entail doing something dangerous like bargaining with demons.  But that last part is me guessing, inferring.  I want to connect.  I want to hear it from her.
What would I like to have talked about? How did her arguments with Marethari go?  How was she picked to be a Keeper?  What drives her to recover the past?  What mistakes do her think the Dalish are making by wanting the mirror destroyed?  Why are their warnings, while well intentioned, mistaken?  What are her fears for the Dalish?  How much of this is tied to Tamlen?  I just needed to understand her obsession more than I did.  I wanted to understand how she could come to be obsessed like that--not just see that she was obsessed and then be asked to support her.  I mean, sometimes a romantic partner being secretive is part of the drama.  In the Dark Ritual, Morrigan not telling you everything was very much the point and part of the dilemma.  I never really felt there was a dramatic justification for the lack of conversation with Merrill on these things.  I think had Merrill been in camp in DAO, we would have talked about these things, and I would have been better connected to her.  Granted, I acknowledge that her side quests would also have been worse in DAO because there would have only been one of them.
Tentative Suggestions
Does it take "reams of expository dialogue"?  I don't know.  But that hammer can pound the message through.  Maybe just more dialogue during "Questioning Beliefs" or even gift segments would help.  I liked Fernis's stories about his past, for example.  Perhaps I wish Merrill had something like this.  She talked about the Dread Wolf which reinforced her status as as storyteller and an intellectual.  She used the wooden halla gift to express regret over being separated from her people.  But I never felt any of those gift or questioning-beliefs scenes gave me insight to her obsession.  It's also possible that more budget could be allocated to love interests--like after they move into your house.  These things wouldn't have to trigger quests.  They could just be things you check in on (at homebase or Hawke Estate) and have the option to initiate.  So people who don't want to trudge through and hunt for dialogue that can trigger quests...have nothing to worry about.  People that want extra insight and connection can get that with a romance character through the ,optional content.  Now I know that means making content that not everyone sees...but I actually think that's a really good thing these days in gaming because individuation makes for immersion which creates loyalty, which has value.  

Modifié par Giltspur, 23 avril 2011 - 04:07 .

[Everwarden]

jds1bio wrote...

I read on the forums today that BioWare is unlikely to have "rambling", party-camp style conversations in a Dragon Age game again.  They do not deem it a requirement to have such "reams of expository dialogue" in order for the player to feel connected to the character.

You don't understand, Gaider knows what you want and need in a game better than you do. Customer satisfaction is irrelevant. Good, cohesive stories and continuity are irrelevant. Forging bonds with characters is irrelevant.

What -you- as a Bioware supporter need to do is just form these connections immediately when Bioware puts a story cue in the game indicating you should give a rat's ass. Example: Getting to know your sibling is unnecessary, Bioware is saving valuable resources by not writing reams of dialogue so that you can get to know them, and passing those savings on to you! All you have to do in exchange is care when you see little brother/sister broken like a little toy soldier, is that so much to ask? After all Bioware has done for you? Stop feeling so entitled. No one owes you character development. 

Don't question the Gaider, or Gaider will smash: http://social.biowar...index/6589945/1

(Or at least lock down your thread.)

Modifié par Everwarden, 24 avril 2011 - 04:04 .