323 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

The very best we could do is allow a conversation to occur in areas where we know there is sufficient space for the cameras. That's if there's nothing in the environment we want to have happen, however, and in fact it's probably harder to script those "safe" zones in than you might think. Most likely it'd have to be restricted down to a list of locations small enough that the idea of "I can talk to them anywhere" would become rather moot anyhow.

All stages used by your game (including the ones spawned dynamically) have the associated --and calculated automatically-- "bounding box" which envelopes character spawning points as well as the cameras. All props in your game come with the same kind of bounding boxes. As do the characters.

It's a rather trivial matter of testing whether the bounding box of the "dynamic stage" can fit at the point the game is trying to spawn it, without hitting any other bounding boxes present. I say "trivial" since its' something the game already does multiple times a second for every character present in the scene, simply to prevent them from running through things and walls.

Please, talk with the coders of your game about it; fairly sure they can confirm this could be less complicated issue than you imagine

Incidentally, these conversations can include more than one camera -- having two to switch the view between the follower and the PC would be most obvious-- and these can be easily enough combined with other cameras set up for close-ups and whatnot. And all of these can be used to animate content of the cutscene in the manner very similar to the cinematic exchanges you had in DA2 (the ones which didn't involve props at least and very large number of them didn't) Again, fairly sure your cinematic guys like Mr.Epler could confirm that.

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Also height differences (stairs, slopes, rocks, etc.) were very bad too. If characters are talking to each other while standing at different heights in arbitrary positions, it becomes very difficult to synchronize animations for things like touching, hitting, interacting, etc. because the animations are almost invariably created with equivalent height in mind. You can hide this with camera tricks (the camera only sees waist-up), but it's still another constraint you have to work around.

DA already has mechanics to address that -- the spawn points for cutscene actors can be snapped to the ground level, but don't need to be. It actually requires certain setup in the cutscene to make them snap to the ground. Since camera pretty much never shows characters' feet, this goes largely unnoticed.

[Zjarcal]

fchopin wrote...
Then please remove the cinematics for dialogue as it's impossible for me to get immersed with dialogue or companions, use cinematics in other ways but not in this, dialogue is very important for role playing.

Yeah, I'm sure they will remove a feature they've been working on for so long and one that they've claimed will be a key part of every future game they develop, just beause it made it impossible for you to feel immersed.

And while I'm here I will say that I don't feel that "conversations everywhere" are absolutely necessary to feel close to my companions. I felt just as close to the companions in DA2 as I did to the ones in Origins (the same can be said for ME2 and the interaction there was even more limited).

Even if DA2 and ME2 were missing the "long rambling conversations", they featured much more detailed personal quests, which for me, helped a lot in feeling closer to my companions. And in the case of DA2 there were enough conversations spread out through the game that I honestly didn't miss the "laundry list of options". While I would never say no to more dialogue and would support the idea to bring back some sponatneous form of conversations, I agree with Gaider's stance that it's not absolutely necessary to feel connected to companions as long as there are other venues that offer an opportunity to become close to them.

If I had to come with an example of a game where I didn't feel conneceted to the companions it would be Awakening, and that's because it was missing both the spontaneous conversations as well as more involved personal quests. That and the number of conversations was extremely small.

Of course I can only speak for myself, so I'm certainly not telling those who absolutely need the spontaneous dialogue that they are wrong.

And finally, may I suggest that maybe some people don't feel connected to the DA2 companions simply because they don't like them? After all, no ammount of long rambling conversations would ever make me feel connected to Wynne or Alistair in Origins, and I feel that may also apply for many people regarding the DA2 companions.

[tmp7704]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Take a look at this and tell me it doesn't completely change the viewer's feelings about the scene in question. The obscured camera angles and clipping issues are often so jarring that the viewer is completely broken out of any immersion. You might not think so, but I assure you that many players will.

Of course the only reason that particular conversation has clipping issue and obscured camera angles is, the intended actor was replaced by a player with a much larger figure through modding, something the scene wasn't designed nor checked for. I'd imagine the viewer would get their immersion broken even more effectively by hearing voice of female Hawke coming from the Arishok's mouth, which also happens in that very scene...

(incidentally, i can't watch that particular scene with straight face even in its intended shape thanks to the ridiculous noises Anders is making)

Modifié par tmp7704, 25 avril 2011 - 03:01 .

[LobselVith8]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The companions don't remain stagnant in Origins

Aside from "hardening" just how else do they change and grow?  Please provide specific examples.

Also, with regards to DA2, please explain how character growth that takes place in view of the player is compromised or contradicted by expository background information as to what occurred during timeskips.

If you'd like, Upsettingshorts. I think it's better for us to see the development of our relationship with the different companions, as well as the different facets of their personality, than having to read about such changes in a codex entry. I think part of the problem is that Hawke is a custom character that has plenty of things implemented without our imput (like being Andrastian, for instance) while the Warden leaves us more of a chance to embody who the protagonist is in regards to their personality and attitude, including whether they are religious or not (such as how we respond to the Chantry clergic in Ostagar). There's also the fact that in Origins, we were choosing between different lines of dialogue that address what the protagonist actually said as opposed to DA2's diplomatic/sarcastic/angry options that leave the player guessing at what Hawke might be saying (such as choosing "I'll take responsibility" that had Hawke saying things that I left were OOC for my protagonist).

As for the fact that the characters in Origins weren't stagnant, we see growth and change with the characters. I feel that the characters in Origins have deep and interesting storylines, and we can hear from our interaction with them that they have distinct personalities. Morrigan who is an apostate who initially sees love as a weakness, but is slowly grapping with the implications of love for the first time with a romanced Warden who can see how she is visibly shaken because of the feelings that she's been taught all her life were a weakness; Oghren deals with the madness that drove his wife to destroy their entire House and having been an outcast in Orzammar because she didn't bring him along, while he tries to find a place on the surface after finding a friend and confidant in the Warden and getting back together with Felsi; Shale is initially hesitant about the fact that she was discovered by a mage and apprehensive, but she comes to terms with the Warden despite his status as a mage and deals with the discovery that she was once a dwarven volunteer for Caridin; Wynne can come to terms with failing Aneirin and her status as an abomination because of Uldred's rebellion; Sten can slowly reveal the depths of who he is and how he sees the world to the Warden as he changes his stance from being an observor of a foreign land to wanting to fight at the side of someone who has become a friend, and he can accept a mage as his Kadan and explain his feelings and opinions about a society that defies the Qunari way of life; Loghain can explain the macinations of his daughter (who demonstrates more depth than Meredith or Orsino do) and we see how he adjusts to working with a former antagonist turned ally while we can explore his deep seated issues with the Orlesians and how he comes to grips with his actions, changing from a nemesis who thought he could save Ferelden without any help from the Wardens to a man who is willing to sacrifice his life for the chance to redeem himself for his mistakes.

[hoorayforicecream]

tmp7704 wrote...

All stages used by your game (including the ones spawned dynamically) have the associated --and calculated automatically-- "bounding box" which envelopes character spawning points as well as the cameras. All props in your game come with the same kind of bounding boxes. As do the characters.

It's a rather trivial matter of testing whether the bounding box of the "dynamic stage" can fit at the point the game is trying to spawn it, without hitting any other bounding boxes present. I say "trivial" since its' something the game already does multiple times a second for every character present in the scene, simply to prevent them from running through things and walls.

Please, talk with the coders of your game about it; fairly sure they can confirm this could be less complicated issue than you imagine

Incidentally, these conversations can include more than one camera -- having two to switch the view between the follower and the PC would be most obvious-- and these can be easily enough combined with other cameras set up for close-ups and whatnot. And all of these can be used to animate content of the cutscene in the manner very similar to the cinematic exchanges you had in DA2 (the ones which didn't involve props at least and very large number of them didn't) Again, fairly sure your cinematic guys like Mr.Epler could confirm that.

It's not as easy as you think it is. So you have a bounding box. If it fits, great. What do you do if the box won't fit? Do you rotate it? Move it? Find the closest nearby location where it would fit and teleport your characters there? What if that location is many many meters away? How do you find such a spot? Do you simply disallow dialogue in an enclosed area if the box doesn't fit? How is the player to know where she can or cannot initiate dialogue? What if you're on a slope? Now the box collides with the ground. Now what?

It isn't as trivial an issue to solve as you make it out to be. Finding sufficient room to enact cinematic sequences with characters and camera positions being arbitrary and variable can be difficult. Making sure that you don't accidentally clip through stuff is paramount; Sony and Microsoft aren't going to let a game pass certification if it has severe clipping issues.

DA already has mechanics to address that -- the spawn points for cutscene actors can be snapped to the ground level, but don't need to be. It actually requires certain setup in the cutscene to make them snap to the ground. Since camera pretty much never shows characters' feet, this goes largely unnoticed.

The best option is to snap them to the PC's level, but it severely limits what they can do for sufficiently sloped ground, or other world geometry like rocks, shrubs, bushes, chairs, bannisters or tables.  If you've got a clear space, and the characters start moving, you have to be sure that everything around them is clear, or they can walk directly through waist-high geometry.

[hoorayforicecream]

tmp7704 wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Take a look at this and tell me it doesn't completely change the viewer's feelings about the scene in question. The obscured camera angles and clipping issues are often so jarring that the viewer is completely broken out of any immersion. You might not think so, but I assure you that many players will.

Of course the only reason that particular conversation has clipping issue and obscured camera angles is, the intended actor was replaced by a player with a much larger figure through modding, something the scene wasn't designed nor checked for. I'd imagine the viewer would get their immersion broken even more effectively by hearing voice of female Hawke coming from the Arishok's mouth, which also happens in that very scene...

(incidentally, i can't watch that particular scene with straight face even in its intended shape thanks to the ridiculous noises Anders is making)

I bring it up because the exact same effect would happen if an NPC on a set path walked directly in front of the camera and stood there during the conversation for about as much time. That won't happen with controlled environments like they have now, but it can for an arbitrarily placed conversation that can happen anywhere in the world.

[fchopin]

Zjarcal wrote...

fchopin wrote...
Then please remove the cinematics for dialogue as it's impossible for me to get immersed with dialogue or companions, use cinematics in other ways but not in this, dialogue is very important for role playing.

Yeah, I'm sure they will remove a feature they've been working on for so long and one that they've claimed will be a key part of every future game they develop, just beause it made it impossible for you to feel immersed.

And while I'm here I will say that I don't feel that "conversations everywhere" are absolutely necessary to feel close to my companions. I felt just as close to the companions in DA2 as I did to the ones in Origins (the same can be said for ME2 and the interaction there was even more limited).

Even if DA2 and ME2 were missing the "long rambling conversations", they featured much more detailed personal quests, which for me, helped a lot in feeling closer to my companions. And in the case of DA2 there were enough conversations spread out through the game that I honestly didn't miss the "laundry list of options". While I would never say no to more dialogue and would support the idea to bring back some sponatneous form of conversations, I agree with Gaider's stance that it's not absolutely necessary to feel connected to companions as long as there are other venues that offer an opportunity to become close to them.

If I had to come with an example of a game where I didn't feel conneceted to the companions it would be Awakening, and that's because it was missing both the spontaneous conversations as well as more involved personal quests. That and the number of conversations was extremely small.

Of course I can only speak for myself, so I'm certainly not telling those who absolutely need the spontaneous dialogue that they are wrong.

And finally, may I suggest that maybe some people don't feel connected to the DA2 companions simply because they don't like them? After all, no ammount of long rambling conversations would ever make me feel connected to Wynne or Alistair in Origins, and I feel that may also apply for many people regarding the DA2 companions.

I was connected with all the companions in DAO, did not matter if i liked them or not.
When you can get personal with a character there is a connection even if you hate them.
 
In DA2 there was no connection with any companion for me for the simple reason that there was no personal interaction.
 
This game is a role playing game and not a role watching game, i want to play a role not watch my character play a role.
 
Therefore i disagree with Mr Gaider but only in regards to what is important for an RPG. I love watching cinematics but not when they take away my role playing.

[Brockololly]

In Exile wrote...
Rather, I meant that they aren't different at the end of it. Morrigain is still the same Morrigain you meet in the Wilds, but Isabella isn't still the same Isabella you met in the pearl.

Eh, I'd disagree, especially about Morrigan- sure she still does the DR and all that, but if you're friendly with her she comes to view the Warden  as a true friend or practically a sister, or more than that if you  romance her. Certainly it doesn't cause her to undergo a 180, but her  motivations for the DR are changed if you're friendly or romancing her  as she sees it as a means to not lose the friend/lover she gained. So  while her entire worldview might not change, its arguably more  significant than even Isabela's, especially then if you were to add in  how she trusts a romancing Warden enough to follow her through the Eluvian in Witch Hunt.

Its not even close that you could honestly say she's the same person as she was at the start of Origins.

hoorayforicecream wrote...
I don't believe anybody has ever brought up less voice acting as a cost-saving measure. The closest I've ever seen to that is the reason why they cast Adam Howden as Anders instead of Greg Ellis, and that was because Greg Ellis was unavailable for such a large role, so they brought him back to reprise Cullen in order to get what they could.

Where did anyone say anything about less voice acting as a cost-saving measure?

I don't know so much about a cost savings measure, but back before DAO came out Georg Zoeller said this regarding if they had added player VO to Origins:

Georg Zoeller wrote...
Well, it's really quite simple. If DA had player voice over, it would be a game about 50% shorter.

Not that it seems to matter anymore with BioWare as the voiced PC is their sacred cow, but you have to imagine that having a voiced protagonists affects the scope of the game in some capacity (like having different racial Origins) and certainly having a voiced PC affects the amount of VO they have in the game overall, to some extent. Maybe they increased their VO budget accordingly, but it seems just as likely that there is less other VO in the game due to the voiced PC- whether thats fewer companion lines or fewer lines from more second tier NPCs.

Modifié par Brockololly, 25 avril 2011 - 03:16 .

[tmp7704]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

What do you do if the box won't fit?

That's not going to happen often to begin with -- the conversation stages aren't generally larger than the space taken overall by the player's party and the levels are designed with this amount of open space in mind.

If it actually happens how you resolve it is fairly open question -- simplest approach would be to have companion outright state something along the lines "can we find more open space to talk? Feels too cramped in here". You can also try to nudge the desired location (knowing which spots cause conflict helps) with a limit of how far it can go if you feel so inclined. Ultimately this isn't different from pathfinding/placement calculations done for large in-game creature like say, an ogre.

What if you're on a slope? Now the box collides with the ground. Now what?

Ground collisions and props collisions are viewed as two different things in my understanding -- since you want your characters to snap to the walk mesh but  not necessarily snap to anything else. As such not sure why you'd test the stage box with the ground especially if the characters are to be spawned on arbitrary level instead.

Note that's different from items like stairs -- these have both the walk surface and the collision mesh. As such you can skip the ground collision testing but still know when your stage is trying to spawn on something that'd get severely in the way.

Making sure that you don't accidentally clip through stuff is paramount; Sony and Microsoft aren't going to let a game pass certification if it has severe clipping issues.

Define severe clipping issues -- DA2 has every single weapon mesh clip very noticeably into equipped shield mesh. And it's not accidental, it's continuous as long as you remain out of combat. If Sony and Microsoft don't mind that, why expect them to fret over accidental clipping in a cutscene?

The best option is to snap them to the PC's level, but it severely limits what they can do for sufficiently sloped ground, or other world geometry like rocks, shrubs, bushes, chairs, bannisters or tables.  If you've got a clear space, and the characters start moving, you have to be sure that everything around them is clear, or they can walk directly through waist-high geometry.

The waist-high geometry comes with its own bounding boxes. As long as you don't move the characters out of the stage area, if the stage was succesfully placed in the first place that should be a non-issue -- these items won't be present within the stage area.

Modifié par tmp7704, 25 avril 2011 - 03:34 .

[tmp7704]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I bring it up because the exact same effect would happen if an NPC on a set path walked directly in front of the camera and stood there during the conversation for about as much time. That won't happen with controlled environments like they have now, but it can for an arbitrarily placed conversation that can happen anywhere in the world.

If that is scenario you have on mind then i'd say personally i'd find it something enhancing the immersion, not breaking it -- if there's NPCs walking nearby then i'd by all means expect them to be visible in the scene.

(there's also the /trollface option of noting that if there's one thing the recent BioWare games lack, it's the actual ambient --and especially moving-- crowds. Which makes it largely a theoretical concern)

Also since the point of these 'cinematic conversations' is to adorn them with extra camera work and switching, i think the prospect of NPCs who would manage to stand in front of all these cameras through entire conversation quite difficult to pass

[jds1bio]

To the guys having the bounding box discussion:

I know you are trying to assist in the solution for greater flexibility in companion conversations in the game. And I appreciate the technical details behind what is essentially stagecraft's blocking, but your sub-convo is starting to veer off-topic. There are many things that can be done to make un-staged conversations happen "anywhere" (including dynamically building stages that will fit the characters and warping them there temporarily), but their technical details can be discussed in a separate thread.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

This is a false statement. I never claimed there was no development in DA2. I addressed that I didn't feel that the characters were as developed as the companions in Origins, I didn't feel as connected to them, I didn't feel that I knew them as personally as Hawke as the Warden knew his moiety crew. [/quote]

You misunderstand.

You said that the development in DA2 isn't shown. I'm disagreeing with that; I'm claiming it is shown. What I am saying is that so far as you have offered no proof that it isn't shown, other than saying it should take place on screen and not in the codex, yet never said what development happens in the codex that doesn't happen on screen.

So, no, I am not mischaracterizing what you said. [/quote]

I was addressing that the development from the codex entries wasn't shown, and I think it should have been. It's my opinion, of course, but I think it would have helped strengthen the relationships with the companions.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Making false claims isn't proof, either. I'm addressing that I don't feel as connected to the DA2 characters as I did with the DA:O characters, and I don't find there to be as much insight into the characters as there was in Origins. You're welcome to disagree, of course.

You don't need to take my opinions so personally. [/quote]

I'm taking nothing personally. I want to have a discussion, but you don't see to want one. Yes, these are all your opnions, but your evidence for them is that they happen to be your opinions.

If you don't want to talk about it, we don't have to. But I think it's an interesting discussion to have, if you're willing to actually discuss the execution of it. [/quote]

I have no issue with discussions, even when people disagree with my opinions.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm not saying I dislike the characters, I'm addressing how I don't feel as connected to these companions. I don't feel that the story really provides us with a connection to these characters, particularly when our dialogue options are limited to three expressions where I'm playing a guessing game at whether the options chosen will actually have my protagonist speak the same dialogue, or if it'll be completely different than what I intended. I feel that the dialogue is sparse in giving us insight into the respective characters. [/quote]

Okay, this is much better.

DA:O gives us the same options as DA2 insofar as your number of options are concered. Very rarely DA:O had what I call ''double up'' options, which have different text for the PC but which actually amount to identical lines and effect for the NPC (usually empty flavour lines that the NPC ignores).

Hawke just as much unique dialogue as the Warden did - picking one option on the wheel changes the wheel that you get. as in DA:O. Accusing Aveline of failing to protect your mother switches the conversation from her trying to console you to her failure. [/quote]

Except when dialogue was chosen for the Warden, it's often what he said (except for the line where he hardened the personality of Alistair); when dialogue is chosen for Hawke, it can be (and often is) radically different than what was intended (such as the "you're useless" option for Grand Cleric Elthina). I feel that it hurts immersion.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

I found DA:O the system that I had to struggle with to build a connection when I was either rairloaded into liking the Wardens (no bearded dude kidnapped me, I had no choice!) options, and being forced to be passive and reactive in most conversations (because even when you got to speak, the majority of your lines were hooks for what the other person said).

I disagree with you on the empirical side of things - I don't think we had less dialogue than DA:O; it was just that the interface changed.

Now, if you honestly feel that the wheel itself prevented you from getting close to the characters, I acknowledge that. But that isn't the same as DA2 failing to show character development. [/quote]

I don't think there wasn't any character development, but I feel that the ties to the companions weren't as strong as they were in Origins.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The plot forces you to get involved even if you find no justification in it, though. Even when you turn down a quest, you're often forced to go through with it. It's an issue of linear progression where we have the illusion of choice.[/quote]

As it is in Dragon Age Origins. You can't not recruit an army. You can't call a Landsmeet without it. [/quote]

That's true, but you can determine what Orzammar's future will be like by choosing the next ruler and whether the Anvil will be spared; you can choose to help or abandon the people of Redcliffe; you can side with the elves, the werewolves, or help both of them; you can save the mages or argue for their destruction. The Warden had the opportunity to change the world around him even though there were some linear elements to the storyline. Hawke never has the opportunity to change Darktown, the Alienage, investigate the "O" letter, or be proactive like the Warden was. I hope this issue is rectified in DLC or an expansion.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

It's the same thing. I agree with you that DA2 failed to offer branching choice and I absolutely agree that this cheapens the experience, but with respect to mandatory quests that's just what Bioware does.

The plot allows you to invent a justification for Hawke. Just as there could be lots of reasons you might want to stop the blight, there could be lots of reasons you end up doing these quests. You even get to pick options at one point. [/quote]

But the problem is some quests force you to do them, even when you've turned them down. It's the illusion of choice.

[quote]In Exile wrote...

That being said, I think DA2 faild to use the templars as blackmail. Using that in DA2 to force the main quests (help practice your apostate ass is thrown in the Gallows or executed) and suddenly there's a justification, since it seems players need that.  [/quote]

That would have explained why Hawke would have to accomplish some of the quests, as Meredith uses the same threat to force Hawke to do "On the Loose."

[Maria Caliban]

fchopin wrote...
Then please remove the cinematics for dialogue as it's impossible for me to get immersed with dialogue or companions, use cinematics in other ways but not in this, dialogue is very important for role playing.

fchopin wrote...
I was connected with all the companions in DAO, did not matter if i liked them or not.

How could you connect with the companions in DA:O if cinematics make it impossible to do so?

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

How could you connect with the companions in DA:O if cinematics make it impossible to do so?

It seems both sides agree that having the PC and companion stand in front of each other and exchange dialogue lines with static camera isn't "real" cinematics, hence all the extra bits they added to them in DA2.

Modifié par tmp7704, 25 avril 2011 - 04:14 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Yeah... this doesn't belong here. If you want to continue the discussion on bounding boxes, please send me a PM.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 25 avril 2011 - 04:21 .

[Sabariel]

The problem I had with my companions taking the initiative and coming to talk to me (eg: Aveline visiting me about "my" mother) is I often wondered why they were doing it. I didn't feel friendly enough with or connected enough to Aveline for her to just barge into my house and say "Well, if you want to talk about your mother, come find me."

I would really, really like a balance between DAO and DA2. Some "frivolous" things to talk about whenever and wherever I please: "Hey, Fenris, how come your eyebrows don't match your hair?" and some "for srs" talks to have at designated times and designated places: "Hey Fenris. Oh, your master is after you again? Well, let's go kill him! " The "big things" and the "little things" are what helped me connect to the characters in DAO. I'd love to have that feeling again in DA3.

[Maria Caliban]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

How could you connect with the companions in DA:O if cinematics make it impossible to do so?

It seems both sides agree that having the PC and companion stand in front of each other and exchange dialogue lines with static camera isn't "real" cinematics, hence all the extra bits they added to them in DA2.

I see.

Back and forth conversation with Leliana = fine
Back and forth conversation with Isabela that ends with her leaning on the bar = immersion breaker

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 25 avril 2011 - 04:28 .

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I see.

Back and forth conversation with Leliana = fine
Back and forth conversation with Isabela that ends with her leaning on the bar = immersion breaker

Can't say i find the latter an immersion breaker myself but that seems to be the gist of it. There is a fair difference between having the camera just sit on your character's shoulder, and a "cinematic" scene where you view "yourself" pacing around and talking as just one of the actors. The latter can give stronger sense what you're watching is entirely separate person rather than your extension.

[Lenimph]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I see.

Back and forth conversation with Leliana = fine
Back and forth conversation with Isabela that ends with her leaning on the bar = immersion breaker

Can't say i find the latter an immersion breaker myself but that seems to be the gist of it. There is a fair difference between having the camera just sit on your character's shoulder, and a "cinematic" scene where you view "yourself" pacing around and talking as just one of the actors. The latter can give stronger sense what you're watching is entirely separate person rather than your extension.

[tmp7704]

And how often that happens, compared to DA2?

edit: for that matter try the reverse -- how many conversations in DA2 have the camera on Hawke's shoulder and not showing his/her face during the speech.

Modifié par tmp7704, 25 avril 2011 - 05:01 .

[Deztyn]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I see.

Back and forth conversation with Leliana = fine
Back and forth conversation with Isabela that ends with her leaning on the bar = immersion breaker

Can't say i find the latter an immersion breaker myself but that seems to be the gist of it. There is a fair difference between having the camera just sit on your character's shoulder, and a "cinematic" scene where you view "yourself" pacing around and talking as just one of the actors. The latter can give stronger sense what you're watching is entirely separate person rather than your extension.

I understand this.

I didn't have a problem with it in DA2, but being forced to see Shepard recline on the bed looking lost and vulnerable while quietly begging for Liara to come back soon?

Rage!

[Zjarcal]

tmp7704 wrote...

And how often that happens, compared to DA2?

Plenty of times. But really that's not the point, the point is that it happens in almost every conversation and based on the opnions that some have given, that is a huge immersion breaker.

I can understand if people say that the voice bothers them, but if the camera pointing at the PC is an immersion breaking detail, then the conversations in Origins should not really be immersive for them.

As for DA2 having the camera over the PC's shoulder, a few times, very few. Which is fine by me. I like watching my beautiful Hawke's face. 

Modifié par Zjarcal, 25 avril 2011 - 05:04 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Deztyn wrote...
I didn't have a problem with it in DA2, but being forced to see Shepard recline on the bed looking lost and vulnerable while quietly begging for Liara to come back soon?

Rage!

I just imagined my Shepard revealing a broad smirk after he made sure she left, at the prospect of holding so much power.

Girls like vulnerability last I heard. My Shepard was acting. And was quite good at it. See? Easy to get past that  

[tmp7704]

Zjarcal wrote...

I can understand if people say that the voice bothers them, but if the camera pointing at the PC is an immersion breaking detail, then the conversations in Origins should not really be immersive for them.

I think it's more the whole package of the camera pointing at the PC and watching him/her move around there and talk. That really doesn't happen in DAO, after all.

[Lenimph]

tmp7704 wrote...

And how often that happens, compared to DA2?

edit: for that matter try the reverse -- how many conversations in DA2 have the camera on Hawke's shoulder and not showing his/her face during the speech.

The Warden didnt talk. Would you have liked to watch the warden "speak"?

And if you want to go prove a point why don't you go count and show us some of your almighty evidence but as for now... 
 here's some of that smexy Hawke shoulder

Modifié par Lenimph, 25 avril 2011 - 05:22 .