341 réponses à ce sujet

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Bostur wrote...

@mrcrusty
That's some nice examples of what good paraphrasing can do. When a game insists that all choices must be voiced and all conversation must be animated it does put a lot of limit on the depth and variety. Making dialogue choices fit into categories to match icons like in DA2 doesn't help creativity either I bet.

They aren't paraphrases, but they are examples of good, fully written out responses for three reasons.

1. The dialog is clear, precise and easy to understand. There is no confusion between what is shown on the screen, and what your character says.
2. The player is made aware of a choice and can make several ones with differing consequences.
3. The dialog options aren't bland or "gamey". They are in-character, and allow the player to make their decision based on the personality and mindset of the character they've crafted.

The paraphrases help with the third point, which was a problem with Origins dialogue options, but it causes potential problems on the first two points.

I suffered this problem with both Dragon Age 2 and Witcher 2, although the Witcher 2 didn't suffer from the second problem. Unlike Dragon Age 2, when it offered a choice in dialog, it honored it. Whereas Dragon Age 2 suffered from the "3 ways to say the same thing" problem.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 28 mai 2011 - 09:23 .

[-Semper-]

AmstradHero wrote...

-Semper- wrote...
i bet da3 will be the same as da2 with ... all the dumbed down rpg mechanics ...

Such as?

kill this, kill that... butcher everything. there are no soft skills or skill usage in dialogues. there is no quest with a "be clever and kill nobody but talk your way out" solution. in every single quest you have to choose one of the 2 sides and kill the other one.

AmstradHero wrote...

-Semper- wrote...
... horrible desgin decisions ...

Such as?

- voiced pc
- a game based around action and fighting (in terms of ultrakilling everything)
- horrible ui with the total lack of atmosphere
- fast paced in every single way.... but a static world
- equipment rating based on stars... wtf?! is this a facebook game?
- where are the nice looking item icons we all love? let alone the item descriptions -.-
- constant childish sex comments with a girly giggle aspect... god, this was so embarrassing!
- no interesting items... each category pushes the same 2-3 stats constantly oO
- not beeing able to speak to my party when i want to

AmstradHero wrote...

-Semper- wrote...
... watered down inventory management ...

Maybe you played a different DA2, but I stilll got inventory management from weapons, amulets, rings for everybody [...] I do understand that people love customising their entire party to the nth degree, but I'll confess I find it gets a little old after a while for me.

i don't want to get into the companion equipment discussion but i don't want my games to dictate me which weapon my pc can fight with. you want a mage with a crossbow? go for it! you want a dual wield fighter? that's fine. imo da2 comes with too many restrictions.

Uhh, did we play the same game? I didn't get to talk to my companions as much as I would have liked, but the conversations I did have with them were far from meaningless

they talk to me when they want and they dictate the point. there is no character developement and therefore i don't care for them. can i get them to a point where they leave my group or attack me?

We're never going to get Ninja Gaiden or God of War in a BioWare game, they're not that stupid. But up until now, if you asked to declare which combat was more "fun", I'd say DA2 over DAO

the fighting in da2 was interesting the first 2h. afterwards it was boring, less tactical and repetitive. da:o is by far no prime example but at least it feels a lil' bit like the glory dnd days^^

"Dumbed down" means nothing. If you'd said "reduced role-playing flexibilty because in some cases you receive fewer options in how to give a 'flavour' response", you might have a point. Otherwise, dialogue is frequently on-par with DAO.

it's not only the missing rpg aspect but also the drive of the dialogue. first you click the "additional info" button to hear a little snippet of a backstory and then you can choose between 3 different respones. afterwards the npc babbles 2-3 more sentences and that's it. there is no dialogue outside the quests, there are no huge branching backstory information or dialogues just for the fun to talk... it's only about the quest, what to do and this feels rushed and kills the atmosphere.

Modifié par -Semper-, 28 mai 2011 - 01:25 .

[Bostur]

mrcrusty wrote...

Bostur wrote...

@mrcrusty
That's some nice examples of what good paraphrasing can do. When a game insists that all choices must be voiced and all conversation must be animated it does put a lot of limit on the depth and variety. Making dialogue choices fit into categories to match icons like in DA2 doesn't help creativity either I bet.

They aren't paraphrases, but they are examples of good, fully written out responses for three reasons.

1. The dialog is clear, precise and easy to understand. There is no confusion between what is shown on the screen, and what your character says.
2. The player is made aware of a choice and can make several ones with differing consequences.
3. The dialog options aren't bland or "gamey". They are in-character, and allow the player to make their decision based on the personality and mindset of the character they've crafted.

The paraphrases help with the third point, which was a problem with Origins dialogue options, but it causes potential problems on the first two points.

I suffered this problem with both Dragon Age 2 and Witcher 2, although the Witcher 2 didn't suffer from the second problem. Unlike Dragon Age 2, when it offered a choice in dialog, it honored it. Whereas Dragon Age 2 suffered from the "3 ways to say the same thing" problem.

Indeed.

My use of the word paraphrase was for a lack of a better English word. I'm not sure what the official term is for "Menu item used in a literary context" ;-)

I liked the fact that "The Witcher 2" wasn't scared of showing one 'option'. Also it was very clear that some options was mostly meant for flavour and others brought the story forwards. We may get fooled by an illusion of choice the first few times we encounter it, but not throughout a whole game then it just becomes tiresome. TW2's honesty in that regard was handy.

As a sidenote, I'm playing through KOTOR at the moment, which I think is a wonderful RPG, but it suffers from the same dialogue issues. I don't really need 3 ways to turn someone down in a rude and evil tone. Especially not when all options are equally bland.


Your first point was the thing that annoyed me the most about DA2. I very often got the feeling of: "I totally didn't say that", leading to a feeling that it didn't matter what I chose, because Hawke would just blurt out some random comment anyway.

The second point, being made aware of a choice is more of a grey area I think. Language is inaccurate, context sensitive, and emotionally loaded. For that reason I think it sometimes help immersion if we aren't completely aware of the consequences of dialogue choices. It's ok if the response to something we say sometimes is different than what we imagined. I think this inaccuracy worked well in a game like "Alpha Protocol", I quickly got used to the fact that I couldn't make the 'perfect' choice every time, and it flowed well with the game.
Of course choices that mark major turning points in the story should be obvious, but minor choices can be obfuscated a little.

[Theagg]

inkjay wrote...

the implementation of wave combat,

Love the careful use of language there, "Implementation" was not the issue, it was waved combat, period. It only artificially lengthens the game and destroys strategy even if enemies don't appear out of thin air on top of you.

Hmm, exactly how do waves of enemies destroy strategy ? I can think of many real world, historical battles in which 'waves of combatants' were involved.

And a great deals of strategy and tactics on the part of commanders in dealing with that. For example, Napoleonic warfare was repleat with 'waves'. Send in the first wave of infantry. Then a wave of cavalry, then another wave of infantry, perhaps finishing off with the elite Guard wave. So no, 'waves' don't destroy the ability to use, nor the need for tactics and strategy.

Granted, enemies dropping out of the sky was not perhaps handled so well from an aesthetic standpoint but if you look carefully many of the spawn points for the second waves in DA 2 were often by doors, or from alleys. Sensible places where reinforcements would enter from. Where, of course, you might just have happened to unfortunately position yourself.. But the truth is, from a first play through perspective, the waves did come from unexpected places. Which is kind of the point really. you don't get a free lunch.

[TonyTheBossDanza123]

I just wanted to pop in and say that I'm going to stop following this thread. Minutes after my last post my internet went out, and has been down since then, just coming up now. I don't have the time or desire to read the last few pages, and I don't feel obliged too. I've said my piece, and workers at Bioware have read it, which is all that matters to me. How, or whether, they choose to act on it is what matters now.

Have fun everyone, if you want to discuss something more you can feel free to PM me and I might respond.

[Loup Blanc]

Laidlaw's posts are just damage control. Nothing more. Nothing we can say will change the company's direction at this point. So far the company has expressed a total disregard for the community's voice and you'd be a fool to think our complaints have had an impact on his vision and Bioweare's plan for the franchise.

Modifié par JL81, 28 mai 2011 - 01:23 .

[abaris]

Theagg wrote...


Love the careful use of language there, "Implementation" was not the issue, it was waved combat, period. It only artificially lengthens the game and destroys strategy even if enemies don't appear out of thin air on top of you.

Stands to reason, they're still Hamburger meat thrown in to artificially lenghten the combat because the "I" in AI isn't up to be challenging by itself.

Modifié par abaris, 28 mai 2011 - 01:23 .

[Theagg]

Across many of these vilification of DA2 threads that I have read I have noticed a strange thing. People bemoaning DA2 for its retreat from RPG standards (for example, removing the choice of race selection from the player), or prattling on about how the combat is dumbed down and veering into 'button pushing' Action RPG territory, with the 'awesome button'  (except, of course, when playing nightmare, its not dumbed down at all, much of the mechanics of Origins still clearly present and is still a long way from true aRPG . Granted it has its flaws, the removal of the full tactical camera for example but it turns out to be, surprise, at nightmare level, an improvement over Origins ).

And then those same critics lauding up Witcher 2, a game which have no choice about who you can roleplay, not even by gender, name or appearance. And a game whose combat mechanics are far more action RGP oriented than those of DA 2. By several leagues, never mind just the proverbial mile. Witcher is all about 'pushing buttons'. And those critics want Dragon Age to be more like Witcher ?

You can't have it both ways.

[Xewaka]

Theagg wrote...

Across many of these vilification of DA2 threads that I have read I have noticed a strange thing. People bemoaning DA2 for its retreat from RPG standards (for example, removing the choice of race selection from the player), or prattling on about how the combat is dumbed down and veering into 'button pushing' Action RPG territory, with the 'awesome button'  (except, of course, when playing nightmare, its not dumbed down at all, much of the mechanics of Origins still clearly present and is still a long way from true aRPG . Granted it has its flaws, the removal of the full tactical camera for example but it turns out to be, surprise, at nightmare level, an improvement over Origins ).

And then those same critics lauding up Witcher 2, a game which have no choice about who you can roleplay, not even by gender, name or appearance. And a game whose combat mechanics are far more action RGP oriented than those of DA 2. By several leagues, never mind just the proverbial mile. Witcher is all about 'pushing buttons'. And those critics want Dragon Age to be more like Witcher ?

You can't have it both ways.

To my understanding, what The Witcher 2 does extremely well is reactivity: the whole act 2 takes place on a different location depending on your choices in act 1. That kind of reactivity simply does not exist in Dragon Age 2.
In addition, the combat in DA 2 is the worst of both worlds: Not twitchy enough to play it as an action RPG, too cumbersome to play it as a pause-and-play team based RPG.

[Theagg]

abaris wrote...

Theagg wrote...


Love the careful use of language there, "Implementation" was not the issue, it was waved combat, period. It only artificially lengthens the game and destroys strategy even if enemies don't appear out of thin air on top of you.

Stands to reason, they're still Hamburger meat thrown in to artificially lenghten the combat because the "I" in AI isn't up to be challenging by itself.

Oops, you quoted me saying some other chaps comment :

But in one sense yes, the problem is that no AI yet developed can accurately give you a short, challenging combat, in this kind of game without this kind of mechanic added. Ie, in a game that doesn't require you to dodge, parry, duck, run for cover, or "Aim for the Face" (I like that line that keeps popping up when mobs are hassling me) and numerous other tactical bits and pieces that would make small scale squad style combat more challenging.

But would at the same time push Dragon Age well into action RPG territory because of all the timed button pressing required to achieve those kinds of tactics.

[Elvhen Veluthil]

RPG mechanics are meant to rely heavily on a turn-based philosophy, character/world development through dialog, a great inventory and an unvoiced protagonist. There are so many worlds to explore and so many tales to be told, maybe if they focused on that and stopped making all the awesome stuff, then we would have again an epic game.

[Theagg]

Xewaka wrote...

Theagg wrote...

Across many of these vilification of DA2 threads that I have read I have noticed a strange thing. People bemoaning DA2 for its retreat from RPG standards (for example, removing the choice of race selection from the player), or prattling on about how the combat is dumbed down and veering into 'button pushing' Action RPG territory, with the 'awesome button'  (except, of course, when playing nightmare, its not dumbed down at all, much of the mechanics of Origins still clearly present and is still a long way from true aRPG . Granted it has its flaws, the removal of the full tactical camera for example but it turns out to be, surprise, at nightmare level, an improvement over Origins ).

And then those same critics lauding up Witcher 2, a game which have no choice about who you can roleplay, not even by gender, name or appearance. And a game whose combat mechanics are far more action RGP oriented than those of DA 2. By several leagues, never mind just the proverbial mile. Witcher is all about 'pushing buttons'. And those critics want Dragon Age to be more like Witcher ?

You can't have it both ways.

To my understanding, what The Witcher 2 does extremely well is reactivity: the whole act 2 takes place on a different location depending on your choices in act 1. That kind of reactivity simply does not exist in Dragon Age 2.
In addition, the combat in DA 2 is the worst of both worlds: Not twitchy enough to play it as an action RPG, too cumbersome to play it as a pause-and-play team based RPG.

Neither did that kind of reactivity exist in Dragon Age Origins. (and I'm all for games that evolve differently for each player depending on their choices) though given the restrictions of the single player based game with a game that relies on human writers and not some grand internalised incredibly clever plot generating AI, ( that takes player chocies and evolves its own story from thereon without human writers involvement), those varying choices can only be allowed to diverge so far.

Any further and it becomes a nightmare for writers to handle as literally they would end up writing multiple parallel stories that bear little in relation to each other. Who is going to pay them to do that ? More to the point , where would they find the time ?

From my own perspective, I didn't find it cumbersome at all playing pause and play, with the exception of the lack of full tactical view. It worked well for me. What hampered it were the numerous bugs and glitches when doing that pausing.

[Shallina]

What was so bad with DAO is that it couldn't be made in 6 months.

[abaris]

Theagg wrote...

Neither did that kind of reactivity exist in Dragon Age Origins. (and I'm all for games that evolve differently for each player depending on their choices) though given the restrictions of the single player based game with a game that relies on human writers and not some grand internalised incredibly clever plot generating AI, ( that takes player chocies and evolves its own story from thereon without human writers involvement), those varying choices can only be allowed to diverge so far.

DAO was far from perfect. That's a given, but it hooked me and obviously a lot of others. Now what we expected was an improvement over DAO. But what we (as in those disagreeing with DAII) got, was monkey combat with lazily implemented 300 flair, non reacting NPCs, less companion development in every aspect and repetitive environments.

More power to those who can live with that or even enjoy it. I certainly don't and it seems there is a sound portion of players out there, who aren't into this kind of approach. What they tried to do was to create a Jack of all Trades. That never turns out well, or at least I would be hard pressed to name anything in the entertainment industry having successfully pulled that trick.

[Theagg]

abaris wrote...

Theagg wrote...

Neither did that kind of reactivity exist in Dragon Age Origins. (and I'm all for games that evolve differently for each player depending on their choices) though given the restrictions of the single player based game with a game that relies on human writers and not some grand internalised incredibly clever plot generating AI, ( that takes player chocies and evolves its own story from thereon without human writers involvement), those varying choices can only be allowed to diverge so far.

DAO was far from perfect. That's a given, but it hooked me and obviously a lot of others. Now what we expected was an improvement over DAO. But what we (as in those disagreeing with DAII) got, was monkey combat with lazily implemented 300 flair, non reacting NPCs, less companion development in every aspect and repetitive environments.

More power to those who can live with that or even enjoy it. I certainly don't and it seems there is a sound portion of players out there, who aren't into this kind of approach. What they tried to do was to create a Jack of all Trades. That never turns out well, or at least I would be hard pressed to name anything in the entertainment industry having successfully pulled that trick.

Oh, I loved Orgins too and many of the issues you have with DA2 are ones I share, especially when it comes to interacting with companions in DA2 versus the larger scope presented in Origins. And lack of varying environments too.

Monkey combat though ? Don't agree there, certainly not when playing the game in nightmare mode. I've yet to see any constructive criticism that paints picture of Origins combat (nightmare) as overall being superior to the DA2 combat (again at nightmare)

Generic comments about 'waves', or suddenly being surrounded by enemies poping out of nowhere don't really get to the nub of the issue. Since there were 'waves' in Origins and yes, encounters in Origins where suddenly you were surrounded by hostiles popping out of nowhere. (the infamous wolf random encounter fits this perfectly but there are others)

[neppakyo]

Theagg. DA2, there is nothing BUT wave combat. At least in DAO, it was used in places that made sense. (redcliffe). Not to mention the God Of War/Devil May Cry bosses. Massive amounts of HP.. it just drags out the lame combat even longer. Their idea of difficulty seems to add a tonne more HP, and resistances to almost everything. Its idiotic imho.

[oldmansavage]

Theagg wrote...

inkjay wrote...

the implementation of wave combat,

Love the careful use of language there, "Implementation" was not the issue, it was waved combat, period. It only artificially lengthens the game and destroys strategy even if enemies don't appear out of thin air on top of you.

Hmm, exactly how do waves of enemies destroy strategy ? I can think of many real world, historical battles in which 'waves of combatants' were involved.

And a great deals of strategy and tactics on the part of commanders in dealing with that. For example, Napoleonic warfare was repleat with 'waves'. Send in the first wave of infantry. Then a wave of cavalry, then another wave of infantry, perhaps finishing off with the elite Guard wave. So no, 'waves' don't destroy the ability to use, nor the need for tactics and strategy.

Granted, enemies dropping out of the sky was not perhaps handled so well from an aesthetic standpoint but if you look carefully many of the spawn points for the second waves in DA 2 were often by doors, or from alleys. Sensible places where reinforcements would enter from. Where, of course, you might just have happened to unfortunately position yourself.. But the truth is, from a first play through perspective, the waves did come from unexpected places. Which is kind of the point really. you don't get a free lunch.

There is no excuse for the shoddy way they handled the parachuting enemies.  Just look at a **** game like Dungeon Hunter Alliance they even managed to make enemies come out of doorways, bushes and other crawl spaces.

Having things come from behind me wouldn't bother me if it was done with a little bit of flavor and logic.  Having rogue enemies sneak up on your mages is cool or some kind of sapping enemy but what they did was just pathetically lazy.  Whether is makes the game more challenging or not is a non issue because it breaks immersion.

We might as well all be playing god of war with a dialogue wheel if this is this the best answer we have for increasing tactical difficulty.  I can get my goofy romp and stomp games elsewhere.  I was hoping DA would have a little more class.

[Oopsieoops]

Theagg wrote...
Monkey combat though ? Don't agree there, certainly not when playing the game in nightmare mode. I've yet to see any constructive criticism that paints picture of Origins combat (nightmare) as overall being superior to the DA2 combat (again at nightmare)

Generic comments about 'waves', or suddenly being surrounded by enemies poping out of nowhere don't really get to the nub of the issue. Since there were 'waves' in Origins and yes, encounters in Origins where suddenly you were surrounded by hostiles popping out of nowhere. (the infamous wolf random encounter fits this perfectly but there are others)

In origins they made sense and were rare enough to keep them fresh and not a bother. In DA2 roughly 90% of combat is like that. The problem with that is that it's impossible to properly position you characters, making all tactical element virtually meaningless. In DA2 combat is essentialy: hold you party around a corner outside the spawing area, attract the attention of the enemies and lure them to your party, kill them, wait for the second wave, repeat.

EDIT: Not to mention the shift from  few, more powerful enemies, to many, 3-4 hit kill mobs.

Modifié par Oopsieoops, 28 mai 2011 - 04:12 .

[4love]

Nice thread OP

[Elhanan]

The people who live in a golden age usually go around complaining how yellow everything looks. ~Randall Jarrell

[yumz0mbies]

 I love Dragon Age 2.  I hope DA3 is just like it plus refinements.

If it's an FPS I'll be mad.  But really, DA2 was great.  Thanks for such a fun game.

3 playthroughs - contemplating whether I should start the 4th or try out Red Dead Redemption.

[Oopsieoops]

Elhanan wrote...

The people who live in a golden age usually go around complaining how yellow everything looks. ~Randall Jarrell

Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them ~Samuel Palmer

[oldmansavage]

Quotation confesses inferiority.  
-  Ralph Waldo Emerson

Damn this is having a retroactive effect.

[abaris]

Oopsieoops wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

The people who live in a golden age usually go around complaining how yellow everything looks. ~Randall Jarrell

Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them ~Samuel Palmer

+1

seems there's a new Volourn on the prowl.

[neppakyo]

abaris wrote...

seems there's a new Volourn on the prowl.

Ouch. thats just mean.