The only thing I'd like to see brought over from the DA2 dialog system is the personality tracking, and having it be tied to Paragon/Renegade scores like Charm/Intimidate are in ME2. IE, if one of the scores is more then X amount above the other, Shep's lines reflect that(Nicer for Paragon, more jerkish for Renegade) while if the scores are closer together(under the X amount above) Shep has a more neutral tone.
The whole icons thing works better for DA2, honestly. Leave 'em out of ME3, but the personality tracking has potential.
Will Mass Effect 3 utilize Dragon Age 2's conversation system/mechanics?
Débuté par
Yurdle The Turtle
, juin 16 2011 03:07
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 16 juin 2011 - 08:29
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 626 messages
Blooddrunk1004 wrote...
One wrong line could even get you killed in the game, if you didnt read carefull
This isn't a selling point for a dialog system.
If it was, then ME's system would be superior to DAOs because you have to work at figuing out what the paraphrases mean.
Modifié par AlanC9, 16 juin 2011 - 08:30 .
#53
Posté 16 juin 2011 - 08:42
Malanek
-
- Members
- 7 838 messages
I completely understand your problem but I don't think a hybrid method is going to solve it. Already you have added 6 icons for renegade choices, you probably need to add another 6 for paragon and potentially another 6 for neutral. That is a lot of icons for the player to remember. And what happens if there is a tone that isn't on the list? Say just making a renegade decision that isn't pragmatic or violent? You already have the morality and the paraphrase. In the case you illustrated above you could have solved it by changing the paraphrase to "I don't trust Turians".MinotaurWarrior wrote...
Malanek999 wrote...
Having said that, I repeat from my
post above. ME3 should not change. To change to the DA system, does not
just mean putting an icon in the middle of the dialogue wheel. It means
removing the mechanics of morality from the game. Although ultimately
I dislike measure a characters morality with a numerical score, it is
too deeply entrenched in the trilogy to be changing it before the final
game.
Ok, I see your point. I also wouldn't like it if they completely copied the DA:][ system, but can't you see how including elements of it could be helpful?
As it stands, the bottom right choice is "renegade" but that could mean "impatient" "violent" "skeptical" "anti-alien" "pragmatic" or "criminal". Infamously, in ME1, right after Nihlus leaves the ship, you have the dialog blurb "I don't trust him", which seemed perfectly reasonable for my pro-alien but highly skeptical shepard, but turned out to actually mean "I don't trust him, because he's a tuarian." If there was a little icon of two aliens ignoring eachother when I highlighted that option, I wouldn't have been tricked into that out of character moment.
Modifié par Malanek999, 16 juin 2011 - 08:43 .
#54
Posté 16 juin 2011 - 08:55
Malanek
-
- Members
- 7 838 messages
I think this this is a very good point but I think it was more a symptom of the implementation than the system. For whatever reason they decided they needed to have 3 different options everytime and went down the route of writing over the top responses to fit into these. IMO most of the options available should be neutral. Multiple diplomatic options should be avaialble to be chosen at the same time. For instance suppose you were playing survivor and you were trying to get someone to align with you. One way of doing it is to suggest they will go further in the game. Another way to do it is to appeal to their better nature. The point is you can be diplomatic in significantly different ways and when you develope some arbitrary rule to use 3 different, and quite often over the top, tones, conversations start taking an unrealistic feel. IMO, assuming they are keeping the dialogue wheel for DA, they should just write normal conversations without any self imposed rules and then fit it into the dialogue wheel at the end.Dark Necronus2 wrote...
Basically having the icons meant that every dialogue boiled down to "Good/bad/silly". It actually made the conversations more shallow, because even if you mixed it up, the game would still give you your dominant personality so it wouldn't matter. I don't want this in DA3, let alone ME3.
#55
Posté 16 juin 2011 - 09:17
Jkol1
-
- Members
- 30 messages
As valuable and essential of a skill that literacy is, making you read is not
The same as making you think.
If every dialogue is Paragon, Neutral, Renegade and you have no control over the exact wording
What value do words add over symbols beyond aesthetic? Streamling to the most efficient way to present information is far from childish but rather highly intelligent.
The symbols in DA2 where highly useful because they conveyed the tone of the conversation and highlighted irreversible decisions such as executions and romances.
That is not to say that there is no value in complexity. There are plenty of situations where complex communications allow for precision. Choosing between a racist renegade option and a pragmatic renegade option might require more than a symbol. So would choosing Sheppard's exact dialogue.
This reveals the true issue. The problem is not that symbols dumb down the dialogue tree (they do not) but rather that he dialogue tree is already sufficiently simple that the most effective way to communicate the choices are symbols.
The same as making you think.
If every dialogue is Paragon, Neutral, Renegade and you have no control over the exact wording
What value do words add over symbols beyond aesthetic? Streamling to the most efficient way to present information is far from childish but rather highly intelligent.
The symbols in DA2 where highly useful because they conveyed the tone of the conversation and highlighted irreversible decisions such as executions and romances.
That is not to say that there is no value in complexity. There are plenty of situations where complex communications allow for precision. Choosing between a racist renegade option and a pragmatic renegade option might require more than a symbol. So would choosing Sheppard's exact dialogue.
This reveals the true issue. The problem is not that symbols dumb down the dialogue tree (they do not) but rather that he dialogue tree is already sufficiently simple that the most effective way to communicate the choices are symbols.
#56
Posté 17 juin 2011 - 01:09
Lunatic LK47
-
- Members
- 2 024 messages
Jkol1 wrote...
As valuable and essential of a skill that literacy is, making you read is not
The same as making you think.
If every dialogue is Paragon, Neutral, Renegade and you have no control over the exact wording
What value do words add over symbols beyond aesthetic? Streamling to the most efficient way to present information is far from childish but rather highly intelligent.
The symbols in DA2 where highly useful because they conveyed the tone of the conversation and highlighted irreversible decisions such as executions and romances.
That is not to say that there is no value in complexity. There are plenty of situations where complex communications allow for precision. Choosing between a racist renegade option and a pragmatic renegade option might require more than a symbol. So would choosing Sheppard's exact dialogue.
This reveals the true issue. The problem is not that symbols dumb down the dialogue tree (they do not) but rather that he dialogue tree is already sufficiently simple that the most effective way to communicate the choices are symbols.
This. Why else are visual maps given? It shows us where the hell things are in a visual sense. How helpful would it be if getting directions to a local McDonalds is something like "Turn right on A road, then left on B road, then straight for two blocks, and make a right on the first intersection you see" without knowing where it's located.
#57
Posté 17 juin 2011 - 01:22
Rune-Chan
-
- Members
- 1 054 messages
Personally I just want them to remove all involuntary dialogue. If you create a game where the player decides what their character says, it should always be the case.
#58
Posté 17 juin 2011 - 01:28
Kadzin
-
- Members
- 834 messages
Yeah this...javierabegazo wrote...
Ninjamances have more to do with misleading prompts rather than a lack of icons I believe.Lunatic LK47 wrote...
javierabegazo wrote...
Eh, I think the icons are too....arcady. I hope they stay in DA2 and out of ME
It sure beats getting ninja romanced with Jacob if you're just picking nothing but the upper-right choice just because "it's usually the nice thing." The only thing I'm going to blame user error on is for situations like "I want you Thane" to not mean they want to bump uglies with him.
However you suaully realise this pretty soon if the character starts asking you if you feel the same way, and that should be your Q to gtfo out of the conversation.
Had to do that with Jack and Tali, I didn't talk much with Miranda just because I find her dull
#59
Posté 17 juin 2011 - 03:30
taigin
-
- Members
- 292 messages
I think there were both pros and cons with the DA2 system. I did feel it was a much more flexible system in some way. You could many times choose between different option without it being labeled as "good" or "bad" and thus not labeling support to one side as good or bad. Some times choosing the diplomatic or rough option was just giving Hawke a different tone while it lead to the exact same outcome. This was a sneaky way of removing control from the player. I am not a big fan of the icons, especially when it comes to romances. I think it simplifies too much.
I would rather see that BW rework the para/rene system. Reintroduce paragon and renegade as persuation skills again (with modification if needed) instead of a bar that dictates what type of dialogue you will have available. This way you wont feel forced to play a certain way to gain enough points, instead you will just have choices (like 'support', 'uncertain' 'disagree') . I think this would increase the roleplaying options when you don't feel forced to follow a certain pattern. I especially like rpgs where it's not all about building a strong character with good combat skills but about making a character with good persuation skills too, so more focus on persuation skills would be great.
I would rather see that BW rework the para/rene system. Reintroduce paragon and renegade as persuation skills again (with modification if needed) instead of a bar that dictates what type of dialogue you will have available. This way you wont feel forced to play a certain way to gain enough points, instead you will just have choices (like 'support', 'uncertain' 'disagree') . I think this would increase the roleplaying options when you don't feel forced to follow a certain pattern. I especially like rpgs where it's not all about building a strong character with good combat skills but about making a character with good persuation skills too, so more focus on persuation skills would be great.
