85 réponses à ce sujet

[Sutekh]

por favor wrote...
The way the game was organized into Acts was an absolute nightmare. If you forget to do something in Act I, that's it. You're f&cked. You better pray you have a pre-save.

Many games do this kind of "points of no return" things. At least those that aren't open sandbox. DAO does it at least three times; The Game That Must Not Be Named (and its predecessor) does it too.

And it wasn't so bad, since in Act I & II, you're warned to wrap things up before doing a certain thing. Act III is another story though (but Act III is another story about so many things...)

.

[Xalen]

por favor wrote...

How animated the characters are when they speak is a completely different topic. It has nothing to do with the freedom to initiate conversation and especially has nothing to do with long, drawn-out conversations.

But it does! And I think it was mentioned in the very thread DG's qoute was taken from. 
brb time to look for a link.

[por favor]

Xalen wrote...

por favor wrote...

How animated the characters are when they speak is a completely different topic. It has nothing to do with the freedom to initiate conversation and especially has nothing to do with long, drawn-out conversations.

But it does! And I think it was mentioned in the very thread DG's qoute was taken from. 
brb time to look for a link.

You are confusing character animation with dialogue length and the option to initiate conversations whenever you want.

Modifié par por favor, 01 juillet 2011 - 10:59 .

[furryrage59]

Zanallen wrote...

The problem with Origins is that you could conceivably exhaust all dialogue with a companion during the first time you spoke with them in camp. That is ridiculous. It has nothing to do with people complaining about having to slough through massive amounts of dialogue. Don't be absurd. Also, from what Gaider has said, there is a similar amount of companion dialogue in DA:O and DA2. DA:O has slightly more, but not anything major. The main difference is that the dialogue in DA2 is broken up over the course of the game and not immediately available as it is in DA:O.

Actually you get more conversation options the closer you become friends.

[Xalen]

Here it is. I insert the full quote, because it's good. See bolded about freedom to initiate dialogue (I have nothing to say on the length of the dialogue, I admit):

David Gaider wrote...

julian08 wrote...
Ha, well played Mr. Gaider. People like me who have to play a lot of their favorite games in Dosbox are always going on about how perfect BGII was, and now you use that as an argument. Well played indeed.
But let's be realistic: BGII was released in 2000, and in game terms that pretty much means that it predates the Roman Empire. Fully voiced companion dialogue was just impossible to do back in the day. To me, it seems that your argument is like saying "Charlie Chaplin's The Gold Rush was a great movie, so modern movies don't need sound or color."
Really, it's your own fault people. You showed us what could be done in terms of characterization and party banter nowadays, and now we won't accept anything less.

:blink:Ahem. . . no disrespect meant of course. Please don't use your writing sorcery to make my head explode.

You misunderstand. I am not saying that those expectations aren't justified... things have changed. But some perspective is required. Some people are expressing that they didn't feel as connected to the characters and then looking for what was different and deciding that must be what's at fault. I'm not convinced it is.

And if it is, and someone's requirement is that they must have everything and more in order to feel connected to a character at all ...then you're not going to be connected to any of our characters in the future. If that's truly what it takes, then I can safely say it's not going to happen.

This is not to say that some middle ground isn't possible, but that's middle ground and not "why not just do both?" As I said earlier, in an ideal world you'd get to click on your party members everywhere you liked, get lots of options for new dialogue to initiate and get quest dialogue to boot... but until this becomes the Companion Relationship Game, that's probably unrealistic to expect. Even in DAO that didn't happen, and DA2 was probably even more character focused. There are always going to be resource issues as well as other limitations to contend with (if you want cinematic dialogue, for instance, you need a set stage-- the dialogue cannot happen anywhere... the way our engine works dialogue that can occur anywhere must be "unstaged" and thus have a fixed camera), and while I understand that players will always want more of everything, I'm not at liberty to be okay with the idea that more of everything is required in order for a player to feel emotionally engaged.... and I simply suspect that some people are seeing something missing from what they had before and deciding that the equation now adds up to less than zero.

In short: they're feeling what they're feeling, and that's valid, but there may be other reasons behind it that are more easily addressed. If not, and they require constant dialogue in order to feel any emotional connection, then they're simply not going to get it.

But this is a discussion for a different thread, as it no longer has anything to do with Anders. I'll leave you guys to it.

I'm a bit confused about what is it I'm confusing...

Modifié par Xalen, 01 juillet 2011 - 10:29 .

[Huntress]

DAA was the stone to have less party interaction, many of us weren't happy about it, the worst thing of DAA was apart from Crafting, you have to press Shift for 90% of the game to get more dialog, phew thanks goodness they removed that in DA2.

I have played DAA 2 times only, the WH 2 times because the first time I missed the items lol, Golems 1 time, Darkspawn 1 time for the sword, Leliana just abit but quited and never started again.

[Tirfan]

Xalen wrote...

Tirfan wrote...
Soo.. you think that the look of the scenes were more important than the actual content? Because, I honestly couldn't care less if the characters interact with anyways when they only talk about one or two things and say about 6 lines about those/act. Because I really would prefer cutting down the cinematics and having some actually meaningful conversations with interesting content and things that would add depth to the characters rather than Fenris throwing a bottle to the wall and moaning about how he was a slave. and doing something different in the next act and moaning about how he was a slave.

It's not just the "look of scenes" though. Cinematic conversations can
actually
allow for deeper characterization, what's with "show, don't tell". A game is as much visual media as any other, so to limit this potential seems a bit silly to me. Sometimes the 5-second animation can tell more about a character than 10-minutes long conversation: it's body language, facial expressions (very well done in DA2), all that stuff we perceive and process unconsciously - in real life it may have a greater impact on our perception of the person we are talking to then actual words that this person is saying. So to include this things in a game that supposed to immerse the player makes much more sense than not to.

Like I said, DA2 is certainly not perfect in how the dialogue is handled, but I think to include such features was certainly a step in the right direction

Well, yes, I did not say that they were not a step in the right direction, but if it comes with the cost of the characters having so little dialogue that they are completely one-dimensional, I'd rather not have it. Body language and facial expressions were done quite nicely in most cases, some times however the expressions were just too horrifying to comprehend, and seriously, I did not understand the point of some cinematics, especially that fenris-throwing a bottle at the wall, I had already gathered he was bitter and angry; I did not need to see more, I would rather have had the few additional dialogue lines that would have actually expanded on his character.

[Sutekh]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
Characters touch, move, and interact in the DA2 scenes, when all they do is *talk* in DAO. It's a huge difference in quality, but it comes at the expense of quantity. Perhaps they didn't hit that sweet spot between the two this game, but I'm much more pleased with the quality of interactions in DA2 than I was with DAO.

Yeah, pretty much. They went from one extreme to the other. Besides, not all type of conversation require a lot of action. Personal casual conversations, domestic argument, whatever... don't really. You can have two chars sitting and talking, or standing. That's usually how it happens IRL. People sit and talk. And have tea.

A companion talking his heart out or making a big revelation? OK, give me some movement, add drama, be expressive. "What's up, bro?" "Not much, dude." or gossiping about Isabela's last stunt, or asking Varric in a card game (followed by an "end conversation") don't need that, IMHO.

I can understand people wanting more movement, because, frankly, in DAO, that was sometimes painful. But did they really interpret that as "We don't want to actively interact with NPC anymore"?

[Blessed Silence]

I have to say when I first got the game, I was pretty bummed to find out that I had to wait to have a good conversation with my ocmpanions.  Gone were the days to talking to them when i wanted to.I

But you know what?  After a while those small conversations gave me alot of insight.  My companions talking to each other while we waled around was great.  I knew I finally got attached to my companions, when in a battle, Sebastian fell and shouted out "Hawke!" right when he did so.  I squealed and my husband ran upstairs asking what was wrong.

"My baby fell in battle!" I replied.

"Anders?" he asked.

"No, Sebby."

And my husband just rolled his eyes and went back downstairs.

To me, that little thing shows I am attached.  Heck I even cried at a few points in the game and wanted to bad to give Varric a hug.

Would I have liked more deeper conversations?  Absolutely.  Does it break DA2 for me?  Not in the least.

Modifié par Blessed Silence, 01 juillet 2011 - 10:06 .

[Jerrybnsn]

DA:O had over 1,000,000 words of dialogue. DAII had around 400,000. Surprisingly though DAII had twice the amount of cut scenes compared to Origins.

No. DAII did the same exact thing that ME2 did, you could only talk to your companions when it was time to do their quests. And ALL the dialogue was exhausted during those conversations.

DA:O is very unique in the amount of effort put into it, and I think it paid off very well for Bioware. However, EA isn't a company that will allow for that type of game developement. We will never see a game as in depth and companion interaction as Dragon Age: Origins was again. Requiescat In Pace.

[por favor]

Xalen wrote...

"if you want cinematic dialogue, for instance, you need a set stage-- the dialogue cannot happen anywhere"

I'm a bit confused about what is it I'm confusing...

This is only an issue if you expect every dialogue scene to be cinematic, which is ridiculous because then you end up with what DA:II gave us.

DA:O had independent dialogues AND cinematic dialogues. I don't see how DA:II couldn't have had both. Indepedent dialogue with the ocassional cinematic dialogue when you open a certain door, go in a certain building, pick up a certain item, etc., sounds perfectly reasonable.

[csfteeeer]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

DA:O had over 1,000,000 words of dialogue. DAII had around 400,000. Surprisingly though DAII had twice the amount of cut scenes compared to Origins.

No. DAII did the same exact thing that ME2 did, you could only talk to your companions when it was time to do their quests. And ALL the dialogue was exhausted during those conversations.

DA:O is very unique in the amount of effort put into it, and I think it paid off very well for Bioware. However, EA isn't a company that will allow for that type of game developement. We will never see a game as in depth and companion interaction as Dragon Age: Origins was again. Requiescat In Pace.

in Mass Effect 2's Defense (i now care about ME more than DA, i used to care equally, but with DA2, no more)
You could Actually talk to them every time you want, you could ask something, they would always repeat, but you know, AND, after every main mission, they would always have something new to say, they never really run out of topics, until you finish the game.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 01 juillet 2011 - 11:02 .

[Xalen]

por favor wrote...

This is only an issue if you expect every dialogue scene to be cinematic, which is ridiculous because then you end up with what DA:II gave us.

*shrug* well, I do enjoy cinematic dialogue. And I did not find DA2 system ridiculous in the slightest... Facts and opinions.

DA:O had independent dialogues AND cinematic dialogues.

No, companion dialogues in DAO were not cinematic. Companion stood in front of PC and talked. Occasionally s/he might give you something. This was the extent of DAO dialogue animation.

I don't see how DA:II couldn't have had both. Indepedent dialogue with the ocassional cinematic dialogue when you open a certain door, go in a certain building, pick up a certain item, etc., sounds perfectly reasonable.

Well, yeah...

David Gaider wrote...

And if it is, and someone's requirement is that they must have everything and more in order to feel connected to a character at all ...then you're not going to be connected to any of our characters in the future. If that's truly what it takes, then I can safely say it's not going to happen.

This is not to say that some middle ground isn't possible, but that's middle ground and not "why not just do both?" As I said earlier, in an ideal world you'd get to click on your party members everywhere you liked, get lots of options for new dialogue to initiate and get quest dialogue to boot... but until this becomes the Companion Relationship Game, that's probably unrealistic to expect

Modifié par Xalen, 01 juillet 2011 - 11:15 .

[Chiramu]

Long rambling conversations aren't natural; it's far more enjoyable for the writers to achieve a conversation between two or more people that feels very natural and something that you could possibly hear in real life.

People you're friends with don't go rambling on to you. Your companions in Dragon Age are suppose to be your friends, so like in real life, less is more.

I agree with David Gaider, he can write very well .

[Tirfan]

That kind of posts from David makes it really hard for me to even be somewhat optimistic that I could even enjoy DA3 to some extent - in this particular case, are the devs going to try to find the middle ground and what would that exactly be?

[Chiramu]

Tirfan wrote...

That kind of posts from David makes it really hard for me to even be somewhat optimistic that I could even enjoy DA3 to some extent - in this particular case, are the devs going to try to find the middle ground and what would that exactly be?

Let the writers be happy, if the writers are happy and write well you'll end up with an enjoyable story to play through .

[Xalen]

Oh, I've found much better quotes. Forgot about another thread on this topic. Read here, Gaider explains the issues with DA2 dialogue much more extensively, and I think it will be more to your liking. I'll not post all here, it's too long, but here's one:

David Gaider wrote...

As for conversations being a thing of the past, that's simply not true. You had quite a few conversations with your followers in DA2, some of them quite lengthy. Overall the density of conversation was, in fact, higher than in Origins. When I say 'that's not going to happen again", I mean the dialogue being as weighted in favor of "tell me about" questions as it was in Origins. I'd sooner have followers reacting to the plot more often, scenes like a follower coming to speak to you about your mother, then I would putting more resources into exposition-- which has its place, don't get me wrong, but I really don't think that's why most people connect to a character. Perhaps the "notice" you received whenever new dialogue became available made people feel like it was always quest-related (which, if so, certainly wasn't it's intent-- the intent was to not make you feel like you had to keep returning to a follower only to get "I'm still recalibrating the weapons" dialogue), perhaps it simply felt too structured and some level of spontaneity is required-- as in a feeling that the conversation you're having is because you wanted it to happen (whether that's technically true or not, perception is everything). There are several possibilities, not all of which can be addressed, but some might be at least on the structural level.

If anything, my comment was directed solely at those who felt the Origins method was the only possible solution, that they required lengthy and repeated conversations about nothing in particular in order to feel connected. If someone absolutely feels that's the case, my response was that they weren't likely to feel connected to a character of ours again in a game. That said, I don't feel that the DA2 method is the be-all and end-all of our development on this front, nor that everything Origins did was wrong-- while some people will mix things like plot and content volume into this argument as if they're the same thing, I think there's some very valuable information to be garnered even if I'm forced to filter it through my "I only have limited resources" lens.

If I also have to take such criticism with the caveat that it's primarily going to come from those who didn't enjoy the results, and that there are those who did... well, you can call that arrogance if you like. I seem to get called arrogant a lot these days when I disagree with someone regarding what they think Dragon Age should be. If simply having the power to form my own conclusions and act as I think best (ignoring the fact that I do not control the franchise outside of my tiny corner of it) is arrogant, then so be it. I'll simply ask you in the most snide and arrogant tone possible to keep providing such useful and thoughtful feedback. Even if it doesn't seem like we're coming to the conclusions you think we should be, it's still very much appreciated.

[caridounette]

It had been said that DA2 has as much conversations then DAO. Even if true, it doenst feel like it.

Of course there should have been player initiated interactions. One per Act for each character maybe and the rest could revolve around the personal quests ( what id call a happy middle).

But to me its also that the quantity of meaningful character interaction doesnt even begin to make sense for a ten years (well 7 years) period. Specially for the live-in LIs and Fenris weird romance arc.

DAO was supposed to happen on what, a 1and a half year span? Taht was way more realistic in term how much you got to know your party members.

[Tirfan]

Still not very much to my liking, while it would be nice to have the companions react to the storyline and possibly the choices I make... if the dialogues are going to be anything like in DA2 it does not really make any difference, "I did not like what you did back there with thing x" Well no sh*t, I may have guessed that from the fact that I got x points of rivalry from it "nothing more to add." "okay."

But that is just me wanting characters that are not one-dimensional and that I can get to know, having n-dialogues each with three lines from the characters just doesn't seem natural, even if the number n is quite high, I really do feel those bit longer conversations are needed to achieve this.

[Chiramu]

I think NPCs initiating conversations with your character is a very good thing.

Though it would be best if there was a nice little happy medium that had player initiated conversations(that involved the story, not just random tidbits of the character information) and NPCs initiating conversations with you.
That seems more like a relationship, then having your character forced to initiate everything. A one-sided relationship doesn't work , friendship is a two-way street.

[Xalen]

caridounette wrote...

But to me its also that the quantity of meaningful character interaction doesnt even begin to make sense for a ten years (well 7 years) period. Specially for the live-in LIs and Fenris weird romance arc.

Yeah, that's a valid complaint and one I agree with. It seems, writes kind of cornered themselves: on one hand, 
there's only so much you can put in the game, but on the other hand, telling a 7-year long story requires tons of character interaction to be realistic. So they went with amount of dialogue roughly equivalent to DAO (according to Gaider), but it just couldn't work well in DA2.

Chiramu wrote...

Let the writers be happy

 
I know, right?  I'm one of those strange "Videogames are art" people, so I'm much more concerned with what writers want to accomplish than with what fans want to get. Even if I personally don't like the final product. 

Modifié par Xalen, 02 juillet 2011 - 12:05 .

[Chiramu]

Xalen wrote...

Chiramu wrote...

Let the writers be happy

 
I know, right?  I'm one of those strange "Videogames are art" people, so I'm much more concerned with what writers want to accomplish than with what fans want to get. Even if I personally don't like the final product. 

I've liked a lot of stories where the writer just writes the story how they want it to go, without imput from fans . 

JK Rowling's Harry Potter ended badly because she paired people together because it's what her fans wanted, fans don't really know what's best for a story :/.

[Addai]

Xalen wrote...

It's not just the "look of scenes" though. Cinematic conversations can
actually
allow for deeper characterization, what's with "show, don't tell".

Can, perhaps.  In my experience, they don't.  Maybe if these were live actors, but watching awkward pixel animation is no more immersive to me than listening to the voice acting and mentally filling in the images.  Probably less.

[Xalen]

Addai67 wrote...
Can, perhaps.  In my experience, they don't.  Maybe if these were live actors, but watching awkward pixel animation is no more immersive to me than listening to the voice acting and mentally filling in the images.  Probably less.

Well, to each their own. I was just saying that opposing cinematic dialogue scenes in general on the basis that they are somehow cutting out character-related content is a bit contradictory because they can be used to actually add such content. One can argue whether this goal was achieved with DA2 in particular. I'd say - to some extent, but there are many more people who will disagree.

Modifié par Xalen, 02 juillet 2011 - 01:08 .

[Erode_The_Soul]

That's one of the things that bugged me most about this game. I loved the characters, but hated how Bioware restricted our interactions with them. And it really makes me sad to see that Gaider quote that all but completely dashes any hope to return to longer conversations with companions