1502 réponses à ce sujet

[erynnar]

Brockololly wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The companions are doing that all the time though, chatting about their personal feelings while on the move, in the middle of that dungeon. If it makes sense for them and if it makes sense to the player who might want this feature, it'd be pretty cool if this functionality could be restored....

(really liked that ability in DAO, and pretty much agreed with the sentiment in the post which brought that up)

There is a very big difference between the way the game handles banter and the way the game handles a "full" staged conversation. There are technical reasons why this, while not impossible (few things are in video games), is not very feasible.

Beyond technical, if we were to have these dialogs such that they could play anywhere, they would, by nature, have to be completely static "talking heads" and while I'm aware that some people are fine with that, I do not think it plays to our strengths. I would much rather discuss things with my followers in an area that's appropriate.

So, to be direct: No, you will not be able to have full dialogs with your followers on the road. I completely understand why it's a desired feature, but it is not one we will be pursuing.

(Yes, the danger of an honest and open dialog with developers is that they sometimes say no. Sorry!)

And I think this mentality is one of the biggest problems with DA2's design- taking away control from the player. Along with stuff like taking control away from the player in respect to companion armor and the aforementioned taking control away from the player to have reactive conversations with companions anywhere...and for what? Slightly more cinematic conversations where the camera can zip around and go shakey cam?


I think its a matter of giving the player freedom and choice. The lack of being able to talk with companions on the road in DA2 was part of the game's overall lack of reactivity. Origins worked great in that regard where the mechanism of starting a conversation worked in one way in every location- it was simple and intuitive. It made sense to even the most casual of player- want to talk? Click on them!  If I wanted to take a break in the Deep Roads and chat with Leliana about shoes in Orlais, why do you care as the developer where the player has that sort of conversation?

I can understand having certain BIG Important conversations framed and scripted in certain places, absolutely. But a huge problem in DA2 was how every conversation went into dramatic cinema mode, even if the conversation ended up being something fairly inconsequential, or how you'd be standing next to somebody on the road and have a popup in your journal how they want to talk with you. I'd much rather you guys save your resources for the cinematic big guns on moments that actually require it and not every single character interaction. Like Deus Ex Human Revolution seems to be doing in having big conversation moments where its clear they spent a lot of time on them along with more standard fare which makes the big moments stand out that much more.

When every conversation ends up having the camera moving all around and so forth, they all sort of blur together. What was once special becomes mundane.  IMO, you need a variety of conversation types- so something like the Dark Ritual in Origins gets the 5 star cinematics and staging but asking a lore question from Sten or a story from Leliana is something you can ask whenever.

Just as much as people like shooting random civilians and hijacking cars to drive them off a cliff in GTA, they do that to test the reactivity of the game world. Is the game going to react when I try to essentially "break" it? Its in that moment when you realize that yes, the cops are chasing you down for running down the dude at the hotdog stand when you're having a blast. That yes, the game is reacting to the **** you've stirred up. Its better than any scripted moment a developer can conjure up because its initiated by the player and in the mind of the player, its their own little narrative.

Its that "Oh ****!" moment in something like BG2 when the Cowled Wizards come at you. In Origins, you had it in the reactivity of being able to click on somebody and "Oh ****!" they actually responded to you and didn't ignore you or give a canned response. You're not worried about the camera smash zooming or having somebody go sit in a chair- you're enjoying the narrative and freedom and reactivity the game is giving you. And its allowing the player to play the game without the developer breathing down their neck,  going "You're playing the game wrong! This companion only speaks with you at first light on the fifth day when you look to the east at dawn!"

And its the same thing with being able to randomly kiss your LI on the road in Origins. Its reactivity to something initiated by the player. It surprised me that the game reacted to not only allowing the player to do that, but even in the little quips the other companions would give when you chose to kiss your LI. At that moment you don't give a damn that its not staged in some field at sunset as you skip through the meadows- its about the game reacting to the player in the moment and allowing the player the freedom to create their own narrative, even if its something as small as that.


And as tmp mentioned, in DA2 its even more infuriating and frustrating when the companions are chatting away and having a jolly old time conversing and having ****s and giggles on the road while the PC is rendered mute. Its especially jarring given the voiced PC while at least in Origins you could talk whenever if hearing a banter while on the road made you want to chat with Shale or Morrigan or whoever. And no, having Hawke randomly join banter didn't do much IMO, since more often than not I was left going "Who was that?" since there is zero input from the player in those cases.

TL;DR You need to balance player agency and allow for more player freedom and reactivity, even if that means letting up on having every conversation some cinematic masterpiece.

This, very much this. ^

[Zjarcal]

Brockololly wrote...

When every conversation ends up having the camera moving all around and so forth, they all sort of blur together. What was once special becomes mundane.

Lolwut? I will never understand you.

[Realmzmaster]

Stanley Woo wrote...

We in QA have quite a collection of... ahem... "strategic" screenshots that will never see the light of day.

Such a tease!

[hoorayforicecream]

tmp7704 wrote...

On the other hand, there's things like very cinematic kiss mod by DahliaLynn (at  http://social.biowar...m/project/3194/) which works perfectly well on the hills, with the moving camera etc

(yes, that uses the snap to height and don't show things below knee level tricks, but that's perfectly fine for the subject at hand)

You'll have to note that the camera never angles up or down, zooms in or out, or does anything besides orbit the characters. I would also imagine that if you do it in corners or near trees/pillars, it likely will cause the camera to clip through geometry. Camera clipping through trees may not be a big deal, but clipping through walls at all is an instant certification failure from Sony and Microsoft.

[erynnar]

Addai67 wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
And I think this mentality is one of the biggest problems with DA2's design- taking away control from the player. Along with stuff like taking control away from the player in respect to companion armor and the aforementioned taking control away from the player to have reactive conversations with companions anywhere...and for what? Slightly more cinematic conversations where the camera can zip around and go shakey cam?

While it seems clear this value is here to stay, I'll chime in and say it's unfortunate that we get so much taken away for such dubious return.  It's also really odd, since this seems like a value the devs are pushing and not a player-driven thing.

Same with the iso camera being taken away for some design purpose- and yet the game is, IMO, pretty ugly.  What are we getting for the loss in gameplay features?

I wondered why we get less too. Or seem to be. I don't feel I'm getting more for the sacrifice.

And I really hate waiting for the romance, or having to wait what three years to reconcile? *coughFenriscough*  Seriously, It was just too jarring and disjointed.

[MerinTB]

I was doing my best to just LURK in this thread...

but there's a reason I click on your posts when I see them, Brock.  You take the time to say what I'm thinking and often won't take the time to post.

So I'll just add I agree with this.  Exactly this.

[Tirfan]

Zjarcal wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

When every conversation ends up having the camera moving all around and so forth, they all sort of blur together. What was once special becomes mundane.

Lolwut? I will never understand you.

Cinematics in general I think.
I remember the days when cinematics were a reward, you had accomplished something great, have an extremely nice looking cutscene now, feel happy.

When there is cinematics on every other corner.. they do kind of blur together, they are not special anymore, they are not rewarding as they used to be - they are just something that happens all the time.

[element eater]

Mr.House wrote...

Hawke was not really a preset character. Yes you are only a human but you can still write your own past and childhood for her/him, change there class and have more controll over them then other preset characters then say like Geralt.

Also just like the Warden you have a familly  that was already chosen for you, a last name and a pre-made past to get you started in the game but with enough gaps to fill in. Hawke only lacks the race selection the Warden had.

i humbly dissagree

hawke is more customisable then characters like gerralt that is undeniable. But the whole manner iin which hawke is presented is limiting imo. his backround has almost no flexability his life prior to da2 is pretty much set in stone.  look at the origin storys for example ignoring race you get anumber of backrounds each of which give you room to establish your character through minor decisions throughout the segment, a dwarf noble allowed for you you decide the relation ship with your family and a you second the city elf allowed for the ability to show your characters opinion of the alienage and so forth. now look at the equivilent section of da2 durng the flight to kirkwall u get almost no realy ability to show hawkes character beyond the direct events of the game. 

yes in dao you had a family but they generaly as a base for the character from which he can develop in 2 you are tied to them throughout the game and your relationship with them is pretty fixed regardless of which dialogue choices you decide on. equally all the charcters have a second name but in dao it is never mentioned and as such doesnot tie you down in any way. oin practice one city elf will not simply feel like another, but hawke will always just feel like any other hawke.

As to making up your own backround and motives in my opinion da2 foes not let you do this as very rarely is hawke ever asked for motive and reasoning. This is something dao did quite often a good example is moriggan asking a mage what he thought of the tower to which the player can respond in a number of ways another such instance is when asked to leave the dalish camp in the dalish orign story you can give a number of reasons as to why your leaving. Little moments like this help establish character throughout the game and help make each playthrough feel unique. DA2 however sadly lacks this and almost anything you come up with for your character will unortunately have to to stay in your head as theres pretty much no way to establish it in game. What you are left with is a hawke that coasts through the  story with one of 3 tones of voice and me remaining pretty apathetic to the whole thing 

i could go on but i wont as im incredibly tired and you will only dissagree anyway.But, it is my belief that for a number of resons hawke is a pretty established character and you have a very limited number of ways in which you can give him traits of your choosing, After all it is as the devlopers said prior to lauch.This is a story about hawke champion of kirkwall its a story about a particular man/woman in thedas its about there character not yours.


apoligies for poor writting staandaed as i said i am very tired

[David Gaider]

Brockololly wrote...
And as tmp mentioned, in DA2 its even more infuriating and frustrating when the companions are chatting away and having a jolly old time conversing and having ****s and giggles on the road while the PC is rendered mute. Its especially jarring given the voiced PC while at least in Origins you could talk whenever if hearing a banter while on the road made you want to chat with Shale or Morrigan or whoever. And no, having Hawke randomly join banter didn't do much IMO, since more often than not I was left going "Who was that?" since there is zero input from the player in those cases.

TL;DR You need to balance player agency and allow for more player freedom and reactivity, even if that means letting up on having every conversation some cinematic masterpiece.

Just to chime in here, since we're talking dialogue, from my perspective I think Legacy is a step in the direction we'd like to take banter. The PC in Legacy is interacting far more, and there is considerably more comment from both the PC and party members that relates to their environment and immediate situation. I thought that felt very organic, and I think we'd like to push that further.

Having the player be able to offer input into this type of dialogue (ie. non-cinematic dialogue) is something we're exploring. How far we can push that, we'll see, but ideally we could allow the player to engage in initated dialogue of this fashion. It's very much a technical limitation, however, as hoorayforicecream points out above-- and, no, we don't consider it an acceptable compromise to allow happen-anywhere cinematic dialogue that can make for screwy cameras.

I don't, however, consider this to be a huge limitation-- with the caveat that there should be more opportunity for the player to engage in initiated dialogue in places where we know what the camera situation will be. My impression regarding views on the party dialogue is that the feature we intended to be for convenience (the notification of a follower having new dialogue) was seen by many as rendering follower dialogue too obviously structured. Some people felt like they were only talking to the follower at the follower's behest rather than the other way around. An interpretation, for sure, but perhaps as a result it surrendered too much agency for the sake of convenience.

So fair enough. While I'm not going to go into detail regarding what my plan is going forward, I think I've collected some good feedback, and I think a bit of middle ground is necessary-- that, along with some ability for the player to engage in some "small talk" (which was also missed), is not at all out of the question.

Modifié par David Gaider, 06 août 2011 - 01:27 .

[Zjarcal]

Tirfan wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

When every conversation ends up having the camera moving all around and so forth, they all sort of blur together. What was once special becomes mundane.

Lolwut? I will never understand you.

Cinematics in general I think.
I remember the days when cinematics were a reward, you had accomplished something great, have an extremely nice looking cutscene now, feel happy.

When there is cinematics on every other corner.. they do kind of blur together, they are not special anymore, they are not rewarding as they used to be - they are just something that happens all the time.

I could understand that if I felt getting a cinematic was a reward, but cinematics are just standard stuff to me, stuff that I've come to expect from modern games. So I honestly don't get that statement.

I don't want to get less of something I enjoy just so that I can go "wow, a cinematic!". To me that would be taking a step backwards.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 06 août 2011 - 01:30 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Zjarcal wrote...

Tirfan wrote...

Cinematics in general I think.
I remember the days when cinematics were a reward, you had accomplished something great, have an extremely nice looking cutscene now, feel happy.

When there is cinematics on every other corner.. they do kind of blur together, they are not special anymore, they are not rewarding as they used to be - they are just something that happens all the time.

I could understand that if I felt getting a cinematic was a reward, but cinematics are just standard stuff to me, stuff that I've come to expect from modern games. So I honestly don't get that statement.

I don't want to get less of something I enjoy just so that I can go "wow, a cinematic!". To me that would be taking a step backwards.

I never understood this myself. There's been a lot of cinematic techniques adopted into movies over the years that seem old hat now but were considered special for the time. Maintaining what feels 'special' for the sake of being a reward doesn't seem right to me. Cinematics shouldn't be put on a pedestal, they should be treated just as they are - as tools for creators to express and further their stories. I would prefer that the reward be cool new parts of the story unfolding, not just seeing them animated in a cinematic.

[tmp7704]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

You'll have to note that the camera never angles up or down, zooms in or out, or does anything besides orbit the characters.

Yes, although i believe this is simply artistic choice; it could easily perform these operations.

And yes, it's possible to clip the camera into surrounding geometry in that scene if you try hard enough* But then it's equally possible to clip the regular, user-controlled camera in the same geometry with similar amount of effort. If this is instant certification failure perhaps DA games shouldn't have gotten one in the first place.

*) for the most part the game engine appears to detect such instances and pushes the camera out of the way

Modifié par tmp7704, 06 août 2011 - 01:42 .

[Johnny Jaded]

b1322 wrote...

If the dialogues initiated are optional, then why not give players the option to choose if they want to talk or not?

I think you may be missing the point. I'm not saying the player should be forced to engage in conversation, merely that they shouldn't be the only one to initiate a conversation.
When you're out with friends, are you the only one who strikes up a conversation? No, your friends do also. Of course, if you don't want to talk about whatever's on their mind, you're free to tell them so and carry on.

Brockololly wrote...
And no, having Hawke randomly join banter
didn't do much IMO, since more often than not I was left going "Who was
that?" since there is zero input from the player in those cases.

This is the one thing I despise about set protagonists. In both the banter and conversation, Hawke would end up saying things I never wanted her (yes, I'm a gender bender) to say. Now, I don't mind a voiced protangonist - we have no control over how our natural voice sounds so I can tolerate not being able to choose a voice for my character (that and I like the received pronunciation being English) - but the praphrase system is a bane on RPGs. Note: I'm not talking about the wheel, there's nothing wrong with the wheel and it actually gives the potential for more dialogue options than DA:O's list - it's just difficult to tell at a glance due to the layout and intention symbols.
No, the problem is not knowing the full extent of what the character is going to say. While the lines delivered were not as grossly unrelated to the paraphrase as they were in Mass Effect, there were still many occasions
when the line delivered wasn't quite what was expected and often something I felt was out of character. With this system, Hawke never feels like my character, I never formed the type of attachment I did to my Warden/Revan/hero of Neverwinter; the type of connection I developed was more akin to that of a companion rather than protagonist
and thus I didn't care quite as much about Hawke's fate as I feel I should.

Modifié par Johnny Jaded, 06 août 2011 - 01:45 .

[b1322]

I liked that there was a lot more party banter in Legacy and that the companions had more to say but I am playing origins as we speak and the fact that I can choose when to talk or kiss a party member is not a small matter, to me it changes the whole setting and making the game so deep and meaningfull so that it is not pure action, so its really a shame and disapointing that I wont have that ability in da3

[Zjarcal]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Tirfan wrote...

Cinematics in general I think.
I remember the days when cinematics were a reward, you had accomplished something great, have an extremely nice looking cutscene now, feel happy.

When there is cinematics on every other corner.. they do kind of blur together, they are not special anymore, they are not rewarding as they used to be - they are just something that happens all the time.

I could understand that if I felt getting a cinematic was a reward, but cinematics are just standard stuff to me, stuff that I've come to expect from modern games. So I honestly don't get that statement.

I don't want to get less of something I enjoy just so that I can go "wow, a cinematic!". To me that would be taking a step backwards.

I never understood this myself. There's been a lot of cinematic techniques adopted into movies over the years that seem old hat now but were considered special for the time. Maintaining what feels 'special' for the sake of being a reward doesn't seem right to me. Cinematics shouldn't be put on a pedestal, they should be treated just as they are - as tools for creators to express and further their stories. I would prefer that the reward be cool new parts of the story unfolding, not just seeing them animated in a cinematic.

Exactly.

[FieryDove]

David Gaider wrote...

Just to chime in here, since we're talking dialogue, from my perspective I think Legacy is a step in the direction we'd like to take banter. The PC in Legacy is interacting far more, and there is considerably more comment from both the PC and party members that relates to their environment and immediate situation. I thought that felt very organic, and I think we'd like to push that further.

<Explodes like a Pinata!

So fair enough. While I'm not going to go into detail regarding what my plan is going forward, I think I've collected some good feedback, and I think a bit of middle ground is necessary-- that, along with some ability for the player to engage in some "small talk" (which was also missed), is not at all out of the question.

Small talk...yes!!!

DG =

[b1322]

Delete this...

Modifié par b1322, 06 août 2011 - 01:59 .

[b1322]

No I didnt dissagree Johnny, I actually agreed with what you said. I am from Denmark so I might not be able to write properly in english, sorry

Modifié par b1322, 06 août 2011 - 01:58 .

[tmp7704]

David Gaider wrote...

My impression regarding views on the party dialogue is that the feature we intended to be for convenience (the notification of a follower having new dialogue) was seen by many as rendering follower dialogue too obviously structured. Some people felt like they were only talking to the follower at the follower's behest rather than the other way around. An interpretation, for sure, but perhaps as a result it surrendered too much agency for the sake of convenience.

Just a note -- while i've complained about exactly this effect (and yes, definitely a result of interpretation but just not something i can make myself to perceive differently) this was mainly irritating because it was happening for about every conversation opportunity that i can think of. At the same time though, if it was instead just an occasional thing (like say, having Hawke/other protagonist return to his/her home and finding a note from companion requesting a meeting) it'd feel quite more acceptable and maybe even a welcome bit of variety, i think.

[seraphymon]

Brockololly wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The companions are doing that all the time though, chatting about their personal feelings while on the move, in the middle of that dungeon. If it makes sense for them and if it makes sense to the player who might want this feature, it'd be pretty cool if this functionality could be restored....

(really liked that ability in DAO, and pretty much agreed with the sentiment in the post which brought that up)

There is a very big difference between the way the game handles banter and the way the game handles a "full" staged conversation. There are technical reasons why this, while not impossible (few things are in video games), is not very feasible.

Beyond technical, if we were to have these dialogs such that they could play anywhere, they would, by nature, have to be completely static "talking heads" and while I'm aware that some people are fine with that, I do not think it plays to our strengths. I would much rather discuss things with my followers in an area that's appropriate.

So, to be direct: No, you will not be able to have full dialogs with your followers on the road. I completely understand why it's a desired feature, but it is not one we will be pursuing.

(Yes, the danger of an honest and open dialog with developers is that they sometimes say no. Sorry!)

And I think this mentality is one of the biggest problems with DA2's design- taking away control from the player. Along with stuff like taking control away from the player in respect to companion armor and the aforementioned taking control away from the player to have reactive conversations with companions anywhere...and for what? Slightly more cinematic conversations where the camera can zip around and go shakey cam?


I think its a matter of giving the player freedom and choice. The lack of being able to talk with companions on the road in DA2 was part of the game's overall lack of reactivity. Origins worked great in that regard where the mechanism of starting a conversation worked in one way in every location- it was simple and intuitive. It made sense to even the most casual of player- want to talk? Click on them!  If I wanted to take a break in the Deep Roads and chat with Leliana about shoes in Orlais, why do you care as the developer where the player has that sort of conversation?

I can understand having certain BIG Important conversations framed and scripted in certain places, absolutely. But a huge problem in DA2 was how every conversation went into dramatic cinema mode, even if the conversation ended up being something fairly inconsequential, or how you'd be standing next to somebody on the road and have a popup in your journal how they want to talk with you. I'd much rather you guys save your resources for the cinematic big guns on moments that actually require it and not every single character interaction. Like Deus Ex Human Revolution seems to be doing in having big conversation moments where its clear they spent a lot of time on them along with more standard fare which makes the big moments stand out that much more.

When every conversation ends up having the camera moving all around and so forth, they all sort of blur together. What was once special becomes mundane.  IMO, you need a variety of conversation types- so something like the Dark Ritual in Origins gets the 5 star cinematics and staging but asking a lore question from Sten or a story from Leliana is something you can ask whenever.

Just as much as people like shooting random civilians and hijacking cars to drive them off a cliff in GTA, they do that to test the reactivity of the game world. Is the game going to react when I try to essentially "break" it? Its in that moment when you realize that yes, the cops are chasing you down for running down the dude at the hotdog stand when you're having a blast. That yes, the game is reacting to the **** you've stirred up. Its better than any scripted moment a developer can conjure up because its initiated by the player and in the mind of the player, its their own little narrative.

Its that "Oh ****!" moment in something like BG2 when the Cowled Wizards come at you. In Origins, you had it in the reactivity of being able to click on somebody and "Oh ****!" they actually responded to you and didn't ignore you or give a canned response. You're not worried about the camera smash zooming or having somebody go sit in a chair- you're enjoying the narrative and freedom and reactivity the game is giving you. And its allowing the player to play the game without the developer breathing down their neck,  going "You're playing the game wrong! This companion only speaks with you at first light on the fifth day when you look to the east at dawn!"

And its the same thing with being able to randomly kiss your LI on the road in Origins. Its reactivity to something initiated by the player. It surprised me that the game reacted to not only allowing the player to do that, but even in the little quips the other companions would give when you chose to kiss your LI. At that moment you don't give a damn that its not staged in some field at sunset as you skip through the meadows- its about the game reacting to the player in the moment and allowing the player the freedom to create their own narrative, even if its something as small as that.


And as tmp mentioned, in DA2 its even more infuriating and frustrating when the companions are chatting away and having a jolly old time conversing and having ****s and giggles on the road while the PC is rendered mute. Its especially jarring given the voiced PC while at least in Origins you could talk whenever if hearing a banter while on the road made you want to chat with Shale or Morrigan or whoever. And no, having Hawke randomly join banter didn't do much IMO, since more often than not I was left going "Who was that?" since there is zero input from the player in those cases.

TL;DR You need to balance player agency and allow for more player freedom and reactivity, even if that means letting up on having every conversation some cinematic masterpiece.

Exactly how i feel as well. Nice post.

[jds1bio]

David Gaider wrote...

So fair enough. While I'm not going to go into detail regarding what my plan is going forward, I think I've collected some good feedback, and I think a bit of middle ground is necessary-- that, along with some ability for the player to engage in some "small talk" (which was also missed), is not at all out of the question.

This thread continues to be stellar from all contributors, I haven't wanted to play DA2 today because of it. (don't take that the wrong way!)

And it continues to be great to hear from the people involved in making the games.  I just hope that the community, we, don't hold on too tightly to what developers say in the course of a conversation.  I can envision a time in the future where the next DLC or game comes out, and we find out that for some people the game didn't have enough middle ground to their liking in, say, companion dialogue for instance.  Even though promises aren't being made by anyone, will every point the developers meet the community part-way on during discussions be jumped on by the community with "remember when you said..." complaints, when certain things end up not being so easy to do, or because circumstances naturally and normally arise during the development cycle?  I hope not.  I just hope that there is enough trust in what people say and mean to do that we will be able to react rationally if and when that situation arises.

[Adobe Amena]

I have to say, I'm strongly in the camp of people who want more on-the-road reactivity from my companions than I got in DA2. I've always wanted more of that reactivity in BioWare's games, and I've noticed a disturbing trend ever since, oh, Mass Effect...? Of being able to interact with your party members outside the "home base" area less and less. I understand that it breaks immersion and whatnot to have Mission Vao locking you into the "BioWare conversation interface" just so she can go, "Look! A pretty rock! I like pretty rocks! DEEEERRRRP!" I absolutely agree that that's an issue. But you guys don't have to trigger the conversation interface every time I ask some dude to talk to me. At the very least, give me a couple of canned responses that don't knock me into said interface. I don't usually want or need to start a conversation; sometimes I just want to be reminded that the characters are still theoretically reacting to me.

It's a little thing, but it keeps the illusion alive so much more ably than the "run through trigger point, hear conversation between party members, be disallowed from taking any sort of interest or asking about anything they brought up". Seriously, even if the banter just brought up stuff I could discuss with my companions later at "home base". Same thing with codex entries; if I read in his bio that Varric, uh, I dunno, hates demons, and it's relevant to the larger narrative for me to bring that up to him, I don't like being forced into a state where I've read something about someone I'm talking to that seems like a Pretty Big Deal, but my character somehow hasn't, and so I'm not allowed to ask about the Pretty Big Deal even though my character would be an absolute idiot not to. I don't think rectifying that, at least, is too much to ask.

Also, if I get a sword called Sword Of Borthalor's Rage or something, I kinda wanna know why it's called that. You don't have to bring back item descriptions for every single item, but if the new bit of loot I just hoovered up is somehow special, I want to get at least a few sentences of backstory on it. Otherwise it's just another "...Of The Bear" WOW item.

And look, as an amateur writer myself, I understand how hard this stuff is to do, so I'm not asking you guys to kowtow to my every demand. Just, you know, give me (and, by extension, us) something. I know it's never going to be perfect, but there's definite room for improvement there.

[Stanley Woo]

There will always be disagreements, jds1bio, since we can't read each other's minds and we developers keep many things very close to our chests. And we'll always have the occasional person who feels very strongly one way or another, or those who harp on very minute details, or those who have very specific and static tastes. But as long as we can discuss our differences and disagreements as we have been doing in this thread, with as much developer contributions as we can muster, I think we'll be just fine.

[b1322]

Adobe Amena wrote...

I have to say, I'm strongly in the camp of people who want more on-the-road reactivity from my companions than I got in DA2. I've always wanted more of that reactivity in BioWare's games, and I've noticed a disturbing trend ever since, oh, Mass Effect...? Of being able to interact with your party members outside the "home base" area less and less. I understand that it breaks immersion and whatnot to have Mission Vao locking you into the "BioWare conversation interface" just so she can go, "Look! A pretty rock! I like pretty rocks! DEEEERRRRP!" I absolutely agree that that's an issue. But you guys don't have to trigger the conversation interface every time I ask some dude to talk to me. At the very least, give me a couple of canned responses that don't knock me into said interface. I don't usually want or need to start a conversation; sometimes I just want to be reminded that the characters are still theoretically reacting to me.

It's a little thing, but it keeps the illusion alive so much more ably than the "run through trigger point, hear conversation between party members, be disallowed from taking any sort of interest or asking about anything they brought up". Seriously, even if the banter just brought up stuff I could discuss with my companions later at "home base". Same thing with codex entries; if I read in his bio that Varric, uh, I dunno, hates demons, and it's relevant to the larger narrative for me to bring that up to him, I don't like being forced into a state where I've read something about someone I'm talking to that seems like a Pretty Big Deal, but my character somehow hasn't, and so I'm not allowed to ask about the Pretty Big Deal even though my character would be an absolute idiot not to. I don't think rectifying that, at least, is too much to ask.

Also, if I get a sword called Sword Of Borthalor's Rage or something, I kinda wanna know why it's called that. You don't have to bring back item descriptions for every single item, but if the new bit of loot I just hoovered up is somehow special, I want to get at least a few sentences of backstory on it. Otherwise it's just another "...Of The Bear" WOW item.

And look, as an amateur writer myself, I understand how hard this stuff is to do, so I'm not asking you guys to kowtow to my every demand. Just, you know, give me (and, by extension, us) something. I know it's never going to be perfect, but there's definite room for improvement there.

I really agree with this and I think the majority of the origins fans wants this, I read about it everywhere but it doesnt seem like we will get it sadly...

[Adobe Amena]

Oh, and if a DA dev happens to read my little post up there, do you mind mentioning those issues to the Mass Effect guys as well? I don't want to inconvenience anyone, but it's an issue with all BioWare games, not just DA.

EDIT: For me, anyway.

Modifié par Adobe Amena, 06 août 2011 - 02:23 .