63 réponses à ce sujet

[Mike Laidlaw]

b1322 wrote...

I have a question for Bioware and I hope someone will answer it:

One thing I really missed from origins to be seen in DA2 is the ability to talk with your companions, I loved all the deep conversations, is this something that Bioware intents to integrate back in DA3?

Oh, FINE. One more fun one: yes.

Our intention is that there will be the ability to initiate companion dialogs at "home base," whatever that is. Remember, though, that we have a finite amount of resources, and there's a delicate balance between the resources spent on personal plots out in the world and dialogs in the "base," and the we'll have to tread carefully.

Still, I completely understand the desire to plunk down and at least have the option to ask Fenris a few things, even if they're eventually going to be the same things (as was the case in Origins), if only to show off / enjoy / savor Gideon Emery's dulcet tones.

[Mike Laidlaw]

AloraKast wrote...
Mike, may I kiss you?

For now, yes, but only if we're on a personal plot. Later? Yes.

Twice.

[Mike Laidlaw]

pixieface wrote...

Mike Laidlaw, confirmed LI for DA3 and his entire female fanbase!

Both of them? Sweet!

[John Epler]

Let's keep it PG.

[Mike Laidlaw]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

Frankly, they have already admitted how incompetent they were in several regards. They were surprised that constant area re-use was an issue, they didn't realize that fans of DA:O preferred to have choices that mattered, they were flabbergasted when people purchased their sequel expecting.... a sequel.

To go back to the original topic, this kind of post is very destructive to developer feedback. Having your words thrown in your face with a healthy dose of hyperbole (I don't recall admitting incompetence at any point in this discussion, nor have I ever actually been flabbergasted in my life that I can recall), rarely makes for spritely dinner conversation.

[Mike Laidlaw]

FieryDove wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

To go back to the original topic, this kind of post is very destructive to developer feedback. Having your words thrown in your face with a healthy dose of hyperbole (I don't recall admitting incompetence at any point in this discussion, nor have I ever actually been flabbergasted in my life that I can recall), rarely makes for spritely dinner conversation.

You need a hug I can tell. ((Hug))

Ha! I'm fine, but thank you! This topic IS about dev/community interaction, though, so I thought that deserved a call out.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Adobe Amena wrote...

This is my first post on this forum, and may or may not be my only one.  Not that I don't think the community around here seems pretty cool.  I'm just antisocial.

Welcome!

Anyway, Mr. Laidlaw?  Mike?  Mike Laidlaw?  Layer-Of-Laws?

Mike is just fine. That last one's pretty bad-ass, though.

So: I was not planning on getting Legacy, as I was majorly disappointed with DA2.  I will be getting it now.  This is due entirely to the fact that you've engaged with the community here in a real way.  Thanks for that.

(snip)
Anyway, thanks for letting us know you're listening!:D:D

That's great to hear, and you're more than welcome. Hope you enjoy it. Take your sibling, they're awesome.

[Mike Laidlaw]

stoicsentry2 wrote...

Specific apologies to Mr. Laidlaw for my attitude toward him. However, in exchange Mr. Laidlaw, I would also like an apology from you to me.

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy DAII.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Savber100 wrote...

Whoa... didn't expect that. 

It doesn't hurt any to apologize that someone so obviously passionate didn't enjoy DAII.

[Mike Laidlaw]

stoicsentry2 wrote...
I was looking more for something about how you totally betrayed the fan base by making DA2 into DMC and you now hang your head in shame and sit in a dark corner longing for human companionship, but the PR team probably wouldn't allow that so... good enough.

This would be the definition of not knowing when to quit, kids. For future reference: when someone extends you an olive branch, don't take it and try to hit them with it. It just makes you look spiteful.

Modifié par Mike Laidlaw, 05 août 2011 - 10:43 .

[Stanley Woo]

I take the treatment of our developers by our community very seriously. While I don't expect that we will always agree on things, nor do I expect the community to always like what we have to say, to agree with us all the time, or even to like us even a little bit. What I do expect is that, regardless of our differences and preferences and tolerances, that the community treat our developers with respect. Not even friendliness, bowing and scraping, or deferential treatment, just the plain old-fashioned common decency and respect you would give anyone you are talking to in person.

The anonymity of the internet is no excuse to be rude, juvenile, or insulting to anyone, let alone the developers you want to listen to you and perhaps agree with you. You can hate, you can whinge, you can complain, you can lament, you can question. But you will not disrespect our developers. I hope I am crystal clear on this.

[Stanley Woo]

b1322 wrote...

I liked Legacy and could feel some of the improvements. And I really appreciate that Bioware takes the time to listen and answer our feedback, thank you! :-)

Increased community interaction is one of the things I would like to do in future projects. I would like us to get back to the way things were in the early days of the BioWare online community, where developers felt safe and valued and their opinions and advice were respected because, hey, these guys made the game y'all love.

Over the years, as the community has gotten bigger and project deadlines more important, we've slacked off a bit. I admit that. I've even gotten grouchier as a Moderator and have had to get people like John Epler to be the "good cop" to my "bad cop," Chris Priestly isn't even able to be online with you guys as much as he used to be.

But going forward, I would like both us and the community to be welcoming to new developers who want to share their expertise, advice and opinions. I want an artist, for example, to come in and talk about what he's working on without a small portion of the community screaming "DA2 SUCKED!" at him. I would like a designer to be able to talk about this new system or solicit ideas for a planned feature without a big long tangent on how "EA is the devil!" And I especially want to come in and chat with all y'all without feeling like I have to fight through some of you to get to those people who can and want to listen to what I have to say.

We hope that the Dragon Age franchise has a long way still to go. We have lots of ideas, and you guys have a lot of opinions and a desire to learn everything you can about what's coming up, what's in the pipe, and what hit store shelves, like, an hour ago or whatever. To do that, we have to be willing to set our differences aside and work like a community again. We have to believe that you ultimately like us and want to help us build better games, and you have to believe that we love what we do and that we are doing it for you, our community, our fans, and gamers worldwide (as well as for money).

Let's be excellent to each other and help to make this community the best developer board you can find. Let's attract some new devs to talk, and let's agree to disagree when things get too heated or when we start talking in circles. And we, in turn, will continue to be forthright with you and, as always, as open as we can be about what we're doing and why we do it.

Thanks for reading.

[John Epler]

Naked Oghren is a traumatizing experience that I would wish on no one.

And the thought of him moving about and fighting Darkspawn... ye gods.

[Mike Laidlaw]

craigdolphin wrote...

And I'm all for that. But what I want to know is whether we will additionally get back the ability to INITIATE dialog on the road (Active Dialog) as we were able to do in DAO?

As I noted elsewhere, we will be looking at putting player-initiated dialog back in. Likely at some sort of camp/base/etc.

I very much doubt that we will be doing player-initiated dialog "on the road," however, as our systems are designed to work in fixed places. There are several technical and multiple story reasons why it's inappropriate to stop to chat about someone's personal feelings in the middle of a dungeon; while possible, it doesn't make a lot of sense, so it would not be a priority for us.

[Mike Laidlaw]

AloraKast wrote...

In making the (some would call them) big changes in DA2 and steering the franchise in a noticeably different direction, what WAS the audience you were aiming for? To what kind of audience were you hoping to make this game more accessible? So as not to get boggled down by terms and definitions, is it fair to say the aim was simply to have the game appeal to anyone who doest not consider themselves an RPG gamer?

Yep, that's pretty much it. And I think there's a lot of static in the message, because DAII was a transitional product where it's hard to discern what is vision, and what is not. I wince every time I read "obviously they dumbed it down for console players who don't care if they visit the same cave over and over!" There are....well, there's an awful lot of things wrong with that statement.

Which brings me to another point. What is this new direction that you have in mind for the DA franchise? Where are we headed?

As much as I have enjoyed this dialog, I strongly suspect that any detailed answer I give here will be widely interpreted as wrong, since any element of the game I don't list will be construed as cut, or ruined.

Suffice it to say that I am strongly in the camp with the people who believe that the best parts of Origins combined with the best parts of DAII would create a game better than both of them. I am also a fan of customization, both of character and story, and increasingly aware that the DA universe is in dire need of more "activitites." More ways to interact with the world around you.

The rest will come out as we get closer to future products.

[Mike Laidlaw]

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!)

[Mike Laidlaw]

Johnny Jaded wrote...
Is there consideration for character-initiated dialogue? It would feel more natural than the player starting every conversation. For example, in DA:O, you could ask Leliana what she knew about an area and have a brief discussion about it; instead she could have started up a conversation stating that she had something interesting to say and allow the player to engage in conversation or dismiss her.

Situational. Certainly not off the table.

[Mike Laidlaw]

b1322 wrote...
But Mike, do You think that it will at least be possible to kiss your love interest on the road? Not talk but just kiss?

Very unlikely. Kisses are next to impossible when characters could be standing on a hill.

And no one wants to see that screenshot.

[Stanley Woo]

Johnny Jaded wrote...

Is there consideration for character-initiated dialogue? It would feel more natural than the player starting every conversation. For example, in DA:O, you could ask Leliana what she knew about an area and have a brief discussion about it; instead she could have started up a conversation stating that she had something interesting to say and allow the player to engage in conversation or dismiss her.

People seemed to dislike it when we did something similar in KotOR. While they liked the dialogues themselves, usually they were on the way somewhere adn got frustrated with having to stop and engage in conversation whenever Bastila was feeling chatty. Multiply that by the two or three you have in your party, and you can see how some folks might not enjoy having their adventure stopped now and again by one's followers.

It breaks up the flow of the game, I think, when that happens. I liked it in KotOR because it was different than what we'd done for NWN, but these days, I think it would feel intrusive, like we were trying to force feed you character stories or dialogue.

[Stanley Woo]

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

[Stanley Woo]

Mr.House wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

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

You can't do that! Now we want to see them!

That would be quite impossible, i'm afraid. Many are not appropriate for our family-friendly forum.

[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 .

[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.

[David Gaider]

tmp7704 wrote...
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.

Part of this is a result of the way we divided each follower's content in DA2. Splitting up the game into three time periods forced us to have an "introduction" for each follower at the beginning of one-- a way to catch up and tell the player what the follower has been up to in the intervening years. We also shifted a lot more focus onto the follower personal plot arcs. Neither of these things are necessarily bad, but they did mean less content being available for "extra" dialogue, even though the overall amount of dialogue per individual follower was comparable to DAO. Simply different priorities.

So a bit of rearrangement is necessary, and perhaps some room needs to be left for "small talk" like I said earlier-- perhaps leaving the notifications for the really important stuff, and allow the player some dialogue to discover on her own. What we'll do with the notifications, or whether we'll keep them at all, I can't really say. A lot depends on adapting to the structure of the story in question.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Savber100 wrote...

[image snippage]
Is there anyway for more choices that go beyond my "reaction" or a "yes" or "no"?

You could click the investigate to open up 5 additional choices to ask Isabela about her relationship with Hayder, or you could choose to help her or not, and enjoy one of 3 possible responses, colored by the dominant tone you had chosen throughout the course of the game, creating a consistency of character. So that's...let's see....11 possible things you could say there, some of which were determined by how you had played the game up to that point.

Not too shabby, if you ask me.