ME1 may have had a lower combat/dialogue ratio, but it had a much higher pointless driving/dialogue ratio. The fact is, ME2 had more dialogue overall than ME1 did.Ghost-621 wrote...
Reaper Kitten of Doom wrote...
I'm guessing, since it is a fully voiced game, the more options you give the player, the more disc space you need.
If it was up to me, they could cut out half of the running and gunning, and have more dialogue.
This is what they should have been doing. ME1 had the combat/dialogue ratio down. ME2 and ME3 are more about the combat GOW linear corridor shooting awesome button gameplay than the actual dialogue and story.
Is the dialogue wheel needed anymore?
Débuté par
Jaron Oberyn
, oct. 18 2011 09:32
#151
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 02:21
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
-
- Guests
Retour en haut
#152
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 02:31
Labrev
-
- Members
- 2 237 messages
Arkitekt wrote...
CaptainZaysh wrote...
Mesina2 wrote...
^Pretty much that.
Yeah. Pwned.
/Thread
Not really, I still think the same as I did in my last post.
#153
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 02:46
KainrycKarr
-
- Members
- 4 819 messages
There have been several instances of game-based evidence where this attitude has been proven to be extremely inaccurate, misguided, and exaggerated.
#154
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 04:20
Jaron Oberyn
-
- Members
- 6 755 messages
Oh sorry kainryckarr, I must have missed the memo that over time information becomes irrelevant. What was I thinking?
And to my old friend Javier, people "role playing" was never in question. I can "roll play" that I'm Marcus Fenix and decided to do a combat roll because I'm him all I want, but that doesn't change the fact that he's a predefined character.
-Polite
And to my old friend Javier, people "role playing" was never in question. I can "roll play" that I'm Marcus Fenix and decided to do a combat roll because I'm him all I want, but that doesn't change the fact that he's a predefined character.
-Polite
#155
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 04:25
Il Divo
-
- Members
- 9 775 messages
PoliteAssasin wrote...
And to my old friend Javier, people "role playing" was never in question. I can "roll play" that I'm Marcus Fenix and decided to do a combat roll because I'm him all I want, but that doesn't change the fact that he's a predefined character.
-Polite
You're honestly comparing the pre-defined character of Marcus Fenix against Commander Shepard? I think you might want to go replay the ME series if you consider them to be equivalent scenarios. In the first case, everything about the character is pre-chosen for you, dialogue, appearance, choices, etc. The second case allows a variety of decisions and responses in terms of how your character handles any given situation.
Modifié par Il Divo, 22 octobre 2011 - 04:28 .
#156
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 05:00
Jaron Oberyn
-
- Members
- 6 755 messages
I never said they were equally predefined. It is as you said though, you can choose how he handles a situation. For example: will I be nice to this guy, neutral, or a jerk? Choosing the tone of voice doesn't change anything about Shepard. Ultimately most of the paragon/renegade responses are the same, but have a different tone. Why is it so hard to understand and accept that Shepard is predefined, even after Ray Muzyka said so? And for those of you pointing out the bi status of Shepard, it's called a retcon.
-Polite
-Polite
#157
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 06:32
Gadaire17
-
- Members
- 29 messages
Of course you need it. Not only is it a trademark, its also gives you the complete freedom to choose how you want to be.
#158
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 09:12
ReshyShira
-
- Members
- 205 messages
You know, I either would like DA:O's dialogue system, or none at all. The dialogue wheel feels like a cheap way to provide the illusion of choice when you actually have very little. This is not helped by the arbitrary paragon/renegade system which penalizes you for picking what you really want in favor of shoehorning you into a specific persona. For example in DA:O I can be a rather nice guy and polite to people, but always quick to threaten or kill unscrupulous people. In ME you can't do that without screwing up your paragon/renegade scores which VASTLY limits the roleplaying element.
If paragon/renegade scores were a reflection of say... public opinion that might be one thing, but it is a good and evil meter at it's most basic sense. For example if it was public opinion based, doing something like... saving the geth rather than blowing them up might get you renegade points as people think you've been put in a situation where you could kill hundreds if not thousands of geth and let it slip by.
Overall I think the dialogue wheel is more kept in for nostalgia than actual purpose. All of the dialogue could be boiled down to a screen of "Good" "Neutral" "Evil" and very little would change or heck there could be no choice at all and shepard acts according to his past renegade/paragon scores and I'd have no problem with that. I just hate the feeling that I'm being given a false sense of choice when I really have none what so ever.
If paragon/renegade scores were a reflection of say... public opinion that might be one thing, but it is a good and evil meter at it's most basic sense. For example if it was public opinion based, doing something like... saving the geth rather than blowing them up might get you renegade points as people think you've been put in a situation where you could kill hundreds if not thousands of geth and let it slip by.
Overall I think the dialogue wheel is more kept in for nostalgia than actual purpose. All of the dialogue could be boiled down to a screen of "Good" "Neutral" "Evil" and very little would change or heck there could be no choice at all and shepard acts according to his past renegade/paragon scores and I'd have no problem with that. I just hate the feeling that I'm being given a false sense of choice when I really have none what so ever.
#159
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 12:47
Il Divo
-
- Members
- 9 775 messages
PoliteAssasin wrote...
I never said they were equally predefined. It is as you said though, you can choose how he handles a situation. For example: will I be nice to this guy, neutral, or a jerk? Choosing the tone of voice doesn't change anything about Shepard. Ultimately most of the paragon/renegade responses are the same, but have a different tone. Why is it so hard to understand and accept that Shepard is predefined, even after Ray Muzyka said so? And for those of you pointing out the bi status of Shepard, it's called a retcon.
-Polite
Because as you're describing it, pre-defined is a "yes" or "no" matter, when in reality it's closer to a scale. If Shepard is simply pre-defined, why do I have the ability to choose romances? Save/kill the Rachni? Let Garrus kill Sidonis? Choose his sex? These all can significantly affect how we view our individual Shepards. Hell, Paragon and Renegade can affect who's alive or dead at the end of my playthrough.
Every Bioware game pre-defines your character to some extent in order to allow a central narrative. Ex: Role-playing a character who refuses to participate in KotOR's Jedi Civil War is impossible, since that is what the central story is centered around.
Where I might agree is that, due to the paraphrases/voice-acting, the "level" of pre-definition has definitely gone up.
Modifié par Il Divo, 22 octobre 2011 - 12:49 .
#160
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 12:55
Raizo
-
- Members
- 2 526 messages
I equate the dialogue wheel with choice. I have no problems using the dialogue wheel to make choices with different outcomes or the choices between two or more different 'tones' ( paragon, renegade, sarcastic, smooth, flirty, etc ) of dialogue but I don't get why it's there in regular conversation and the only options it provides is what piece of general info you ask about first. Why can't general info and exposition be delivered without the stupid dialogue wheel.
#161
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 03:12
Geth_Prime
-
- Members
- 907 messages
Eh, I find this argument silly. I don't think I really need to explain further. Sorry, PoliteAssassin. Do not take offence.
#162
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 03:59
Bostur
-
- Members
- 399 messages
The dialogue wheel is used for a few different game mechanics.
1. To allow players to delve deeper into some information, or to skip it.
2. To force a resolution through Paragon/Renegade stats.
3. To reach a resolution through dialogue gameplay, or otherwise impact the game and story.
4. To press 'Continue' in several different ways.
I think the fourth use of the dialogue wheel is silly. When the player has no impact on what is going on, it's a cheap trick to make it seem like it's an important choice. The other ways to use the dialogue wheel is fine though.
Dialogue games have started focusing too much on decision making as binary trees. You can only have a few real branches in a system like that, otherwise the amount of combinations and loose ends will become impossible to catch. Instead I think there should be more focus on impacting the dynamics of the gameplay and the world through dialogue. The ME games probably have very few ways to interact with the world, and therefore the dialogue choices are bound to become shallow and without choice, there is nowhere to plug in those choices. If the world dynamics are deeper and more complex, more opportunities will appear to make sensible dialogue choices.
1. To allow players to delve deeper into some information, or to skip it.
2. To force a resolution through Paragon/Renegade stats.
3. To reach a resolution through dialogue gameplay, or otherwise impact the game and story.
4. To press 'Continue' in several different ways.
I think the fourth use of the dialogue wheel is silly. When the player has no impact on what is going on, it's a cheap trick to make it seem like it's an important choice. The other ways to use the dialogue wheel is fine though.
Dialogue games have started focusing too much on decision making as binary trees. You can only have a few real branches in a system like that, otherwise the amount of combinations and loose ends will become impossible to catch. Instead I think there should be more focus on impacting the dynamics of the gameplay and the world through dialogue. The ME games probably have very few ways to interact with the world, and therefore the dialogue choices are bound to become shallow and without choice, there is nowhere to plug in those choices. If the world dynamics are deeper and more complex, more opportunities will appear to make sensible dialogue choices.
#163
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 04:53
didymos1120
-
- Members
- 14 580 messages
Bostur wrote...
I think the fourth use of the dialogue wheel is silly. When the player has no impact on what is going on, it's a cheap trick to make it seem like it's an important choice.
Um, such as? I assume you're referring to the ME1 thing where you got the same result no matter what you picked. In ME2, that was pretty much gone. They just had Shep talk instead (though far, far less than the OP likes to think). If you're referring to cases where the wheel just had a right and left option, that wasn't to fool people that there was "an important choice". It was to just to give us a minor variation, and possibly, if you picked "left", you'd get additional branching after that, whereas picking "right" tended to cut things short. If you were tricked into thinking every single dialogue option was of great significance, it's a trick you played upon yourself.
#164
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 05:00
Dean_the_Young
-
- Members
- 20 684 messages
If there's one improvement I feel the dialogue wheel needs from ME1 and ME2, it's putting 'yes' and 'no' selections somewhere other than the standard P/R axis. That goes for most choices that were neither Paragon or Renegade as well, such as the Anderson/Udina choice or romance dialogues that were 'continue/stop' rather than 'paragon/renegade' in nature.
When you establish a need to consistently pick P or R options in order to keep P/R options available in the future, ala the ME2 P/R system of proportional points, it helps to distinguish between P/R opportunities and non-alignment choices.
Really it could be as simple as a top/bottom split for yes/no, or a left/right, rather than the P/R 'top right/bottom right'.
When you establish a need to consistently pick P or R options in order to keep P/R options available in the future, ala the ME2 P/R system of proportional points, it helps to distinguish between P/R opportunities and non-alignment choices.
Really it could be as simple as a top/bottom split for yes/no, or a left/right, rather than the P/R 'top right/bottom right'.
#165
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 05:11
JeffZero
-
- Members
- 14 400 messages
The very concept behind the question posed in this topic title is beyond silly, IMO. Seriously, seriously exaggerating what little diminished choice there was in the wheel from ME1 to ME2.
And besides, there was less roundabout dialogue in ME2.
Yeah, Shepard spoke a few more lines on his/her own than I would have preferred (and definitely more than in ME1) but asking if this wonderful key feature for the franchise is 'even needed anymore' seems rather over-the-top to me.
And besides, there was less roundabout dialogue in ME2.
Yeah, Shepard spoke a few more lines on his/her own than I would have preferred (and definitely more than in ME1) but asking if this wonderful key feature for the franchise is 'even needed anymore' seems rather over-the-top to me.
#166
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 05:24
Bostur
-
- Members
- 399 messages
didymos1120 wrote...
Bostur wrote...
I think the fourth use of the dialogue wheel is silly. When the player has no impact on what is going on, it's a cheap trick to make it seem like it's an important choice.
Um, such as? I assume you're referring to the ME1 thing where you got the same result no matter what you picked. In ME2, that was pretty much gone. They just had Shep talk instead (though far, far less than the OP likes to think). If you're referring to cases where the wheel just had a right and left option, that wasn't to fool people that there was "an important choice". It was to just to give us a minor variation, and possibly, if you picked "left", you'd get additional branching after that, whereas picking "right" tended to cut things short. If you were tricked into thinking every single dialogue option was of great significance, it's a trick you played upon yourself.
I don't think I was tricked very often even on the first playthrough. In most cases it seemed pretty obvious that options lead in the same direction and thats even worse. I don't mind being tricked as long as it's not too obvious, thats how games work after all, tricking us into thinking that mathematical equations are actually fantasy worlds.
ME2 had a lot of cases where we had a choice between two dialogue options that did nothing at all. Sure it adds some variations, but if the NPCs ignore it anyway that variation feels irrelevant to me. If I am faced with the choice of pressing A or B, I expect that those two options are different in some way. It doesn't have to be a big impact, small effects can be fun as well.
But it's true that ME2 reduced these cases a bit compared to ME1.
Old RPGs used to have a joke where the player is faced with a large number of options that does nothing at all because the character is clearly out of control. In a lot of modern games this isn't even a joke, it has become standard practice with no attempt to hide it.
#167
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 06:01
KainrycKarr
-
- Members
- 4 819 messages
PoliteAssasin wrote...
Oh sorry kainryckarr, I must have missed the memo that over time information becomes irrelevant. What was I thinking?
And to my old friend Javier, people "role playing" was never in question. I can "roll play" that I'm Marcus Fenix and decided to do a combat roll because I'm him all I want, but that doesn't change the fact that he's a predefined character.
-Polite
The article is based on why Shepard is straight without the option to be gay. Shepard now has the option to be gay.
So yeah, that makes it pretty much irrelevant. I don't know why you don't get that.
Fact is, Shepard is NOT pre-defined, because there are countless decisions we make about OUR Shepards, no matter how small, and several people, myself included, have pointed out these decisions.
You say Shepard is pre-defined. This is false. The ONLY argument you could make is that is that Shepard is PARTIALLY pre-defined, due to the few instances of "auto" dialogue.
#168
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 08:29
Nilbog79
-
- Members
- 73 messages
KainrycKarr wrote...
The article is based on why Shepard is straight without the option to be gay. Shepard now has the option to be gay.
So yeah, that makes it pretty much irrelevant. I don't know why you don't get that.
Fact is, Shepard is NOT pre-defined, because there are countless decisions we make about OUR Shepards, no matter how small, and several people, myself included, have pointed out these decisions.
You say Shepard is pre-defined. This is false. The ONLY argument you could make is that is that Shepard is PARTIALLY pre-defined, due to the few instances of "auto" dialogue.
I'd agree that you don't get a pre-defined Shepard, instead you get to choose one of three pre-defined Shepards
. Of those, the most three-dimensional and plausible is probably the Neutral Shepard, even though very few people ever choose that option.
#169
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 08:33
diamondedge
-
- Members
- 191 messages
Don't like it.stonbw1 wrote...
I haven't played it, but I thought DA2 did something similar to OP's request. Apparently, you would choose one 'dialogue' option at the very begining of the game and from that choice, the game somewhat inferred your stance (sarcastic, mean, humorous, etc) throughout the game. I may be wrong and you folks can probably clarify.
I want to b able to respond to each situation differently. Just because I'm good hearted person in general doesn't mean I'll pass us the oportunity to do someting exceptionaly violent or cruel if I conclude that the situation - or the person - warrants for it.
#170
Posté 22 octobre 2011 - 11:46
Jaron Oberyn
-
- Members
- 6 755 messages
Wow, touched a nerve kainry? I still don't see how you believe the article is irrelevant when it's simply a retcon.
-Polite
-Polite
#171
Posté 23 octobre 2011 - 12:46
Il Divo
-
- Members
- 9 775 messages
PoliteAssasin wrote...
Wow, touched a nerve kainry? I still don't see how you believe the article is irrelevant when it's simply a retcon.
-Polite
Shepard's sexuality is never actually established from what I've seen. The player is free to imagine any number of reasons why Shepard chose not to romance his ME1/ME2 party members. It would only be a retcon if Shepard was established as straight in the previous games.
Regardless, the article does negate your point, since the example of same-sex relationships is used to explain how Shepard is defined, yet now same-sex relationships are available.
Modifié par Il Divo, 23 octobre 2011 - 12:46 .
#172
Posté 23 octobre 2011 - 01:07
didymos1120
-
- Members
- 14 580 messages
diamondedge wrote...
Don't like it.stonbw1 wrote...
I haven't played it, but I thought DA2 did something similar to OP's request. Apparently, you would choose one 'dialogue' option at the very begining of the game and from that choice, the game somewhat inferred your stance (sarcastic, mean, humorous, etc) throughout the game. I may be wrong and you folks can probably clarify.
I want to b able to respond to each situation differently. Just because I'm good hearted person in general doesn't mean I'll pass us the oportunity to do someting exceptionaly violent or cruel if I conclude that the situation - or the person - warrants for it.
It doesn't work like that. If you consistently pick "snarky" options, then scripted lines will be snarky. If you start picking "nice" lines instead, then it will eventually adjust, and Hawke won't be snarky in scripted lines anymore. It has no effect at all on selectable dialogue.
#173
Posté 23 octobre 2011 - 01:43
Killjoy Cutter
-
- Members
- 6 005 messages
didymos1120 wrote...
diamondedge wrote...
Don't like it.stonbw1 wrote...
I haven't played it, but I thought DA2 did something similar to OP's request. Apparently, you would choose one 'dialogue' option at the very begining of the game and from that choice, the game somewhat inferred your stance (sarcastic, mean, humorous, etc) throughout the game. I may be wrong and you folks can probably clarify.
I want to b able to respond to each situation differently. Just because I'm good hearted person in general doesn't mean I'll pass us the oportunity to do someting exceptionaly violent or cruel if I conclude that the situation - or the person - warrants for it.
It doesn't work like that. If you consistently pick "snarky" options, then scripted lines will be snarky. If you start picking "nice" lines instead, then it will eventually adjust, and Hawke won't be snarky in scripted lines anymore. It has no effect at all on selectable dialogue.
And those moments of automatical dialogue choice are a mistake in the game design... the player should always choose.
(And as I recall, there are times when an extra dialogue choice will be available to the player based on their past chosen responses.)
#174
Posté 23 octobre 2011 - 01:45
KainrycKarr
-
- Members
- 4 819 messages
PoliteAssasin wrote...
Wow, touched a nerve kainry? I still don't see how you believe the article is irrelevant when it's simply a retcon.
-Polite
Call it whatever you want. But the bottom line is that you DO choose characteristics for Shepard.
If Ray Muyzka said Shepard is now a flying donkey-lizard, does that mean Shepard is a flying donkey-lizard, even if in actual gameplay he is in fact, NOT, a flying donkey-lizard?
Yes, he is a big name of BW(THE name, in fact), but that doesn't mean that everything he says accurately reflects the ACTUAL GAMEPLAY. Hell, how many times has Silverman screwed up?
Frankly, I think you're just trolling at this point.
Modifié par KainrycKarr, 23 octobre 2011 - 01:56 .
#175
Posté 23 octobre 2011 - 01:50
In Exile
-
- Members
- 28 738 messages
Bostur wrote...
I think the fourth use of the dialogue wheel is silly. When the player has no impact on what is going on, it's a cheap trick to make it seem like it's an important choice. The other ways to use the dialogue wheel is fine though.
Illusion of choice makes a significant effect on enjoyment. It's like saying that video-games are silly, because you're just sitting down/lying prone for hours on end moving a plastic clump while looking at a screen. If it improves the experience, then it's worthwhile.
