159 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

StanojeZ wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Stuff like this makes me wonder how people get any emotional enjoyment out of books.

Are there a lot of books where you see several possible lines of dialogue in advanced and largely devoid of context, and then flip the page to see which one the author selected?

Look, I know you prefer being surprised by VOs and like the cinematic delivery. I hope Bioware continues to have paraphrases for people who like paraphrases.

Just understand that there are those who actually like reading their PC's full lines better and would appreciate to be able to do so in future. Frankly I don't care if it's funnier or more emotional, since I know both systems can succeed at making me laugh or cry. It's just the way I prefer to play my RPGs.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 12 novembre 2011 - 02:06 .

[xCirdanx]

A line can be even funnier if you read it and then hear it.

The thing here however is, in the context of a RPG, you know ROLEPLAYING..i want to chose WHAT my CHAR says. (of all the options)  And unfortunaly that doesn´t work very well with a dialogue wheel. Also written text gives much more freedom for the writers, which in return, if you bother to read all of this and try different answers (you know RPG) can lead to a lot of interesting insights when it comes to a party member.

And after playing text based RPG´s for way over a decade, no, the line IS still funny. What might destroy it, is some bad voice acting or just not being comfortable with the voice at all. Now THAT can totally destroy your game.

[katling73]

I might have liked the new system much better if the paraphrasing was even remotely accurate. I can't remember the number of times I picked an option and was appalled and horrified by what Hawke then said as it bore little or no resemblance to the paraphrase and then had to hurriedly reload so that my Hawke didn't come off sounding like a complete jerk. In particular, the number of times the 'charming' response was absolutely not charming but instead were rather creepy and/or rude and/or appalling was a bit of a worry. I have no idea what the writers' definition of charming is but it doesn't seem to be anything like mine. It makes me wonder how much they actually get out and socialise with real people who aren't developers or otherwise deeply involved in the computer industry. Frankly, if I said some of the things Hawke said, I'd get my face punched in.

[StanojeZ]

Just understand that there are those who actually like reading their PC's full lines better and would appreciate to be able to do so in future.

I never said there weren't. Why would I think that? You people are all over this forum!   

[KilrB]

StanojeZ wrote...

Just understand that there are those who actually like reading their PC's full lines better and would appreciate to be able to do so in future.

I never said there weren't. Why would I think that? You people are all over this forum!   

So are "you people".

It must be very sad to be unable to appreciate a book, movie, play, song, etc,. the second time because you already read/heard it.

To be unable to laugh @ "Napalm and Silly Putty", "Interesting Times", "Liar Liar", or "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" again because you've BTDT ...

In Origins, every play-though with a new Warden was just as good as the first time.

Just as exciting, dramatic, sad, and yes ... funny.

In "2" the first time was just as dissapointing and boring as the last. <_<

Hawke and company never surprised me in  a good way and against a backdrop of the most disappointing game I've ever played ... nothing in it was even remotely funny.

[StanojeZ]

KilrB wrote...

It must be very sad to be unable to appreciate a book, movie, play, song, etc,. the second time because you already read/heard it.

Please point out some posts in this thread where people say they can't appreciate a book or a movie a second time.

Modifié par StanojeZ, 12 novembre 2011 - 01:59 .

[KilrB]

StanojeZ wrote...

KilrB wrote...

It must be very sad to be unable to appreciate a book, movie, play, song, etc,. the second time because you already read/heard it.

Please point out some posts in this thread where people say they can't appreciate a book or a movie a second time.

it is the logical extension of your erroneous line of reasoning ...

The line's not as funny if you can read it in advance.

Or as dramatic, or as sad.

That's why paraphrasing dialoge
choices is better than writing them out fully - it undercuts the actual
delivery, which is where the emotion happens. No paraphrasing means no
surprise. And without surprise, there won't be a lot of humor.

You cleary indicate that you must be "surprised" in order to appreciate humor, drama, and pathos.

If you have already BTDT ... where's the "surprise"?

[StanojeZ]

KilrB wrote...


it is the logical extension of your erroneous line of reasoning ...

The line's not as funny if you can read it in advance.

I am capable of not taking things to stupid, counter-productive extremes. It's not a binary thing where you suddenly lose all appreciation for a line of dialogue because you've already read it. I never said that, yet you act as if I had, in order to... what?

Just because something's not as funny if you read it in advance and out of its proper context, doesn't mean you can't appreciate re-reading a book. Those are two vastly different scenarios.

And without surprise, there won't be a lot of humor.

You cleary indicate that you must be "surprised" in order to appreciate humor, drama, and pathos.

No, I wrote that "there won't be a lot of humor", not that I must be surprised in order to appreciate humor. Again, those are two different scenarios.

You're not engaging with what I wrote; you're making stuff up and arguing against those fairy facts.

Modifié par StanojeZ, 12 novembre 2011 - 02:28 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

StanojeZ wrote...

Just understand that there are those who actually like reading their PC's full lines better and would appreciate to be able to do so in future.

I never said there weren't. Why would I think that? You people are all over this forum!   

Hah. Fair point.

@KilrB - I think you'll find that few things are as funny on a second reading/viewing. Novelty can only be benefitted from once in any media. Unless you get amnesia, I guess.

[Sylvius the Mad]

StanojeZ wrote...

Are there a lot of books where you see several possible lines of dialogue in advanced and largely devoid of context, and then flip the page to see which one the author selected?

No, but if you're claiming that there's any relevant comparison to be made here at all, then you're claiming that DA2 is supposed to tell the player a story without the player having any meaningful input.

The relevant context that you claim is missing is your character's state of mind.  If the game is allowing you to play your character as you see fit, then the game cannot provide you with that context.  Providing that context is your job.

[StanojeZ]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

StanojeZ wrote...

Are there a lot of books where you see several possible lines of dialogue in advanced and largely devoid of context, and then flip the page to see which one the author selected?

No, but if you're claiming that there's any relevant comparison to be made here at all, then you're claiming that DA2 is supposed to tell the player a story without the player having any meaningful input.

The relevant context that you claim is missing is your character's state of mind.  If the game is allowing you to play your character as you see fit, then the game cannot provide you with that context.  Providing that context is your job.

Of course it can. When my PC's goldfish is abducted, brutally murdered, and turned into a zombie, I know that my character is going to be both violently angry and deeply sad. As opposed to being indifferent, or being glad to be finally rid of that old thing.

The game provides me with the relevant context about my PC's state of mind, and gives me several options on how to react via dialogue, and sometimes action.

[KilrB]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

StanojeZ wrote...

Just understand that there are those who actually like reading their PC's full lines better and would appreciate to be able to do so in future.

I never said there weren't. Why would I think that? You people are all over this forum!   

Hah. Fair point.

@KilrB - I think you'll find that few things are as funny on a second reading/viewing. Novelty can only be benefitted from once in any media. Unless you get amnesia, I guess.

I disagree.

Good writing in any form is not diminished by multiple readings, listenings or viewings.

Are "Hamlet" or "Romeo and Juliet" lessened by repetition?

How about "The Ten Commandments", "Spartacus" or "Citizen Kane"?

No, in my opinion, they are not.

Neither in my view are the humorous works I mentioned previously.

Should you find your game less funny, dramatic, etc. for knowing what your character is going to say ...

A. The writing wasn't that good.

or

B. You need a better imagination.

Obviously, your choice will be influenced by  how much YOU liked the game.

[Heimdall]

I find most of the paraphrases make sense... in hindsight. Beforehand, there isn't much to go by though I was usually able to get what I wanted. I like my voiced protagonist, but I wouldn't mind being able to read the full line as an option.

[Sylvius the Mad]

StanojeZ wrote...

Of course it can. When my PC's goldfish is abducted, brutally murdered, and turned into a zombie, I know that my character is going to be both violently angry and deeply sad. As opposed to being indifferent, or being glad to be finally rid of that old thing.

Unless you designed your character to be glad to be rid of it, in which case the game portraying your PC as sad or angry is a serious problem.

The game shouldn't force a state of mind on your character.

The game provides me with the relevant context about my PC's state of mind, and gives me several options on how to react via dialogue, and sometimes action.

If the game knows your character's state of mind, then it's not your character.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 15 novembre 2011 - 05:57 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

KilrB wrote...

Good writing in any form is not diminished by multiple readings, listenings or viewings.

Are "Hamlet" or "Romeo and Juliet" lessened by repetition?

How about "The Ten Commandments", "Spartacus" or "Citizen Kane"?

No, in my opinion, they are not.

Neither in my view are the humorous works I mentioned previously.

Should you find your game less funny, dramatic, etc. for knowing what your character is going to say ...

A. The writing wasn't that good.

or

B. You need a better imagination.

Obviously, your choice will be influenced by  how much YOU liked the game.

*raises brow* Well, I don't know if you're blessed that you can watch the same movie ten times in a row and still get exactly the same, or better entertainment value. But it's an interesting trait, to be sure.

I did not intend my comment to convey that anything becomes 'less' once you've seen/watched/heard it once. I meant that there's something to be said for novelty. If someone tells you a good joke, you probably won't laugh as hard on the third telling in as many minutes. That's just how most people work.

With game dialogue, I think you can get entertainment from reading the full line AND you can get entertainment from seeing it played out. Would seeing it played out be less entertaining if you read the full line first? Depends. Once the Monkey Island series became voiced, it still kept full written lines and I listened to it all because I adored the life Guybrush's actor put into his dialogue.

Anyway, the real laughs IMO were never the PC's dialogue, but the NPCs' reactions to it. Since you don't get to read *those* in advance, I don't know why we're suddenly getting the same deal for our own characters.

[StanojeZ]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Unless you designed your character to be glad to be rid of it, in which case the game portraying your PC as sad or angry is a serious problem.

There simply is no way to give a player absolute freedom in how to portray the PC. The only way to do it is to give the player a limited number of reactions for the PC from which to choose. Unless you know of a way to provide Bioware with a limitless budget & infinite time... ?

If the game knows your character's state of mind, then it's now your character.

Heh.

[StanojeZ]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...


*raises brow* Well, I don't know if you're blessed that you can watch the same movie ten times in a row and still get exactly the same, or better entertainment value. But it's an interesting trait, to be sure.

I think he's this guy.

[Anomaly-]

StanojeZ wrote...
There simply is no way to give a player absolute freedom in how to portray the PC.

No, but certainly more than DA2 allowed.

The only way to do it is to give the player a limited number of reactions for the PC from which to choose. Unless you know of a way to provide Bioware with a limitless budget & infinite time... ?

Allowing the player their own reaction is vastly more efficient.

[StanojeZ]

Anomaly- wrote...

Allowing the player their own reaction

How does a game do that?

[Xewaka]

StanojeZ wrote...

Anomaly- wrote...
Allowing the player their own reaction

How does a game do that?

By not expliciting any reaction. Then you are free to implement whatever reaction fits your character concept.
And to those who say that no explicit reaction means no reaction at all: abscence of evidence does not equal evidence of abscence.

Modifié par Xewaka, 15 novembre 2011 - 01:36 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

StanojeZ wrote...

There simply is no way to give a player absolute freedom in how to portray the PC. The only way to do it is to give the player a limited number of reactions for the PC from which to choose.

As Xewaka pointed out, any time the PC's reaction isn't modeled within the game, the player is free to invent whatever reaction he would like.  By leaving the PC-specific events (like facial expressions) off-screen, the game avoids contradicting the player's design for that character.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If the game knows your character's state of mind, then it's now your character.

Heh.

That should have been "not your character".  I mistyped.

Xewaka wrote...

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.

Bravo, sir.

[Raikas]

KilrB wrote...

Good writing in any form is not diminished by multiple readings, listenings or viewings.

Are "Hamlet" or "Romeo and Juliet" lessened by repetition?

How about "The Ten Commandments", "Spartacus" or "Citizen Kane"?

No, in my opinion, they are not.

I think it's less a matter of it being diminished than it's just about it being changed.  A mystery or suspense story (for example) isn't going to engage you the same way once you know the resolution.  That's not to say it won't still be entertaining, but your reaction isn't going to be the identical.  If you avoid spoilers for a movie with a twist that doesn't mean you can't go to one of those sing-along musicals and watch something you've seen 50 times too, but let's not pretend that the first viewing/reading/playthrough of something is the same as the 10th even if it is a work of art that you still enjoy.  That enjoyment is going to evolve, and that's really separate from a the whole paraphrased or not issue.

I generally prefer the full-sentences we had in DAO, but that's for role-playing reasons - for all the complaints about DA2, I was actually totally entertained by a lot of the dialogue and part of that was from the element of surprise.  I was charmed by the fact that some of the snarky Hawke comments to the dog turned out to be things I've actually said to my dog - which isn't to say that once I knew it was coming it became uninteresting, it's just that the surprise added an extra bit of entertainment.

Modifié par Hervoyl, 15 novembre 2011 - 08:46 .

[StanojeZ]

Xewaka wrote...

StanojeZ wrote...

Anomaly- wrote...
Allowing the player their own reaction

How does a game do that?

By not expliciting any reaction. Then you are free to implement whatever reaction fits your character concept.
And to those who say that no explicit reaction means no reaction at all: abscence of evidence does not equal evidence of abscence.

How do you tell a story where the main character is not allowed to display any emotion?
And how is this idea supposed to work with a dialogue system? The moment you have a dialogue system, you have a limited number of character reactions from which to choose.

Modifié par StanojeZ, 15 novembre 2011 - 09:43 .

[StanojeZ]

[quote]Sylvius the Mad wrote...

[quote]StanojeZ wrote...

There simply is no way to give a player absolute freedom in how to portray the PC. The only way to do it is to give the player a limited number of reactions for the PC from which to choose.[/quote]
As Xewaka pointed out, any time the PC's reaction isn't modeled within the game, the player is free to invent whatever reaction he would like.  By leaving the PC-specific events (like facial expressions) off-screen, the game avoids contradicting the player's design for that character.
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Can you give an example of a scene with dialogue & action where the player has complete freedom to invent whatever reaction he would like, and this reaction is fed back into the game and has an impact on future choices? Because without the latter part, I don't see any point to what you describe.



[QUOTE][quote]Xewaka wrote...

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.[/quote]
Bravo, sir.
[/QUOTE]

In this case it might as well be, since unless I'm missing something in what you two describe, I don't see how the game is supposed to react to this completely player-chosen reaction.

Modifié par StanojeZ, 15 novembre 2011 - 09:44 .