311 réponses à ce sujet

[N00blet666]

I've got no problem with the actual dialogue spoken. I just want to have choices.

[Exia001]

N00blet666 wrote...

G3rman wrote...

Clearly the demo had cut content and the main autodialogue piece to grab casual gamers who would download it. Not to mention its considering a new Shep, not an imported one which significantly changes dialogue.

People will **** about this everyday until the damn game gets in their hands, even if them complaining will do nothing.

Dude I just think we want a dev to say whether or not autodialogue will be present for most of the game the way it was in the demo. 

Mac Walters has already tweeted that three choice options make up the majority of the game, besides which you're going to get the decide the fate of the universe, getting antsy about intro diologue choice is silly

Modifié par Exia001, 13 février 2012 - 11:13 .

[N00blet666]

Exia001 wrote...

N00blet666 wrote...

G3rman wrote...

Clearly the demo had cut content and the main autodialogue piece to grab casual gamers who would download it. Not to mention its considering a new Shep, not an imported one which significantly changes dialogue.

People will **** about this everyday until the damn game gets in their hands, even if them complaining will do nothing.

Dude I just think we want a dev to say whether or not autodialogue will be present for most of the game the way it was in the demo. 

Mac Walters has already tweeted that three choice options make up the majority of the game, besides which you're going to get the decide the fate of the universe, getting antsy about intro diologue choice is silly

I think this whole thread is more about auto dialogue than the number of dialogue options.

[Wulfram]

daqs wrote...

If you're thinking about tactics, you're thinking about battle. And if you're thinking about battle against the Reapers at this stage, you are going to lose.

Seems pretty straightforward and not-all-that-derpy to me.

Avoiding battle is a tactic.

[Exia001]

Very well, however we do noy know for sure that two missions in a deno is entirely consistant with the final product

[VinWizzy]

If what Mac said is true then I'm okay with it. I actually kind of liked it in the prologue.

[VinWizzy]

Exia001 wrote...

Very well, however we do noy know for sure that two missions in a deno is entirely consistant with the final product

Exactly because I know there is WAY more to do in Sur'Kesh after I watched the leaked beta. I think it had the full level with a hub area before combat starts with more dialogue.

[Gibb_Shepard]

daqs wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

That sentence is just logically retarded. Without planning or tactics, survival is impossible. Honestly, how could they possibly hope to survive without setting a plan in motion and tactically executing said plan? 

I would prefer Shepard to say something that doesn't make him sound like an illogical goof.

If you're thinking about tactics, you're thinking about battle. And if you're thinking about battle against the Reapers at this stage, you are going to lose.

Seems pretty straightforward and not-all-that-derpy to me.

Since when is thinking about tactics thinking about battle? Do you know the definition of tactics? Hell, avoiding battle and planning your maneuvers is a tactic.

[incinerator950]

Luc0s wrote...

Guys, lots of dialogue and dialogue-options were cut from the demo for the sake of reducing the file-size. The actual Mass Effect 3 game will have more dialogue and more dialogue-options.

So, less auto-dialogue and more dialogue-options in the final game. Everyone who has seen the E3 demo of Sur'Kesh or the leaked beta demo knows this.

I've been witholding the conversations from the beta for this reason actually.

[Exia001]

And there we are, thanks man

[Aimi]

Wulfram wrote...

Avoiding battle is a tactic.

No, it isn't. Tactics - to use the super-simple Clausewitz definition - are actions taken in battle.

Avoiding battle is a strategy, however. And Shepard does say that it's not the time for strategy, either. Since strategy is implicit in all actions taken by any military, ever, one can either decide that Shepard is speaking nonsense or that Shepard is referring to a specific subset of "strategy", probably the one that involves taking a stand in the Sol system to protect Earth and getting wiped out.

[Grey34]

brilliant so now the nip pickers resulting down do this?

[Aimi]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Since when is thinking about tactics thinking about battle? Do you know the definition of tactics? Hell, avoiding battle and planning your maneuvers is a tactic.

Yes, I do know the definition, and I know variations on the definition, from Clausewitz through Liddell Hart down to Luttwak and FM 100-5, **** you very much. Tactics are definitionally things concerned with battle. They've been defined that way ever since Clausewitz, and he was only codifying practices that were already standard.

Avoiding battle can be a policy undertaken either on the operational level or the strategic level of warfare. Operational decisions to avoid battle are generally temporary, taken to alleviate a time-sensitive deficiency in combat power as compared to a given enemy. The usual armchair historian reference here is Q. Fabius Maximus Cunctator in 217-216 BC in his operations against the Qarthadastei general Hannibal (so often misused that "Fabian strategy [sic]" has become part of the English lexicon); a better one is the response of the People's Liberation Army to the Guomindang invasion of Manchuria in 1946-7, before the counteroffensive that led to the Huaihai campaign.

Strategic and grand strategic decisions to avoid battle are done out of a institutional or general inferiority that cannot be rectified within the course of a campaign. Steppe tribes, from the Xiongnu to the Skythoi to the Zunghars and everything in between, historically shunned classic defensive battle against the likes of Han Wudi or Darayavahush Wuzurg because it was a lose-lose scenario and can never have been anything but.

[Darkfoxz87]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Bioware should honestly skip all this choice nonsense and stick to pure storytelling
Forget the whiners, tell the story you want to tell, to hell with dialogue choices!

Mass Effect isn't a linear story you have to make choices, which is one of the best aspects of the game. If you think they should cut dialogue play action or dont play at all.

This auto dialogue is scaring the S**T out of me. Mass Effect with auto Dialogue is just Generic ThirdPersonShooter Number 25,467. IMHO

Now some Auto Dialogue is fine, the start of the Suicide mission in Mass Effect 2 had some Auto Dialgue, but that was it. Everything else that came out of Shepards mouth you had some control over it. But the demo had more Auto Dialogue than Suicide Mission in the first few minutes.

I hope the demo cut somethings out but after reading this: http://social.biowar.../1323620/184037
I am very wary about the rest of the game.

[N00blet666]

Darkfoxz87 wrote...

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Bioware should honestly skip all this choice nonsense and stick to pure storytelling
Forget the whiners, tell the story you want to tell, to hell with dialogue choices!

Mass Effect isn't a linear story you have to make choices, which is one of the best aspects of the game. If you think they should cut dialogue play action or dont play at all.

This auto dialogue is scaring the S**T out of me. Mass Effect with auto Dialogue is just Generic ThirdPersonShooter Number 25,467. IMHO

Now some Auto Dialogue is fine, the start of the Suicide mission in Mass Effect 2 had some Auto Dialgue, but that was it. Everything else that came out of Shepards mouth you had some control over it. But the demo had more Auto Dialogue than Suicide Mission in the first few minutes.

I hope the demo cut somethings out but after reading this: http://social.biowar.../1323620/184037
I am very wary about the rest of the game.

I agree.

[Terror_K]

While I don't really want ME1's style of "I'll find some way to take him down!" syndrome, nor do I want Shepard speaking too much automatically and an overall lack of dialogue choices, which ME2 was sometimes guilty of (especially regarding TIM and Cerberus stuff, where there was quite often no options to really stick it to them, especially when you really wanted to.).

I remember leading into ME2 one of the devs said that to avoid too many cases of two or three dialogue choices leading to the exact same response (i.e. "I'll find some way to take him down!" syndrome, a common complaint with ME1's dialogue) that they automated more of Shepard's responses, so instead of redundant choices Shepard would just auto-speak. This was received really well upon first being mentioned, but I think the execution was slightly flawed, and we ended up with times when Shepard would just speak when there should have been choices, even purely cosmetic ones. And ME3 looks to be suffering this issue even more if the current demo and other footage is anything to go by.

Personally, while admittedly some dialogue should be automated if there's no real reason for Shepard to say anything else, I think they should have simply had a better illusion of choice in certain cases. When a situation is purely cosmetic and doesn't really have an outcome or set a flag, instead of Shepard just speaking or three options with the exact same dialogue being spoken, how about different deliveries and even different things being said, perhaps with slightly altered reactions from the people being spoken to... at least initially, before you continue on the same track.

ME1's issue was that it didn't even really give the illusion of choice because the player saw that each option had him/her say the exact same line in the exact same way, and get the exact same response. ME2's was Shepard would just speak without input and be sometimes over-controlled and railroaded. What they should do is give us different options that really do produce different results, if only cosmetic ones. There's no reason talking to Anderson, TIM or a squaddie can't have some slight variations to certain aspects of the conversation, even if it still ends up going in the same place. Dragon Age: Origins often did this: where even when the conversations took the same path, you'd have varied options and whoever you were talking with would have a different initial response before continuing on as normal. At least that way players have a choice, if only a cosmetic one.

[Chuvvy]

I'd be fine with auto dialog, if Shepard were even remotely close to an interesting character.


inb4 playin teh game wrong. No, I don't commit to Renegade, or Paragon, I swap around and say different things. That doesn't change the fact that Shepard is just a poorly written, his character has no life, male or female. If Shepard were a squadmate instead of the PC, he'd be on par with Jacob.

[Exia001]

Slidell505 wrote...

I'd be fine with auto dialog, if Shepard were even remotely close to an interesting character.


inb4 playin teh game wrong. No, I don't commit to Renegade, or Paragon, I swap around and say different things. That doesn't change the fact that Shepard is just a poorly written, his character has no life, male or female. If Shepard were a squadmate instead of the PC, he'd be on par with Jacob.

The opinion is strong with this one

[Wulfram]

daqs wrote...

Avoiding battle is a strategy, however. And Shepard does say that it's not the time for strategy, either. Since strategy is implicit in all actions taken by any military, ever, one can either decide that Shepard is speaking nonsense or that Shepard is referring to a specific subset of "strategy", probably the one that involves taking a stand in the Sol system to protect Earth and getting wiped out.

But if that is his point, he could certainly express it in a lot clearer way, and with a lot less of a pissy attitude.

To be honest, I guess my main problem is that Shepard seems like he's acting like a ****** in that scene.  That he's sounding stupid while doing it is just an aggravating factor.

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 février 2012 - 12:11 .

[Exia001]

*double post*

Modifié par Exia001, 13 février 2012 - 12:12 .

[Chuvvy]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Bioware should honestly skip all this choice nonsense and stick to pure storytelling
Forget the whiners, tell the story you want to tell, to hell with dialogue choices!

That'd be great, if ME actually had a good story to tell. ME1 didn't have a good story, it was better than ME2s, but not on par with say, RDR or Metro 2033. Hell, even the baseline story of ME is as cliche as you can get. "AN ANCIENT EVIL ARISES"

Darkfoxz87 wrote...
Mass Effect with auto Dialogue is just Generic ThirdPersonShooter Number 25,467. IMHO

I agree with you sir.

[Terror_K]

Slidell505 wrote...

I'd be fine with auto dialog, if Shepard were even remotely close to an interesting character.


inb4 playin teh game wrong. No, I don't commit to Renegade, or Paragon, I swap around and say different things. That doesn't change the fact that Shepard is just a poorly written, his character has no life, male or female. If Shepard were a squadmate instead of the PC, he'd be on par with Jacob.

Well, to be fair, that's kind of the point. In most RPGs you're supposed to fill in what's empty yourself, that's largely the point: to define the character and make them your own, even in a somewhat pre-defined character like Shepard. Shepard isn't bland, he/she is just purposefully devoid of any major personality factors because it's up to the player to define them, through dialogue, through his/her actions and just through their own imagination. If Shepard were too defined, the player wouldn't really feel they were roleplaying them at all, and that too much of Shepard was pre-established and set in stone. A roleplaying character has to be at least a mostly empty vessel and malleable to work, or else the player can never really feel they're making a difference and filling their shoes in the slightest.

And, y'know... that in the end is kind of the main issue with auto-dialogue: it defines Shepard too much and takes control away from the player, where it should be. I'm supposed to be playing Mass Effect 3, not Final Fantasy XIII-3 or Metal Gears Solid 4.5.

Modifié par Terror_K, 13 février 2012 - 12:16 .

[Arppis]

daqs wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Avoiding battle is a tactic.

No, it isn't. Tactics - to use the super-simple Clausewitz definition - are actions taken in battle.

Avoiding battle is a strategy, however. And Shepard does say that it's not the time for strategy, either. Since strategy is implicit in all actions taken by any military, ever, one can either decide that Shepard is speaking nonsense or that Shepard is referring to a specific subset of "strategy", probably the one that involves taking a stand in the Sol system to protect Earth and getting wiped out.

Now you are just splitting hair. Yes avoiding battle is a tactic.

[wright1978]

Better not be so much auto dialogue in final version of intro. Destroys ability to roleplay.