19 réponses à ce sujet

[sleepy__head]

Dear developers,

When we (the players) have a conversation with an npc, PLEASE do not end the conversation for us unless we explicitly do so.  Just to explain what I mean :

You click on a NPC, you have
1.  Discussion Topic A
2.  Discussion Topic B
3.  Question C
4.  Question D
5.  Question E.
6.  Option to exit

It is really annoying to choose option 1, 2 and 3 and then have the game end the conversation for you.  Now this isn't so bad if you can just click on the npc and chat again, but that is not always the case.  Sometimes that npc will no longer talk, or certain conversation topics become unavailable if you exit (BUT are available if you talk in just the correct "order" which the players have no way of knowing unless they reload).

Please for the love of god don't end a conversation for us (specially a one-time conversation) until we explicitly want to do so.

[pokemaughan]

No

[Rhys Cordelle]

Agreed. It's a way of helping each playthrough feel different.

[Garad Moonbeam]

There are consequences to your choices, that is the point. In many cases selecting to say something will elminate the possibility of broaching an opposing subject, or you might ****** the person off and they aren't willing to talk to you anymore. I love this about the game, because you have to think about your choices as they may have both immediate and long term effects.



In short, devs, please keep doing this; at least when appropriate to do so.

[pathenry]

Same here, I like this. It makes it feel as though what you say or do actually matters. If you miss out on some low xp mini-quest, so be it. Answer more carefully next time instead of mashing buttons.

Modifié par pathenry, 24 novembre 2009 - 02:03 .

[sleepy__head]

Johohoho.Ehehehe wrote...

I think it only adds to gameplay if an NPC "chooses" to end a conversation based on your responses. I understand what you mean since I also tend to exploit every single dialogue as much as possible. However, this approach ruins any potential replayability so going through one particular conversation line leaves surprises for subsequent playthrough. And it gives me stronger feeling that I actually "talked".

If the conversation ends because the npc turns hostile or the player GIVES the npc a reason to stop talking, of course that is not a problem.  But numerous times a conversation with a FRIENDLY npc ends for completely arbitrary reason.  Why does the conversation ends?  Because the person who made the script said so.  That, is far more unrealistic.  If I'm talking to a friendly npc and there are 5 topics of interest to discuss, why does the chat abruptly ends when you talk about topic 2 and 5 when those topics are as harmless as 1, 3, and 4?

[Sarakinoi]

Because like in mass effect, sometimes there is nothing more to say because the NPC will give the same answer to many of your questions. To take your example :



You click on a NPC, you have

1. Discussion Topic A

2. Discussion Topic B

3. Question C

4. Question D

5. Question E.

6. Option to exit



Question C, D, and E trigger the exact same response from the NPC. So if you already explored A and B and one of these repeat 3, then it kicks you out of the conversation so you don't experience the repetition. Or you will notice that sometimes it even removes multiple questions and dialogue options when you ask something for the same reason.

[xYOSSARIANx]

I'd like my conversations not to involve me being told the same information 3 or 4 times when going though the available speech options. I've lost count of the times I've snapped "yes I know you told me 10 seconds ago and 10 seconds before that as well" as they continually tell me the same stuff even though I've asked a different question.

[Rakan13]

sleepy__head wrote...

Johohoho.Ehehehe wrote...

I think it only adds to gameplay if an NPC "chooses" to end a conversation based on your responses. I understand what you mean since I also tend to exploit every single dialogue as much as possible. However, this approach ruins any potential replayability so going through one particular conversation line leaves surprises for subsequent playthrough. And it gives me stronger feeling that I actually "talked".

If the conversation ends because the npc turns hostile or the player GIVES the npc a reason to stop talking, of course that is not a problem.  But numerous times a conversation with a FRIENDLY npc ends for completely arbitrary reason.  Why does the conversation ends?  Because the person who made the script said so.  That, is far more unrealistic.  If I'm talking to a friendly npc and there are 5 topics of interest to discuss, why does the chat abruptly ends when you talk about topic 2 and 5 when those topics are as harmless as 1, 3, and 4?

In other words you want the game to be non realistic.  If you do not want the game to change do to what you choose to ask and what order then you bought the wrong type of game.  Go get a game that does not require roleplaying.

[catofnine]

Garad Moonbeam wrote...

There are consequences to your choices, that is the point. In many cases selecting to say something will elminate the possibility of broaching an opposing subject, or you might ****** the person off and they aren't willing to talk to you anymore. I love this about the game, because you have to think about your choices as they may have both immediate and long term effects.

In short, devs, please keep doing this; at least when appropriate to do so.

QFT.

OP: the conversation killer choices are by design for the reasons above.

[Mnemnosyne]

Well it depends. Some conversations it makes perfect sense for them to end if you say certain things. Other times it really doesn't. Like if you're asking someone questions, unless you make them mad or something of the sort, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to ask all the questions you can think of. But sometimes the dialogue trees are set up so that if you ask questions in the 'wrong' order, you never get a chance to go back and ask the other ones. And if the NPC 'feels' you're asking too many questions, they should say so. You shouldn't lose the ability to ask at all. So maybe NPC X will only answer Y number of questions (hidden), but you shouldn't lose the option to ask question A just because you picked question B, and then you can still ask question C, but question A is still relevant - however you just don't get the option to ask it, for no particular reason we can discern. Now I'm not saying the NPC should answer them in the same way, necessarily, or that he should be willing to answer all of them at all - but you should certainly never lose the option to ask, in the first place.

Unless there's a logical reason for you never to bring up that topic again, you should be able to go back to it, even if it just provokes a 'go away, I won't talk about that' response from the NPC.

[Zenon]

Sten: "No."



I actually would prefer more dialogue options geared towards the character. So far I see it sometimes, but could be better. As for the NPC ending the conversation: How much do you experience that in your life, that you always get to control the entire conversation yourself?



Example: After revealing you are a Grey Warden (who is maybe feared or strongly disliked by the other for whatever reason), the NPC may not want to give you certain answers or information about Loghain's actions. If you pretended to be on his side or one of his people he probably would freely express his feeling or information to your character.



So far I found the dialogues one of the best made qualities of Bioware games. So good, that I hardly play RPGs made by other studios, which I might having enough time. Still, I probably prefer to play a Bioware RPG two or three times again before trying one from other studios. The only other one currently on my HDD is Vampire "Bloodlines". Suggestions which to get next (apart from ME2) are appreciated. Maybe "Drakensang", "Fallout 3", or "Risen" may be good candidates?

[Mnemnosyne]

Actually here's a really good example that I just came across. A certain tree asks of me a boon at one point. If I ask it what it wants and agree to do it, the rest of my conversation options are gone. I can't ask any of my questions about anything else. I can ask the questions first, then agree to do what he wants, but I can't do it the other way around. Why? There doesn't seem to be any good reason for this. We're still on good terms, I'm going to do what he wants, and it's not a task that is so time-sensitive he can't spend a few minutes talking about other things first. However, my options to ask him questions go away when I agree to do what he wants.

[Enoch VG]

Zenon: Sometime next Spring, check out Alpha Protocol. It's coming from Obsidian (who did NWN2 and KotOR2, both of which vastly outclassed their Bioware-made predecessors in the character writing area), and has an interesting take on in-game dialogue. All the conversations are one-try-only, based on ME-ish "stances" (but without the silly "pick A for niceguy points, pick B for jerk points") and there is reportedly a crazy level of gameworld reactivity built in to your choices.

[Zenon]

Enoch VG wrote...

Zenon: Sometime next Spring, check out Alpha Protocol. It's coming from Obsidian (who did NWN2 and KotOR2, both of which vastly outclassed their Bioware-made predecessors in the character writing area), and has an interesting take on in-game dialogue. All the conversations are one-try-only, based on ME-ish "stances" (but without the silly "pick A for niceguy points, pick B for jerk points") and there is reportedly a crazy level of gameworld reactivity built in to your choices.

Thanks for the hint. NWN2 was really good. I still play both NWN and NWN2. The former mostly because there are some incredibly well made community modules for NWN thrilling me regardless of the outclassed graphics.

About KotOR2: Actually apart from some dialogues I felt a little bit disappointed by KotOR2. It seemed unfinished and I somehow felt the story was a bit too chaotic giving my hero less sense of purpose but to hunt down those Sith-Lords one by one... or I don't remember the main plot well enough anymore, which doesn't happen to me with the other good RPGs. Or my memory fails me and I should play it again. ;-)

[Bibdy]

Koyasha wrote...

Actually here's a really good example that I just came across. A certain tree asks of me a boon at one point. If I ask it what it wants and agree to do it, the rest of my conversation options are gone. I can't ask any of my questions about anything else. I can ask the questions first, then agree to do what he wants, but I can't do it the other way around. Why? There doesn't seem to be any good reason for this. We're still on good terms, I'm going to do what he wants, and it's not a task that is so time-sensitive he can't spend a few minutes talking about other things first. However, my options to ask him questions go away when I agree to do what he wants.

That's generally because those questions pertain to the item itself, giving you more story about the item and more information to digest to help you make a decision.

If the dialogue option was "Why should I help you?", and the response is a spiel about..well, why you should help them, why would that dialogue show up AFTER you've already agreed to help them?

[Enoch VG]

Zenon wrote...
About KotOR2: Actually apart from some dialogues I felt a little bit disappointed by KotOR2. It seemed unfinished and I somehow felt the story was a bit too chaotic giving my hero less sense of purpose but to hunt down those Sith-Lords one by one... or I don't remember the main plot well enough anymore, which doesn't happen to me with the other good RPGs. Or my memory fails me and I should play it again. ;-)

That's why I said "character writing" rather than just "writing."  The joinable NPCs in the sequel were far more interesting and compelling than anything I've seen from Bioware.  They got the story a little too lost in the nuance, though.  A guy called "Scorchy" did an epic "Let's Play" thread on KotOR2 on the SomethingAwful forums a couple years ago that is worth googling-- you get to see the brilliance of the character writing without sinking another 40 hours into the game. 

[Mnemnosyne]

Bibdy wrote...

Koyasha wrote...

Actually here's a really good example that I just came across. A certain tree asks of me a boon at one point. If I ask it what it wants and agree to do it, the rest of my conversation options are gone. I can't ask any of my questions about anything else. I can ask the questions first, then agree to do what he wants, but I can't do it the other way around. Why? There doesn't seem to be any good reason for this. We're still on good terms, I'm going to do what he wants, and it's not a task that is so time-sensitive he can't spend a few minutes talking about other things first. However, my options to ask him questions go away when I agree to do what he wants.

That's generally because those questions pertain to the item itself, giving you more story about the item and more information to digest to help you make a decision.

If the dialogue option was "Why should I help you?", and the response is a spiel about..well, why you should help them, why would that dialogue show up AFTER you've already agreed to help them?

Very often, such as in the conversation I'm speaking of, the questions do not pertain to the item but to other general questions.  In this case, questions about the person I'm taking to (not related to the request), about the area I'm in, and about another quest I'm on that's not directly related to the request being made of me.  Logic suggests it would be easier to get people to help you and give you information after you've agreed to do what they want, but in this and numerous other cases it's not true - you agree to do what they want and you can no longer even ask them about the other things you wanted to know about.
Now I'll note that by and large, I don't have issues with most of the conversations in the game that I've come across, but every once in a while there are ones that irk me because you only get to ask or say one thing out of several options, and very often with no warning that you will not be able to ask the other questions, because there's no reason to suspect that the other conversation options will become unavailable to you.