833 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
It would be great David if the choices you get to make really made an impact to how the story in regards to your companions evolves. DA2 was much more preset than DAO in regards to companions.

Is that what you meant by your reply?

I'm actually not certain how you're connecting companion evolution to the amount of auto-dialog, to be honest. So I guess my response would be, no, that's not at all what I meant by my reply.

[David Gaider]

bEVEsthda wrote...
You do your job, of course, but do you like this better? Now that you get to narrate and serve your stories in greater detail, rather than leaving space for the player?

I'm not sure there's a response I could give you which you would appreciate. The implication behind your question is that someone would have to be forced to implement dialog in this manner, since nobody could like it otherwise? Which may not be what you intended, but that's certainly how it sounds.

I see benefit in both approaches. I like a silent protaganist just fine. I think it works less well in a fully-cinematic game-- which itself I also consider not a necessity but a different approach-- and, if anything, I think it's half-measures that hamper a game. Either approach works for an RPG, and I suspect most fans who try to sell one or the other as necessary-for-RPGness actually mean necessary-for-Dragon Age because that's the expectation built from DAO. Which is fair; we change the formula at our own risk. Regardless, there's lots of things we're likely to change... but our basic approach is not one of them. If that's a deal-breaker for someone, then they should consider themselves duly informed-- especially since we've never implied otherwise-- though I would suggest waiting until we show what we're actually working on, and how we're going about it, before someone jumps to conclusions.

It goes without saying, however, that no matter what we do it's hardly going to magically satisfy everyone.

[slashthedragon]

Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

[AkiKishi]

slashthedragon wrote...

Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

Mike Laidlaw does not like it. It's very unlikely to happen.

Having read what Dave just wrote It looks like we are more or less on the same page about characters and cinematics.

[bEVEsthda]

David Gaider wrote...
[I'm not sure there's a response I could give you which you would appreciate.

Seems you managed.
Of course, I didn't get any answers to the questions (which is 'why' basically) we have never got any kind of answers to. So that wasn't expected anyway.

[slashthedragon]

BobSmith101 wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...

Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

Mike Laidlaw does not like it. It's very unlikely to happen.

Having read what Dave just wrote It looks like we are more or less on the same page about characters and cinematics.

Well then ML needs to come here and tell us WHY.  I bet if we did a poll (hmm maybe I will) about the paraphrasing issue, that most everyone would NOT want paraphrases.  If BW wants to get back on our good side, hey NEED to listen to us.  They say they are, but it's more like 'we hear you but....no'.

[LobselVith8]

slashthedragon wrote...

Well then ML needs to come here and tell us WHY.  I bet if we did a poll (hmm maybe I will) about the paraphrasing issue, that most everyone would NOT want paraphrases.  If BW wants to get back on our good side, hey NEED to listen to us.  They say they are, but it's more like 'we hear you but....no'.

This was addressed on Page 2. Here was Gaider's explanation about the paraphrasing:

David Gaider wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Doesn't that leave a disconnect between what the the player wants his (or her) character to say, and what the protagonist actually says? If the protagonist ends up saying entire lines of dialogue that are different than what's actually chosen, it ends up running the risk of saying something entirely different than what was intended - which was the primary problem with the paraphrasing in Dragon Age II.

Let me be frank: there is no solution which will be the catch-all that satisfies everyone. Ideally we could look at some options where the player can set preferences (the dreaded toggle), but that's not going to be an option where we are writing two or three versions of the paraphrase for every single response in the game. That would be mind-boggling. There is a point where we're going to have to pick a route and try to implement it in the best way we can.

Again, this is something that we'll have to eventually show to convey our meaning, but we've some options. They all have their benefits and drawbacks-- and, yes, I agree not everyone is going to like them all equally, but then again y'all are hardly interchangeable.

[AkiKishi]

slashthedragon wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...

Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

Mike Laidlaw does not like it. It's very unlikely to happen.

Having read what Dave just wrote It looks like we are more or less on the same page about characters and cinematics.

Well then ML needs to come here and tell us WHY.  I bet if we did a poll (hmm maybe I will) about the paraphrasing issue, that most everyone would NOT want paraphrases.  If BW wants to get back on our good side, hey NEED to listen to us.  They say they are, but it's more like 'we hear you but....no'.

His answer was along the lines of he did not like hearing repeated what he had already read.

As long as DA3 makes it clear that I'm playing a character they created I won't care about paraphrasing. It does not bother me in DX:HR at all. Where it does bother me is when I'm trying to play a character and having to guess what they might say. If I'm supposed to be the character, then it is beyond stupid.

[Sylvianus]

I'm currently replaying M1. And I can now say why I liked the auto-dialogue in M3. ( or why it didn't bother me )

In M1 I felt that Shepard doesn't really talk much in its interactions. He says something, the NPC, answers him, he says another sentence and that's it. It is as if it was interrupted. With a silent protagonist, it doesn't bother me, but with a voiced protagonist, it's a bit odd. ( doesn't bother me if we keep that style though )

In M3, shepard has a real personality, he speaks much more, the interactions are much more dynamic and organic, it was more alive. More opportunity to discover the personalities of our companions who interact with him, since they talk more between them. Like Liara or Garrus.

However, what M3 did wrong was that it chose for us who we could love or not, etc. It was also maybe too much.

It should be measured as well, but I think a bit of auto-dialogue also has a positive side. At least for a voiced protagonist.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 avril 2012 - 05:35 .

[the_one_54321]

Sylvianus wrote...
In M3, shepard has a real personality,

And you don't get to decide what that personality is. Trade-off.

[slashthedragon]

social.bioware.com/3649721/polls/31334/

Poll, please vote.

[Sylvianus]

Yes, that's why I said it was too much. But a bit of auto-dialogue could be a good thing for me.

[MyKingdomCold]

Unless they go the route of a silent protagonist, which I don't think will happen, I think there will have to be some auto-dialogue. Unless, of course, you want them to stop the game every time so you can choose what lines to say.

[bEVEsthda]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
In M3, shepard has a real personality,

And you don't get to decide what that personality is. Trade-off.

Not a trade off at all. It's watching a movie. If you feel the voiced protagonist is more 'interesting' or 'alive', you're watching a movie. You may "define" caring for the hero in that movie as 'role playing' until you get blue in the face. It's still watching an interactive movie. I'm not saying some people may not love that, or that it's objectively bad, but that's what it is.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 04 avril 2012 - 05:37 .

[David Gaider]

slashthedragon wrote...
Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

I understand there's a lot of people in this thread who have expressed that desire, but please understand that doesn't mean it's by any means universal. That it's not universal doesn't mean your opinions are irrelevant, but there may only be so much we can do that would actually address the concern.

Insofar as what I feel about the subject, I'd suggest reading some of my comments in this thread. There are still many things which are open to change with regards to our approach-- but the basic premise is not one of them.

[the_one_54321]

bEVEsthda wrote...
Not a trade off at all. It's watching a movie. If you feel the voiced protagonist is more 'interesting' or 'alive', you're watching a movie. You may "define" caring for the hero in that movie as 'role playing' until you get blue in the face. It's still watching an interactive movie. I'm not saying some people may not love that, or that it's objectively bad, but that's what it is.

You trade a better presentation for your ability to control that presentation...

[slashthedragon]

David Gaider wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...
Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

I understand there's a lot of people in this thread who have expressed that desire, but please understand that doesn't mean it's by any means universal. That it's not universal doesn't mean your opinions are irrelevant, but there may only be so much we can do that would actually address the concern.

Insofar as what I feel about the subject, I'd suggest reading some of my comments in this thread. There are still many things which are open to change with regards to our approach-- but the basic premise is not one of them.

I just don't understand.  DA:O, the more popular of the two DA games, had full sentences. 
If it's an issue of resources or something, then just tell us that.
If it's that you are trying to lure in a new player base, that is just spitting on current fans and RPG fans.
If it's just because one or two people in the company like it, then that's just insane.
People are already saying they won't preorder until they know is done right in the game.  Maybe BW doesn't think these forums are representative of the consumer base they want.  If so, then you might as well just shut down these forums.

[AkiKishi]

slashthedragon wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...
Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

I understand there's a lot of people in this thread who have expressed that desire, but please understand that doesn't mean it's by any means universal. That it's not universal doesn't mean your opinions are irrelevant, but there may only be so much we can do that would actually address the concern.

Insofar as what I feel about the subject, I'd suggest reading some of my comments in this thread. There are still many things which are open to change with regards to our approach-- but the basic premise is not one of them.

I just don't understand.  DA:O, the more popular of the two DA games, had full sentences. 
If it's an issue of resources or something, then just tell us that.
If it's that you are trying to lure in a new player base, that is just spitting on current fans and RPG fans.
If it's just because one or two people in the company like it, then that's just insane.
People are already saying they won't preorder until they know is done right in the game.  Maybe BW doesn't think these forums are representative of the consumer base they want.  If so, then you might as well just shut down these forums.

Same reason that Fallout/New Vegas etc. does Silent Protagonist. I'm trying to think of a voiced game that uses full sentences but I'm coming up empty. Either because I can't remember having played one, or because there are none.

[bEVEsthda]

the_one_54321 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
Not a trade off at all. It's watching a movie. If you feel the voiced protagonist is more 'interesting' or 'alive', you're watching a movie. You may "define" caring for the hero in that movie as 'role playing' until you get blue in the face. It's still watching an interactive movie. I'm not saying some people may not love that, or that it's objectively bad, but that's what it is.

You trade a better presentation for your ability to control that presentation...

The better presentation is only relevant if you're watching a movie.
But OK, tradeoff. You trade watching a movie for your ability to 'role play' (as some people define it).

[David Gaider]

slashthedragon wrote...
I just don't understand.  DA:O, the more popular of the two DA games, had full sentences. 
If it's an issue of resources or something, then just tell us that.
If it's that you are trying to lure in a new player base, that is just spitting on current fans and RPG fans.
If it's just because one or two people in the company like it, then that's just insane.
People are already saying they won't preorder until they know is done right in the game.  Maybe BW doesn't think these forums are representative of the consumer base they want.  If so, then you might as well just shut down these forums.

That's a rather all-or-nothing attitude, with which I'm afraid I can't agree-- even if I see the sentiment behind it. DAO was not necessarily more popular solely because it had a silent protaganist or full sentences instead of paraphrases on its interface. And "spitting" on RPG fans because we're changing our approach to the dialogue-- as if there were no overlap in the fans, or nobody who likes RPG's could possibly like what we're doing-- is rather misleading.

I'm happy to listen to what people are suggesting. As I've said before, there's numerous permutations which such an approach can take. If someone is dead set against the very concept of it, however, then there's not much of a conversation to be had. These forums are open to people with a wide range of opinions even so, as should be clear from any conversation on a given topic, so I don't see the need to shut them down.

I appreciate your passion, regardless. Hopefully you'll take part in the conversation as it develops, and see something of value in where we're going.

[David Gaider]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
I felt that in DA2 a lot of companion interaction was connected to auto-dialog. The choises you had to interact with your character were very limited unlike the ones in DAO. The auto dialog triggered in scenes when you're interacting with your companions were few and you had no real control over it.

My question would be will there be more influence in the dialog with your companions.

Then I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're referring. The choices with followers were not more limited, from where I'm sitting, and certainly had nothing to do with the interface... and I don't recall there being auto-dialog in the follower relationships, at least insofar as I understand what most people here are calling auto-dialog.

So I think we may be talking about two different things. Sorry.

[slashthedragon]

David Gaider wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...
I just don't understand.  DA:O, the more popular of the two DA games, had full sentences. 
If it's an issue of resources or something, then just tell us that.
If it's that you are trying to lure in a new player base, that is just spitting on current fans and RPG fans.
If it's just because one or two people in the company like it, then that's just insane.
People are already saying they won't preorder until they know is done right in the game.  Maybe BW doesn't think these forums are representative of the consumer base they want.  If so, then you might as well just shut down these forums.

That's a rather all-or-nothing attitude, with which I'm afraid I can't agree-- even if I see the sentiment behind it. DAO was not necessarily more popular solely because it had a silent protaganist or full sentences instead of paraphrases on its interface. And "spitting" on RPG fans because we're changing our approach to the dialogue-- as if there were no overlap in the fans, or nobody who likes RPG's could possibly like what we're doing-- is rather misleading.

I'm happy to listen to what people are suggesting. As I've said before, there's numerous permutations which such an approach can take. If someone is dead set against the very concept of it, however, then there's not much of a conversation to be had. These forums are open to people with a wide range of opinions even so, as should be clear from any conversation on a given topic, so I don't see the need to shut them down.

I appreciate your passion, regardless. Hopefully you'll take part in the conversation as it develops, and see something of value in where we're going.

But isn't BW dead set against going back to full lines?
The only middle ground I could see was if what the paraphrase says and what comes out of the PC's mouth is what you would expect.  Too many times in DA:2 the paraphrase made you think 'x' was going to be said but then the PC says 'y'.  That is just inexcusable.

[Cultist]

David Gaider wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...
Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

I understand there's a lot of people in this thread who have expressed that desire, but please understand that doesn't mean it's by any means universal. That it's not universal doesn't mean your opinions are irrelevant, but there may only be so much we can do that would actually address the concern.

Insofar as what I feel about the subject, I'd suggest reading some of my comments in this thread. There are still many things which are open to change with regards to our approach-- but the basic premise is not one of them.

After DA2 disaster and ME3 ending controversity people are already suspicious about BioWare and future products. Maybe it's time to end risky experiments and make a use of a proven approach that actually was praised by consumers?