833 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

I like the cinematics and voiced PC. They're not perfect, no, but neither was the silent protagonist of previous games.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

David Gaider wrote...

wsandista wrote...
Yeah what really confuses me is how they seem to think that if they just tweak the Voiced PC things will get better, when the voiced PC is the problem.

The use of a voiced PC is fundamental to our design. Yes, it comes with disadvantages, but so does a silent PC... and, in our opinion, the silent PC works less well with cinematics... which is also a fundamental part of our design. Seeing as that's the case, we'll embrace the advantages that a voiced PC offers. We'll certainly tweak our approach, and feel free to make suggestions to that effect, but what we won't do is mitigate those advantages by trying to appeal to people for whom the voiced PC is a non-starter.

So if your preference is a silent PC and/or a lack of cinematics, that's fine-- but it's not a conversation that's going to go anywhere. There's really no need for confusion on that front.

And here's my suggestion as starting point.
1. Please focus the camera to one that talks and not the one that listens, It made me feel like I'm watching my PC instead of conversing.

2. Please keep auto-dialogue minimum. Although I can see it's advantages, too many auto-dialgues disconnect me from my character as I feel I no longer has the control. However, I think endgame final speech is vital as auto-dialogue option because it's ineffective to  rely on player's input. 

3. The purple mask icon tonal tones. To my understanding, it's meant sarcasm. The wiki refer it as humorous. And that's precise how NPC react to it. It's confusing. I intended to to create a snarky character. Something like Fenris sarcastically comment Merril. Fenris has calm voice and yet sharp enough to make his point. Somehow I couldn't pull it right with purple mask icon because the NPC keep thinking Hawke was joking. A separate tonal icon may help?

4. PC tends to sweep everything under the rug after few minutes. For example Leandra died. Hawke sad. She went out and immediately she's change into a gleeful person. It bothers me because it directly conflict with how I perceive my character. I have heard something about emoticon. Would it be feasible to implement such feature?

[TEWR]

David Gaider wrote...

 We'll certainly tweak our approach, and feel free to make suggestions to that effect, but what we won't do is mitigate those advantages by trying to appeal to people for whom the voiced PC is a non-starter.

To start, I am a supporter of the voiced protagonist. And I'm going to suggest what I think would help, but because I don't understand how a game is actually developed beyond resource limitations and collaborative discussion between employees in all fields -- meaning I don't understand the actual mechanics and such -- I don't know how valid some of these will be. Number 2 especially, because I've begun to have some doubts about it in the past few weeks.

But I make these suggestions not only because I want to help, but because I want to learn so I can make better informed suggestions in the future.

1) The less autodialog there is the better. I'm not sure why, but there's just something about the dominant tone autodialog thingy that rubs me the wrong way. I can't explain why, but it's just.... odd. Perhaps it's simply because it's autodialog, rather then the way the autodialog is said.

2) A refinement to the idea of of the specialized options available. I've made a suggestion in the past where I thought that instead of certain options being available to a certain subset of the PC -- meaning aggressive gets aggressive -- that they should be numerically tallied. And if you chose enough of a certain type of response, you could choose a special option available like that. To explain a bit better because it may come off as saying the same thing as what's currently done: If I choose 5 aggressive/direct responses but I'm predominantly snarky, I can still access a special aggressive option that requires the PC to have picked 5 aggressive/direct responses in the past.

3) A better understanding of what my PC is going to say. There is a middle ground between knowing what the PC is going to say and still allowing paraphrases. For me anyway, because of how I play a game. But I understand that how I play is not how other people play, so this may not work for everyone. But I would enjoy being able to have the full line of dialogue appear at the top of the screen when I highlight a paraphrase, prior to me actually picking it. Or alternatively, having the dialogue list from DAO but retain the tone icons from DAII and have the tones off to the side of the list.

4) Perhaps more options? Or maybe separate the 6 responses tied to the 3 personalities into being their own choices? So instead of having 3 choices per conversation you have 6, even if they still affect the dominant tone. But that'd end up costing far too many resources, I imagine. So I harbor no illusions that it will happen.

Hmm.... that's about all I can think of.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 mai 2012 - 03:40 .

[In Exile]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
And here's my suggestion as starting point.
1. Please focus the camera to one that talks and not the one that listens, It made me feel like I'm watching my PC instead of conversing.

Or don't, because I spent a lot of time crafting my PC, and I love to see my PC interact with the game world. It's what makes RPGs fun, because it's my character up there.

3. The purple mask icon tonal tones. To my understanding, it's meant sarcasm. The wiki refer it as humorous. And that's precise how NPC react to it. It's confusing. I intended to to create a snarky character. Something like Fenris sarcastically comment Merril. Fenris has calm voice and yet sharp enough to make his point. Somehow I couldn't pull it right with purple mask icon because the NPC keep thinking Hawke was joking. A separate tonal icon may help?

I don't think it was ever meant to be sarcastic, we just called it that on the forums.

4. PC tends to sweep everything under the rug after few minutes. For example Leandra died. Hawke sad. She went out and immediately she's change into a gleeful person. It bothers me because it directly conflict with how I perceive my character. I have heard something about emoticon. Would it be feasible to implement such feature?

That's a bigger issue than VO. Bioware's improving on actually letting the PC react in-game things... but we're still closer to shrugging off the murder of everyone we love because there are darkspawn to kill than we are to actual emotional reactions.

[dragonflight288]

Nice list Etheral...although I don't know how #2 would work out...maybe still be predominantly snarky, but if you do enough aggressive choices within that single conversation, you can have the special dialogue option for that one conversation alone. That way we would have some pretty dramatic party discussions, especially if we disagree with the party member in question, but still be overall snarky the rest of the time.

[In Exile]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

3) A better understanding of what my PC is going to say. There is a middle ground between knowing what the PC is going to say and still allowing paraphrases. For me anyway, because of how I play a game. But I understand that how I play is not how other people play, so this may not work for everyone. But I would enjoy being able to have the full line of dialogue appear at the top of the screen when I highlight a paraphrase, prior to me actually picking it. Or alternatively, having the dialogue list from DAO but retain the tone icons from DAII and have the tones off to the side of the list.

The real solution is to have paraphrases that use a part of the line.

"He won't be alone" != "At least father will have company."

"Father won't be alone" = "Father will have company" .

[TEWR]

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

3) A better understanding of what my PC is going to say. There is a middle ground between knowing what the PC is going to say and still allowing paraphrases. For me anyway, because of how I play a game. But I understand that how I play is not how other people play, so this may not work for everyone. But I would enjoy being able to have the full line of dialogue appear at the top of the screen when I highlight a paraphrase, prior to me actually picking it. Or alternatively, having the dialogue list from DAO but retain the tone icons from DAII and have the tones off to the side of the list.

The real solution is to have paraphrases that use a part of the line.

"He won't be alone" != "At least father will have company."

"Father won't be alone" = "Father will have company" .

There is that as well. I'd certainly welcome that.

Choosing "I'm a Mage" as a Mage and hearing "I have friends that are Mages" was just bad.

dragonflight288 wrote...

Nice list Etheral...although I don't know how #2 would work out...maybe still be predominantly snarky, but if you do enough aggressive choices within that single conversation, you can have the special dialogue option for that one conversation alone. That way we would have some pretty dramatic party discussions, especially if we disagree with the party member in question, but still be overall snarky the rest of the time.

Thanks. In my mind, #2 would allow for better roleplaying if it could be implemented. However, I don't know if that's actually the case or not. I think your suggestion would also be pretty good, as I can't see any drawbacks to such a thing right now.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 mai 2012 - 03:57 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

In Exile wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
And here's my suggestion as starting point.
1. Please focus the camera to one that talks and not the one that listens, It made me feel like I'm watching my PC instead of conversing.

Or don't, because I spent a lot of time crafting my PC, and I love to see my PC interact with the game world. It's what makes RPGs fun, because it's my character up there.

You get to see your PC interaction when he/she started to talk. .
 

In Exile wrote...

3. The purple mask icon tonal tones. To my understanding, it's meant sarcasm. The wiki refer it as humorous. And that's precise how NPC react to it. It's confusing. I intended to to create a snarky character. Something like Fenris sarcastically comment Merril. Fenris has calm voice and yet sharp enough to make his point. Somehow I couldn't pull it right with purple mask icon because the NPC keep thinking Hawke was joking. A separate tonal icon may help?

I don't think it was ever meant to be sarcastic, we just called it that on the forums.

Then create a truly crystal clear sarcastic tonal choice. Or  bitter tone that doesn't sound like angry. If Fenris can sound the way he was then why can't my PC too?

In Exile wrote...

4. PC tends to sweep everything under the rug after few minutes. For example Leandra died. Hawke sad. She went out and immediately she's change into a gleeful person. It bothers me because it directly conflict with how I perceive my character. I have heard something about emoticon. Would it be feasible to implement such feature?

That's a bigger issue than VO. Bioware's improving on actually letting the PC react in-game things... but we're still closer to shrugging off the murder of everyone we love because there are darkspawn to kill than we are to actual emotional reactions.

There was no darkspwan in Kirwall or secured location like Castle. City, Village etc.Therefore I don't see any pressing matter that could possible cause PC to shrug off and move on instantly. Fenris lives a hard life under Tervinter Slave master. If his background influence his character as bitter and consistently reflect through his conversation, why can't my PC to be consistent bitter too? . 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 02 mai 2012 - 04:07 .

[force192]

I don't mind if there is a little bit of auto dialogue in DA3. Similar to the amount in DA2 but not as much as ME3.

[jackofalltrades456]

David Gaider wrote...

wsandista wrote...
Yeah what really confuses me is how they seem to think that if they just tweak the Voiced PC things will get better, when the voiced PC is the problem.

The use of a voiced PC is fundamental to our design. Yes, it comes with disadvantages, but so does a silent PC... and, in our opinion, the silent PC works less well with cinematics... which is also a fundamental part of our design. Seeing as that's the case, we'll embrace the advantages that a voiced PC offers. We'll certainly tweak our approach, and feel free to make suggestions to that effect, but what we won't do is mitigate those advantages by trying to appeal to people for whom the voiced PC is a non-starter.

So if your preference is a silent PC and/or a lack of cinematics, that's fine-- but it's not a conversation that's going to go anywhere. There's really no need for confusion on that front.

I have a video that shall change your opinion on the matter. You will support a silent protagonist after watching this.


To be honest, although I heavily support silent protagonists a voiced one wouldn't kill the game for me. It's the dialogue wheel I have a problem with. Ever since I first encountered it in Mass Effect, it has been torturing me with misleading paraphrases. I just want some type of preview of what I'm going to say.  Like the paraphrase being the beginning of the sentence the voiced character is going to speak.

As for auto-dialogue....

NO! I just hated watching my Hawke make a crappy joke when I wanted him to be serious or have him do a one minute speech without any control.    

[In Exile]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
You get to see your PC interaction when he/she started to talk.

My apologies. I completely misunderstood your point. I thought you were talking about a first person POV.

Right. What you're saying makes total sense. I agree.
 

Then create a truly crystal clear sarcastic tonal choice. Or  bitter tone that doesn't sound like angry. If Fenris can sound the way he was then why can't my PC too?

For the same reason we don't get to be Alistair or Sten funny in DA:O. The writers don't let the PC have that "voice".

There was no darkspwan in Kirwall or secured location like Castle. City, Village etc.Therefore I don't see any pressing matter that could possible cause PC to shrug off and move on instantly. Fenris lives a hard life under Tervinter Slave master. If his background influence his character as bitter and consistently reflect through his conversation, why can't my PC to be consistent bitter too? . 

I was kidding about the fighting darkspawn bit.

My point was just that Bioware's really bad at this, and it isn't so much about VO as it is about Bioware's design approach as a whole.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

In Exile wrote...


For the same reason we don't get to be Alistair or Sten funny in DA:O. The writers don't let the PC have that "voice".

Why don't the writers allow PC to have that "voice"?

In Exile wrote...

My point was just that Bioware's really bad at this, and it isn't so much about VO as it is about Bioware's design approach as a whole.

Thank you for addresing that. 

Can it be improved? I believe it can.  Bioware can design NPCs  well enough. We get deep well thought NPCs personality traits like Isabela ( Seductive caring ), Leliana ( Devout believer ),  Alistair ( lighthearted and righteous ) Morrigan ( chaotic dominant ) Sten ( righteous composure ) etc,, PC response and behaviour isn't much different than NPC personality traits created by BioWare. Since they already created the line spoken for PC and the conditioning associate with it. And most players don't have any problem with it. The problem only limited in presentation. Not the dialogue itself ( until paraphrase implementation). Now It's just a matter to show it in sensible manner yet flexible enough be crafted accordingly to any given situation.

How it can be designed in such manner? I'm not sure. Perhaps some indication or a series of questionaire at creator creation like Fallout New Vegas did. Just to get general idea of player personality traits. Therefore the PC could act in approriate manner when react to events and npc. I don't know if this is feasible or not. Just some silly suggestion.   

or would you like to suggest better design approach?

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 02 mai 2012 - 07:08 .

[SmokePants]

You know what? I support "autodialog" in whatever form the various BioWare teams see fit. There are so many characterization opportunities that the traditional method is simply too slow and clumsy to take advantage of. Moments where timing is critical or moments during normal gameplay that would be a bummer to halt.

I enjoyed Hawke participating in party banter. I didn't care that I wasn't in direct control of everything that came out of Shepard's mouth (though I seemed to be exercising indirect control in most cases). I appreciated Hawke's dominant tone.

These are good, novel concepts that BioWare is pioneering and it's just a shame that they can't be left to innovate without having people trapped in the late 90's beating down their door with pitchforks and torches.

[AkiKishi]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Thank you for addresing that. 

Can it be improved? I believe it can.  Bioware can design NPCs  well enough. We get deep well thought NPCs personality traits like Isabela ( Seductive caring ), Leliana ( Devout believer ),  Alistair ( lighthearted and righteous ) Morrigan ( chaotic dominant ) Sten ( righteous composure ) etc,, PC response and behaviour isn't much different than NPC personality traits created by BioWare. Since they already created the line spoken for PC and the conditioning associate with it. And most players don't have any problem with it. The problem only limited in presentation. Not the dialogue itself ( until paraphrase implementation). Now It's just a matter to show it in sensible manner yet flexible enough be crafted accordingly to any given situation.

How it can be designed in such manner? I'm not sure. Perhaps some indication or a series of questionaire at creator creation like Fallout New Vegas did. Just to get general idea of player personality traits. Therefore the PC could act in approriate manner when react to events and npc. I don't know if this is feasible or not. Just some silly suggestion.   

or would you like to suggest better design approach?

NPCs are fixed, the PC is an unknown. At best Bioware can give you the tools to create a PC of your own. The only way to create a fully fleshed PC is to do it JRPG style and do away with the player agency of creation.

Fallout NV's personality creator only determined your skills from what I saw, although it may have given a springboard for a personality type too.

Better how ? If you want a PC that is fully intergrated into the story, then JRPG is the way to go. Of course there are many JRPGs already and few CRPGs and I don't really want to lose that, even if there are certain things that can be taken from JRPGs.

The core problem is one of psychology. If the player feels they own the character, then they expect the character to act in a certain manner. When the game does not reflect this, there is disconnect. In the case of voicing, you may expect the line to come out one way, the director/voice actor will have other ideas.
In a JRPG I might be playing Tidus, but I'm under no illusion that Tidus is me, or that I have any control over his personality. Therefore disconect is never an issue.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 02 mai 2012 - 09:31 .

[AkiKishi]

SmokePants wrote...

You know what? I support "autodialog" in whatever form the various BioWare teams see fit. There are so many characterization opportunities that the traditional method is simply too slow and clumsy to take advantage of. Moments where timing is critical or moments during normal gameplay that would be a bummer to halt.

I enjoyed Hawke participating in party banter. I didn't care that I wasn't in direct control of everything that came out of Shepard's mouth (though I seemed to be exercising indirect control in most cases). I appreciated Hawke's dominant tone.

These are good, novel concepts that BioWare is pioneering and it's just a shame that they can't be left to innovate without having people trapped in the late 90's beating down their door with pitchforks and torches.

People like certain things, you can't really blame them for fighting for those things ,even if they may hold back other aspects. Familiarity is comforting, the unknown is scary, and well unknown..
I'm fine with autodialogue as long as the game is not trying to sell me the idea of the character being mine. If that is the idea they are trying to sell, then thats what I expect.

For example in the game I'm currently playing there is a scene where an NPC has his sword to an enemies throat and the protagonist steps in and stops him. In a CRPG I expect that to be a choice if my character did that, that would be very bad since had I been in that situation I'd have been the one doing the killing. In the grand scheme of things it does not matter because said character dies shortly after in an entertaining manner, but that's the sort of difference between pure cinematic and choice.
A Dragon Age 2 example would be Bethany. I would have reduced Kirkwall to ashes rather than go along with that, but the game never gave me the option, and I felt railroaded as a result.

Good is a matter of perspective I guess, but there is nothing novel about the idea of a PC talking on his/her own.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 02 mai 2012 - 09:46 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

BobSmith101 wrote...

NPCs are fixed, the PC is an unknown. At best Bioware can give you the tools to create a PC of your own. The only way to create a fully fleshed PC is to do it JRPG style and do away with the player agency of creation.

Fallout NV's personality creator only determined your skills from what I saw, although it may have given a springboard for a personality type too.

Better how ? If you want a PC that is fully intergrated into the story, then JRPG is the way to go. Of course there are many JRPGs already and few CRPGs and I don't really want to lose that, even if there are certain things that can be taken from JRPGs.

The core problem is one of psychology. If the player feels they own the character, then they expect the character to act in a certain manner. When the game does not reflect this, there is disconnect. In the case of voicing, you may expect the line to come out one way, the director/voice actor will have other ideas.
In a JRPG I might be playing Tidus, but I'm under no illusion that Tidus is me, or that I have any control over his personality. Therefore disconect is never an issue.

We already drifted into JRPG's terrority with cinematic approach. And BioWare is right. Silent protagonist could not work for cinematic approach. Because we see everything. The interaction, facial expression, body laguange etc.. Everything is front of us. It won't do any good to use silent protagonist. BioWare wants to use this approach. But they also want the player to create their own character. Now this where the headache is. No one ever done that before. Not in 3 decades of gaming. Every cinematic games, be it interactive movie or action, and JRPG integrated  fixed protagonist in their story, Every single one of them.

I completely understand your point. I would like to create my own character too. However, the current design used by DA 2 is a big mess as it was stuck in the middle of fix protagonist and player created character and nowhere to go. So we may as well just suggest how to fix it  in order to get back player agency and character agency. 

The thing I suggest relates to cinematic behavior of PC. Things that we do not control as it is under cutscene. So I would want player themselves to define it's behaviour indirectly through character creation to better show PC's behaviour during cutscene. Otherwise we'll would never be able to influence our cinematic experience even if it doesn't fit our character. PC shrug off and move on completely disregard past encounter/events in cutscene is bad design  It doesn't reflect consistent personality and may conflict with the one we created for gameplay.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 02 mai 2012 - 10:27 .

[ReallyRue]

I'm fine with the level of autodialogue that's in DA2, especially because it's tone-dependant, rather than just the same for everyone, so there's less chance of it being out of character. So long as they don't go overboard (like in ME3), I don't mind.

One thing I really like about it though, is the main character participating in party banter, and their comments changing depending on their 'personality'. I'd love to see more of that in the next game.

[AkiKishi]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
We already drifted into JRPG's terrority with cinematic approach. And BioWare is right. Silent protagonist could not work for cinematic approach. Because we see everything. The interaction, facial expression, body laguange etc.. Everything is front of us. It won't do any good to use silent protagonist. BioWare wants to use this approach. But they also want the player to create their own character. Now this where the headache is. No one ever done that before. Not in 3 decades of gaming. Every cinematic games, be it interactive movie or action, and JRPG integrated  fixed protagonist in their story, Every single one of them.

I completely understand your point. I would like to create my own character too. However, the current design used by DA 2 is a big mess as it was stuck in the middle of fix protagonist and player created character and nowhere to go. So we may as well just suggest how to fix it  in order to get back player agency and character agency. 

The thing I suggest relates to cinematic behavior of PC. Things that we do not control as it is under cutscene. So I would want player themselves to define it's behaviour indirectly through character creation to better show PC's behaviour during cutscene. Otherwise we'll would never be able to influence our cinematic experience even if it doesn't fit our character. PC shrug off and move on completely disregard past encounter/events in cutscene is bad design  It doesn't reflect consistent personality and may conflict with the one we created for gameplay.

While there is nothing stopping this in theory In practice it would take a lot of time and a lot of money. The big advantage JRPGs have in cinematic terms is you are telling a scripted story with very few unknowns. In a CRPG you have to cover various possible outcomes which leads to a huge ammount of waste, that an individual player will never see unless they replay the game numerous times.

The problem with being in the middle is you have people pulling from different directions. My method would be to do away with illusion that the character is yours and just allow the player to direct the action. Deus Ex:HR does this. Adam is fixed, he's got his personality, but the player can still choose the direction, both in speech and in gameplay.
At the same time you never expect Adam to say something when he says something else, because, well .. he's Adam.
While that model would be my ideal, it would not be something everyone could accept.
Key things would obviously be a fixed character. A fixed character would have to have a fixed gender (or a lot of extra changes to allow for it). Obviously if you made Adam female, it changes the dynamic of the story when it comes to Megan.

To me DX:HR is the perfect melding of JRPG cinematic and CRPG freedom of choice. The sacrifice being I can't create my own character in the story, or choose what he looks like. But given my experience in DA2 and how trivial that ended up being. It's something I could live with.

[Cantina]

The auto dialogue made my head hurt. Moreover, I caught myself swearing sometimes, because my character said something that I had no control over saying. The game just took whatever personality I had and used it. Well if you are going to auto speak for my character why the hell give me a dialogue wheel to begin with.

Here are some examples that bugged me:

The Quest “Faith” (Returning to the Grand Cleric)

The auto dialogue said, “Sister Nightingale says you must leave Kirkwall.”

Then when I watched on Youtube the humorous auto dialogue, I would have preferred saying that to her or the aggressive choice. My character is not serious and sometimes not nice to the Grand Cleric.


The Last Straw (The final speech)

Would have been nice for the wheel to pop up and give you a choice on which speech you want to give.

Diplomatic Speech

Humorous Speech

Aggressive Speech

Sure, I like being a diplomatic/helpful Hawke, but when it comes to times like these, I like the option to choose something different and not have it chosen for me.


The other pet peeve of mine was dialogue you chose did not always come out what was shown.

During the Anders conversations, these were apparent.

I click on “I’ll always be here for you” and it comes “We got rid of Ser Alrik right? Meradith will look downright reasonable in comparison.” Wait what? I did not want Hawke to say that, I wanted her to say something similar to what I chose. Besides how does the dialogue she just said coincide with what I was shown?! In addition, how is that line even remotely romantic!

Now if it was written on the wheel something to the effect of “Getting rid of Meredith will be easy.” Then it would have made the speaking dialogue make sense. Still not romantic though.

I also dislike it when I got the option to say, “I love you” to Anders, Hawke would say something other than that. Then when the option was shown to say, “I don’t want to lose you” it comes out “I love you.”

I get that Bioware is not going back to the Origins dialogue box. But at least when Hawke says something it should be a close match up of what is in the wheel. Do anything other then that makes it so damn confusing and having to reload a previous save before the conversation.

Modifié par Cantina, 02 mai 2012 - 01:09 .

[brushyourteeth]

Cantina wrote...

The other pet peeve of mine was dialogue you chose did not always come out what was shown.

During the Anders conversations, these were apparent.

I click on “I’ll always be here for you” and it comes “We got rid of Ser Alrik right? Meradith will look downright reasonable in comparison.” Wait what? I did not want Hawke to say that, I wanted her to say something similar to what I chose. Besides how does the dialogue she just said coincide with what I was shown?! In addition, how is that line even remotely romantic!

Now if it was written on the wheel something to the effect of “Getting rid of Meredith will be easy.” Then it would have made the speaking dialogue make sense. Still not romantic though.

I also dislike it when I got the option to say, “I love you” to Anders, Hawke would say something other than that. Then when the option was shown to say, “I don’t want to lose you” it comes out “I love you.”

I get that Bioware is not going back to the Origins dialogue box. But at least when Hawke says something it should be a close match up of what is in the wheel. Do anything other then that makes it so damn confusing and having to reload a previous save before the conversation.

Yup.

I realize Bioware has already committed to fixing this for DAIII - but this is really the best example I've seen on the forums so far of exactly what needs to be fixed.

[AkiKishi]

That's a problem with paraphrasing more than autodialogue. You expect something but the character says something completely different.

While I'd champion DX:HR and it's intent words (with full dialogue if you hover over it) having already copied DX's endings in ME3, that would give people who don't like DA3 lot's of free ammo.

I'm in broad agreement with Mike Laidlaw on this <shock> I can read a lot faster than the VA can deliver the line, so if I've already read it, hearing it read just takes time. For most of DX:HR the one word was enough to direct the conversation.

[brushyourteeth]

BobSmith101 wrote...

That's a problem with paraphrasing more than autodialogue. You expect something but the character says something completely different.

While I'd champion DX:HR and it's intent words (with full dialogue if you hover over it) having already copied DX's endings in ME3, that would give people who don't like DA3 lot's of free ammo.

I'm in broad agreement with Mike Laidlaw on this <shock> I can read a lot faster than the VA can deliver the line, so if I've already read it, hearing it read just takes time. For most of DX:HR the one word was enough to direct the conversation.

I've never played DX but their system sounded pretty tidy to me. Hover if you want to read the full dialogue, click on ahead if you don't - no one's forced to have the gameplay slowed down, but if they want to know what's coming before they make their selection they have that option available.

Nothing about that (to me) negates the effectiveness of the voice actor. It's simply an optional feature for those of us who are control freaks.

And as far as Bioware taking flack for drawing inspiration from another game's mechanics goes, as long as it's actually an improvement I don't think anyone should disapprove.

[AkiKishi]

brushyourteeth wrote...
I've never played DX but their system sounded pretty tidy to me. Hover if you want to read the full dialogue, click on ahead if you don't - no one's forced to have the gameplay slowed down, but if they want to know what's coming before they make their selection they have that option available.

Nothing about that (to me) negates the effectiveness of the voice actor. It's simply an optional feature for those of us who are control freaks.

And as far as Bioware taking flack for drawing inspiration from another game's mechanics goes, as long as it's actually an improvement I don't think anyone should disapprove.

You have to be a bit quick to pause it, but you can see how it shows one word, then more if you leave it hovering. For most of the game the one word is enough. Adam is Adam, it's not like there is a wrong answer. Not sure how that would work for more open character generation.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 02 mai 2012 - 02:31 .

[brushyourteeth]

BobSmith101 wrote...



You have to be a bit quick to pause it, but you can see how it shows one word, then more if you leave it hovering. For most of the game the one word is enough. Adam is Adam, it's not like there is a wrong answer. Not sure how that would work for more open character generation.

Wow - I really like that. The only thing I would change would be to have the marker hover for a second or two before displaying the full text. For players who are unsure about which path they want to take but aren't interested in previewing the complete dialogue.

It's probably because I'm a lit. nerd, but rather than being annoyed at reading the text and then hearing it, I'd be really interested in seeing how the VA chose to act it. I mean, just think of how many different ways you can say "thanks" just with voice inflection alone. There's no need for that to be considered redundant.

[AkiKishi]

brushyourteeth wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...



You have to be a bit quick to pause it, but you can see how it shows one word, then more if you leave it hovering. For most of the game the one word is enough. Adam is Adam, it's not like there is a wrong answer. Not sure how that would work for more open character generation.

Wow - I really like that. The only thing I would change would be to have the marker hover for a second or two before displaying the full text. For players who are unsure about which path they want to take but aren't interested in previewing the complete dialogue.

It's probably because I'm a lit. nerd, but rather than being annoyed at reading the text and then hearing it, I'd be really interested in seeing how the VA chose to act it. I mean, just think of how many different ways you can say "thanks" just with voice inflection alone. There's no need for that to be considered redundant.

In the case of DX:HR since there is no way you can play Adam wrong, most of the time that one word is enough. Works better than tone too since it's directly related to the nature of the response.
When it comes to the speech challenges, the seeing the full text helps you to figure out the best response for that persons personality.

Best of both worlds in my book. Most of the time I want to hear Adam act. But sometimes I need to have more detail. DA2 really double fails on this.

Depending on the hover time Mike Laidlaw might even be able to get on board with this one, there is nothing at all that requires you to see the full text unless you want it.