69 réponses à ce sujet

[CarlSpackler]

Rojahar wrote...



Honestly, I can't see how it could hurt Bioware to keep this kind of feedback in mind. I think these are helpful suggestions.

1. The codex does end up making the game pretty lame to anyone who doesn't bother reading it. I'm fine with a codex being in the game, but I think they'd reach people much better and tell their stories in a better way if they didn't RELY on the codex to communicate story, character and setting information.

2. OP doesn't seem to be suggesting the removal of investigate, but that the writers should write as if there was no investigate so that they don't rely so heavily on it. I think the other suggestions though would help make interaction with NPCs more engaging though. The predictable "time to ask all the investigates" could... be better.

3. I'm pretty sure Bioware's done this one before, because I've played one of their games (either DA2 or ME2/3, or maybe it was in all of them, or none, I can't recall) and noted to myself how much I liked using the player character as the knowledgable one teaching things to someone else as a sly way of informing the player without the player character seemingly like someone who always needs to be taught this and that.

Anyway, I think it's a good gimmick that Bioware should maybe utilize more, even if they do already. I think it's more character defining that you're always some ignorant who doesn't know the first thing about the very world they've lived in for their whole lives. "Hey... so... what's the deal with the Circle Tower? Why are we in here?" says the 30 year old mage who's lived there all his life.

4. If dialog is weak, then it should be strengthened, instead of just repeated over and over, counting on the fact the player is dozing in and out of attention. Quality over quantity.

It's fine to like Bioware's games and defend them, but I also think it's fine to say there's room for improvement as well. There's room for improvement in everything, and people who go to one extreme or another (saying something is all rubbish, or defending everything as perfect) don't benefit anyone.

Certainly there's always room for improvement, but not everyone agrees as to what constitutes improvement.  As for the codex, I still can't think of any crit path moment that relies on the dialogue.  It has always come across as optional, there's only so many resources they can devote to supplying in game information via dialogue and the codex is an excellent way to comminicate non-essential but lore-filling information.  Not to mention simple text in a journal is rather low-resource intensive so asking to ditch it doesn't even gain you a lot in the trade-off.

As for 2, sure make investigates better, I'm all for that.  But there seems to be something missing to me if you make a lot of the investigates completly non-essential, there are already plenty of games out there that require nothing from you to advance the plot, I certainly don't want that element removed from a Bioware game, I'd have nowhere else to turn.

3 - I really don't like this suggestion, when playing a character I create I like as much control as possible, and if my character starts soliloquizing about days I know nothing about, it really pulls me out of the game.

4 - Mixed feelings here, again most games don't have nearly enough dialogue, more meaningful dialogue sure, but honestly sometimes banal dialogue adds to the game.  most people I know have nothing but vapid exposition so to a certain sense it adds to making the world feel real.

Modifié par CarlSpackler, 20 avril 2012 - 02:14 .

[PsychoBlonde]

Maria Caliban wrote...

3. Between the all-caps words, multiple exclamation points, and poor argument, you're coming off as rather angry. People enjoying something you don't like shouldn't cause this reaction.

Oh dear.  I should clarify:

I love Dragon Age.  Both games.  And the novels.  Even though they're not timeless classics of literature.  I think they could be better--but that's true of just about everything.  One of my big passions in life is analyzing stories, so I like having the theoretical discussion even if nothing ever comes of it.  It's fun!

And I'm NOT ANGRY.  I'm JUST REALLY REALLY LOUD.

[PsychoBlonde]

CarlSpackler wrote...
3 - I really don't like this suggestion, when playing a character I create I like as much control as possible, and if my character starts soliloquizing about days I know nothing about, it really pulls me out of the game.

4 - Mixed feelings here, again most games don't have nearly enough dialogue, more meaningful dialogue sure, but honestly sometimes banal dialogue adds to the game.  most people I know have nothing but vapid exposition so to a certain sense it adds to making the world feel real.

3 can be done, and done well, if you have the PC introduce *factual* information without saying where they learned it or what events took place.  It just means that once, in the distant past, the PC actually paid attention to SOMETHING.  This can also be a great tool to use because then, when you introduce something that's supposed to be foreign to the PC's experience, it doesn't just look like everything else in the universe that the PC knows nothing about.  Doing this kind of thing is a major benefit of having a voiced protagonist, so if they're going to do the voice thing, milk it for all it's worth.

I'm not saying cut the AMOUNT of dialog.  I want the dialog to be TIGHTER so we can have *more* dialog that conveys MORE characterization and setting and exposition etc.

In general, I'd be happy if elements were A.) better integrated or B.) removed.  What I really dislike is elements that are disjointed because they're floating out there in limbo land.

Obsidian, for instance, writes boss dialog--but it's structured in more of a linear fashion so the flow is tons better.  DA2, on the other hand, has horribly discontinuous dialog, particularly if you're playing Aggressive Hawke, because the attitude changes between the Investigate options and the Angry Hawke options make Hawke sound schizophrenic.  The way the investigate options are implemented is a major reason for this problem.  

[Dejajeva]

Rojahar wrote...

CarlSpackler wrote...
3 - I really don't like this suggestion, when playing a character I create I like as much control as possible, and if my character starts soliloquizing about days I know nothing about, it really pulls me out of the game.

I'd think a character who's in the military, asking his underlings the basics of the military, or playing a mage who knows absolutely nothing about mages, is more immersion breaking. I don't see how someone who's been in the Circle their whole life knowing why they're there is somehow losing control of your character anymore than your character forcibly being someone who needs EVERYTHING explained to them, from why they're there to how to wipe their @ss.

I don't see anyone asking for the PC to go at length about detailed things, but a way to establish your character isn't some "American who doesn't know who their president is..." type of idiot. I think Filament struck the balance, when he suggested it be based off character traits. In Fallout and KOTOR2, if you had high Computer skill, for example, you'd get an extra dialog option (which you didn't have to choose) in which YOU could explain how some computer works, or join an NPC in a detailed technical conversation. In contrast, in Mass Effect, even if your Shepard is an ENGINEER, you're forced to be a complete idiot who needs to be talked down to about anything technological - the game pretty much assuming you're a jarhead soldier, no matter what.

I agree, there's no reason that say, someone from Ferelden should have something like, for example, what a Mabari is or what the Wilds are explained to them. Or that a Mage should be explained the concept of Blood Magic. I'm not saying these things are in the game, just giving examples of stuff that any basic person should know. But I assume that people playing DA3 are people who have played Origins and 2- and that may not always be the case. So I think a lot of it is put into the game to educate new players more than it's to educate the character.

[CarlSpackler]

Rojahar wrote...

I don't see anyone asking for the PC to go at length about detailed things, but a way to establish your character isn't some "American who doesn't know who their president is..." type of idiot. I think Filament struck the balance, when he suggested it be based off character traits. In Fallout and KOTOR2, if you had high Computer skill, for example, you'd get an extra dialog option (which you didn't have to choose) in which YOU could explain how some computer works, or join an NPC in a detailed technical conversation. In contrast, in Mass Effect, even if your Shepard is an ENGINEER, you're forced to be a complete idiot who needs to be talked down to about anything technological - the game pretty much assuming you're a jarhead soldier, no matter what.

Things that are based off of traits I'm ok with, I agree with the high computer skill, etc.  Ironically with Shepard he ended doing exactly the kind of talking in ME3 I do not enjoy.  As for what is immersion breaking, well different strokes for different folks.  I for one always like to err on the side what i know the pc knows.  There are far too many games the other direction.  

That being said, if the protagonist is predefined a la shepard or hawke and given a voice, I do think that gives the developer more license to have that character know certain things, surely Hawke should have known about his own family.  And if these types of circumstances are what the OP is referring to, then I don't have as much of a problem, I just loathe auto-dialogue and I when I see a suggestion about the pc informing me as a player about something, I guess thats where my mind runs to.

[PsychoBlonde]

CarlSpackler wrote...

That being said, if the protagonist is predefined a la shepard or hawke and given a voice, I do think that gives the developer more license to have that character know certain things, surely Hawke should have known about his own family.  And if these types of circumstances are what the OP is referring to, then I don't have as much of a problem, I just loathe auto-dialogue and I when I see a suggestion about the pc informing me as a player about something, I guess thats where my mind runs to.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was meaning.  It's more having the PC know basic facts about the world--like, say, that the big tree in the Elven Alienage is significant, minor stuff like that.  They might not know EVERYTHING about it, but they'll at least be AWARE of it, just like you'd pretty much expect most people to know what a skyscraper is or that a Pontiac is a brand of car.

I'd also like it if there were options where you could CHOOSE to know even more, if you, say, decided your character was the educated sort.

[Lucy Glitter]

 NEIN! THE CODEX WILL STAY STANDING. 

I love the codex... T.T

[HiroVoid]

I think I would have to skip out on a lot of dialogue on repeat playthroughs if characters talked about every single bit of codex info in DAO.  Just because it works in HL2 doesn't mean it works for every game.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 20 avril 2012 - 04:27 .

[PsychoBlonde]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

 NEIN! THE CODEX WILL STAY STANDING. 

I love the codex... T.T

I like to read the codex.  If they printed it out and called it a game manual, that'd be spiffy.  I think, in game, it gets in the way.

[Maria Caliban]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

3. Between the all-caps words, multiple exclamation points, and poor argument, you're coming off as rather angry. People enjoying something you don't like shouldn't cause this reaction.

Oh dear.  I should clarify:

I love Dragon Age.  Both games.  And the novels.  Even though they're not timeless classics of literature.  I think they could be better--but that's true of just about everything.  One of my big passions in life is analyzing stories, so I like having the theoretical discussion even if nothing ever comes of it.  It's fun!

And I'm NOT ANGRY.  I'm JUST REALLY REALLY LOUD.

This makes me happy.

[TJX2045]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

 So, The Laidlaw was talking a bit about how they really, really want to get more into the "Show, Don't Tell" ethos with the writing on The Next Thing™.  So maybe we can come up with some suggestions on how to accomplish that!

Here's some of mine:

1.  Write the game as if there's no codex.  Even better (IMO) GET RID OF THE CODEX ENTIRELY.  It's not that I dislike all the cool stories and stuff, but I think having it there is holding you guys back from really developing your ossum characteriztion and expositional abilities!

2.  Write as if there are no investigate options, and you have to convey 100% of the situational information without ever letting the player click "investigate".  Maybe even consider getting rid of the "Investigate" options entirely in favor of making those different options for the PC to approach the situation instead of just different things for the PC to ASK.  And don't ever let the player go back to the same list of questions in order to cycle through all of them.  Have situations where making a snap decision benefits you because people become irate when they're interrogated.  Stuff like that!

3.  USE THE PC FOR EXPOSITION.  The protagonist has lived in Thedas all their life.  They have to know SOMETHING about SOMETHING.  Let some of the explanations issue from the PC's mouth.  Heck, I would be absolutely floored if you did something as cool as (at least occasionally) replace the ? options with an icon that looks like a book to let the PC deliver some erudition on the topic at hand.

4. CUT CUT CUT the dialog.  When I went back to replay DA2 a couple of weeks ago, I started making notes of how many times a character will a.) say something, then b.) immediately repeat basically the same thing in a slightly different way.  I was up to, literally, DOZENS of examples JUST by the time Hawke & co got to Kirkwall.  Heck, assign an editor just to go through the dialog line by line and flag all of these repeats before they get voice-recorded, and the savings will probably be enormous.  Plus you'll have SO MUCH more air time for stuff that's NOT A REPEAT OF SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST SAID.  I realize this is generally done for emphasis, but if you feel the original statement is weak, emphasize it by fixing that statement, not by rephrasing it and saying it AGAIN. 

My thoughts on this:

1) The codex has always been there, and not having it there bothers me.  I would say put less emphasis on ridiculous amounts of entries, but the entries that focus on your PC's choices and even your life, including your LI's story intertwined with yours, were awesome to read through in my opinion.

2) I'm kind of on the fence about this.  I like the idea that they can explain everything important about the situation without you having to investigate, but getting rid of it completely is a bad idea to me.  I prefer having the numerous questions there when I want more information, but in situations where it's dire and you have to make a big decision in a small amount of time, then I'm all for the "1 or 2 questions only then decision time" style.  Skyrim did this in a few places and it felt fine without forcing me to go in with little information about how big an impact I was going to make.

3) It would be too strange for the PC to suddenly break into an outer monologue to explain the story.  If a character has to speak 2-3 paragraphs on a topic (I'm assuming it's that way since you mention the book icon as if it gives more insight like a backstory) then it's better off in the codex or being explained through your backstory choices after you create your character.

4) I've been replaying DA2 but I haven't really been paying attention to the repeating dialogue.  I can't say that I really noticed it.  Could you give me an example?  Regarding this topic though, if the character is saying the same exact thing in the dialogue but isn't trying to convince a character over something, then it does seem strange.  I can't really comment more until I go back and play DA2 and see just how similar the lines are.  I never noticed it or they weren't that much of a detractor for me if I did.

Rojahar wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I like to read the codex.  If they printed it out and called it a game manual, that'd be spiffy.

That reminds me...

I miss when games came with manuals that were basically big lore/art books, with useful reference charts.

T_T

I was wondering if I was the only one.  I hate games that use e-manuals.    We're already using up paper...the whole "going green" excuse is just another way to say "less money for us to spend".  When I'm in game, I don't want to have to go through the manual.  I never use the ME3 manual.  Mainly because I know the game and I've been with it since ME1.  But e-manuals aren't compelling to read.  They're quite meh to me.

I prefer printed out ones because while the game is installing the data to run or right before I boot up and get all immersed in the world, I can know all the gameplay controls and information right then and there so I don't have to get all excited by the boot up sequence and intro video only to have to sit on the edge of my seat for 10 minutes while I rampage through the manual.

Modifié par TJX2045, 20 avril 2012 - 06:09 .

[deuce985]

On the OP's post...I'd just like to put my 2 cents in on the codex part...

I don't agree they should get rid of it. To me, it's important because it has tons of OPTIONAL info about DA's universe if I choose to explore it.

This mean I can do it whenever I want. They don't force tons of unneeded info on you. By elmininating the codex, you're either going to have to force more info through dialogue or cut needed information to immerse yourself more in the universe.

Forcing more dialogue is not what I want. Example, play MGS4 and the entire MGS franchise. That game crams information down your throat and something that only need two sentences to explain...turns into a 5 minute cut-scene. That's what I fear DA3 will go down by slashing the codex.

I enjoy that Bioware games keep their writing focused and they only force what they need in the dialogue. At any point in the game...if I want to immerse myself more, I just open the codex to understand more. Just comes a point in time when you have too much information or too little. Bioware splitting it up for the codex is the perfect way to do it, IMO.

[G00N3R7883]

NO MORE TIMESKIPS.

Because obviously the very next thing that has to happen, is "okay, so now I need to TELL you what you missed ..."

PsychoBlonde wrote...

4. CUT CUT CUT the dialog.  When I went back to replay DA2 a couple of weeks ago, I started making notes of how many times a character will a.) say something, then b.) immediately repeat basically the same thing in a slightly different way. 

Have you played Kingdoms of Amalur? This happens on literally every quest  I agree its not necessary. I can't remember it being so blatant in DA2, but absolutely its something to be careful with.

[Sabriana]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

 NEIN! THE CODEX WILL STAY STANDING. 

I love the codex... T.T

Agreed.

[Maria Caliban]

G00N3R7883 wrote...

Have you played Kingdoms of Amalur? This happens on literally every quest

It does. Part of the problem is that there almost no conversation trees. There's no way for the game to know if the PC has heard X information previously, even when talking with the same NPC.

And NPCs will sometimes show knowledge of something prior to you telling it to them but act shocked when inform them.