131 réponses à ce sujet

[abaris]

wright1978 wrote...

I never once did that. It would be like fast forwarded through my favourite film or skipping a chapter while re-reading a book. Now in ME3 it got so bad i could have left the room firm in the knowledge i could be gone for 10 minutes and shep wouldn't give me a dialogue choice.

Yeah, I was talking about ME3 - certainly not about the first two, since there actually was something new to discover.

Nrieh wrote...

YES! I
thought I was the only one. And it didn't help that a lot of that crowd
was acting like LotSB was the holy grail of story telling or something.

LotSB
has autodialogues? Oh my, I was just going to finally get
one..probably, will still do.... But anyway. Wah may do for a DLC must
never be main-game standart, imo.

Certainly not to the extent of ME3. It might have some, but overall you can influence your dialogue options.

Modifié par abaris, 03 juin 2012 - 07:23 .

[chemiclord]

Nrieh wrote...

Well, it was YOUR choice to consider YOUR Shep something totally premade and non-personal..

Once again, fact that all Sheps fight Saren does not make them same, not even within same "aligment". Emotions, backgrounds, motives, feelings etc - it all was player's own (for those who needed it, of course, those who did not - just enjoyed their "yet-another-hero". And you can't say it's all about selling things and PR, there is no way you can prove it to those who did have their "own" Shep.

ps: You may count youself how many combinations may follow from, let's say, 3 dialogues with 3 primary and 3 optional answers each.

The point was, each game of this series pretty much follows the exact same narrative structure.  A bunch of little pre-planned choices that narrow down into one fairly large choice that doesn't really take your previous choices into account.

It seems silly to lose your mind over a structure that you had absolutely no problem with the first two times.

[lillitheris]

chemiclord wrote...

It seems silly to lose your mind over a structure that you had absolutely no problem with the first two times.

You don’t understand what the difference is even with the explanations provided, and that’s fine.

Just please understand that a huge amount of people do see a difference, regardless of how illusory you think it is.

Modifié par lillitheris, 03 juin 2012 - 07:44 .

[slimgrin]

chemiclord wrote...

Nrieh wrote...

Well, it was YOUR choice to consider YOUR Shep something totally premade and non-personal..

Once again, fact that all Sheps fight Saren does not make them same, not even within same "aligment". Emotions, backgrounds, motives, feelings etc - it all was player's own (for those who needed it, of course, those who did not - just enjoyed their "yet-another-hero". And you can't say it's all about selling things and PR, there is no way you can prove it to those who did have their "own" Shep.

ps: You may count youself how many combinations may follow from, let's say, 3 dialogues with 3 primary and 3 optional answers each.

The point was, each game of this series pretty much follows the exact same narrative structure.  A bunch of little pre-planned choices that narrow down into one fairly large choice that doesn't really take your previous choices into account.

It seems silly to lose your mind over a structure that you had absolutely no problem with the first two times.

Apparently you didn't read my post cause you just fell right in line here. This has become so predictable - an apologist's response, defending poor design whether it was there from the beginning or not. This is why Bioware makes casual games for a casual audience.

Modifié par slimgrin, 03 juin 2012 - 07:59 .

[abaris]

slimgrin wrote...

Apparently you didn't read my post cause you just fell right in line here. This has become so predictable - an apologist's response, defending poor design whether it was there from the beginning or not. This is why Bioware makes casual games for a casual audience.

Even if it was there from the beginning, a good illusion is better than no illusion. And that's what ME3 has come down to.

[wright1978]

Statistics clearly show the % of the dialogue we pick in ME3 nosedived in comparison to ME2. In mass effect 2 there was so much dialogue as to where Shep's loyalties lay which was a roleplayer's dream and yet in ME3 it is auto-dialogued that i love the scent of alliance boots polish as i lick it in the morning.

[napushenko]

were there branching dialogue choices in me 1 - 2 ?
or you just click them all anyway.

i know when i replayed it you only get different dialogue based on your decisions / sex, otherwise, there is no significant dialogue change whatsoever.

me 3 is same in that regard, maybe even more so then previous games.
only, you get less dialogue options as in clickable dialogue options.

example :
npc a offers you 5 non branching dialogue inquries. they are same no matter how much you replayed the games and they dont exactly branch.

in me 3, some of those inquries are automatic. everything else is the same.

dont try to make me 1 - 2 shining examples of branching dialogues, its not even close to that.

[abaris]

napushenko wrote...

i know when i replayed it you only get different dialogue based on your decisions / sex, otherwise, there is no significant dialogue change whatsoever.

The difference being, there was dialogue, not autodialogue.

As I said, probably noone argues there's only the illusion of choice, but an illusion gives you the feeling of being part of something, not only being taken for a ride.

[napushenko]

and please ppl, dont try to make yourself smart by whining about casualization, youre not making a point there. me series are actually the most casualized rpg-s i ever played, and i played them a lot.

that doesnt make them bad though.
but yeah, you played through oh so complex me 1 and me 2. you must feel very smart

[abaris]

napushenko wrote...

but yeah, you played through oh so complex me 1 and me 2. you must feel very smart

Given your post record, I take that with a truck load of salt.

But for the record, ME1 and 2 had more in ways of RPG than ME3 could manage on its best day. Doesn't say they were perfect. Also, there's quite a difference between character customisation for combat purposes and character exposition through dialogue. I would only call the latter RPG.

[napushenko]

abaris wrote...

napushenko wrote...

i know when i replayed it you only get different dialogue based on your decisions / sex, otherwise, there is no significant dialogue change whatsoever.

The difference being, there was dialogue, not autodialogue.

As I said, probably noone argues there's only the illusion of choice, but an illusion gives you the feeling of being part of something, not only being taken for a ride.

there was dialogue in me 3 too. it may seem that there was less of it, but i can bet that there was more clickable dialogue lines in me 3 then in me 1. 
it hasamount of me 1 & me 2 dialogue lines combined. most of it was automatic / cinematic, but there was clickable dialogue there, lets not pretend there wasnt.  it may seem so litlle because of the amount of overall cinematics though. 

[wright1978]

napushenko wrote...

abaris wrote...

napushenko wrote...

i know when i replayed it you only get different dialogue based on your decisions / sex, otherwise, there is no significant dialogue change whatsoever.

The difference being, there was dialogue, not autodialogue.

As I said, probably noone argues there's only the illusion of choice, but an illusion gives you the feeling of being part of something, not only being taken for a ride.

there was dialogue in me 3 too. it may seem that there was less of it, but i can bet that there was more clickable dialogue lines in me 3 then in me 1. 
it hasamount of me 1 & me 2 dialogue lines combined. most of it was automatic / cinematic, but there was clickable dialogue there, lets not pretend there wasnt.  it may seem so litlle because of the amount of overall cinematics though. 

I doubt it but i haven't counted it. All i can be sure of is that the % of times Shep speaks and i don't get an input has lept a hundred fold between ME1/ME2 and ME3.

[napushenko]

abaris wrote...

napushenko wrote...

but yeah, you played through oh so complex me 1 and me 2. you must feel very smart

Given your post record, I take that with a truck load of salt.

But for the record, ME1 and 2 had more in ways of RPG than ME3 could manage on its best day. Doesn't say they were perfect. Also, there's quite a difference between character customisation for combat purposes and character exposition through dialogue. I would only call the latter RPG.

i dont care how you take it.  yes, it was a bit more streamlined, and like i said, thats not a bad thing because all series was / is streamlined compared to previous rpg model. 

and voiced characters have their drawbacks, you can never have amount of exposition through dialogue as it was in fallout / bg series. 
but considering that they doubled the amount of spoken lines in this game, i didnt have much problem with exposition, especially considering that its not a new character in question but character we know through previous 2 games. 

 .

[London]

Thanks everyone for their replies.

I think the crowd I was most confused by were those who really went out of their way to criticize virtually everything Shepard said that they didn't agree with. For example, I saw a few people post, "MY Shepard would not be talking about Ashley's death. I didn't like Ashley and thought she was a bigot. <autodialogue rant>"

To those people, who really felt that they should have had so much control over the character that they could choose whether Shepard should comment on past characters, or care about them, etc. really concerned me because they seemed to think that the prior games provided such options and control. I never felt that way.

I understand that video games as a medium can only code so much, and provide so many options. That is why I am not really receptive to the autodialogue complaints. I really still feel Shepard is a pre-determined character with just a small grid of variations that you can control, most of which have no real impact on the character's trajectory.

I mean, we can't even technically fail the Suicide Mission in ME2...else that storyline ends entirely and that Shepard's ME3 doesn't even exist. All of the major choices that people felt ME1 and 2 provided...I'm still not seeing any of this as having mattered in any of those games, including ME1 and 2.

[Ryzaki]

...Huh?

Shep COULD downright insult Ashley in ME1, hell he could infer it in ME2. Him being forced to be BFFs with the VS to me was horrible. Same with Liara in ME2 (the whole forced hug thing). There was only ONE character Shep had a forced friendship with in ME1 if recruited and that was Garrus. Shepard and Kaidan barely talked to one another. (My dude Shep and Kaidan anyway. They certainly weren't enemies but they sure in hell didn't feel like friends either). Why BW decided to give all Sheps a lobotomy and force them to all like the same people I don't know.

And then to do it AGAIN in ME3 with characters like Jack. Ugh.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 03 juin 2012 - 08:41 .

[RiouHotaru]

Neutral dialogue was pointless half the time. I'm fairly darn sure most of you didn't pick the middle option during ME1 or 2. I know I certainly didn't especially during ME2, I think the only times I picked "neutral" options was on Horizon.

[napushenko]

Ryzaki wrote...

...Huh?

Shep COULD downright insult Ashley in ME1, hell he could infer it in ME2. Him being forced to be BFFs with the VS to me was horrible. Same with Liara in ME2 (the whole forced hug thing). There was only ONE character Shep had a forced friendship with in ME1 if recruited and that was Garrus. Shepard and Kaidan barely talked to one another. (My dude Shep and Kaidan anyway. They certainly weren't enemies but they sure in hell didn't feel like friends either). Why BW decided to give all Sheps a lobotomy and force them to all like the same people I don't know.

And then to do it AGAIN in ME3 with characters like Jack. Ugh.

you mean virmire survivor ? you can actually kill him in this game ou know. how is that being forced to be bff ? 
you can barely talk with vs in this game too. as with any other npc

[London]

I mean I could have the same complaint. I personally do not like Garrus as a character and have no idea why he's such a fan favorite. I spoke to him as infrequently as possible and never brought him along.

Fast-forward to ME3 and we are having these deep conversations like we are best friends. Huh? I think I spoke to you for a total of 10 minutes between ME1 and 2 combined.

But I didn't choose to complain because I respected that Shepard, if not myself, had this relationship with Garrus and it really wasn't mine to dictate.

Even if Shep insulted Ashley in ME1, I don't see why he couldn't still regret her death and console others who seem to have cared for her.

[napushenko]

SebastianDA wrote...

Thanks everyone for their replies.

I think the crowd I was most confused by were those who really went out of their way to criticize virtually everything Shepard said that they didn't agree with. For example, I saw a few people post, "MY Shepard would not be talking about Ashley's death. I didn't like Ashley and thought she was a bigot. <autodialogue rant>"

To those people, who really felt that they should have had so much control over the character that they could choose whether Shepard should comment on past characters, or care about them, etc. really concerned me because they seemed to think that the prior games provided such options and control. I never felt that way.

I understand that video games as a medium can only code so much, and provide so many options. That is why I am not really receptive to the autodialogue complaints. I really still feel Shepard is a pre-determined character with just a small grid of variations that you can control, most of which have no real impact on the character's trajectory.

I mean, we can't even technically fail the Suicide Mission in ME2...else that storyline ends entirely and that Shepard's ME3 doesn't even exist. All of the major choices that people felt ME1 and 2 provided...I'm still not seeing any of this as having mattered in any of those games, including ME1 and 2.

same here. 
i may change my stances if someone can provide some examples of those decisions and that amount of influence on dialogue. 

[wright1978]

SebastianDA wrote...

I mean I could have the same complaint. I personally do not like Garrus as a character and have no idea why he's such a fan favorite. I spoke to him as infrequently as possible and never brought him along.

Fast-forward to ME3 and we are having these deep conversations like we are best friends. Huh? I think I spoke to you for a total of 10 minutes between ME1 and 2 combined.

But I didn't choose to complain because I respected that Shepard, if not myself, had this relationship with Garrus and it really wasn't mine to dictate.

Even if Shep insulted Ashley in ME1, I don't see why he couldn't still regret her death and console others who seem to have cared for her.

Sorry but ME3 defines relationships with characters that is in complete contradiction with possible dialogue choices in the 1st 2 games. Same with loyalties etc. Game assumes Shep is a paragon and has always been.

[Ryzaki]

napushenko wrote...
you mean virmire survivor ? you can actually kill him in this game ou know. how is that being forced to be bff ? 
you can barely talk with vs in this game too. as with any other npc

You kill them and are forced to express regret, everytime you talk to them you open up as though you're friendly or at least were friends with them. Even the angry dialogue has the reek of past friends to it.

And the only way to tell them to GTFO is sickingly nice.

[Ryzaki]

SebastianDA wrote...

I mean I could have the same complaint. I personally do not like Garrus as a character and have no idea why he's such a fan favorite. I spoke to him as infrequently as possible and never brought him along.

Fast-forward to ME3 and we are having these deep conversations like we are best friends. Huh? I think I spoke to you for a total of 10 minutes between ME1 and 2 combined.

But I didn't choose to complain because I respected that Shepard, if not myself, had this relationship with Garrus and it really wasn't mine to dictate.

Even if Shep insulted Ashley in ME1, I don't see why he couldn't still regret her death and console others who seem to have cared for her.

And you'd be perfectly valid with that complaint however Shep was never able to be cruel to Garrus. Ever. The most you could do is not recruit him. Ashley by comparison can have a hostile relationship with Shep. Same with Liara. (with the hostility being mostly on Shep's side).

And that's your right. Just like it's mine to complain for blantant character derailment forcing my Sheps into a boring and irritating homogenous whiny emo blob.

And there's no reason he HAD to care about her either. He can gun down Wrex in cold blood but all of a sudden with Ashley he has feels? F that noise.

[lillitheris]

napushenko wrote...

SebastianDA wrote...

Thanks everyone for their replies.

I think the crowd I was most confused by were those who really went out of their way to criticize virtually everything Shepard said that they didn't agree with. For example, I saw a few people post, "MY Shepard would not be talking about Ashley's death. I didn't like Ashley and thought she was a bigot. <autodialogue rant>"

To those people, who really felt that they should have had so much control over the character that they could choose whether Shepard should comment on past characters, or care about them, etc. really concerned me because they seemed to think that the prior games provided such options and control. I never felt that way.

I understand that video games as a medium can only code so much, and provide so many options. That is why I am not really receptive to the autodialogue complaints. I really still feel Shepard is a pre-determined character with just a small grid of variations that you can control, most of which have no real impact on the character's trajectory.

I mean, we can't even technically fail the Suicide Mission in ME2...else that storyline ends entirely and that Shepard's ME3 doesn't even exist. All of the major choices that people felt ME1 and 2 provided...I'm still not seeing any of this as having mattered in any of those games, including ME1 and 2.

same here. 
i may change my stances if someone can provide some examples of those decisions and that amount of influence on dialogue.

You won’t, but please see my Dialogue thread linked in my signature for concrete places where additional options were needed. Inexhaustive list.

[chemiclord]

lillitheris wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

It seems silly to lose your mind over a structure that you had absolutely no problem with the first two times.

You don’t understand what the difference is even with the explanations provided, and that’s fine.

Just please understand that a huge amount of people do see a difference, regardless of how illusory you think it is.

I guess I just don't get it.  Maybe you can "clarify" it for me.

I can understand being furious with Casey Hudson for pretty much outright lying about the content of the game... and if that had been my sole reason for buying it, I'd be furious too.

But I didn't listen to a word of that tool's promises, nor did I buy the game solely for them, and I think if everyone here was being honest, they weren't sold on the game by Hudson either.  They were going to buy it regardless.  It's an excuse to be angry, not a reason.

There's plenty of things to not like about ME3.  The ending (I refuse to give that abortion a plural) was atrocious; it looked like Mac Walters composed a first draft and called it good.

There are also a **** ton of bugs and continuity errors that deserve to be pointed out, as well as how little impact your ME2 squadmates have on ME3 (Hey Padok... I mean, Mordin.  I'm sorry, the both of you pretty much do the exact same thing, it's hard to tell you apart sometimes).

But there's a lot of issues that really... the fans have no one to blame but themselves for.

This entire discussion about the dialogue options?  Wanna know why its that way?  Because fans complained incessently about 4-5 choices that all wound up saying the same thing and breaking the flow of the conversation.  They then LOVED how it was handled in Lair of the Shadow Broker.

Shockingly, Bioware gave fans more of it.  Less shockingly, fans now claim they hate it.

All that exploration that fans claimed they loved?  They sure had a funny way of showing it, considering they venomously hated every attempt by Bioware to do it.

The steady loss of RPG elements?  Yeah, also steadily cut because of fan complaints.

Blaming Bioware for doing what the fans wanted, then screaming at them afterwards for doing so... sorry, that doesn't make much sense to me.

[Chromie]

We've always rented Shepard. Shepard will always be a Marine and have his history already chosen. He neither has the depth of say Geralt or is the empty shell waiting to be roleplayed like the Dovahkiin.