342 réponses à ce sujet

[Pasquale1234]

Fortlowe wrote...

Pacing is ABSOLUTLY  Biowares job.

I disagree, because it steps all over player agency - which, as I mentioned before, is the player's ability to control their gaming experience.

It's the job of any storyteller.

But who is the storyteller here?  I say the player is supposed to be, at the very least, co-creating the story.

The role of a cRPG is supposed to be the role of a DM in a PnP game.

I think much of what you are describing is the province of action-adventure games rather than RPGs.

[Fortlowe]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Pacing is ABSOLUTLY  Biowares job.

I disagree, because it steps all over player agency - which, as I mentioned before, is the player's ability to control their gaming experience.

It's the job of any storyteller.

But who is the storyteller here?  I say the player is supposed to be, at the very least, co-creating the story.

The role of a cRPG is supposed to be the role of a DM in a PnP game.

I think much of what you are describing is the province of action-adventure games rather than RPGs.

Round and round and round. None of this has anything to do with the subject. Such as the case, I've just high-lighted with no further comment. 

[Pasquale1234]

Fortlowe wrote...

Round and round and round. None of this has anything to do with the subject. Such as the case, I've just high-lighted with no further comment. 

It has everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer - though I accept your lack of interest in replying.

[Fortlowe]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Round and round and round. None of this has anything to do with the subject. Such as the case, I've just high-lighted with no further comment. 

It has everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer - though I accept your lack of interest in replying.

Do tell. Because it loos like what you've posted there is the opening volley of an arguement about the nature of RPGs. If you want to discuss the timer or some other alteration of the wheel, then do that. But posting more of that dead horse on this thread is useless. And pretending such a post is about the subject is ridiculous. 

If your post has, as you say 'Everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer', then please, ellaborate. Enlighten the uninformed. Otherwise, I don't see exactly what your interest would be in replying to this thread, beyond 'I want the DA:O system back'. 

Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:46 .

[Darth Death]

The dialogue wheel supports two vital things:

1. A voiced protagonist...
2. Controlled/defined protagonist dialogue...

BioWare isn't going to change this, feedback or not.

[Fortlowe]

Darth Death wrote...

The dialogue wheel supports two vital things:

1. A voiced protagonist...
2. Controlled/defined protagonist dialogue...

BioWare isn't going to change this, feedback or not.

That's....stating the obvious. Do you have any suggestions to augment the dialogue wheel. That kind of feedback they very may well have an ear out for. 

[Pasquale1234]

Fortlowe wrote...

Do tell. Because it loos like what you've posted there is the opening volley of an arguement about the nature of RPGs. If you want to discuss the timer or some other alteration of the wheel, then do that. But posting more of that dead horse on this thread is useless. And pretending such a post is about the subject is ridiculous. 

If your post has, as you say 'Everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer', then please, ellaborate. Enlighten the uninformed. Otherwise, I don't see exactly what your interest would be in replying to this thread, beyond 'I want the DA:O system back'. 

I responded to your assertions that BioWare should control the pacing, because they are telling the story.  That has a great deal to do with the imposition of a conversation timer.

Your response to that thus far has been a litany of accusations and excuses for failing to address the issues I raised.

[Fortlowe]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Do tell. Because it loos like what you've posted there is the opening volley of an arguement about the nature of RPGs. If you want to discuss the timer or some other alteration of the wheel, then do that. But posting more of that dead horse on this thread is useless. And pretending such a post is about the subject is ridiculous. 

If your post has, as you say 'Everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer', then please, ellaborate. Enlighten the uninformed. Otherwise, I don't see exactly what your interest would be in replying to this thread, beyond 'I want the DA:O system back'. 

I responded to your assertions that BioWare should control the pacing, because they are telling the story.  That has a great deal to do with the imposition of a conversation timer.

Your response to that thus far has been a litany of accusations and excuses for failing to address the issues I raised.

What issues have you raised ecaxtly? What role the dev should have in the game? Seriously? This is why I don't want to get into a discussion of  the nature of RPGs or DA's place amongst them. The topic we have here is very specific. It is focused on a particular mechanic we are all familliar with. If you want to discuss something more broad,  here is a thread that would best suit your interests, I think. This thread is about altering the dialogue wheel. 

Does anyone have any other suggestions that are not 'Just do what DA:O did'?

Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:46 .

[esper]

Fortlowe wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Do tell. Because it loos like what you've posted there is the opening volley of an arguement about the nature of RPGs. If you want to discuss the timer or some other alteration of the wheel, then do that. But posting more of that dead horse on this thread is useless. And pretending such a post is about the subject is ridiculous. 

If your post has, as you say 'Everything to do with your interest in imposing a conversation timer', then please, ellaborate. Enlighten the uninformed. Otherwise, I don't see exactly what your interest would be in replying to this thread, beyond 'I want the DA:O system back'. 

I responded to your assertions that BioWare should control the pacing, because they are telling the story.  That has a great deal to do with the imposition of a conversation timer.

Your response to that thus far has been a litany of accusations and excuses for failing to address the issues I raised.

What issues have you raised ecaxtly? What role the dev should have in the game? Seriously? This is why I don't want to get into a discussion of  the nature of RPGs or DA's place amongst them. The topic we have here is very specific. It is focused on a particular mechanic we are all familliar with. If you want to discuss something more broad,  here is a thread that would best suit your interests, I think. This thread is about altering the dialogue wheel. 

Does anyone have any other suggestions that are not 'Just do what DA:O did'?

As a matter of fact I wouldn't mind if they changed the design of the wheel to make it look more medival/Dragon Age in some way. As it looks right, now the look if it is kind of uninspiring. But that is really all, so far I have had no complain with the wheel or paraphraing and they have said they will continue it, so I just want it too look more the part of dragon age, I guess.  

[Fortlowe]

I agree! It is rather...blah in its present form. I imagine that was a function over form decision. But with more time to examine it, I hope that it is made to be more aesthetically pleasing. It think adding to its complexity could help in this regard.

For instance, adding rudimentary control to body language or interrupts or (maker no!) a timer could result in the wheel being displayed in more than one format. Then, having a highly contrasting and highly visible font and UI becomes a necessity instead of a flourish. Good stuff! Thanks!

Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 juillet 2012 - 08:03 .

[Pasquale1234]

Fortlowe wrote...

What issues have you raised ecaxtly? What role the dev should have in the game? Seriously?

Developers recognize the value of player agency (or at least the appearance of it), and BioWare's devs have discussed a desire to support more player agency going forward, not less.  I've tried to point out to you how and why a conversation timer would interfere with that.

This is why I don't want to get into a discussion of  the nature of RPGs or DA's place amongst them.
<snip>
This thread is about altering the dialogue wheel.

More specifically, it is a topic about altering the dialogue wheel in DA, the nature of which is supposedly RPG.

Without going back and re-reading the thread, this is what I remember:  You want a conversation timer to be imposed on all players, with no on/off toggle.  Several other players have said they would not want it without the toggle, and it's been suggested that you could play your game that way without the timer if you prefer.

If you intend for this to be a thread for suggestions sans discussion, carry on.

[Fortlowe]

 So all of a sudden you are aware of the Dev's progress and intentions. Doubtful. Then let's ask so we can be done with this very fragile tangent. Would the devs like to throw their hat into this discussion? Would a timer inhibit player agency? (Or more closely, but not necessarily in need of an answer, is that even related to the topic of altering the dialogue wheel?) 

As a longshot (in being that this likely won't get a response at all), since I'm addressing the devs in particular here, I'd also like to ask  has a system been settled on for how the wheel will function and can you relate any of how that system works to us?

Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 juillet 2012 - 09:03 .

[Sir JK]

I'm a little off regarding timers. I can see the merit of them, since it facilitates the player making a decision on the same grounds as the character. But I generally don't like them. Partly because their mere presence essentially forces me to divert more attention to the interface and less to the storytelling and partly because I frequently am left with too little time to scan my options. I didn't mind the interrupts in ME2+3 too much, since I had ample time to decide yes or no. But I didn't like them in the witcher 2, were there frequently were several different options to choose from in about 1,5 seconds. It turned those moments into panically trying to find a fitting choice... which didn't really add to my enjoyment.
So overall I don't think a timer would lead to much benefit in the games. Interrupts, maybe. Since they're essentially binary yes or no questions. But nothing involving choices that need to be evaluated.

Overall I think the dialogue wheel could benefit from a more informative interface. Not neccessarily the full line (or a close approximation) since those can be very tedious in the long run (saying this from experience) but rather small icons indicating when a option includes a back-and-forth, when there's a action involved (and preferably the icon should hint to what that action is) and if there is some other intrinsic part of that line, such as a insult. Small indicators that tell us what choosing this line will mean.
Something like this perhaps:
[Tone icon: Comedy mask] Fantastic idea! [Expressive body language icon][Walking icon][Back and forth icon]. Which in this case would mean that the character is being sarcastic and critisize the idea ironically, probably throws his/her hands in the air in exasperation, that him/her changes location and that there will be a curt answer that follows the following npc line.

The downside of that idea is that there'd be a very large gallery of icons that the player would learn to interpret. On the upside, there's a neat description of what the character would do more than just say a line of which the text is a paraphrase.

Another idea would be to allow the wheel to cover more than just speech and make many of the actions the characters normally take automatically optional for the player. There's already some use of the wheel to cover actions and I'm sure it could be used for that more frequently. In a perfect world it'd even allow up to 10 actions per prompt (yeah, I know. Not going to happen. But one can dream right ). One potential consequence of that could be increased cinematic control for the player.

[Darth Death]

Fortlowe wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

The dialogue wheel supports two vital things:

1. A voiced protagonist...
2. Controlled/defined protagonist dialogue...

BioWare isn't going to change this, feedback or not.

That's....stating the obvious. Do you have any suggestions to augment the dialogue wheel. That kind of feedback they very may well have an ear out for. 

Funnily enough, that was my point while addressing the op. My point is- there will be no changes made on the dialogue wheel since it serves the two important functions (I've already listed above). The dialogue wheel already accomplishes its purpose. If you so happen to hate it, then you're out of luck.

[Fortlowe]

Sir JK wrote...

I'm a little off regarding timers. I can see the merit of them, since it facilitates the player making a decision on the same grounds as the character. But I generally don't like them. Partly because their mere presence essentially forces me to divert more attention to the interface and less to the storytelling and partly because I frequently am left with too little time to scan my options. I didn't mind the interrupts in ME2+3 too much, since I had ample time to decide yes or no. But I didn't like them in the witcher 2, were there frequently were several different options to choose from in about 1,5 seconds. It turned those moments into panically trying to find a fitting choice... which didn't really add to my enjoyment.
So overall I don't think a timer would lead to much benefit in the games. Interrupts, maybe. Since they're essentially binary yes or no questions. But nothing involving choices that need to be evaluated.

Overall I think the dialogue wheel could benefit from a more informative interface. Not neccessarily the full line (or a close approximation) since those can be very tedious in the long run (saying this from experience) but rather small icons indicating when a option includes a back-and-forth, when there's a action involved (and preferably the icon should hint to what that action is) and if there is some other intrinsic part of that line, such as a insult. Small indicators that tell us what choosing this line will mean.
Something like this perhaps:
[Tone icon: Comedy mask] Fantastic idea! [Expressive body language icon][Walking icon][Back and forth icon]. Which in this case would mean that the character is being sarcastic and critisize the idea ironically, probably throws his/her hands in the air in exasperation, that him/her changes location and that there will be a curt answer that follows the following npc line.

The downside of that idea is that there'd be a very large gallery of icons that the player would learn to interpret. On the upside, there's a neat description of what the character would do more than just say a line of which the text is a paraphrase.

Another idea would be to allow the wheel to cover more than just speech and make many of the actions the characters normally take automatically optional for the player. There's already some use of the wheel to cover actions and I'm sure it could be used for that more frequently. In a perfect world it'd even allow up to 10 actions per prompt (yeah, I know. Not going to happen. But one can dream right ). One potential consequence of that could be increased cinematic control for the player.

^This. Thank you so much for this! 

Anyways, I understand how the timer could steer attention away form the story and onto the interface. Definitely, Do not want. Still, I don't think that should discount it as a device entirely. I wouldn't suggest bludgeoning the player of the head with the timer. It doesn't have to operate at break neck speeds and it doesn't even have to be a part of every conversation. An example is the decision during the prologue concerning who you'll work for. No narrative, emotional, or functional reason for the timer, there, so no point in using it there. But when negotiating with the Arishok, concerning Isabela? A timer would have made this situation far more poingant, I think. 

I really do think the wheel needs not only to be more informative, but to contain more information. More complexity. 
I too am a dreamer   The talking head situation has to end. I do not like that the characters just stand there whenever the wheel is up. They should be doing something and the wheel should have some role in whatever they are doing. Here is where Dragon Age could do intereupts, but in its own way. If the NPC is a farmer and you're trying to negotiate a stay in the barn, and he's bailing hay at the time, well a interrupt prompt can come up while you're talking. The result is you start tossing bales of hay onto the wagon alongside the farmer. A little prompts comes up indicating the farmer notices it looks like you've done this before. Now the timer starts over and the wheel has an additional option. No paragon/ renegade or whatever you want to call that dynamic. Just handling the situation in more than one way.

On descriptors, how about instead of icons (or rather not instead but in addition to; a solid set of icons is still an improvement in my book) words are used to describe some of the responses? Then the icon list stays slim and trim and when I have the option to select a response that is both diplomatic and sarcastic (basically anytime I talk to Uncle Gamlen), it's clear what the tone is I'm about to convey. 

Ideally, there would be a way, in close to realtime, to change the tone of the response without changing the line itself. Some games do just that by listing the same line twice but indicating it with a discription of how it will be recited. Perhaps here is where the 'hovering' solution, previously put forward as a means to show the entire response as opposed to the paraphasing could be employed? Except, instead of showing the whole passage, it shows a choice in tone. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fortlowe wrote...

Pacing is ABSOLUTLY  Biowares job. It's the job of any storyteller. And make no mistake, as much agency as you or I may claim we want in a game, the game is the dev's story.

NO.  The game is the player's story.  The devs' story is merely backdrop.  The devs' story is flavour text that fleshes out the setting in which the player's story takes place.

I emphatically disagree that a timer is antithetical and that it robs you of the time needed to make a rational decision.  It is abrasive to you're desires, but  having a finite amount of time to weigh your options does not mean that an 'out of character' descision will be made.

It means that an out of character decision might be made buy accident.  Only by offering the player an unlimited amount of time to do his analysis can you eliminate the risk of him running out of time.

Indeed, if protecting your character is your primary concern, then I can go ahead and guaruntee you that unless you turn off the machine, you character is gonna make it to the end.

Protecting my character isn't my primary concern.  Protecting the coherence of my character is my primary concern.  Several of my DAO characters did not reach the end of that game.  One was killed by Shale.  Another by Sten.

You prefer the DA:O system. I'm not discussing that system. The topic is not addressing that system.

Nor am I.

The dialogue wheel is the subject at hand. If the sum total to the discussion of altering the wheel you have is 'Make the paraphases more informative', then so be it.

The obfuscatory nature of the paraphrases is the wheel's primary failing.  I'd also like to see the wheel options visibly numbered to make it easier to play the game with the keyboard.  Aside from that, the wheel is merely aesthetic.

But if you want to add a timer to the wheel, then you're fundamentally breaking the game, and I'll stand up and object.  IF DA2 already had such a timer, my contribution to this thread would be to call for the removal of the timer.

I believe you could contribute more, considering your knack for analysis, but if your agenda is to regress the series back to the DA:O (or an even older system) dialogue system, then naturally that would be all you have to contribute.

First, calling a return to DAO's dialogue system "regression" is a value judgment on your part.  I would call the move to the voice+paraphrase a regression, as it moves the game farther away from the ideal dialogue system (one that grants maximum player control over his character's behaviour, and mimics real-world conversations).  I am not claiming that DAO's dialogue system was the ideal dialogue system, but there are ways in which DA2's dialogue system was clearly inferior - the clarity of the visible options being the most obvious example.

If you'd like, I can offer suggestions about how to make those paraphrases more informative.  I'd suggest allowing paraphrases to be longer, either by permitting multiple lines for each option, or by moving the wheel to the edge of the screen to allow longer single line paraphrases.  I would suggest always having the sentence type of the paraphrase match the sentence type of at least part of the spoken line - so if the paraphrase is a question, have the PC actually ask a question.

I would also call for tone icons either to be removed (with a corresponding change in how the dialogue is written and acted), or to be precisely defined with those definitions applied rigidly and universally.  As they stand in DA2, I found the tone icons to be worse than useless.  They need to be either dramatically improved or discarded completely.

The player needs to know what his character will do as a result of the dialogue option he is selecting, and DA2's system faied horribly at this (DAO's did much better, though people who think NPC reactions indicate PC tone disagree - those people's impression of human interaction is vastly different from mine).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 04 juillet 2012 - 10:55 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Rojahar wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It means that an out of character decision might be made buy accident.  Only by offering the player an unlimited amount of time to do his analysis can you eliminate the risk of him running out of time.

You're more likely to make an out of character decision by having far more time than your character would have in the actual situation, and having none of the pressure the character would face in that situation. In the real world, time doesn't just freeze for an eternity until you decide you've analyzed every variable and outcome of a situation enough. You're trying to mask your personal preference and dislike for the "pressure" of real time by making some "purity of RP" claim.

No, that's not true.

We haven't lived our whole lives as the character. We didn't grow up in the world of Thedas, understanding its subtle politics, beliefs and struggles. So for you to expect someone to truly Role Play a character who, in-game, may have a quick response but which we, as the player, may take some time to deliberate, is not valid.

A timer is just a forced gimmick. It very rarely would have any real good gameplay impact and would provide more frustration than actual realism.

[Fortlowe]

Okay! Now we're cooking Sylvius. Add numbers. Even though I am a console player, I can totally get behind that idea. If I played on PC, I'd find it weird that the responses weren't numbered, so I totally sympathize.

Longer paraphases (ie more detailed paraphases)? Well, I just can't shake the notion that that's a little too broad a stroke. Some conversations need more detail than others. So yes, I am for paraphases that limit misunderstanding. Does that mean I need to read a essay? I don't think so.

I happen to, at least in part, agree with you on icons. I do believe icons should be a part of the wheel. I do not believe they were implemented as deftly as they could or should have been in DA2. Sir JK mentioned a system to use them as a descriptor more than as a value. To me that makes perfect sense.

I'll use Gamlen as an example again. He's my characters Uncle and he loves him, so my character wants to be gracious. But Gamlen is also a world class ******, so my character also gives him a bit of the business and is sarcastic. Ideally, I could move to the option with a gracious icon, then select either a compassionate or sarcastic tone. Ahem... all with a timer

[Sylvius the Mad]

Rojahar wrote...

You're more likely to make an out of character decision by having far more time than your character would have in the actual situation, and having none of the pressure the character would face in that situation. In the real world, time doesn't just freeze for an eternity until you decide you've analyzed every variable and outcome of a situation enough. You're trying to mask your personal preference and dislike for the "pressure" of real time by making some "purity of RP" claim.

If the character were me, you would be correct.

But he's not.  I might not have a strong intuitive grasp on his preferences or his knowledge.  I might need to consult notes to see what decisions he's made previously.  He would already know these things, but I don't, so I need to have the time to reach a mental state similar to his in order to make the decision.

You know what your beliefs are, but your grasp of the whole of someone else's beliefs can never be that strong.  That's why the timer doesn't work.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fortlowe wrote...

Longer paraphases (ie more detailed paraphases)? Well, I just can't shake the notion that that's a little too broad a stroke. Some conversations need more detail than others. So yes, I am for paraphases that limit misunderstanding. Does that mean I need to read a essay? I don't think so.

If an essay is what's required to understand the whole of what the PC will say, then yes, you do need to read an essay.

But that's obviously not always the case.  I do think BioWare should implement some rules with regard to the paraphrases, and that they should tell us what those rules are.  Rules like, "if the spoken dialogue includes the PC stating an opinion, that opinion needs to be part of the paraphrase."  This would allow the player to avoid dialogue selections that stated opinions the PC didn't hold.

What the line doesn't say is as important as what the line does say - I routinely choose dialogue options based on what they don't say, but because DA2's paraphrases were so unclear Hawke often said that exact thing I wanted to avoid saying anyway.  ME also did this.

Given that, the player now needs to be given as much information as possible about each line in order to let him make decisions.  If the paraphrase merely says "Yes", but then Hawke says, "Yes, because it's the right thing to do," that might be character-breaking.  I'd also support a rule that the paraphrase should match the full line whenever there is space to list the full line, but BioWare seems to think repetition of this sort is bad.  But either way, the rules need to be available to us.  In DA2, the writers mostly followed a rule that prevented them from using any word in the paraphrase that also occurred in the spoken line.  Ignoring that I think that's a terrible rule, knowing that it was there would have made the paraphrases easier to use.

I happen to, at least in part, agree with you on icons. I do believe icons should be a part of the wheel. I do not believe they were implemented as deftly as they could or should have been in DA2. Sir JK mentioned a system to use them as a descriptor more than as a value. To me that makes perfect sense.

I'll use Gamlen as an example again. He's my characters Uncle and he loves him, so my character wants to be gracious. But Gamlen is also a world class ******, so my character also gives him a bit of the business and is sarcastic. Ideally, I could move to the option with a gracious icon, then select either a compassionate or sarcastic tone.

The tones, I think, exacerbate the problem created by the voice.   The voice fixes the delivery of each line in a way that a game with a silent protagonist doesn't.  Now, I don't think tone conveys valuable information, because I find them horribly ambiguous.  The icons made the tone explicit, and thus made it harder for me to ignore the tone when interpreting the line.  I could still ignore it, but the lines were written assuming I didn't - assuming I got some sort of useful information from them - thus making the lines harder to use.  I would suggest that a neutral tone needs to be available pretty much all of the time, especially for plot-relevant choices.

Ahem... all with a timer

And this has all reminded me of yet another reason why the timer is bad.  When selecting options in DAO, where I know exactly what each line says, there were times where upon first glance none of the available options were comatible with my character design.  Sometimes I'd spend a minute or more choosing my reply because I needed to find a way to deliver or intend one of the lines in a way that suited by character.  With a voiced PC, the options are now even more limited, as the tone is set for me.  This makes the investigation of what possible intent for each line would be consistent with my character's personality a potentially even longer process.

Putting a timer on it would force me to choose before I knew which answer was the right answer.

Also, as long as the paraphrases don't provide perfect information of PC behaviour, I still support the addition of a rewind button to let us back up and replay conversations line by line - and that would render your timer moot.

[jillabender]

Sir JK wrote…

Another idea would be to allow the wheel to cover more than just speech and make many of the actions the characters normally take automatically optional for the player. There's already some use of the wheel to cover actions and I'm sure it could be used for that more frequently. In a perfect world it'd even allow up to 10 actions per prompt (yeah, I know. Not going to happen. But one can dream right ). One potential consequence of that could be increased cinematic control for the player.

Using the dialogue wheel to control the PC's body language could actually be very cool. I'd imagine that it might be incredibly time-consuming to implement in practice, though.

Fortlowe wrote…

I'll use Gamlen as an example again. He's my characters Uncle and he loves him, so my character wants to be gracious. But Gamlen is also a world class ******, so my character also gives him a bit of the business and is sarcastic. Ideally, I could move to the option with a gracious icon, then select either a compassionate or sarcastic tone.

I think that's a terrific idea – something like that could go a long way toward making a voiced PC feel more multi-dimensional than Hawke did, by allowing for more nuanced and convincing responses that feel more tailored to the situation.

It would also solve one of my biggest frustrations with the dialogue wheel in DA2 – I hated when wanting my character to make a particular point or convey certain information required me to choose a certain tone. For example, there were times when my angry apostate Hawke wanted to express her allegiance with fellow apostates, but couldn't do that in an aggressive way befitting her character.

Modifié par jillabender, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:02 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

jillabender wrote...

Using the dialogue wheel to control the PC's body language could actually be very cool. I'd imagine that it might be incredibly time-consuming to implement in practice, though.

If the player can't control it, the PC shouldn't do it.

[Fortlowe]

That's good! A rewind, like a pause is a compromise I could definitely live with. I'd probably even use it from time to time. That doesn't render the timer moot, though. The timers purpose is to enliven the wheels connection to the game, not to make the game a burden. If I need to pause it or rewind it, from time to time? Fine! Life happens. But keeping the momentum of the narrative going is a worthy pursuit.

[Fortlowe]

jillabender wrote...

Sir JK wrote…

Another idea would be to allow the wheel to cover more than just speech and make many of the actions the characters normally take automatically optional for the player. There's already some use of the wheel to cover actions and I'm sure it could be used for that more frequently. In a perfect world it'd even allow up to 10 actions per prompt (yeah, I know. Not going to happen. But one can dream right ). One potential consequence of that could be increased cinematic control for the player.

Using the dialogue wheel to control the PC's body language could actually be very cool. I'd imagine that it might be incredibly time-consuming to implement in practice, though.

Fortlowe wrote…

I'll use Gamlen as an example again. He's my characters Uncle and he loves him, so my character wants to be gracious. But Gamlen is also a world class ******, so my character also gives him a bit of the business and is sarcastic. Ideally, I could move to the option with a gracious icon, then select either a compassionate or sarcastic tone.

I think that's a terrific idea – something like that could go a long way toward making a voiced PC feel more multi-dimensional than Hawke did, by allowing for more nuanced and convincing responses that feel more tailored to the situation.

It would also solve one of my biggest frustrations with the dialogue wheel in DA2 – I hated when making a particular story choice required me to choose a certain tone. For example, if I want to side with the mages as Hawke in a side-quest, I shouldn't have to choose the "aggressive" option – especially if I've been consistently siding with the mages and choosing the "diplomatic" options in previous quests.

That's exactly why I wanted to steer this thread back on topic. Unless we address our concerns specifically, instead of saying over and over again that DA:O is super and DA2 isn't, then the Dev's are just going to tune us out. 

I didn't like situations like that either.  And it can be completely attributed to the shallowness of the wheel. The wheel can work, but it needs work. 

Modifié par Fortlowe, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:04 .