342 réponses à ce sujet

[brushyourteeth]

Cirram55 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I think it held promise, but in the end my guess is it'd be much more beneficial to scrap it than to try to perfect it. If I were to try to roleplay as myself (which many people do) I'd be sarcastic with my friends, diplomatic with my superiors (especially in Acts 1 and 2) and aggressive toward scum like Petrice. So where does that leave my Hawke? People rarely fit into neat, prepackaged boxes. Most likely I would end up being accidentally mean to my friends or accidentally sarcastic with people I wanted to rip apart with my bare hands.  Like I said, I was really impressed with the idea, but not with how the execution of it took away player control.

Though I will say one auto-dialogue I wouldn't have changed for anything in the world was Hawke's "Maker, she's bad at this!" during "The Long Road." Priceless!

What would you think of a system that in some sort of fashon records you personality for, say, each of your companions? I mean, the game remembers that you hate Isabela and you're always violent with her (you bastard); but the game also aknowledges that with Anders you are kind and flirtatious because you're pro-mage. Vice versa for Fenris and so on.

Would it work?
Could it be extended to any other NPC?
Would it be worth it?

Interesting idea. I think first of all, that'd be biting off more than the devs would probably want to chew. Not that I can really speak for them, but they decided to scrap the rivalry system rather than add new dimensions to it, so I don't see them making the dominant personality that much more complicated. At least not in this next installment.

And then there's also the fact that it still suddenly takes away player agency. What if I'm friendly toward Anders until I meet Justice in the fade and then I'm completely creeped out by him? What if I hate Isabela until I find out later that she released that shipment of slaves? What if I want to be respectful of the Arishok but still let him know in no uncertain terms that this is my city and he'll have me to deal with if he attacks it? No technology I'm familiar with would be able to roleplay for you. I think it's a mistake to try.

[Morroian]

Xewaka wrote...

See, the thing is: it is the NPC reaction what surprises you. However, with paraphrases, it is your own character that surprises you. You can guess which situation is more likely to break your character.

Both, this discussion has been had before so yes some people are able to accept the issue with a silent protagonists tone being misinterpreted but equally some are also able accept the occasional surprise with paraphrases plus the paraphrasing can be made better.

[Korusus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

In DAO the warden's voice was yours, you were not limited to three tones because you set them in your mind

Did you ever run into instances where you imagined a response being sarcastic, but the NPC responded in a way that reflected that it was an actual threat? This was always my biggest concern over the full line dialogues is that I'd still make "mistakes" in interpreting the intention of the line.

I always interpretted that as just because the line is sarcastic doesn't meant the NPC will react kindly to it and may even take serious offense, just like being a smartass in real life.  I don't need a dialogue wheel or a big flashy "THIS IS SARCASTIC" icon next to the  dialogue choice.

[Allan Schumacher]

Xewaka wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

In DAO the warden's voice was yours, you were not limited to three tones because you set them in your mind

Did you ever run into instances where you imagined a response being sarcastic, but the NPC responded in a way that reflected that it was an actual threat? This was always my biggest concern over the full line dialogues is that I'd still make "mistakes" in interpreting the intention of the line.
A game like PST ameliorated this by often adding additional text to indicate if you were lying and so forth, though I think they did stuff like this more so that the character's D&D morality would be reflected.

See, the thing is: it is the NPC reaction what surprises you. However, with paraphrases, it is your own character that surprises you. You can guess which situation is more likely to break your character.

For me, both are equally breaking.  I've always picked the dialogue option the best went along with the general theme of how I wanted to respond, which always had me critiquing just what the writers were intending with the particular line of dialogue.

That is a problem for/with the NPC. You can't control how they think/react.

I disagree emphatically.  On these very boards I have people misinterpreting what is a sassy comment of mine and me having to immediately go into damage control.  People often require the use of emoticons in order to understand that a comment isn't sarcastic or genuine.  It's an inherent limitation with relying purely on the written word.  I have literally lost friendships because what I meant to be fun, sassy comments were being taken literally.


I can say "Wow that's awesome" in at least two different ways which convey exceptionally different meanings which the overwhelming majority of my daily face-to-face interactions with people is NOT misunderstood.  In CRPGs, I don't have the option to emphasize syllables, place inflection on various words, or utilize body languages and eye contact to convey the message that I am meaning to send, when all of these are vital to providing communication, and it's been a serious issue with written communication forever.  Social psychologists feel that around two thirds of communication between a speaker and his audience is non-verbal, and it's been completely absent in CRPGs for as long as I can remember.

The Ultima and Wizardry games were driven by keywords, which meant that I could fill in the blanks on what my character may have said but only based upon the response that the NPC provided.  Morrowind and Oblivion also behaved this way, though I think Skyrim is different.  I do think that a fully written line is much better than a keyword.

I consider the non-verbal components so vital that I've always had to have some level of suspension of disbelief when playing CRPGs.  It's also why I have always struggled to find them a good analogue to PnP RPGs.  I've always been restricted to the options that the game designers provided me.  I don't think it's as acceptable to just dismiss a companion NPC misinterpreting a sassy remark that I make as being a typical standard miscommunication in real life.  This is someone that I've presumably been adventuring with for some time.  Ideally I'd love for it to tie into the personality idea that DA2 had, where a sassy remark from a character that is typically sarcastic is taken appropriately.  Though many have mentioned they feel the personalities restrict their roleplaying, and there's probably additional restrictions that come into play.


I think my favourite conversation system ever belongs to Alpha Protocol, both in terms of how the conversations lay themselves out (easily the closest thing to a fluid conversation I've seen in video gaming) and the level of variation provided.  I also think the voice actor did a fantastic job of keeping grounded enough that changing tones mid conversation didn't result in a significantly different way of speaking.  I really wish some of the gameplay mechanics were better received because THAT was a game I wanted more of for sure.

[Ihatebadgames]

As a person who is hard of hearig in right ear and deaf in the left I prefer a silent protagonist.A voiced protagonist never sounds like I think the person would sound.I play both males and females just to find every iota of the game.I hear female voices better which means fewer males as the female voices are more in my range.
I hated in DA:O when you would get ahead of the group and a conversation would start,by the time i'd turn around and get to where I could read the caption it'd be almost over.The wheel in DA2 was ok.The two choice in the majority of ME2 was not.
Need a way to be firm and not come off as a jerk,be nice and not come off as a footstool.

[mr_luga]

Just remove the freaking paraphrasing. It's not sorcery, Deus Ex HR pulled it off. Witcher 2 didnt have a wheel, and gasp! People liked that game too! magic!

It baffles the mind how a bigger company with more resouces, are somehow unable to pull off things like this, but smaller companies can

[Allan Schumacher]

mr_luga wrote...

Just remove the freaking paraphrasing. It's not sorcery, Deus Ex HR pulled it off. Witcher 2 didnt have a wheel, and gasp! People liked that game too! magic!

It baffles the mind how a bigger company with more resouces, are somehow unable to pull off things like this, but smaller companies can

So just a single word or phrase denoting how you'd respond, like how DEHR did it, is satisfactory for you.

[seraphymon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Did you ever run into instances where you imagined a response being sarcastic, but the NPC responded in a way that reflected that it was an actual threat? This was always my biggest concern over the full line dialogues is that I'd still make "mistakes" in interpreting the intention of the line.

A game like PST ameliorated this by often adding additional text to indicate if you were lying and so forth, though I think they did stuff like this more so that the character's D&D morality would be reflected.

Few times yes, but not that much because  i pay attention to whats being spoken and can imagine how would i deliver it within some amount of reason. However i can understand how often or so that could happen. However at times no matter how good you are at conveying a line or replying to someone, at times they will misunderstand you. In which case the only way is to correct them and try and make them understand what you really meant. That i dont think is possible to really do in games. But that still doesnt change the fact that i was in control of what i said. I cant control what NPCs say or how they feel. You can disagree all you want and it is probably easier since your making the game, but sometimes you just have to accept the way they react. If it was a problem in DAO it was much worse in DA2 as it occured frequently, not only did i not want to say what hawke spoke but then the NPC also reacted differently as well.

[FieryDove]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That is a problem for/with the NPC. You can't control how they think/react.

I disagree emphatically.  On these very boards I have people misinterpreting what is a sassy comment of mine and me having to immediately go into damage control.  People often require the use of emoticons in order to understand that a comment isn't sarcastic or genuine.  It's an inherent limitation with relying purely on the written word.  I have literally lost friendships because what I meant to be fun, sassy comments were being taken literally.

Well ...yes. On these boards anything is possible and impossible at the same time. On forums it's harder to get one's meaning across than in a visual game or RL conversation I believe.

I blaming data mining on much ebil's that I disagree with in general. I think many Dev's don't...hmm give enough credit to people who play video games. There is a lot of hand holding, simplified mechanics/combat/dialogue and less general options (I will say ebil word) toggles/checkboxes in todays gaming world.

Example: DA2 demo had locked difficulty. Because? People might go into options change it from normal to nightmare and quit all frustrated for it being too hard. Or: People would go in and change from normal to casual and complain the game was far too easy and I guess not buy it?

Does data mining really show people going into options and just clicking with eyes closed or what? I just scratch my head on things like that and frown...lots.

Many people hate ninja romances so 's for all. I get it. I can disagree and stick with my opinion that the wheel is ebil.

(subliminal message:  Triangle!)

[Gibb_Shepard]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

mr_luga wrote...

Just remove the freaking paraphrasing. It's not sorcery, Deus Ex HR pulled it off. Witcher 2 didnt have a wheel, and gasp! People liked that game too! magic!

It baffles the mind how a bigger company with more resouces, are somehow unable to pull off things like this, but smaller companies can

So just a single word or phrase denoting how you'd respond, like how DEHR did it, is satisfactory for you.

DEHR actually allowed you to see the entire line of dialogue. So yes, DEHR is more than satisfactory for me.

Also, i don't find NPC's misinterpreting what my character said character breaking. I don;t know how anyone could. How your character said something is how he said something, an NPC's reaction cannot anc does not change that. Your character saying something you did not intend, however, is character breaking.

How the NPC interprets something and how your character says something are two different things at their very core.

[Dave of Canada]

DX:HR didn't allow you to see the entire line, it allowed you to see the first line for the entire conversation. The conversation still continued from there, which led to some chagrin from some people.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 13 juin 2012 - 03:13 .

[Direwolf0294]

@ Allan

I've personally always had problems role-playing my character when they're not voiced and the dialogue is presented as a fully written sentence or a keyword, though it's way worse when it's a keyword. My Dragonborn in Skyrim for example was a lifeless husk with no personality of their own, same as my characters in Oblivion and Fallout 3/NV, though I guess that could be because in a sandbox game where you can do pretty much everything and be a hero who saves the world while at the same time assassinating the emperor it's hard to come up with any personality for your character besides psychopath. In games like DA:O it's a bit better but I still have some trouble really getting into my character. With something like Mass Effect though I was fully able to get into the role of Shepard. I came up with a whole backstory for her and motivations for why she does what she does. At the same time though, she wasn't me. She was just a character I was observing. It was like I was a ghost following her around on her journy.

I'm probably not making any sense at all. The point is... well I guess I didn't really have a point. Something about voice acting being better then silent protagonists I guess. Human Revolutions didn't paraphrase and I loved that game. I guess just as long as the characters voice acted I'm fine with whatever system you use to present dialogue choices (paraphrasing, keywords or full sentences). No matter what you choose to go with though, I'd stick to using those icons from DA2 that let you know what the intent or tone of the PC's dialogue is.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Dave of Canada wrote...

DX:HR didn't allow you to see the entire line, it allowed you to see the first line for the entire conversation. The conversation still continued from there, which led to some chagrin from some people.

We're talking about dialogue choice mechanisms here. DEHR allowed you to see the entirety of what Jensen would say before someone else cut in. Sometimes after that you coudn't choose what Jensen would say, but that is just part of what it is to have a semi-preset character.

[Brockololly]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
I've always picked the dialogue option the best went along with the general theme of how I wanted to respond, which always had me critiquing just what the writers were intending with the particular line of dialogue.

But with full text and having all of the full text options visible at once, I think its easier to judge the different dialogue choices against each other and from that, you can more easily interpret possible tone.

Whereas with paraphrases, you can sort of judge what you're seeing, but only the paraphrases. So you might pick the aggressive paraphrase as opposed to the diplomatic one, but for all you know the actual spoken dialogue of the diplomatic might have been more to your liking. But you'll never know cause you can't see the full text spoken dialogue of your PC.

Allan Schumacher wrote...
I can say "Wow that's awesome" in at least two different ways which convey exceptionally different meanings which the overwhelming majority of my daily face-to-face interactions with people is NOT misunderstood.  In CRPGs, I don't have the option to emphasize syllables, place inflection on various words, or utilize body languages and eye contact to convey the message that I am meaning to send, when all of these are vital to providing communication, and it's been a serious issue with written communication forever.

But with the full text dialogue options available, you can often compare/contrast the various dialogues and infer the tones based on the full text.

Or, you could do like other RPGs have done ("Wow... That's awesome." [roll eyes] // "WOW! That is AWESOME!!! [High five]) or either do something like Bloodlines with the different colors and fonts.

But I'd love to see the player given more direct control in terms of actual body language during conversations.

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Though many have mentioned they feel the personalities restrict their roleplaying, and there's probably additional restrictions that come into play.

Yes, the problem with the personality system I felt was that it made it so you felt schizophrenic anytime you chose another option and in the autodialogues they would occassionally feel off- like if you were often sarcastic with one NPC but wanted to change it up, you might get stuck  with the sarcastic tone when you wanted to change it up.

So again, just give more control to the player to properly control the player character; whether thats actions, body language or exact dialogue. Beyond that, just have the NPCs reacting to the actions of the player character

[AngryFrozenWater]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I can say "Wow that's awesome" in at least two different ways which convey exceptionally different meanings which the overwhelming majority of my daily face-to-face interactions with people is NOT misunderstood. In CRPGs, I don't have the option to emphasize syllables, place inflection on various words, or utilize body languages and eye contact to convey the message that I am meaning to send, when all of these are vital to providing communication, and it's been a serious issue with written communication forever.

There can be indeed such a problem in the conversion from spoken dialogue to written text. But if you then paraphrase that text, then even more gets lost, not less.

Of course there is the obvious compromise of showing both. The original text is already available as subtitles. Displaying them both is not hard to code at all. In that solution the paraphrase could help to make the intention clear and/or partially make up for loss of intonation and non-verbal communication.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 13 juin 2012 - 04:05 .

[wsandista]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

mr_luga wrote...

Just remove the freaking paraphrasing. It's not sorcery, Deus Ex HR pulled it off. Witcher 2 didnt have a wheel, and gasp! People liked that game too! magic!

It baffles the mind how a bigger company with more resouces, are somehow unable to pull off things like this, but smaller companies can

So just a single word or phrase denoting how you'd respond, like how DEHR did it, is satisfactory for you.

While I prefer a full text line, or a line that completely conveys what will be said(like in The Witcher 2), a single word would be better than the paraphrase, if it accurately described the intent.

Still, I believe that thee full text line is the best and should be heavily considered.

Modifié par wsandista, 13 juin 2012 - 04:13 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

DEHR actually allowed you to see the entire line of dialogue. So yes, DEHR is more than satisfactory for me.

Did it actually do that?  I don't remember that.  I might just be confusing the dialogue "conflicts" but it doesn't in those cases:

http://youtu.be/XleGcKfgN4M?t=7m42s

EDIT: Dave of Canada points this out too.

Also, i don't find NPC's misinterpreting what my character said character breaking. I don;t know how anyone could. How your character said something is how he said something, an NPC's reaction cannot anc does not change that.

You've never had someone take an email or a written forum post you made and had it misinterpreted?  Imagine any book where every single line of dialogue is simply prefaced with "he/she said."  Never "He said sarcastically" or anything like that.

It's very different for me to genuinely say "I think you're a nice person" compared to sarcastically saying "I think you're a nice person."  In most of my daily face to face interactions, I can safely say something sarcastic to a peer and they know I'm being sarcastic based on all the non verbal clues, on top of the intonation or other variations I employ to actually deliver the line.

Your character saying something you did not intend, however, is character breaking.

At it's core though, it's "your character picking from a list of designer given choices."  I have a feeling that in many cases people end up picking the one that is "close enough" rather than specifically what they want to say

How the NPC interprets something and how your character says something are two different things at their very core.

How your character says something feeds into the expected response.  If I'm talking to Alistair and he and I have been sassy, I should be able to say "I think you're being stupid" and not have him be offended.  How does the gamer actually tell Alistair genuinely that he thinks Alistair is being stupid with the same dialogue line, if the game designer has ascribed "I think you're being stupid" as being sarcastic.  Vice versa if the designer has indicated that the line is to be taken as a serious critique.

If I say to Alistair "I think you're being stupid" and we've been friends for a while (and Alistair is a sassy guy himself), but the game responds as though I'm being serious and he reacts as though he's offended, I end up inferring that the delivery of my line wasn't as I intended.  I bases this inference on the fact that I can be sarcastic to my friends in real life and they aren't offended by it.

[Allan Schumacher]

There can be indeed such a problem in the conversion from spoken dialogue to written text. But if you then paraphrase that text, then even more gets lost, not less.

That's fair, and it's becoming more apparent that how I played through the Infinity Engine games may not be very well aligned with how other people did.


In Baldur's Gate 2, if I was hostile in response to an NPC, I'd pick the dialogue option that seemed to be the most hostile. What words were used were actually inconsequential... I always dissected the intent of each line. Some say that they don't like the paraphrase system because the hostile response may be TOO hostile. Though isn't it just as much of an indictment of a full text system (and really CRPGs in general) if you look at the hostile option and go "whoa that's too intense" and end up having to pick a different line of dialogue instead?


Since I always picked full lines based on intent, I wasn't too set back with games like Alpha Protocol or Mass Effect. Yes, there ARE situations where I may pull out a gun or something which I think can be better conveyed. That IS a negative, but for myself as a gamer, it's offset by the positive that I get to see, listen, and respond to the dialogue when it happens (In TOR specifically I found this led to a lot of hilarious moments with my friend, but I can understand that some people still feel that that takes away from the degree of control they want to exercise).

In the end, I find myself ambivalent about the dialogue wheel. There are some aspects that I think are beneficial to my game experience, at pretty low cost.

By the same token, if I'm ambivalent about it, maybe I shouldn't bother getting involved since ultimately I don't feel like I'm that affected if they go full text

[Brockololly]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Though isn't it just as much of an indictment of a full text system (and really CRPGs in general) if you look at the hostile option and go "whoa that's too intense" and end up having to pick a different line of dialogue instead?

Thats one thing I really like about full text dialogue options though, is that you can look at all the possible options and go "Whoa! Thats too intense!" knowing that what you're seeing is the actual thing your PC will say. The fun then becomes guessing how a given NPC will react to that line.

Or being able to at least appreciate the writing of other dialogue choices without necessarily picking them. I know thats one reason I like full text dialogue in RPGs, is that I can read all the options and appreciate all the lines, like maybe some totally crazy or funny ones, even if I don't end up choosing them. You can't do that with the paraphrases.

[Allan Schumacher]

Brockololly wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Though isn't it just as much of an indictment of a full text system (and really CRPGs in general) if you look at the hostile option and go "whoa that's too intense" and end up having to pick a different line of dialogue instead?

Thats one thing I really like about full text dialogue options though, is that you can look at all the possible options and go "Whoa! Thats too intense!" knowing that what you're seeing is the actual thing your PC will say. The fun then becomes guessing how a given NPC will react to that line.

See, I see this as a bit of a disconnect.  Is it because of prior experience that someone is more accepting of not having a dialogue line that is actually appropriate for what you're looking for.

By the same token, if you're okay and find enjoyment in that, is it not fair for someone to pick the sassy option on a dialogue wheel and then wait in anticipation for the specific words to be said?  I don't recall anything specific from DA2, but there were some moments in TOR that actually had me (and the friend playing with me) just howling.

Or being able to at least appreciate the writing of other dialogue choices without necessarily picking them. I know thats one reason I like full text dialogue in RPGs, is that I can read all the options and appreciate all the lines, like maybe some totally crazy or funny ones, even if I don't end up choosing them. You can't do that with the paraphrases.

You know, for myself as a gamer, this is probably the best point I've read in support of full dialogue lines hahaha.  There have been times that I read the full list and see an option that just makes me laugh out loud, though there's little chance that I'll actually pick that line (at least without save scumming it).

Well played sir!

[Dave of Canada]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

By the same token, if you're okay and find enjoyment in that, is it not fair for someone to pick the sassy option on a dialogue wheel and then wait in anticipation for the specific words to be said?  I don't recall anything specific from DA2, but there were some moments in TOR that actually had me (and the friend playing with me) just howling.

Bees.

[Allan Schumacher]

See... I laughed at that and immediately linked it to a friend XD. In fact, the same friend I play TOR with <.<

[Maria Caliban]

Just rip-off DX:HR.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

How do you propose we reconcile the differences between these two groups?

You should listen to the voice of your True Fans.

Now, everyone claims they're the voice of True Fans and that their personal preferences will help BioWare make the best RPG ever, but I'm the real deal.

[TEWR]

Jumping in to yet another thread here!

Dave of Canada wrote...

Bees.

That was comedy gold for me, I'll admit. Despite how I dislike the dialogue wheel on principle, I did love that line.

Though as an aside, her talking to that guy alone when the guy was expecting Hawke to follow him in search of a healer is kinda.... off.

If Hawke isn't there, then why is the guy talking to her. Hawke obviously doesn't need a healer if Hawke isn't there to keep up the facade of being stung by a bee, so a competent guard would know that something's off and that she's after something (and I know what she's after. It's the lack of competence that's getting to me).

Ah well.... they're Orlesians.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

By the same token, if you're okay and find enjoyment in that, is it not fair for someone to pick the sassy option on a dialogue wheel and then wait in anticipation for the specific words to be said?  I don't recall anything specific from DA2, but there were some moments in TOR that actually had me (and the friend playing with me) just howling.

Dialogue wheel that -- when the player hovers over the options for a set period of time -- allows the player to look at the top or bottom of the screen and see the full line, displayed as a surtitle or subtitle.

Depending on how it would be done that is.

Both sides get what they want.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 13 juin 2012 - 06:16 .