342 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

I certainly don't feel that the two are mutually exclusive.

[deuce985]

Maria Caliban wrote...

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.

You have to admit...that interrogation system they used was awesome. www.youtube.com/watch

[Allan Schumacher]

I loved the "conversation encounters" in DEHR.

[Xewaka]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
I loved the "conversation encounters" in DEHR.

It was, without a shadow of doubt, the best mechanic in DE:HR. It actually gives conversations the narrative and gameplay weight they always should have. We need more of that.

Modifié par Xewaka, 13 juin 2012 - 08:18 .

[AkiKishi]

Persephone wrote...
I thought it was rather realistic as people don't switch personalities at random in real life either. Having earlier behavior reflected (An aggressive character trying to be diplomatic shouldn't work simply because they want it to) is a good thing. Could it do with some tweaking? Sure. But IMHO it was way more immersive than the Warden's multiple personality disorder. (Joking!)

Not at random , but certainly situationaly. I'm not the same at home as I am at work for instance. When I'm in meetings I'm very different to how I am around the "water cooler".

Having fixed autodialogue makes you a very one dimensional figure.

[AkiKishi]

deuce985 wrote...
You have to admit...that interrogation system they used was awesome. www.youtube.com/watch

While I agree,it only works because of the Jensen character. It's very much how everything in Witcher2 is written for Geralt and the reason why that works too. The reason DA2 fails is because it's trying to present this illusion of Hawke not being a fixed character, but hiding behind a see through shower curtain while doing it. Hardly anyone falls for the "trick" as a result.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 13 juin 2012 - 09:24 .

[AkiKishi]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
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.

For me it depends if the character is presented as a pre-gen or if it's supposed to be my creation. When Adam goes off on an autodialogue monologue, that's just Adam. If my character starts doing that it feels wrong.

Theres a classic line in Witcher2 where the paraphrase is "sorry". Geralt actually leans across and says "f**k you" .Again, that's just Geralt since the lines are written for him. But if a character I supposedly created were to do the same thing I'd be extremely anoyed with the paraphrase system.

Bioware really needs to pick a side. Either go for fully fleshed characters like Adam and Geralt, or pull back on the cinematic presentation and give people the tools to be able to play their own creations. In a cinematic game though, there is only one choice.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 13 juin 2012 - 09:40 .

[Kidd]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

Well put. This is why I really liked the dialogue icons. In real life, it's not difficult to use your voice and tone to infer lots of information. All that data is completely lost in text form, which is why people started using smileys in chats (and even on forums ^^). It's a way to quickly bridge a problem with the communicative medium.

Using your example with BSN icons,
 I think you're being stupid
 I think you're being stupid 
<3 I think you're being stupid
 I think you're being stupid

All four have very distinct tones and will instill very different emotions in the recipient of the line. Am I turning their mistake into a joke? First option. Am I implying they need to think things through one more time? Second option. Am I being jokingly insulting in a way where I just want to hold him? Third option. Am I outright damn offensive and telling him he's off the rocker? Fourth option.

If I'm given the full line - sans intention icons at least - "I think you're being stupid," I will have no idea what my character is actually saying until either my character voices it (voiced protag) or the NPC reacts (silent protag). I can choose the words, yes, but I cannot choose the language or meaning. Makes me feel as if my character is incapable of body language and speaks with the acting proficiency of Microsoft Sam xD

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 13 juin 2012 - 10:31 .

[Nomen Mendax]

 A lot of this discussion reinforces that the dialogue wheel is a very inflexible UI.  The community seems to be divided into (at least) two camps.  Those who don't mind, or even enjoy not knowing exactly what their character is going to say and those whose conception of the character is broken if they don't know what he/she is going to say (I'm in the second camp).

I think the tool tip over the dialogue phrase is a neat idea, and I'd certainly take it over what I got in DA2, but it still means that I have to pause to hover the mouse over each phrase for every conversation.  If you are going to allow the players to choose to see either a phrase or the whole line then this is very easy to do with dialogue box, it's also perfectly possible to add intent to a traditional dialogue box, either with a (small) icon or just with a word.  Personally I would prefer words to the icons, some of the icons only come up infrequently and I either have to guess what they mean or *gasp* look them up in the manual.

[brushyourteeth]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

Well put. This is why I really liked the dialogue icons. In real life, it's not difficult to use your voice and tone to infer lots of information. All that data is completely lost in text form, which is why people started using smileys in chats (and even on forums ^^). It's a way to quickly bridge a problem with the communicative medium.

Using your example with BSN icons,
 I think you're being stupid
 I think you're being stupid 
<3 I think you're being stupid
 I think you're being stupid

All four have very distinct tones and will instill very different emotions in the recipient of the line. Am I turning their mistake into a joke? First option. Am I implying they need to think things through one more time? Second option. Am I being jokingly insulting in a way where I just want to hold him? Third option. Am I outright damn offensive and telling him he's off the rocker? Fourth option.

If I'm given the full line - sans intention icons at least - "I think you're being stupid," I will have no idea what my character is actually saying until either my character voices it (voiced protag) or the NPC reacts (silent protag). I can choose the words, yes, but I cannot choose the language or meaning. Makes me feel as if my character is incapable of body language and speaks with the acting proficiency of Microsoft Sam xD

Agree completely!

I find it totally possible that DA:O's full-text, no-VA system just needs to be married to DAII's icon-labeled, voice-acted system. They could make beautiful music together.

[Uccio]

The reason I disliked DA2 conversation wheel was the fact that one could play the game by simple choosing the icon. No need to read any of the texts since the response was usually something else what was written.

[AkiKishi]

Ukki wrote...

The reason I disliked DA2 conversation wheel was the fact that one could play the game by simple choosing the icon. No need to read any of the texts since the response was usually something else what was written.

You could play Deus Ex:HR just with the intent words. You would probably want to examine the dialogue during the speech challenges but in normal conversation the intent words more than did the job.

Without the text though we would never had such classics like "I want to be a Dragon".

[Uccio]

I´ve played DE:HR, the conversation wheel in it is quite good. DA2 wheel is not.

[TEWR]

I find it totally possible that DA:O's full-text, no-VA system just needs to be married to DAII's icon-labeled, voice-acted system. They could make beautiful music together.

That is the ideal solution and one I wholeheartedly agree with and desire, but David Gaider has unfortunately said full-text won't ever return.

Don't know why. Full text with a VA and tone icons would still allow the players that enjoy paraphrases -- meaning being pleasantly surprised by what they hear -- to... well... enjoy what they liked about DAII.

While DAO system supporters get what they wanted, in part: The full line.

Me? I love the voiced protagonist, hate the paraphrases on principle, and approve of the intent icons. So this solution would be my preferred choice.

It would also allow me to play the paraphrase type method, if I want to. Rather then forcing me to.

Resource wise, I can't see how it'd cost too much. Bioware has the VA, they've got the tones, and they're still writing the full line.

So allowing us to see that full line before it's said shouldn't pose much of an issue.

All that needs to be done is get rid of the Dialogue wheel and replace it with what you said:

 My name is Hawke. A pleasure to meet you Ser Farren.
 So you're a Templar? My luck just never goes well.
 Just so you know, I am in no mood for any Templar bull****.
 Varric, what's your take on this fellow? He claims to be a friend of yours.
 So what are you doing all the way out here in the Deep Roads?



Or something like that

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 13 juin 2012 - 11:03 .

[brushyourteeth]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I find it totally possible that DA:O's full-text, no-VA system just needs to be married to DAII's icon-labeled, voice-acted system. They could make beautiful music together.

That is the ideal solution and one I wholeheartedly agree with and desire, but David Gaider has unfortunately said full-text won't ever return.

Don't know why. Full text with a VA and tone icons would still allow the players that enjoy paraphrases -- meaning being pleasantly surprised by what they hear -- to... well... enjoy what they liked about DAII.

While DAO players get what they wanted, in part: The full line.

I know I said I was a guaranteed pre-order no matter what, but if the dialogue system doesn't get resolved I'm not sure I wouldn't rather just wait a few months for another player to come up with a full-text conversation guide. I'm not usually huge on metagaming, especially for the first playthrough, but it's really starting to sound perferrable to having to RP that my character has Tourette's (again).

[PaulSX]

the problem is the diagloue options in DA2 are really not well
written, at least sometimes I just can not understand what exactly those simple
phrases could mean. DA2 tried to use the icons to help you understand,
but sometimes it just feels so ambiguous. I encountered multiple times
that I chose a diplomatic tone and Hawke ended up joking around.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I find it totally possible that DA:O's full-text, no-VA system just needs to be married to DAII's icon-labeled, voice-acted system. They could make beautiful music together.

That is the ideal solution and one I wholeheartedly agree with and desire, but David Gaider has unfortunately said full-text won't ever return.

Don't know why. Full text with a VA and tone icons would still allow the players that enjoy paraphrases -- meaning being pleasantly surprised by what they hear -- to... well... enjoy what they liked about DAII.

While DAO players get what they wanted, in part: The full line.

full text is not nessasary if the dialogue options are well written. I think Mass Effect 1 and 2 did a pretty good job on this aspect.

Modifié par suntzuxi, 13 juin 2012 - 09:59 .

[Nomen Mendax]

suntzuxi wrote...

full text is not nessasary if the dialogue options are well written. I think Mass Effect 1 and 2 did a pretty good job on this aspect.

I disagree, I've just been replaying ME1 and ME2 and there are numerous occasions where my Shepard says something I wasn't expecting.  I would much rather just know the full line.

[AkiKishi]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I find it totally possible that DA:O's full-text, no-VA system just needs to be married to DAII's icon-labeled, voice-acted system. They could make beautiful music together.

That is the ideal solution and one I wholeheartedly agree with and desire, but David Gaider has unfortunately said full-text won't ever return.

Don't know why. Full text with a VA and tone icons would still allow the players that enjoy paraphrases -- meaning being pleasantly surprised by what they hear -- to... well... enjoy what they liked about DAII.

While DAO system supporters get what they wanted, in part: The full line.

Me? I love the voiced protagonist, hate the paraphrases on principle, and approve of the intent icons. So this solution would be my preferred choice.

It would also allow me to play the paraphrase type method, if I want to. Rather then forcing me to.

Resource wise, I can't see how it'd cost too much. Bioware has the VA, they've got the tones, and they're still writing the full line.

So allowing us to see that full line before it's said shouldn't pose much of an issue.

All that needs to be done is get rid of the Dialogue wheel and replace it with what you said:

 My name is Hawke. A pleasure to meet you Ser Farren.
 So you're a Templar? My luck just never goes well.
 Just so you know, I am in no mood for any Templar bull****.
 Varric, what's your take on this fellow? He claims to be a friend of yours.
 So what are you doing all the way out here in the Deep Roads?



Or something like that

Not really seeing a difference except in it being listed rather than spaced around a wheel. Unless you want everyone to speak in sound bites, full dialogue is never going to fit unless you adopt a a similiar method to DX:HR.

[darrylzero]

I'm a little late to this party, but I wanted to say that I think the paraphrasing was mostly fine in principle but frequently lacked execution. The most horrifying moments for me were typically when diplomatic answers became syrupy-sweet answers. In general, I like to play characters who don't want to reveal too much or tip their hand in conversation. "Diplomatic" sounds like it would be that, and I wish it had been moreso. I ended up using firm most often, though I was mixing all three pretty liberally.

Also, the dominant tone thing was a cool idea, but I think it would be nice if it were something you could set in the menu. Being able to have firm or diplomatic be my dominant tone would have freed me to make more jokes, but I was constantly avoiding the snarky options to make sure that wouldn't become the dominant tone, because that didn't feel right for my character.

[joyner1229]

I think the issue is not so much the dialogue wheel, as much as the whole role-playing mechanic and how it changed in DA2. Theoretically, a wheel and a tree are simply different in layout. Theoretically, you can show exactly what your character will say on a wheel or have a voice/icons for a tree.

The problem is that some people (like myself) choose to play the game from a first-person perspective. In Origins, I am Warden. 9 times out of 10, what I feel I would say in a given situation is represented in the tree. Even though Warden doesn't talk or have a dominant tone, I use my imagination and see myself interacting with the characters, like reading a book. I sometimes also choose to be someone completely different from me, much more ruthless or aloof. Again, my imagination fills in any holes and the character becomes mine.

Hawke is much more fixed. I can't really be me because Hawke doesn't sound anything like me and doesn't say things that I would say. When I first met Isabella in the Hanged Man and she asked for help, I chose "You, too?" and the "joking" icon came up. I expected Hawke to say something funny. Instead, he says in a very whiny, annoyed voice and with a cross look on his face, "Can't anyone fix their own live around here!?" Some people, however, like this approach. It's like third-person instead of first. They are not so much becoming the character as directing a character that's reasonably fleshed out instead of an empty puppet. This difference is beyond a discussion of just dialogue mechanics because I think it extends to so many aspects of the game.

I think it is very difficult to have it both ways. Hawke tries, and does not succeed imo. So my suggestions to at least try to appease as many people as possible through the wheel (since it's pretty much confirmed no matter what we say):

-Try to get multiple voice actors for the protagonist (not very likely, I know with limited resources).
-Maybe have some sort of personality meter at the beginning of the game that dictates the type of wheel/dialogue/responses you get. Friendly, stoic, short, aloof, etc. It may sound like DA2's wheel, but I think giving people options within a personality, allows for better and realistic role-playing. This also prevents choosing a "nice" response followed by a "mean" response and sounding like two different people.
-I'm generally against paraphrasing, as I can't play a role if I'm guessing what my character says. Either do the suggestion mentioned of having the whole line displayed or simply do more accurate paraphrasing.
-Add more options. Try to stray away from masking the same line with nice/snarky/mean.
-Minimize auto-dialogue unless it is absolutely trivial (i.e. "You don't say!")

[labargegrrrl]

i notice that most of the concerns about the wheel revolved around hating on the personality-based aspects.  

but i think i'd like to point out a few other things.

when you had to pick between choices that weren't personality driven (the circle arrow wheel things), but my character responded acording to her personality in lines and VA, i enjoyed that.  

when the star icon (expert icon) came up, i loved it.  who didn't like to see rouge hawke go for the murderknife or magehawke get intellectual?

the companion icon was great.  there was far too little of that in DAO.  i can only remember a couple of instances where you could actually ask for help from other party members in origins, and the fact that there was so much of it in DA2 was a great expansion of that concept. 

i think we all can agree that the romance icons were a very, VERY helpful evolution from DAO.  there was nothing worse than having no idea that you were actually flirting with Alistar when you weren't trying to.  

the coin icon could have been improved if i only knew how much money i was dolling out, but i liked the option to bribe, gift, or demand payment.  i actually felt like this could have been utilized more often.

what i found unnerving about the personality driven responses, is that i felt it would have been better if there could have been two blue/purple/red sets for dialogues so both my inclanations and my personality were reflected.  for instance, why is my very only agro option for my pro-templar hawke in dissent to promise she's going to help anders "kill them all."?  it would have made more sense for her to have two agro choices (one pro-temp, one anti-temp) in that scenario.  when first encountering Merril, i didn't like the fact that my only diplo option was to agree with her about the use of deamons/blood magic.  

there were a lot of points like that where i felt like my hawke's personality had to be at odds with the way she saw the world.  i couldn't make diplo hawke diplomatically disagree with people, agro hawke forcefully agree with someone, and my snarkers were schitzophrenic.  always funny, but sometimes siding with one side and then the other in a way that held little ryhme or reason for their political leanings.  

a right AND left side to indicate both ideaology as well as personality would have been an easy solution to that.

as has been previously pointed out, it was nice to know you wouldn't be evoking suprise responses.  i didn't enjoy it when wynn turned on me just because i said cullen MIGHT have a fair point of view in origins.  i was less than thrilled when Alistar took what i believed was a joke as an insult.  little things like that about the old system bother me when i replay it for comparison.

i DO miss the old persuade/intimidate/cunning system sometimes, but they were kind of still there in a way.  i wouldn't object to them being brought back.  a torture option might be a nice addition if they were, imho.

could the wheel be improved?  abso-effing-lutely.  was it an improvement itself?  YES.  there was much to love.

good luck to all of you in your VERY fragile endevor.

[Absafraginlootly]

Regardless of whether the dialogue is in a wheel or in lines, or whether it is paraphrased or not paraphrased, I'd like the icons to remain.
I've had about the same amount of disconnect and confusion in both games.

In DA:O I would sometimes misinterpret the tone of a line (eg. I select what I'd thought was a joking remark and then had the npc react as though I was being mean, looking at you alistair) and in DA2 while I misinterpreted the lines tone less often (I really wish they'd still have tone on the choices, those 3 swirly arrows weren't very informative) the improvement was made up for by my misinterpretations of the paraphrases (eg. selecting something like "I should have known" when talking to Isabella and thinking my Hawke would be blaming herself for not acting on the Qunari situation sooner only to instead have her ripping into isobela about how shes such a backstabbing...something..).

So yeah I want there to be icons telling me whether a line is sad/angry/witty/polite etc. both for normal lines and choice ones and if there are paraphrases instead of full lines I'd like them to be a tad clearer.

Edit: I did also miss the persuasion system of DA:O, as much for the ability to make my character suck at convincing people no matter how well intentioned they are as for the ability to make her/him silver tounged.

Modifié par Absafraginlootly, 25 juin 2012 - 07:07 .

[FedericoV]

BobSmith101 wrote...

For me it depends if the character is presented as a pre-gen or if it's supposed to be my creation. When Adam goes off on an autodialogue monologue, that's just Adam. If my character starts doing that it feels wrong.

Theres a classic line in Witcher2 where the paraphrase is "sorry". Geralt actually leans across and says "f**k you" .Again, that's just Geralt since the lines are written for him. But if a character I supposedly created were to do the same thing I'd be extremely anoyed with the paraphrase system.

Bioware really needs to pick a side. Either go for fully fleshed characters like Adam and Geralt, or pull back on the cinematic presentation and give people the tools to be able to play their own creations. In a cinematic game though, there is only one choice.

I completely agree. If Bioware want to continue in the direction outlined by their last games (interactive storydriven/cinematic games developed to be consolle hits) they should have the gut to cut most RPG elements from their games and follow that kind of design organically. Basically, they should develop action games with dialogue options and branching storylines. No RPG combat and no PC customization.

But then, they should even create a new franchise/setting. Thedas is a classic fantasy RPG setting heavily rooted on D&D tropes and it was created to support that kind of games. It's not a good setting for strong cinematic/visual experiences (just like most fantasy settings as Tolkien liked to point out...).

I would hate that direction and it would ****** the fans a lot. And I'm not sure that Bioware is ready to compete with games like Uncharted or AC on their grounds (I really think not). But at least I would understand the choice and we would avoid another game of impossible compromises.

Modifié par FedericoV, 25 juin 2012 - 08:14 .

[AkiKishi]

FedericoV wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

For me it depends if the character is presented as a pre-gen or if it's supposed to be my creation. When Adam goes off on an autodialogue monologue, that's just Adam. If my character starts doing that it feels wrong.

Theres a classic line in Witcher2 where the paraphrase is "sorry". Geralt actually leans across and says "f**k you" .Again, that's just Geralt since the lines are written for him. But if a character I supposedly created were to do the same thing I'd be extremely anoyed with the paraphrase system.

Bioware really needs to pick a side. Either go for fully fleshed characters like Adam and Geralt, or pull back on the cinematic presentation and give people the tools to be able to play their own creations. In a cinematic game though, there is only one choice.

I completely agree. If Bioware want to continue in the direction outlined by their last games (interactive storydriven/cinematic games developed to be consolle hits) they should have the gut to cut most RPG elements from their games and follow that kind of design organically. Basically, they should develop action games with dialogue options and branching storylines. No RPG combat and no PC customization.

But then, they should even create a new franchise/setting. Thedas is a classic fantasy RPG setting heavily rooted on D&D tropes and it was created to support that kind of games. It's not a good setting for strong cinematic/visual experiences (just like most fantasy settings as Tolkien liked to point out...).

I would hate that direction and it would ****** the fans a lot. And I'm not sure that Bioware is ready to compete with games like Uncharted or AC on their grounds (I really think not). But at least I would understand the choice and we would avoid another game of impossible compromises.

Witcher2/Deus Ex:HR and Uncharted are worlds appart. Both DX:HR and Witcher have RPG combat. Uncharted does not. Drake is as good as I am from the start to the finish.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 juin 2012 - 08:32 .

[TonberryFeye]

First off, an aside; yes, there are plenty of DA fans out there who are not on the Forums, but consider this: we took the time to register here, they didn't. We all clearly feel that the game series matters enough that we want our voices heard. I, for one, certainly do - I joined this forum so I could know that I made my opinion on Dragon Age 2 known, in the hope that if enough people like me said "were you high when you made this?" that Dragon Age 3 would go back to being like Origins - worth playing.

The Dialog Wheel is moronic. Your character sounds outright demented as they switch from aggressively threatening to break the legs of small children to timidly apologising for standing in someone's light. In the end, I just went with the 'comedy' choices every time because it was just too painful to listen to the 'serious' crap.

It is not a mechanic worth salvaging. It is a mistake. It feels like a mechanic that belongs in Mass Effect, and I mean that in the most derogatory sense - it's a gimmick of "look how totally different we are to every other RPG on the market!" Bioware, building a car with only one wheel is 'different'. That doesn't mean it should be done.

As I've said elsewhere, what you need is to bring back the Dragon Age style text lines with no icons next to them. Having an icon telling you whether or not you're going to earn +10 Hippy Points or -15 Grumpy Person Points ruins the game; people stop trying to play as a character, and start trying to manipulate numbers around to make things happen.

Next, having hidden all the alignment and consequence mechanics, you need to deal with the voices.

Once more, Dragon Age has the answer. When you choose your character (which should allow multiple races - we don't want another Hawke!) you pick their personality. Thus, we get situations where the text options change (and for god's sake do not paraphrase!).

For example, let's say you're being asked to do something by an NPC. The option for "Go Away" might change as follows:
Patient: "Please leave."
Wise: "My patience with you is wearing thin."
Wrathful: "Can I get you a ladder so you can get off my back?"
Violent: "You are really pissing me off! Get lost!"

This personality does not always have to stick to a particular tone, however. For example, let's say we're talking with an NPC who is in a romance with us; our character's tone should shift to be more accomodating. This allows for more interesting options...

Let's take Wrathful again, and imagine a party member has screwed up and confesses "I'm sorry, I let you down..." Here's some potential reactions based on friendship:
0: "I noticed!"
-50: "No ****!"
-100 (Rival): "You always let me down! You're hopeless!"
+50: "Yes, I noticed."
+100 (Romance): "Try not to let it happen again."

The idea here is that it helps do something that is quite tricky to accomplish otherwise; that if you genuinely care about someone, you will get to know them. After all, it seems strange that you can be in a romance with Alistair, and yet you'll openly say to his face "I think all Templars are scum!"

That is not to say you should be denied the option of disagreeing, but it should recalibrate itself based on approval.