342 réponses à ce sujet

[Fortlowe]

On accessibility, I think maybe SirGladiator might be on to something of a comprise. Pause it, read the log of the conversation thus far if you missed something (but no further ahead than that very instant, ie knowing/ viewing the responses ahead of time) then resume it and respond.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:41 .

[ianvillan]

Fortlowe wrote...

I've been playing 'The Walking Dead' and I am very impressed with the game, especially how it handles dialogue. Most of the conversations are timed and many are outright dynamic. Consequences, much like in real life are both immediate and long gestating. I could imagine Dragon Age having a similar system, along with dynamic interrupts of companion chatter. How many times have you wanted to take an active part in some of the humorous background chatter your companions were having? What if you got a prompt to do just that? And even better, what if that interaction was determined by your PC's personality? I'd like interrupts introduced to the series in any form, but getting involved with companion chatter seems to me a novel way to introduce it to Dragon Age.

Back to the dialogue options though and how cribbing from 'The Walking Dead' is not a bad idea. Another thing that series has going for it is that usually during these conversations, one or both parties are doing something while they are talking. Kinda like in real life. Looking back on both of the Dragon Age games, the conversations seem so wooden because the P Cand the NPCs kinda just drop whatever they are doing and have a chat. Have them doing something, and better yet, let the player take part in it. Chopping wood. Feeding chickens. Sharpening blades. Crafting potions. Doing paperwork. Tending a campfire. Playing fetch with dog. Etc. Etc. Mundane tasks that the player or NPC or both can take part in during the conversation.

Those are some of my thoughts on the matter. Allan Schmacher, if you're reading this and you haven't played it, I very much suggest 'The Walking Dead' game. The way that conversations are executed is extremely compelling and worth taking note of.

Interupts for me would be an imediate no buy, I have absolutely no idea what will happen if I press an interupt button so how could I know if it is anything my character would do, I hatted it in Mass Effect especially because you needed high paragon or renegade points for conversations and the main way of getting them were by interupts.

[Fortlowe]

Then don't interrupt. Dragon age doesn't do paragon or renegade. I don't see why it would be required in interrupts.

[ianvillan]

Fortlowe wrote...

Then don't interrupt. Dragon age doesn't do paragon or renegade. I don't see why it would be required in interrupts.

Dragon Age has got its own paragon and renegade system it just calls them diplomatic, sarcastic and angry.

But lets say they dont have the interrupts be part of diplomatic etc, then how will you know what pressing the interrupts might do. because in mass effect you get a symbol of paragon or renegade so you know its based of that action.

Plus in mass effect they had alot of information or option availiable if you did an interupt, so if I didn't press the button I missed out on content. So I shouldn't have to press a button for something random to happen just to see more content.

[Allan Schumacher]

Plus in mass effect they had alot of information or option availiable if you did an interupt, so if I didn't press the button I missed out on content. So I shouldn't have to press a button for something random to happen just to see more content.

This is an issue regardless of whether or not it's an interrupt. In fact, by taking the interrupt, you often sacrifice a different type of content because the conversation now flows differently. It's simply a choice, and if we're to provide choices for the gamer then there's going to be some level of content that isn't experienced.

[AkiKishi]

ianvillan wrote...
Plus in mass effect they had alot of information or option availiable if you did an interupt, so if I didn't press the button I missed out on content. So I shouldn't have to press a button for something random to happen just to see more content.

RPGs are all about missing out content. It's what makes them unique and what makes the choices you make matter.
It's also an incentive to replay if you want to see something that badly.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:58 .

[ianvillan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Plus in mass effect they had alot of information or option availiable if you did an interupt, so if I didn't press the button I missed out on content. So I shouldn't have to press a button for something random to happen just to see more content.

This is an issue regardless of whether or not it's an interrupt. In fact, by taking the interrupt, you often sacrifice a different type of content because the conversation now flows differently. It's simply a choice, and if we're to provide choices for the gamer then there's going to be some level of content that isn't experienced.

I dont mind having content that is cut off if I choose a path or option, its the problem of the interupt that I have no idea what will happen when I choose it and it could be totally inapropiate for what my character would do.

If the interupt was clearly defined and I knew what my character would do when I pressed it fine.

[AkiKishi]

ianvillan wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Plus in mass effect they had alot of information or option availiable if you did an interupt, so if I didn't press the button I missed out on content. So I shouldn't have to press a button for something random to happen just to see more content.

This is an issue regardless of whether or not it's an interrupt. In fact, by taking the interrupt, you often sacrifice a different type of content because the conversation now flows differently. It's simply a choice, and if we're to provide choices for the gamer then there's going to be some level of content that isn't experienced.

I dont mind having content that is cut off if I choose a path or option, its the problem of the interupt that I have no idea what will happen when I choose it and it could be totally inapropiate for what my character would do.

If the interupt was clearly defined and I knew what my character would do when I pressed it fine.

I don't think interupts are that obscure. Krogan+fuel tank+renegade interupt = boom.Guy dying+paragon = doing something about it.

[Allan Schumacher]

I dont mind having content that is cut off if I choose a path or option,
its the problem of the interupt that I have no idea what will happen
when I choose it and it could be totally inapropiate for what my
character would do.

If the interupt was clearly defined and I knew what my character would do when I pressed it fine.

That's fine and a fair criticism.

Given the "sudden" nature of the interrupts, what could be done to have made them provide more information?

On some level I found Mass Effect's pretty easy to predict given the type of person a Paragon/Renegade will be, but it's not perfect that way. What improvements would you like?

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:03 .

[AkiKishi]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I dont mind having content that is cut off if I choose a path or option,
its the problem of the interupt that I have no idea what will happen
when I choose it and it could be totally inapropiate for what my
character would do.

If the interupt was clearly defined and I knew what my character would do when I pressed it fine.

That's fine and a fair criticism.

Given the "sudden" nature of the interrupts, what could be done to have made them provide more information?

On some level I found Mass Effect's pretty easy to predict given the type of person a Paragon/Renegade will be, but it's not perfect that way. What improvements would you like?

Well there is one way. Have a thought before the scene contiunues. You just sort of haze out the consequence sequence. The downside of this is that you have the same sort of situation as with voicing full lines, you have already seen the outcomes in "thought form" so it's a little redundant unless you have an issue with not knowing what action you will take in advance.

It would work something like this.

Scene to interupt - thoughtA - thoughtB - recomence scene - activate interupt.

[ianvillan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I dont mind having content that is cut off if I choose a path or option,
its the problem of the interupt that I have no idea what will happen
when I choose it and it could be totally inapropiate for what my
character would do.

If the interupt was clearly defined and I knew what my character would do when I pressed it fine.

That's fine and a fair criticism.

Given the "sudden" nature of the interrupts, what could be done to have made them provide more information?

On some level I found Mass Effect's pretty easy to predict given the type of person a Paragon/Renegade will be, but it's not perfect that way. What improvements would you like?

I will say that some of the interupts were predictable but others were obscure.

How to fix it is difficult, the way it is done now being tied to paragon or renegade has to go, A compromise might be a description of the action you will perform ie (shoot exploding barrel, save person, headbutt templar.) next to a number to press.

[DahliaLynn]

I've been reading through various Dialogue wheel /Voiced  vs. Silent protagonist threads, and generally feel that there is a direct relationship between how one prefers to play their characters to their choice of voiced versus silent. Do you prefer to play as yourself, or control a separate character?

I decided to post a poll to find out how many people feel one way or the other, and find out if this relationship stands true (at least in this forum). 

How do you prefer to play your characters?

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 02 juillet 2012 - 10:07 .

[Fast Jimmy]

http://greywardens.c...-gaider-part-2/ 

I'm just going to leave this 2010 interview quote right here.

Recently we teamed up with BioWare’s Lead Writer, David Gaider, to bring you exclusive and interesting insights. Today we present you part two of our interview with David Gaider.

GW.com: I can imagine that writing for a video game is closer to writing adventures for traditional roleplaying games rather than novels. Could you tell us a little about the process one would take to write the story for a video-game such as Dragon Age and perhaps tell us about any experience you have with traditional (tabletop) roleplaying games, such as Dungeons & Dragons?

Gaider: Story is important, but it really isn’t the sole factor in determining what a project should or should not do. It’s been my experience that the best recommendation for a video game writer is that they have a background in running tabletop roleplaying games. I have some theories as to why that is – essentially I think it’s because someone who’s only experienced in writing prose has a very linear thought process. They write for a passive audience, creating scenes with characters that are always their own. A tabletop GM “writes” for characters that belong to their players, and are accustomed to dealing with the fact that these characters do unexpected things. They’re accustomed to accommodating their players’ creative needs rather than just their own, and tend to have an easier time wrapping their heads around the way that game dialogue branches – as opposed to your typical prose writer who has a very specific “voice” in mind for their player and whose dialogue branches fall apart when the player deviates from the path they had in mind.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 02 juillet 2012 - 11:46 .

[Wulfram]

The main problem I had with interrupts was that you never know if not taking this renegade interrupt will result in a paragon interrupt later, or if it'll just result in Shepard standing around like a lemon.

Otherwise I think DA2's set of icons would help.  If theres a heart icon you'll probably kiss someone, if there's crossed swords then you'll kill someone.

[Dean_the_Young]

Don't you mean if there's a murder-knife icon, Wulfram?

[joyner1229]

I think it would be very hard to do interrupts because the paragon/renegade system in ME is so black and white. I mean, for players who want to play an aloof/standoffish character or a comical, snarky character, what kind of interrupts would they have? One way to add more action in scenes is to simply add more action responses in the wheel.

Another problem I personally have with the interrupts is the fact that I tend to stop listening to conversations and start paying more attention to where Shepard is looking to see what he's contemplating doing. The idea of showing the action of the interrupt is similarly distracting, in my opinion. I just honestly think interrupts would have to go through a LOT of work to be consistently present in DA and give all types of characters choices to use them. If they are implemented, however, there should definitely not be a meter.

Modifié par joyner1229, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:29 .

[AmstradHero]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

http://greywardens.c...-gaider-part-2/ 

I'm just going to leave this 2010 interview quote right here.

Recently we teamed up with BioWare’s Lead Writer, David Gaider, to bring you exclusive and interesting insights. Today we present you part two of our interview with David Gaider.

GW.com: I can imagine that writing for a video game is closer to writing adventures for traditional roleplaying games rather than novels. Could you tell us a little about the process one would take to write the story for a video-game such as Dragon Age and perhaps tell us about any experience you have with traditional (tabletop) roleplaying games, such as Dungeons & Dragons?

Gaider: Story is important, but it really isn’t the sole factor in determining what a project should or should not do. It’s been my experience that the best recommendation for a video game writer is that they have a background in running tabletop roleplaying games. I have some theories as to why that is – essentially I think it’s because someone who’s only experienced in writing prose has a very linear thought process. They write for a passive audience, creating scenes with characters that are always their own. A tabletop GM “writes” for characters that belong to their players, and are accustomed to dealing with the fact that these characters do unexpected things. They’re accustomed to accommodating their players’ creative needs rather than just their own, and tend to have an easier time wrapping their heads around the way that game dialogue branches – as opposed to your typical prose writer who has a very specific “voice” in mind for their player and whose dialogue branches fall apart when the player deviates from the path they had in mind.

Wow. Kind of makes you wonder "what happened, BioWare?" when you look at DA2 and ME3, doesn't it?

To clarify, to me, it feels like recent BioWare games have focussed more on "delivering the story of the writers" rather than "allowing the player to create a character". Design considerations like a paraphrase dialogue wheel, interrupts and full voicing have inherently pushed players down a narrower story path and character trait set.

If we have to have a voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel, I think I prefer an "intent" wheel instead.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:36 .

[AkiKishi]

AmstradHero wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

http://greywardens.c...-gaider-part-2/ 

I'm just going to leave this 2010 interview quote right here.

Recently we teamed up with BioWare’s Lead Writer, David Gaider, to bring you exclusive and interesting insights. Today we present you part two of our interview with David Gaider.

GW.com: I can imagine that writing for a video game is closer to writing adventures for traditional roleplaying games rather than novels. Could you tell us a little about the process one would take to write the story for a video-game such as Dragon Age and perhaps tell us about any experience you have with traditional (tabletop) roleplaying games, such as Dungeons & Dragons?

Gaider: Story is important, but it really isn’t the sole factor in determining what a project should or should not do. It’s been my experience that the best recommendation for a video game writer is that they have a background in running tabletop roleplaying games. I have some theories as to why that is – essentially I think it’s because someone who’s only experienced in writing prose has a very linear thought process. They write for a passive audience, creating scenes with characters that are always their own. A tabletop GM “writes” for characters that belong to their players, and are accustomed to dealing with the fact that these characters do unexpected things. They’re accustomed to accommodating their players’ creative needs rather than just their own, and tend to have an easier time wrapping their heads around the way that game dialogue branches – as opposed to your typical prose writer who has a very specific “voice” in mind for their player and whose dialogue branches fall apart when the player deviates from the path they had in mind.

Wow. Kind of makes you wonder "what happened, BioWare?" when you look at DA2 and ME3, doesn't it?

To clarify, to me, it feels like recent BioWare games have focussed more on "delivering the story of the writers" rather than "allowing the player to create a character". Design considerations like a paraphrase dialogue wheel, interrupts and full voicing have inherently pushed players down a narrower story path and character trait set.

If we have to have a voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel, I think I prefer an "intent" wheel instead.

Technology naturaly pushed things in that direction. The more advanced technology means less room for blank spaces and blank spaces are what character driven games thrive on.

In BG etc. It was hardly an issue. You had a 1 inch tall sprite that you could project what like onto. Now you have a choice of either first person and never seeing the character (Skyrim) or choosing between a very non expressive non voiced character, or letting the writers have more control.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Technology naturaly pushed things in that direction. The more advanced technology means less room for blank spaces and blank spaces are what character driven games thrive on.

They had a choice, Bob.  They could have said no.

Just because they can fill those balnk spaces doesn't mean they have to.

And for the record, you can see your character in Skyrim.  There's an optional third-person camera, and I always use it.

[MerinTB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
And for the record, you can see your character in Skyrim.  There's an optional third-person camera, and I always use it.

I always use the 3rd person cam in TES games, getting mods to fix it if it isn't properly implented (New Vegas.)

[MysticalMage]

I don't know if this would work or not for DA3, but I would like if during character creation we had to choose a dominant personality like the tones in DA2, but during the actual dialogue we choose from options based on emotions (like happy, sad, angry, worried, etc.) that vary and sound different depending on the personality we chose for our character. This way we would keep the dialogue wheel, but it would feel like I have more control of my character.

[Pasquale1234]

Fortlowe wrote...

I don't see what role fairness plays in this at all. Nothing is being imposed.

... except for a conversation timer which some players clearly do not want.

To me, player agency means actually being a part of the story. Not dictating it from on high.

Technically, player agency refers to how much control the player has over the gaming experience.  When the game imposes pacing or timing, it takes away that agency.  A cinematic game such as DA2 tends to do that frequently, and for players who are often interrupted by real life while gaming, it gets really frustrating.  When I am interrupted just as a dialog or cutscene triggers, my options are to 1) Continue where I left off, possibly missing some content, 2) Play through until a point where the game allows me to re-load a previous save, which means I'll have to play through the same content again, or 3) Power off the system and re-boot it.  None of those options are particularly attractive.

OTOH, character agency refers to the variety of choices provided to the character, and how closely they emulate a realistic or likely choice for that character.  There have been some lively threads discussing, for example, the fact that Hawke was not allowed to use the murder knife on Petrice or resist Cullen taking Bethany to the circle.  These were viewed as limits on character agency in service to the story that BioWare chose to tell.  IOW, many legitimate character choices were thwarted by the "but thou must / not" nature of DA2's railroaded storyline.  It is understood that a cRPG can't allow for every possible action a character might take, but many players felt frustrated that Hawke had been given strong motives an opportunities to do some things the game did not allow.

To get back to the quote, being a part of the story is what some people might call role-playing, which for some of us is the entire point of engaging a role-playing game.  Since I never really understood Hawke or felt like I had much control over his/her behavior, I didn't find much role-playing in DA2.

[EricHVela]

AmstradHero wrote...

If we have to have a voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel, I think I prefer an "intent" wheel instead.

I would prefer the option to have no wheel at all (even with voiced). The whole up=nice, down=mean, left=investigate and right=move on is a spoiler to me.

I don't mind "intent" descriptions, but if I had to choose between intent descriptions and tone-setting summaries, I'd go for the latter.

If I had to choose between verbatim dialog options and tone-setting summaries, I'd still go for the latter. (A conversation can consist of more than one line from the hero and a variable amount of dialog during a length of dialog. Also, choosing every single line seems tedious to me.)

I will admit right now that I absolutely love the hidden "personality" variables in Dragon Age: Kirkwall based on how many times a player chose a tone of a response. It alters quite a lot of dialog -- particularly random banter and the three-arrow choices. Yet, the whole icon business gives it away IMHO. One can easily play the numbers to get their character's personality a certain instead of building a character how they think a sarcastic, serious, pleasant character would respond.

Of course, I don't want to force my preferred style on others. I would like the option to remove icon hints and replace the wheel with a randomized (maybe procedurally-ordered) list of responses. (SWTOR has the option to turn off the light-dark hints. I just would like the option to reduce more of the hints.)

[joyner1229]

BBCR wrote...

I don't know if this would work or not for DA3, but I would like if during character creation we had to choose a dominant personality like the tones in DA2, but during the actual dialogue we choose from options based on emotions (like happy, sad, angry, worried, etc.) that vary and sound different depending on the personality we chose for our character. This way we would keep the dialogue wheel, but it would feel like I have more control of my character.

Yeah, some people (myself included) gave some examples of how this could work.  For example, a "friendly" character might have an option that says "Are you leaving?" while a "hostile" character might have an option that instead says "Where the hell do you think you're going?"  A very basic example, but yes, I like this idea because it feels like you have at least a little more control over your character and prevents you from sounding like you have multiple personality disorder a la Hawke.

I think the problem is, with a voiced protagonist, you have to record a LOT of dialogue for each personality type (and voiced PC is confirmed), and that's expensive and time-consuming.  So I doubt this will be implemented, unfortunately.  To that end, I'm also wondering if different races will be playable like many people had wanted.  I guess if they kept one voice for all the races it could work.  Having played ME3, I'm getting worried not much will change in order to keep voice acting costs down, which of course means less player control...

[MysticalMage]

joyner1229 wrote...

BBCR wrote...

I don't know if this would work or not for DA3, but I would like if during character creation we had to choose a dominant personality like the tones in DA2, but during the actual dialogue we choose from options based on emotions (like happy, sad, angry, worried, etc.) that vary and sound different depending on the personality we chose for our character. This way we would keep the dialogue wheel, but it would feel like I have more control of my character.

Yeah, some people (myself included) gave some examples of how this could work.  For example, a "friendly" character might have an option that says "Are you leaving?" while a "hostile" character might have an option that instead says "Where the hell do you think you're going?"  A very basic example, but yes, I like this idea because it feels like you have at least a little more control over your character and prevents you from sounding like you have multiple personality disorder a la Hawke.

I think the problem is, with a voiced protagonist, you have to record a LOT of dialogue for each personality type (and voiced PC is confirmed), and that's expensive and time-consuming.  So I doubt this will be implemented, unfortunately.  To that end, I'm also wondering if different races will be playable like many people had wanted.  I guess if they kept one voice for all the races it could work.  Having played ME3, I'm getting worried not much will change in order to keep voice acting costs down, which of course means less player control...

Yay, it makes me happy that other people were thinking of this, too  Yeah, the example you gave is exactly along the lines I was thinking. What I miss most about the first game is the sense of control I had, and I think this method would be a good compromise between the dialogue systems of both DA games. But you're right, this would definately take a lot of voice acting and resources, so I doubt it will be in the game either. I'm hoping there will be different playable races too, but if not I hope each class at least has a different background story, even if they have one voice actor for each gender. Personally I liked how the dialogue system was in DA:O, but I really hope DA 3 gives us a feeling of control again when it comes to our characters, even with the dialogue wheel.