55 réponses à ce sujet

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

LolaLei wrote...

I'd love to be able to see our companions during "down-time" between quests chilling out in various places around Orlesian cities/environments or whatever, that would make for some interesting companion conversations/interactions.

Absolutely.  One of my favorite ways to have a character rounded out is too see what they're up to when they're not a method for the main character to deploy arrows or healing spells.  I like to see what a character decides to do when he's all on his own.  One of the few good points of Witcher was the bar scene where Gerald and his bros get drunk and talk about women.  I loved that!  There were so very many great down time interludes in ME3 and ME2 between Shepard and the crew that I adored.  I very much want to see this return in DA3.

[Sylvius the Mad]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

For me, it comes down only wanting choices that matter.  I would rather have fewer locations with cinematic dialogue that contains real information about the scene, the zone, or the story than many places to click on characters and check for possible new dialogue.  I don't want to spend time checking to see if I missed anything a character might know about The Evil In The Tower as I'm traveling up the path to the tower.  I want to run into the tower and kick Evil in the balls.

But DA2 forced you to visit everyone in sequence to see if they knew anything.  How is that better?

If Hawke only spoke to the companions when he had reason to believe they had something to say, the player would have missed out on a bunch of content.

I really liked how in Awakening you would find random world objects and click on them and Anders would start talking about how big Andraste's boobs might have been or Oghren would talk about having a rash in his no-no place.  I could totally go for landmark originated conversations in DA3, but I would like some kind of world notification, like the glittery things near the lake in the MotA, rather than having to click and run, click and run, ad nauseum.

I understand the Awakenings system wasn't well received.  The companions probably should have offered those comments without the player having to click on anything.

Which is why I think the companions should be able to initiate conversations.  When the companion has something to say, just drop us into a full conversation.

I'd like to avoid non-interactive ambient dialogue as much as possible.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

But DA2 forced you to visit everyone in sequence to see if they knew anything.  How is that better?

If Hawke only spoke to the companions when he had reason to believe they had something to say, the player would have missed out on a bunch of content.

I'm ok with goin' a visitin' companion by companion after a big battle or a important story point.  What I don't want is to see the tower in the distance and feel like I have to click on a companion to check their dialogue tree, run up to the pathway, click-check, halfway up the path, click-check.... etc.  If the character has something to say, I'd prefer a cut scene occur, and the character run up to Hawke or the Warden and be like "My tribe has a legend of this location..."  It's a strength of fixed location dialogue that I don't have to interrupt the action sequences to go through the click-checks.  If there is an interrup, I know it has a reason for existing.

I understand the Awakenings system wasn't well received.  The companions probably should have offered those comments without the player having to click on anything.

Which is why I think the companions should be able to initiate conversations.  When the companion has something to say, just drop us into a full conversation.

I'd be fine with that.  I like the idea of the companions starting conversations... but still think a "sudden cut scene" is perferable to the NPC nagging the player.

I'd like to avoid non-interactive ambient dialogue as much as possible.

Avoid, yes.  Eliminate, no.  But that's a dead horse of its own color.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Filament wrote...

What I want is for an interface to be able to choose dialog seamlessly during exploration or combat. Imagine how much more effective the Alistair banter of "see, he's not even listening" would have been if you had the option to respond, but chose not to. At least, I think it would have been neat.

Someone in one of these threads, I think possibly Sylvius, suggested that DA3 borrow the interrups from Mass Effect and apply them to all autodialogues, such that you could right click to respond, or left click to stay silent.  I think that would be a great idea for the autodialogues...  I'd call them Killjoy Buttons, since you could either left click to be like "Quiet down back there!" or right click to participate in the dialogue. 

Very much agree on the neat part.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

What I want is for an interface to be able to choose dialog seamlessly during exploration or combat.

I got a glimmer of hope on that front when I complained about the ambient Hawke dialogue in Legacy.  David gaider mentioned something about the possibilty of the player being able to have some control over ambient dialogue (in addition to cinematic dialogue).

Honestly, if ambient dialogue can be interactive, then I want more ambient dialogue.

Imagine how much more effective the Alistair banter of "see, he's not even listening" would have been if you had the option to respond, but chose not to. At least, I think it would have been neat.

Absolutely.  Choosing whether to reply is as important as choosing how to reply.

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

When Hawke took part in the ambient banter of Legacy, I nearly punched my computer.  That was an unbelievably bad idea.

When Hawke took part in any banter without my explicit approval, I nearly punched my computer. Hell, when ever Hawke said something I didn't explicitly pick I got angry. Which was every-time Hawke spoke due to the design of the dialogue wheel. I contend that every line spoken by Hakwe and Shepard are Auto-Dialogue, since they never say a line with explicit consent from the player.

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

When Hawke took part in the ambient banter of Legacy, I nearly punched my computer.  That was an unbelievably bad idea.

When Hawke took part in any banter without my explicit approval, I nearly punched my computer. Hell, when ever Hawke said something I didn't explicitly pick I got angry. Which was every-time Hawke spoke due to the design of the dialogue wheel. I contend that every line spoken by Hakwe and Shepard are Auto-Dialogue, since they never say a line with explicit consent from the player.

That's a completely valid position, but since I expected that sort of failure from the paraphrase it wasn't so suprising.  Some players claim they can discern the content of the spoken lines from the paraphrase, so at least the paraphrase has the potential to work for some players.

But completely non-interactive ambient dialogue?  There's no way to defend that.  I don't see how BioWare ever thought that was a good idea.

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...


That's a completely valid position, but since I expected that sort of failure from the paraphrase it wasn't so suprising.  Some players claim they can discern the content of the spoken lines from the paraphrase, so at least the paraphrase has the potential to work for some players.

While some may be able to correctly predict the content from the paraphrase given, there are quite a few who cannot. Which is why full-text dialogue is better, the line is discernible to everyone.

But completely non-interactive ambient dialogue?  There's no way to defend that.  I don't see how BioWare ever thought that was a good idea.

I can't think of any good argument for it. What I've heard most from supporters of the idea is "Having Hawke chime in on conversations really brought him/her to life for me". This doesn't really make sense to me, since I always thought that one of the appeals of a role-playing game was to be able to bring the PC to life yourself.

[KDD-0063]

I'd say NWN and Kotor2 had my favorite PC to companion convo system.

For both, there are 'normal' dialogue that can happen at any time, and some very specific dialogue has to happen in home base or other specific locations.

For DA2 and ME3, the 'normal' dialogue just seems to be gone.

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

I can't think of any good argument for it. What I've heard most from supporters of the idea is "Having Hawke chime in on conversations really brought him/her to life for me". 

I can understand complaints about the PC never joining in, but the way to solve that problem is to add conversations, not auto-dialogue.

[AkiKishi]

wsandista wrote...
I can't think of any good argument for it. What I've heard most from supporters of the idea is "Having Hawke chime in on conversations really brought him/her to life for me". This doesn't really make sense to me, since I always thought that one of the appeals of a role-playing game was to be able to bring the PC to life yourself.

Being silent while everyone else is talking makes the character feel out of place.It's only a problem when you get into cinematic games, but it is a problem.

White Knight Chronicles is the best example I have seen. The characters chat as you travel, the character you created (for the MP/guild part of the game) does nothing. They sort of stand around in cutscenes while the NPCs drive the plot.
Now in WKC the PC is not really meant to be in the plot of the game and can be benched/ignored.

Any attempt of player interactivity into the banter will just kill the pacing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

wsandista wrote...
I can't think of any good argument for it. What I've heard most from supporters of the idea is "Having Hawke chime in on conversations really brought him/her to life for me". This doesn't really make sense to me, since I always thought that one of the appeals of a role-playing game was to be able to bring the PC to life yourself.

Being silent while everyone else is talking makes the character feel out of place.It's only a problem when you get into cinematic games, but it is a problem.

But that doesn't justify non-interactive conversations.  That's what wsandista and I were complaining about.

Even given the voice, there's no requirement that Hawke speak with no prompting from the player at all (as he does in the ambinet dialogues in Legacy).

Any attempt of player interactivity into the banter will just kill the pacing.

Not if they use an ME2-style interrupt system.  That would allow the player to let the conversation continue at the pace chosen by the writers.

But those of us who value interactivity over pacing would be able to stop the scene and choose responses.

I am strongly of the opinion that controlling the pacing is the player's job, not the writer's job.  You clearly disagree.  An interrupt system would let us both get what we want.

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Not if they use an ME2-style interrupt system.  That would allow the player to let the conversation continue at the pace chosen by the writers.

But those of us who value interactivity over pacing would be able to stop the scene and choose responses.

I am strongly of the opinion that controlling the pacing is the player's job, not the writer's job.  You clearly disagree.  An interrupt system would let us both get what we want.

I don't think the ME2 style interrupts would be the optimal solution for player investment and control in "banter" dialogue, they simply are too broad since a "paragon" or "renegade" action could be a great number of things. What I would prefer would be an interrupt option that brings up a text-box and allows the player to pick a specific PC dialogue line to interject in the party banter or a body motion in response to the banter that is recognized by the party. Another solution would be to change party banter to something similar to companion conversations in NWN:HoU, where there is a text-box for banter, but instead of the player simply selecting "continue", several options for PC input will be available.

[SafetyShattered]

I know I've said this before but I really want the ability to talk to my companions anytime I want to. I'm pretty sure someone from Bioware said that it was unlikely that they'd go back to that, but I'd love it regardless. So yes, I agree with you.

[craigdolphin]

This was one of the two biggest gripes I had with DA2. I already said my piece about it a long time ago to several of the devs. From their responses at the time, I'm not 100% sure whether they will make me happy with the changes they were suggesting/hinting-at back then, or not. That said, I will try to keep an open mind when they eventually do talk about/show their new conversation system.

I can say that they were definitely aware of the issue back then. What I don't know is whether it has fallen off their radar as an important priority since then. I certainly hope not.

But I'm pessimistic about the likelihood of my being able to buy the game since I refuse to have origin on the pc until they provide a data collection opt out. So maybe Bioware won't really give a rip about my opinion anyways

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

I don't think the ME2 style interrupts would be the optimal solution for player investment and control in "banter" dialogue, they simply are too broad since a "paragon" or "renegade" action could be a great number of things. What I would prefer would be an interrupt option that brings up a text-box and allows the player to pick a specific PC dialogue line to interject in the party banter or a body motion in response to the banter that is recognized by the party. Another solution would be to change party banter to something similar to companion conversations in NWN:HoU, where there is a text-box for banter, but instead of the player simply selecting "continue", several options for PC input will be available.

The point is that the interrupts allow us to stop a cinematic or let it continue.

I would also like interrupts to initiate a normal conversation interface which I could then exit and return to the cinematic if I didn't like the available options.

My goal here is for the PC never to do anything the player didn't tell him to do, but without eliminating non-interactive cutscenes for those players who like them.  I think the ME2 interrupts are a good gateway to that solution.

[Sir JK]

Hmmm... I can see the merits of this idea. Enviromental dialogues out on missions, where you can ask what the npc thinks of a location sounds like a decent. And then having personal dialogues in the "home base" and other safe areas. That could work. Especially if in certain particularly unsafe areas, instead of responding the character just hisses "Not now!", there are after all situations during which one should not hold a conversation. Could add a lot of atmosphere.

As for being able to participate volountarily in banter? That's tricky I think. It either means extensive expansion of all banter, which will limit their number. Or it means developing a system that may or may not work satisfactory. The idea sounds decent, but also very difficult to pull off in praxis.
For one, banter would have to be clearer. No matter what kind of system you use, the game would have to point out that banter is happening now. Secondly, it cannot interfere with the normal controls system or risk that you accidentally activate something undesirable.

I could see "interrupts" like in mass effect happening that allows you to choose wether to say a predetermined line or not. But I doubt anything more extensive than that is realistic really. It's probably far more likely that the banter would be replaced by dialogues proper instead. Which would be far fewer.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

As for being able to participate volountarily in banter? That's tricky I think. It either means extensive expansion of all banter, which will limit their number. Or it means developing a system that may or may not work satisfactory.

The system they have now doesn't work satisfactorily.

I'd happily take a chance for improvement over something we already know to be broken.

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The point is that the interrupts allow us to stop a cinematic or let it continue.

I would also like interrupts to initiate a normal conversation interface which I could then exit and return to the cinematic if I didn't like the available options.

My goal here is for the PC never to do anything the player didn't tell him to do, but without eliminating non-interactive cutscenes for those players who like them.  I think the ME2 interrupts are a good gateway to that solution.

ME2 interrupts for a cinematic are definitely a good start to achieve this goal, but variable responses need to be available and very clear. The biggest problem with the ME interrupts was that the player only knew if the action would be "paragon' or "renegade". For example "renegade" interrupts in ME range from telling someone of to punching a reporter to doing something pretty horrible to a former squadmate(ME3 players will know what I'm talking about). The player should not only be able to have the PC interject into the cinematic, but also know what action the PC will take.

Sir JK wrote...

As for being able to participate volountarily in banter? That's tricky I think. It either means extensive expansion of all banter, which will limit their number. Or it means developing a system that may or may not work satisfactory. The idea sounds decent, but also very difficult to pull off in praxis.
For one, banter would have to be clearer. No matter what kind of system you use, the game would have to point out that banter is happening now. Secondly, it cannot interfere with the normal controls system or risk that you accidentally activate something undesirable.

The system of party banter in DA2 is quite unsatisfactory for some players.

Modifié par wsandista, 15 juin 2012 - 01:41 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

ME2 interrupts for a cinematic are definitely a good start to achieve this goal, but variable responses need to be available and very clear. The biggest problem with the ME interrupts was that the player only knew if the action would be "paragon' or "renegade". For example "renegade" interrupts in ME range from telling someone of to punching a reporter to doing something pretty horrible to a former squadmate(ME3 players will know what I'm talking about). The player should not only be able to have the PC interject into the cinematic, but also know what action the PC will take.

I completely agree.  I'd like the interrupts to pause the scene and give the player time to consider whatever options he is provided, and I'd like the player to be undo his initual interrupt decision if he deems none of the options appropriate.

What's relevant about the interrupts is that they allow the player to interfere with a cinematic event voluntarily, and with the scene continuing seamlessly if he chooses not to do so.

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I completely agree.  I'd like the interrupts to pause the scene and give the player time to consider whatever options he is provided, and I'd like the player to be undo his initual interrupt decision if he deems none of the options appropriate.

What's relevant about the interrupts is that they allow the player to interfere with a cinematic event voluntarily, and with the scene continuing seamlessly if he chooses not to do so.

The Witcher 2 actually had a good way for players to have some input in cut-scenes.

What would happen is that there would be a few options are displayed for the player to select during a cut-scene, with a time-limit. If the player didn't feel any of them fit for the situation, they don't select any of them and let the time-limit run out so the cinematic would continue without player input.

Making this work with the dialogue wheel might be a challenge, but it is definitely worth looking into.

To any wandering dev who happens to peek at this thread, are you tired of people suggesting you look at The Withcer 2 for ______?

[Sir JK]

Yes, I did get that impression that the current system is unsatisfactory to some people. I do not object to that. What I meant is that I think the solution you two proposed, with a dialogue prompt that pops up when you hit certain button mid-banter, is quite unrealistic. It might work in a cinematic, but I'm not sure. It sounds like a hassle to implement and extremely difficult to ensure that it works well.

I do however like the idea behind it.

In conversations; hitting an interrupt button a lá Mass effect and instead getting up a prompt allowing you to evaluate the action and choose whether it's something you would do or not howerver. That I can see and do like.

Out of curiosity... I understand the two of you dislike autodialogue, that you do not want your character to act without your permission. Does this also apply to things like "go on", "continue", "yes?" and similar things? Basically the few words most of us use to confirm that we heard and wish the other side to proceed. Would this also be unacceptable to you two?
Similarily. Is it unacceptable for a character to refer to another by name through autodialogue when greeting them?
And what's the extent a character is allowed to move in a cinematic without being prompted? Is it, for instance, acceptable that your character dodges a punch or projectile in a cinematic?
I'm merely curious where you think the limits for what is acceptable to automate and what is not are.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

Yes, I did get that impression that the current system is unsatisfactory to some people. I do not object to that. What I meant is that I think the solution you two proposed, with a dialogue prompt that pops up when you hit certain button mid-banter, is quite unrealistic. It might work in a cinematic, but I'm not sure. It sounds like a hassle to implement and extremely difficult to ensure that it works well.

I do however like the idea behind it.

In conversations; hitting an interrupt button a lá Mass effect and instead getting up a prompt allowing you to evaluate the action and choose whether it's something you would do or not howerver. That I can see and do like.

Out of curiosity... I understand the two of you dislike autodialogue, that you do not want your character to act without your permission. Does this also apply to things like "go on", "continue", "yes?" and similar things? Basically the few words most of us use to confirm that we heard and wish the other side to proceed. Would this also be unacceptable to you two?
Similarily. Is it unacceptable for a character to refer to another by name through autodialogue when greeting them?
And what's the extent a character is allowed to move in a cinematic without being prompted? Is it, for instance, acceptable that your character dodges a punch or projectile in a cinematic?
I'm merely curious where you think the limits for what is acceptable to automate and what is not are.

I proposed almost exactly what you described.  Hitting the interrupt button would bring up a set of options, or at least a detailed description of what the interrupt action was, so the player could then make an informed decision without any time limits.

Hitting any interrupt button should pause the scene lng enough for the player to make his decision.  Never should the player need to make a decision on the clock.  If playing a character castly different from yourseofl, it can sometimes take quite some time to work out what decision that character would make.  Having to rush only forces mistakes.

This is akin to having player skill determine combat outcomes.  It breaks the setting.

As for auto-dialogue, I would argue that it's simply too dangerous to allow the developer to include any of it.  Asking the player for input every time should be their goal.  The developer cannot know when any given auto-dialogue will be character-breaking.  Your "go on", "continue", and "yes?" examples are good ones, because they express interest, which the character might not have.

I would also object to greeting another character automatically at all, regardless of whether a name is used.

Dodging a punch or a projectile, though, probably wouldn't bother me, as those are effectively combat animations.

[Dhiro]

I'm not sure if anyone suggested it already, but why not a mix of both? Some convos you would be able to have on the road, others on your base/their homes. That way you could, say, kiss your LI anywhere, but the romance would only develop itself in conversations that happens within their home/base.

I do miss talking with them anywhere, but I also think some convos (Alistair declaring his love for you on top of a broodmother's corpse) are better if done in a private space.

EDIT: Oops, just saw that you suggested that on your post. Consider me nodding in agreement!

Modifié par Dhiro, 17 juin 2012 - 01:16 .