767 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wulfram wrote...

I did find DA:O conversations very natural.

DAO's conversations, and KotOR's conversations, and NWN's conversations, and BG's conversations all worked exactly like real world conversations.

You choose to say something from a list of possible things you could say (I usually compose and discard several before I find one I like), and then you say it however it is you want to say it.  Then the other person responds to you, and why he responded as he did or how that response relates to what you said is a complete mystery.

That's how real world conversations work, and that's how BioWare's conversations worked before they started voicing the PC.

When they reveal how dialogue is going to work in DA3, I am going to ask - again - for a tutorial on how to use that system.  Because, so far with their voiced protagonists, I'm clearly doing it wrong.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 20 juin 2012 - 06:10 .

[Sylvianus]

David Gaider wrote...
 That naturally leads to arguments over whether that makes it enough of an RPG, what an RPG is and whether we should do things like have a completely preset character or abandon the RPG genre label altogether... and while such discussions are great they're simply not what we're going to do.

We'd rather focus our efforts on how to make that better work for the kind of RPG we're trying to create than dwell on classifications of RPG's. I don't think we've any illusions that our solutions will work for everyone-- but, then again, they never do.

Good. It won't work for everyone but this goal is one of the best ways to please to many people as possible, indeed.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 20 juin 2012 - 05:43 .

[Brockololly]

David Gaider wrote...
 We don't, however, think it works all that well for our purposes... so while player VO isn't a must for an RPG, it's a must for where we intend to take this RPG. That naturally leads to arguments over whether that makes it enough of an RPG, what an RPG is and whether we should do things like have a completely preset character or abandon the RPG genre label altogether... and while such discussions are great they're simply not what we're going to do.

We'd rather focus our efforts on how to make that better work for the kind of RPG we're trying to create than dwell on classifications of RPG's. I don't think we've any illusions that our solutions will work for everyone-- but, then again, they never do.

I think the bolded is sort of at the core issue with Dragon Age as a franchise for many people going forward. What kind of RPG are you guys trying to create? I think a lot of the angst towards Dragon Age 2 was in large part due to the lack of open communication in terms of what kind of direction the franchise was headed after Origins.Going the more ME inspired, cinematic everything route with DA2 when Origins- flaws and all- was pretty well received seemed somewhat odd. Then you end up with people unhappy with that direction, especially after Origins' more old school presentation and feel had people expecting that for the future entries in the franchise going forward.

And its not just DA with this sort of problem. Look at how EA handled Starbreeze's Syndicate reboot. Take a beloved old school game and try to reboot it into a co-op heavy cinematic FPS. Sells poorly and that franchise is basically kaput. On the flip side, look at how the new XCOM games have been handled. 2K shows off that XCOM FPS reboot to a rather tepid response, buries it and unveils Firaxis' XCOM Enemy Unknown, which is more in line with what people would expect from a modern XCOM game. People seem fairly enthusiastic for it.

So I think people mostly want to know what to expect in broad strokes from Dragon Age going forward since Origins and 2 were rather different.  At least what to expect from the main, big budget entries in the series. And likely the sooner that was communicated, the better, so that people can have their expectations in line with what you guys are actually trying to create. So whenever the game is actually shown, people have some expectation of what to be looking for and know what not to be looking for. Something like the vision document for Wasteland 2 would be nice as you'd at least know what to expect or not expect from the franchise and then to adjust expectations accordingly.

Modifié par Brockololly, 20 juin 2012 - 05:49 .

[robertthebard]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Let's not forget what brought us to this particular part of the discussion.  Is VO a must for DA3?  And I said no, because if VO is what killing off race options that I would rather have a more rpg game that allows race options. 

While I don't really disagree with the sentiment, I'd like to point out that in every day life, we all watch to see what another will do or say in relation to what we do or say.  The vast majority of people will edit themselves for television in a room full of kids, for example.  Or we'll watch how we present what we say in the presence of women, and this will vary even more if it's somebody we want to get closer to.  This is the very essence of role playing, since I can go 180 degrees from who I really am, assuming the options are available in dialog, whether it's voiced or not.

So when you role play you like to "watch" how you present yourself? Like watching yourself on TV?

Part of role play is interaction with the environment, sometimes yes, you will watch, or are you saying you just push a number, and hope for the best in dialogs.  Part of what makes role playing games are the dialogs.  Unlike CoD or something, where it's just push buttons to kill stuff.  How else do you reflect your char's personality in a game where you cannot use Voice Chat to say what you intend to say, like I could do in an MMO?

[bEVEsthda]

David Gaider wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...
Lol. This is why BioWare should just stop trying to make RPGs. Wouldn't get academic arguments like these. I firmly feel as if BioWare's focus on NPC driven cinematic narratives would be better served by being in a different genre (like the Action-Adventure one) rather than the RPG genre.

That's only true if it bothers us that there are fans who like to argue about what an RPG should/must be. RPG's as a genre cover a lot more territory than some would like-- and that's fine insofar as it makes for a discussion on a forum-- but it causes no more misconceptions when compared to genre expectations than it would if we suddenly said we were an Action-Adventure game or whatever else. I think most people believe RPG's involve lots of story, talking and stats... and the nuances otherwise are meaningless to anyone who isn't an RPG grognard.

Personally, I'd say player VO isn't a must for an RPG. Silent protaganists work great, so long as there's not a lot of cinematics involved-- Fallout or Skyrim, for instance, use a first-person view where you don't see your own character and the dialogue is mostly talking heads. For their purposes, that works.

If you have cinematics, then it becomes problematic to also have a silent PC. Yes, I'm aware that some people liked it well enough in DAO (and it's no surprise you'd see a concentration of those people on the DA forums). We really did our best to work around it, so it's nice to see people who thought that was successful. We don't, however, think it works all that well for our purposes... so while player VO isn't a must for an RPG, it's a must for where we intend to take this RPG. That naturally leads to arguments over whether that makes it enough of an RPG, what an RPG is and whether we should do things like have a completely preset character or abandon the RPG genre label altogether... and while such discussions are great they're simply not what we're going to do.

We'd rather focus our efforts on how to make that better work for the kind of RPG we're trying to create than dwell on classifications of RPG's. I don't think we've any illusions that our solutions will work for everyone-- but, then again, they never do.

There are three things that occur to me, reading a well stated case like this:

1.  First, it's great that you know what you're doing. Hope your boss is the same. I cannot think that you should approach your next game in any different manner. I mean, really.

2. Second is that my personal little devil sits on my shoulder, grinning, poking with his fork, - "So you're gonna try DA2 yet again, eh? Good luck with the releaseday-reality-check on that. Snark, snark."  

3. Third is that I think you should maybe think about releasing some Dragon Age games, as more being games in the Dragon Age universe/IP,  than sequels in the Dragon Age (:Origins)  franchise.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 20 juin 2012 - 06:11 .

[bEVEsthda]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

I did find DA:O conversations very natural.

DAO's conversations, and KotOR's conversations, and NWN's conversations, and BG's conversations all worked exactly like real world conversations.

You choose to say something from a list of possible things you could say (I usually compose and discard several before I find one I like), and then you say it however it is you want to say it.  Then the other person responds to you, and why he responded as he did or how that response relates to what you said is a complete mystery.

That's how real world conversations work, and that's how BioWare's conversations worked before they started voicing the PC.

When they reveal how dialogue is going to work in DA3, I am going to ask - again - for a tutorial on how to use that system.  Because, so far with their voiced protagonists, I'm clearly doing it wrong.

This ^^.   And I didn't even know that before.

[Dakota Strider]

David Gaider wrote...

That's only true if it bothers us that there are fans who like to argue about what an RPG should/must be. RPG's as a genre cover a lot more territory than some would like-- and that's fine insofar as it makes for a discussion on a forum-- but it causes no more misconceptions when compared to genre expectations than it would if we suddenly said we were an Action-Adventure game or whatever else. I think most people believe RPG's involve lots of story, talking and stats... and the nuances otherwise are meaningless to anyone who isn't an RPG grognard.

Personally, I'd say player VO isn't a must for an RPG. Silent protaganists work great, so long as there's not a lot of cinematics involved-- Fallout or Skyrim, for instance, use a first-person view where you don't see your own character and the dialogue is mostly talking heads. For their purposes, that works.

If you have cinematics, then it becomes problematic to also have a silent PC. Yes, I'm aware that some people liked it well enough in DAO (and it's no surprise you'd see a concentration of those people on the DA forums). We really did our best to work around it, so it's nice to see people who thought that was successful. We don't, however, think it works all that well for our purposes... so while player VO isn't a must for an RPG, it's a must for where we intend to take this RPG. That naturally leads to arguments over whether that makes it enough of an RPG, what an RPG is and whether we should do things like have a completely preset character or abandon the RPG genre label altogether... and while such discussions are great they're simply not what we're going to do.

We'd rather focus our efforts on how to make that better work for the kind of RPG we're trying to create than dwell on classifications of RPG's. I don't think we've any illusions that our solutions will work for everyone-- but, then again, they never do.

This reminds me so much of certain movies, that go to Cannes Film Festival, and other such venues, and get awards there, and all the "right" artsy-fartsy movie critics fawn over them.  Then the movie is released, and nobody wants to go watch it.  Then the movie fans are called "stupid" for not understanding the "artistic direction" the movie was trying to portray.

These people forget, that if they want paychecks, they need to cater to the consumer.  If they want to make art, for the sake of making art, they should do so, but not complain if nobody else likes it. 

Mr. Gaider, I am not saying that you are saying those of us that wish for a more classic Role Playing game experience are stupid.  Not even trying to hint at that.  I just hope the DA team knows what they are doing.  Perhaps I am all wrong, but I consider the base of fans Bioware has built up through the BG games, NwN games, and DAO as your Golden Goose.   You got a gold egg out of us when most of us bought DA2 immediately on release or pre-order.  But don't kill the Golden Goose by starving us from what we keep coming to the feed trough for.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 20 juin 2012 - 06:33 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Darth Death wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

 We don't, however, think it works all that well for our purposes... so while player VO isn't a must for an RPG, it's a must for where we intend to take this RPG. 

I'm starting to wonder what these purposes are, and to be frank, they're beginning to scary me. 

The purpose to make a more cinematic rpg game?  It's still a better game if you have race options.  And if VO kills the race options, then you have to ask what is more important in an rpg.  Considering that VO isn't important at all in an rpg, you're giving up a lot for a genre you wish to create games for.  Maybe you should make a new IP.  As long as you use the name Dragon Age, its going to get compared to Origins.  And in playing rpgs, the more customization and control you have over YOUR character, the better the game is received.  Once you start striking those out, then it becomes a lesser game.  Every game reviewer and every fan of the series will naturally have to compare it to Origins.  So why continue to set the future games up for medicoricity?

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 20 juin 2012 - 07:22 .

[David Gaider]

Dakota Strider wrote...
Mr. Gaider, I am not saying that you are saying those of us that wish for a more classic Role Playing game experience are stupid.  Not even trying to hint at that.  I just hope the DA team knows what they are doing.  Perhaps I am all wrong, but I consider the base of fans Bioware has built up through the BG games, NwN games, and DAO as your Golden Goose.   You got a gold egg out of us when most of us bought DA2 immediately on release or pre-order.  But don't kill the Golden Goose by starving us from what we keep coming to the feed trough for.

Understood. Things like our overall direction aren't really part of my purview, but when it comes to issues like this I do get a bit concerned when people imply that our fans (as in that group of people who are most invested in what we make) are all of the same opinion.

I remember quite clearly the fan rage just before and just after DAO came out-- it wasn't enough like Baldur's Gate (as promised), it was a dumbed-down RPG, it was indicative of a downturn in our adherence to RPG purity, etc. etc. Sound familiar? There was also a group of NWN fans upset that our tradition of releasing proper toolsets capable of creating persistent worlds had been abandoned (a tradition of exactly one game, but that was irrelevant to them). Naturally the tone has changed as well as the context (this being a series where expectations are arguably more justifiable), but it's always been a case of our fans being rather split in their opinions... and that's even true here on the DA forums where the group still remaining are rather self-selecting by their very nature.

That doesn't make them irrelevant by any means-- and certainly DAO proved there's a market for the kind of game it is/was-- but at the end of the day that Golden Goose has laid a lot of different eggs. There's a lot of interests to keep in mind, including our own. From my personal perspective, and with all due respect, I think making the game as good as it can possibly be is what will serve our overall fan base best.

Modifié par David Gaider, 20 juin 2012 - 07:52 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Something tells me we'll get race options only in multiplayer. That actually would be a slap in the face if they did that. My beloved rpg will have been marketed for the CoD crowd. Pick up staff. Shoot. Die. Respawn. Repeat. " Yeah I love playing other races in MP".

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 20 juin 2012 - 08:42 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

From my personal perspective, and with all due respect, I think making the game as good as it can possibly be is what will serve our overall fan base best.

Then don't make us guess at dialogue options.

[wsandista]

David Gaider wrote...

I remember quite clearly the fan rage just before and just after DAO came out-- it wasn't enough like Baldur's Gate (as promised), it was a dumbed-down RPG, it was indicative of a downturn in our adherence to RPG purity, etc. etc. Sound familiar? There was also a group of NWN fans upset that our tradition of releasing proper toolsets capable of creating persistent worlds had been abandoned (a tradition of exactly one game, but that was irrelevant to them). Naturally the tone has changed as well as the context (this being a series where expectations are arguably more justifiable), but it's always been a case of our fans being rather split in their opinions... and that's even true here on the DA forums where the group still remaining are rather self-selecting by their very nature.

There has been(and most likely always will be) a group that complains that a game is not like Baldur's Gate.

However, I don't know if the magnitude is exactly the same, concerning the reaction to new releases. You have to admit, the reaction to DA2 has been pretty extreme.

In all fairness though, you probably won't get a real appraisal of how DA2 was received here on the DA forums. It seems that most of the posters here are the most partisan.

[Jerrybnsn]

Mr. Gaider. Why can't you do both with VO and race options?

[thats1evildude]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DAO's conversations, and KotOR's conversations, and NWN's conversations, and BG's conversations all worked exactly like real world conversations.

You choose to say something from a list of possible things you could say (I usually compose and discard several before I find one I like), and then you say it however it is you want to say it.  Then the other person responds to you, and why he responded as he did or how that response relates to what you said is a complete mystery.

That's how real world conversations work, and that's how BioWare's conversations worked before they started voicing the PC.

Are you high?! Dragon Age is about as far as far from a realistic conversation simulator as you can get.

People don't stare blankly at each other during conversations while they run a mental list of dialogue options; they just "respond" ,unless they're carefully considering their words. They also frequently interrupt each other, ignore what is being said or talk over the other person.

When the pizza guy comes to the door, I say "thank you" and give him his money. A menu doesn't pop up in my head with the following options:

1) Thank you. (pay)
2) (aggressive) Give me that damn pizza and get the hell off my porch!
3) (seductive) Is there some other way I can pay for that pizza?
4) DIE, PIMPLY-FACED TEENAGER! (stab with murder knife)

Incidentally, the Mass Effect system is also inappropriate for real life. 

Modifié par thats1evildude, 20 juin 2012 - 08:33 .

[Jerrybnsn]

thats1evildude wrote...

You choose to say something from a list of possible things you could say (I usually compose and discard several before I find one I like), and then you say it however it is you want to say it.  Then the other person responds to you, and why he responded as he did or how that response relates to what you said is a complete mystery.

That's how real world conversations work, and that's how BioWare's conversations worked before they started voicing the PC.

Are you high?! Dragon Age is about as far as far from a realistic conversation simulator as you can get.

..............
When the pizza guy comes to the door, I say "thank you" and give him his money. A menu doesn't pop up in my head with the following options:

1) Thank you. (pay)
2) (aggressive) Give me that damn pizza and get the hell off my porch!
3) (seductive) Is there some other way I can pay for that pizza?
4) DIE, PIMPLY-FACED TEENAGER! (stab with murder knife)

Incidentally, the Mass Effect system is also inappropriate for real life. 

So you just pick from the menu in your head an icon of , ,   and wait to see what you'll say and do to the Pizza boy?

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 20 juin 2012 - 08:40 .

[thats1evildude]

No, I just say "thank you." But I never claimed that DA2's system is realistic. (It's not.) I was simply pointing out how ludicrous it is to claim that DAO's dialogue system models "how real world conversations work."

Rant all you like about how you prefer the silent PC, but don't ****** in my ear and tell me it's raining.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 20 juin 2012 - 08:49 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

thats1evildude wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DAO's conversations, and KotOR's conversations, and NWN's conversations, and BG's conversations all worked exactly like real world conversations.

You choose to say something from a list of possible things you could say (I usually compose and discard several before I find one I like), and then you say it however it is you want to say it.  Then the other person responds to you, and why he responded as he did or how that response relates to what you said is a complete mystery.

That's how real world conversations work, and that's how BioWare's conversations worked before they started voicing the PC.

Are you high?!

No.  This is how I experience conversation.

People don't stare blankly at each other during conversations while they run a mental list of dialogue options

To be fair, this is true.  I tend to stare blankly past the other person while I generate possible responses.

they just "respond" ,unless they're carefully considering their words.

Why would you ever not consider your words carefully?  At worst, you can rely on carefully vetted stock responses (like the response to the inevitable "How are you?"), but if you're making a substantive statement I would hope you're always considering your words carefully.

When the pizza guy comes to the door, I say "thank you" and give him his money.

Why?  What other things could you have said?  You're not an automaton.  You have options.

[bEVEsthda]

thats1evildude wrote...

No, I just say "thank you." But I never claimed that DA2's system is realistic. (It's not.) I was simply pointing out how ludicrous it is to claim that DAO's dialogue system models "how real world conversations work."

Rant all you like about how you prefer the silent PC, but don't ****** in my ear and tell me it's raining.

It's not ludicrous. I recognized it immediately. It's how it works for me. Different options pass by inside my head, and I react to them:

P.S. sometimes, I still don't reflect enough, and later change my mind, as I did just now when I deleted the examples.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 20 juin 2012 - 09:11 .

[Jerrybnsn]

thats1evildude wrote...

No, I just say "thank you." But I never claimed that DA2's system is realistic. (It's not.) I was simply pointing out how ludicrous it is to claim that DAO's dialogue system models "how real world conversations work."

Rant all you like about how you prefer the silent PC,...
 

 I however prefer VO.
but go back to your nerd holes in your parents basement.
but don't ****** in my ear and tell me it's raining.

There.  That's better.

[Vormaerin]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Mr. Gaider. Why can't you do both with VO and race options?

You can.  Why would you think you can't?   There are just trade offs.

Option 1:  Use different voice actors and dialogue trees for each distinct culture option (whether race or ethnicity based).   This is the most "realistic" but very expensive in terms of resources.  Resources that would otherwise go somewhere else in the game.

Option 2: "The DAO Plan"  Give a bunch of race options, but treat them all as if from the same culture/background so you can share the same dialogue tree and VO for all options of the same gender.   This uses a lot less dev resources than plan 1, but significantly reduces the value of the options in the first place, especially for those interested in RPing distinct cultures and not just different appearances.

The other option is the Shepard/Hawke style defined protagonist (I don't believe that Bioware will ever make an Adam Jensen style no customization protagonist).   It takes the least resources and allows the most tailoring to the specifics of the story.  But it gives the players the least choice about creation.  It will also create the most uncertainty about whether the player is creating the role or adopting a created role.

[Darth Death]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

 We don't, however, think it works all that well for our purposes... so while player VO isn't a must for an RPG, it's a must for where we intend to take this RPG. 

I'm starting to wonder what these purposes are, and to be frank, they're beginning to scary me. 

The purpose to make a more cinematic rpg game?  It's still a better game if you have race options.  And if VO kills the race options, then you have to ask what is more important in an rpg.  Considering that VO isn't important at all in an rpg, you're giving up a lot for a genre you wish to create games for.  Maybe you should make a new IP.  As long as you use the name Dragon Age, its going to get compared to Origins.  And in playing rpgs, the more customization and control you have over YOUR character, the better the game is received.  Once you start striking those out, then it becomes a lesser game.  Every game reviewer and every fan of the series will naturally have to compare it to Origins.  So why continue to set the future games up for medicoricity?

Yes, I agree with anything you said, especially the ones in bold. Once you set that kind of standard you can't withdraw in mediocrity. 

Modifié par Darth Death, 20 juin 2012 - 09:36 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Vormaerin wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Mr. Gaider. Why can't you do both with VO and race options?

You can.  Why would you think you can't?   There are just trade offs.

Option 1:  Use different voice actors and dialogue trees for each distinct culture option (whether race or ethnicity based).   This is the most "realistic" but very expensive in terms of resources.  Resources that would otherwise go somewhere else in the game.

Option 2: "The DAO Plan"  Give a bunch of race options, but treat them all as if from the same culture/background so you can share the same dialogue tree and VO for all options of the same gender.   This uses a lot less dev resources than plan 1, but significantly reduces the value of the options in the first place, especially for those interested in RPing distinct cultures and not just different appearances.

The other option is the Shepard/Hawke style defined protagonist (I don't believe that Bioware will ever make an Adam Jensen style no customization protagonist).   It takes the least resources and allows the most tailoring to the specifics of the story.  But it gives the players the least choice about creation.  It will also create the most uncertainty about whether the player is creating the role or adopting a created role.

I'll take option 1....now....How much money do you need, Bioware, to make this happened?

[thats1evildude]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

No, I just say "thank you." But I never claimed that DA2's system is realistic. (It's not.) I was simply pointing out how ludicrous it is to claim that DAO's dialogue system models "how real world conversations work."

Rant all you like about how you prefer the silent PC,...
 

 I however prefer VO.
but go back to your nerd holes in your parents basement.
but don't ****** in my ear and tell me it's raining.

There.  That's better.

Hey, not bad. 

Of course, I don't see different "tone" options pop up in my head during conversation, but my responses and actions are also not governed by a totally seperate entity. Maybe if "PLAYER 1" was in control, I wouldn't make so many snarky comments on the Internet.

It does cut down on the blank stares, however.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 20 juin 2012 - 09:58 .

[Vormaerin]

Jerrybnsn wrote...


I'll take option 1....now....How much money do you need, Bioware, to make this happened?

Judging by the costs of games these days (where we know about them), tens of millions.

[Fast Jimmy]

Vormaerin wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...


I'll take option 1....now....How much money do you need, Bioware, to make this happened?

Judging by the costs of games these days (where we know about them), tens of millions.

Which segues into the next conversation piece... how many collector's cloth maps of Thedas would we have to pre-order right now to make sure DA3 has multiple races? 

I've got connections. We can try and make this happen.