19 réponses à ce sujet

[Tokion]

First of all I love the DA2 personality system. I see it can be improved in alot of ways to make customising your main character much more interesting. In DA2, you are effectively 'locked out' of 2 of the 3 personalities in conversation because your Hawke is either a diplomatic / sarcastic / straight forward. Imagine the possibilities of not being locked out of any personalities, but instead your personality would be defined by how the number of times you leveled each personality by using it.

I always wanted my Hawke to be funny, but also wish he has just enough diplomacy to solve all arguments I wanted in my game. This planning can allow players to metagaming, which provides incentives to replay the game so you can create the perfect protagonist in your story.

A perfect example of this is ME2's Para-gade playthrough, where Shepard can be very persuasive, as well as being intimidating on bad guys. It was the most satisfying moment when I could unlock "the fastest interrogation" option on Thane's mission when I have just enough renegade points to pass the check. I believe the DA2 system can take this to the next level, by adding a leveling system to each personality in game.

Modifié par Tokion, 10 juillet 2012 - 10:57 .

[Jerrybnsn]

If they make the protagonist silent then you can have that funny-yet-diplomatic personality.

[Fast Jimmy]

ME3's reputation system fixed this, as you'd have access to all of the Paragon or Renegade responses to use as you saw fit, as long as your overall reputation score was you enough.

It basically turned all speech encounters into 'insta-win' scenarios, thh, so I didn't enjoy it much.

I think the dialogue system needs to have a corresponding mood choice when selecting dialogue. Keeping score of how many times I'm nice or mean, regardless of who it is too, is weak gameplay.

[EricHVela]

Um. Dragon Age: Kirkwall does employ a type of demeanor "leveling" system. There are variables that track then number of times the player makes Hawke use a diplomatic/nice, sarcastic/charming, agressive/blunt response.

Idle banter and non-specific dialog (much of the "three-arrow" choices) will change based on that.

I prefer that system over the ability to suddenly change the protagonist's overall demeanor due to gaining points in the various styles. I'm always one for a protagonist that has a semi-consistent demeanor and won't be a diplomat in one sentence and a diplomatic nightmare in the next.

Also, I see a lowered replayability value if the player can save a spot and go back and choose whatever dialog they want for general responses. Building a character by nudging its demeanor in certain directions requires the player to go back further and build the character differently. (This also works for companions. Garrus was such in Mass Effect [but ignored in the subsequent games].)

Plus, you also multiply the number of responses by three if you let the players pick specific responses instead of three general responses. (A response wheel or list with 9 responses is a bit much, IMHO.)

[Tokion]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

ME3's reputation system fixed this, as you'd have access to all of the Paragon or Renegade responses to use as you saw fit, as long as your overall reputation score was you enough.

It basically turned all speech encounters into 'insta-win' scenarios, thh, so I didn't enjoy it much.

ME3 conversation system is a step backwards from the ME2 system. It was too easy. On my first playthrough I can pick all paragon / renegade options at ease, which made the game had zero replay value in terms of how you want to define your Shepard.

[Fast Jimmy]

^ I agree, but that's the hand we're dealing with here.

[FenrirBlackDragon]

Interesting Idea. I like Jimmy's idea of being able to select your mood when picking a dialogue response. I don't like having certain options just handed to me, but I don't want all the good options to be restricted to one personality type either. Sarcastic Hawke doesn't get as many specific options as say, diplomatic or direct Hawke. And I wish they each had an equal chance to shine so each personality had just as many advantages, but was better suited to different situations. And they were suited to different things, but diplomatic and direct Hawke had more chances to do this than sarcastic.

[Cimeas]

I want the Coercion skill back. Yes, everyone took it anyway, but it felt nice knowing you actually were using the skill you had upgraded. Also, give Hawke/the main character more of a personality!

In MOTA/Legacy, he actually sounded more like a person, but come on! Why can't Hawke make jokes, talk to companions, participate in party banter? If you're going with a VO'd protagonist, might as well make him/her a person. Better yet, have an option conversation pop up that allows us to decide what we say in the banter as well.

[Amycus89]

Cimeas wrote...

I want the Coercion skill back. Yes, everyone took it anyway, but it felt nice knowing you actually were using the skill you had upgraded. Also, give Hawke/the main character more of a personality!

In MOTA/Legacy, he actually sounded more like a person, but come on! Why can't Hawke make jokes, talk to companions, participate in party banter? If you're going with a VO'd protagonist, might as well make him/her a person. Better yet, have an option conversation pop up that allows us to decide what we say in the banter as well.

Agreed. The only thing that was wrong with the coercion skill in DA:O was that it was set in the "1-4 level of smaller skills like tracking and potion making". Had they just placed it in the same window as your attribute stats (like strength, cunning, vitality, etc), it would have been much harder to spend points on the skill that has no real "upper limit", and thus felt more rewarding.

[Cimeas]

Amycus89 wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

I want the Coercion skill back. Yes, everyone took it anyway, but it felt nice knowing you actually were using the skill you had upgraded. Also, give Hawke/the main character more of a personality!

In MOTA/Legacy, he actually sounded more like a person, but come on! Why can't Hawke make jokes, talk to companions, participate in party banter? If you're going with a VO'd protagonist, might as well make him/her a person. Better yet, have an option conversation pop up that allows us to decide what we say in the banter as well.

Agreed. The only thing that was wrong with the coercion skill in DA:O was that it was set in the "1-4 level of smaller skills like tracking and potion making". Had they just placed it in the same window as your attribute stats (like strength, cunning, vitality, etc), it would have been much harder to spend points on the skill that has no real "upper limit", and thus felt more rewarding.

Yeah, I think it would be good if they split coercion maybe into like Diplomacy/Intimidate/Lie or something like that as well.

[Amycus89]

Cimeas wrote...

Amycus89 wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

I want the Coercion skill back. Yes, everyone took it anyway, but it felt nice knowing you actually were using the skill you had upgraded. Also, give Hawke/the main character more of a personality!

In MOTA/Legacy, he actually sounded more like a person, but come on! Why can't Hawke make jokes, talk to companions, participate in party banter? If you're going with a VO'd protagonist, might as well make him/her a person. Better yet, have an option conversation pop up that allows us to decide what we say in the banter as well.

Agreed. The only thing that was wrong with the coercion skill in DA:O was that it was set in the "1-4 level of smaller skills like tracking and potion making". Had they just placed it in the same window as your attribute stats (like strength, cunning, vitality, etc), it would have been much harder to spend points on the skill that has no real "upper limit", and thus felt more rewarding.

Yeah, I think it would be good if they split coercion maybe into like Diplomacy/Intimidate/Lie or something like that as well.

...and letting other skills come into play in the dialogue as well. For example in DA;O when you reach for an... acorn in a tree trunk, there was a (and unfortunately the only example of this in the whole game?) dexterity check. If your dexterity wasn't high enough, a trap was released.

[Toki]

Cimeas wrote...

I want the Coercion skill back. Yes, everyone took it anyway, but it felt nice knowing you actually were using the skill you had upgraded. Also, give Hawke/the main character more of a personality!

In MOTA/Legacy, he actually sounded more like a person, but come on! Why can't Hawke make jokes, talk to companions, participate in party banter? If you're going with a VO'd protagonist, might as well make him/her a person. Better yet, have an option conversation pop up that allows us to decide what we say in the banter as well.

He does participate in party banter, or at least so I remember. He cracks jokes as sarcastic Hawke all of the time. I remember him and Varric discussing spit mages last time I was playing.

[wsandista]

Well we could make the PC have any personality we wanted when they were silent.

[Cimeas]

Sure, but I don't want to imagine my character saying something! Everyone else talks, I just find it a bit weird that I have to imagine my character participating in all these conversations, instead of being in them. Of course I enjoyed BG and DA:O, but really it was budget that prevented those games from being fully voiced so I'm happy that has been cleared up and the protagonist can actually be part of the story

[Kidd]

Cimeas wrote...

Yeah, I think it would be good if they split coercion maybe into like Diplomacy/Intimidate/Lie or something like that as well.

Sounds like a good idea. I didn't like how in DAO, you simply put four points in persuasion and then you could talk your way out of anything, any time.

Though at the same time I enjoy how in DA2, you can only talk yourself out of situations with diplomacy if you've used a lot of diplomacy (ie have the diplomacy dominant personality active atm), charm if you've been charming and intimidate if you're someone who can be threatening. As much as I felt this was railroading, I liked how it was impossible for my pushover of a mage to threaten people - it just wasn't in her.

Not to mention I actually became better at talking through talking, instead of killing darkspawn and learning how to speak from that. So in that way, I'd like some refinements to DA2's system more. But then people will be sad they feel railroaded into always picking similar choices because it's hard to tell just how much you can deviate.

It's hard to make a perfect system =\\

[deatharmonic]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

ME3's reputation system fixed this, as you'd have access to all of the Paragon or Renegade responses to use as you saw fit, as long as your overall reputation score was you enough.

It basically turned all speech encounters into 'insta-win' scenarios, thh, so I didn't enjoy it much.

I think the dialogue system needs to have a corresponding mood choice when selecting dialogue. Keeping score of how many times I'm nice or mean, regardless of who it is too, is weak gameplay.

This.

[Pasquale1234]

Amycus89 wrote...

...and letting other skills come into play in the dialogue as well. For example in DA;O when you reach for an... acorn in a tree trunk, there was a (and unfortunately the only example of this in the whole game?) dexterity check. If your dexterity wasn't high enough, a trap was released.

IIRC, there was also a dexterity check opportunity if you played cards with Isabela at the Pearl.  I would love to see more of those in-game.

Cimeas wrote...

Sure, but I don't want to imagine my character saying something! Everyone else talks, I just find it a bit weird that I have to imagine my character participating in all these conversations, instead of being in them. Of course I enjoyed BG and DA:O, but really it was budget that prevented those games from being fully voiced so I'm happy that has been cleared up and the protagonist can actually be part of the story

I'd rather play a protag who is creating the story than one who is merely starring in a story the writers decided to tell.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 11 juillet 2012 - 03:50 .

[MichaelStuart]

I liked the personality system in Dragon Age 2.
It made sense that only a aggressive person could intimidate someone. (I have seen nice people in real life try to sound threatening, it's just sad)
That being said, I don't actually like being able to intimidate/trick/persuade just because I have the right personality/skill points. It's makes the game too easy. You should only be ably to do it, if find something to help you. (example: to intimidate someone you need to have something to blackmail them with, as well having a aggressive personality)

[element eater]

wsandista wrote...

Well we could make the PC have any personality we wanted when they were silent.

[Amycus89]

KiddDaBeauty wrote... 
Though at the same time I enjoy how in DA2, you can only talk yourself out of situations with diplomacy if you've used a lot of diplomacy (ie have the diplomacy dominant personality active atm), charm if you've been charming and intimidate if you're someone who can be threatening. As much as I felt this was railroading, I liked how it was impossible for my pushover of a mage to threaten people - it just wasn't in her.

Not to mention I actually became better at talking through talking, instead of killing darkspawn and learning how to speak from that. So in that way, I'd like some refinements to DA2's system more. But then people will be sad they feel railroaded into always picking similar choices because it's hard to tell just how much you can deviate.

It's hard to make a perfect system =

The real problem with that system was that you always had 3 choices, 1 diplomatic, 1 sarcastic, and 1 mean,  that were all color coded and even in the same place each time you chose something. As has been discussed to death, this leads to people choosing "the sarcastic option" all the time, without even reading in order to get a sarcastic character.

However, there is actually one indie game called "cinders" that did something similar, but better (only negative was that there was no voiceovers whatsoever, but still). They did have similar situations where you could for example attempt to lower a shopkeeper's price by haggle, appeal to friendship, seduce the shopkeeper, or to pay full price. So far it sounds a lot like DA2s system, but apart from this specific situation, it was usually a bit harder to discern how your actions could influence your actions. There is for example a later situation where you hear someone speaking on your lawn, and you can either follow them, or keep snoring soundly. The first option will however make your personality more curious/intelligent, and the other more self interested I suppose. That is, NO COLOUR CODING to make it so darned obvious which personality trait will grow for each option.

Either way my point is that you then really roleplayed from the actions available, not from what you wanted your final personality to be like (since what makes you more cunning, diplomatic, sarcastic isn't as clear. I only found out what did what after replaying the game several times. Some choices could even make you more calculating and diplomatic at the same time). Also, some information could only be obtained by for example blackmailing certain NPCs, which you could only do if you were cunning enough in personality. So even if you were extremely diplomatic, you would have no way to gain this information, as the choice "appeal to the person's honour" will always fail.

Personally I still prefer stats affecting your conversation options like in the older Bioware games, but the above is at least an alternative that I can live with, and is in my opinion not too far from what they tried to do in DA2. In summary what they should do IF THEY HAVE TO KEEP THE PERSONALITY TRAITS A LA DA2:

*Remove the colour codings

*randomize the positions of the dialogue options in the dialogue wheel, so that the "good" choice isn't in the upper right all the time

*Don't always have 1 of each personality type, so that we in certain situations  might have 2 normally considered "good" options, and 3 sarcastic ones, and no evil ones. In another we might have 1 good and 4 evil decisions instead.

*Let some decisions give you more "points" towards a certain character type. For example, if I decide to mercilessly kill an innocent child, I should go more towards an evil personality than if I insult someone.

*Have actual decisions, instead of just 3 ways of saying the exact same thing.

Sorry for the bad english. Pretty tired right now.

Modifié par Amycus89, 11 juillet 2012 - 09:14 .