235 réponses à ce sujet

[Gibb_Shepard]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Holy mother of idiocy.

So instead of having a DW that could possibly lead to uncharacteristic remarks, you believe auto-dialogue where the player has no control over the the choice of remarks, will prevent uncharacteristic remarks?

So if they forced me to do stuff in ME1 and ME2 where there was otherwise a choice, so the next story could make narrative sense later, I would be 100% FINE with that.

As an example: Legion in ME2. There's an option to sell him to Cerberus. This is stupid. Why? Because in ME3, you're required to have him or his replacement on the ship, even if you didn't trust him enough to activate him on the ship the first time because maybe you just didn't trust the geth, or roleplayed as a character who did not.

Totes bro. Lets just scrap decisions because they don't lead into consequences that you thought substantial.

This is the same old "OMFG BIOWARE Y U NO CONSEQUENT MY DECIZION!?!?". If you don't like being disappointed by the consequences, don't play RPGs. Requesting that RPG's become more linear because you dislike the significance of the consequences is absolutely absurd.

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 13 août 2012 - 03:01 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

Stornskar wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Stornskar wrote...


Sounds like your issue isn't with autodialogue, but with game design on Bioware's part

It's all part of the same thing. I can't/don't expect Bioware to account for evvvverything. And they've proven time and again of trying to bite off way more than they can chew.

So if they need to make things linear - dialogue or other stuff - for the narrative to have less issues, that's really not a big deal.


If anything, they should be blamed for not figuring that out sooner and leaving us with these unrealistic expectations.

You're still addressing the wrong issue. From a design standpoint, it makes sense for Bioware to provide multiple branches early on - if you run out of time (like they did), you can always close the branches or merge them (which is what they did), but from a design standpoint placing the options early on - in ME1 and ME2 is the right way to go. This is design vice time to implement the design, I don't see how it is related to autodialogue as a superior mechanic

I'm sure they needed more time. But that's not all of it. I'm pretty sure Mac said very clearly that he and the writing team looked back at the suicide mission and said "we just thought, 'what we we thinking?'" because they made a lot of variables to the point where it was a pain in the rear for them to account for all of it in the game.

And to that end, they did not do that great a job of it either. I imported a career where only Miranda and Thane survived and noticed a lot of issues with the carryover.

Not only that, but them actually being in the industry and having experience, how hard is it for them to figure these things out?

Here's an example, allowing Shepard in ME1 to be openly hostile to aliens. You have the option to play that way, and all of us seem to have the expectation to continue to play our characters as we have been all along. But meanwhile, they build up this major galactic threat that takes the Citadel fleets (three different races), and then the Alliance, to take down just one of. Something you will obviously need the whole galaxy to fight if you expect to have any chance.

So what on Earth were they thinking here, that they'd have a seperate path where Racist!Shep and humanity do it all on their own? And what of the alien help he/she needed in the first place? If they really didn't forsee the need to retcon those player canons, that's rather sad.

That's just one example of it. I've named others. I'm sure there are more.

As it relates to AD, dialogue makes up probably 90+% of our characterization. The example above, basically all a dialogue thing.

[Urdnot Amenark]

TheJiveDJ wrote...

I think an important aspect about auto dialogue many here are overlooking is the fact that in the previous two games we could opt out of certain convos or actions. Maybe I DON'T want to investigate Kaidan's sob story because maybe my Shep is just a dick. So for people to come out and say, "well the auto dialogue is the equivalent of investigate options from the previous games" I say to you: what if I DIDN'T want to investigate? What if I DIDN'T want to hug Liara when I first saw her again? Sometimes the words that aren't spoken, catch the most ears.

This.

[Tritium315]

Pitznik wrote...

And without it any PST conversation that isn't interesting in itself or plot progressing could be reduced to auto-dialogue. Of course it would be really hard to find conversations in PST that weren't interesting or plot-progressing, but that is an entirely different matter.

So now if a conversation is interesting it's okay? You've backpeddled so much to try and justify your original argument that you're basically saying what I've been saying. Dialogue should be it's own reward; that's the point of an RPG, and choices within said dialogue should be there for the purpose of allowing you to define your character.

Pitznik wrote...

I consider perks coming from being LG or full Renegade to be a reward for good roleplaying and that gives me additional satisfaction from the game.

 

There is no such thing as "good roleplaying" and there should be no reward; that's the point. Your "reward" is how the game plays out and how characters respond to the different things you say.

Pitznik wrote... 

Would you be happy with the whole ME paragon/renegade system, with interrupts and charm/intimidate entirely removed?

Personally I'd have been a hell of a lot happier with ME without the paragon/renegade system. If ME3 did one thing right it was how they overhauled that awful mess. Simply because I decided shoot a ****load of people in one situation shouldn't mean that I'm all of a sudden incapable of being charming in a different one. Hell, in real life sociopaths are often extremely charming individuals. 

[His Name was HYR!!]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...


Totes bro. Lets just scrap decisions because they don't lead into consequences that you thought substantial.

This is the same old "OMFG BIOWARE Y U NO CONSEQUENT MY DECIZION!?!?". If you don't like being disappointed by the consequences, don't play RPGs. Requesting that RPG's become more linear because you dislike the significance of the consequences is absolutely absurd.

You're kidding yourself.

It's not just me raising issue to the poor choice-and-consequence. MANY people here have. Even the ones who don't agree with this topic, I'm sure, not realizing a big part of the problem had to do with this perceived freedom of choice.

If you haven't noticed, this series railroads the hell out of you. Most don't even realize it and don't complain either.

[DirtyPhoenix]

I didn't have a big problem with auto-dialogs. Many others may have had, but I can only speak for myself. It was not among my major issues with ME3.

[KotorEffect3]

Another issue overblown by the complainers.

[Pitznik]

Tritium315 wrote...

So now if a conversation is interesting it's okay? You've backpeddled so much to try and justify your original argument that you're basically saying what I've been saying. Dialogue should be it's own reward; that's the point of an RPG, and choices within said dialogue should be there for the purpose of allowing you to define your character.

I didn't backpeddle, it is you who is trying to make my arguement much more radical than it was, all the time presuming something about why I play the game or why I pick some choices over another. When the purpose of dialogue is to only move conversation forward, the autodialogue should be used, just like you can have options in more traditional RPGs of "go on" or "what happened next?", its only purpose being breaking up what other character says into something less than walls of text.

Tritium315 wrote...

There is no such thing as "good roleplaying" and there should be no reward; that's the point. Your "reward" is how the game plays out and how characters respond to the different things you say.

Of course there is, if you really have some sort of motivations or vision of your character in your head when you're playing. If one conversation you strongly support something, just to stop supporting it seconds later, that is a bad roleplaying.

Tritium315

Personally I'd have been a hell of a lot happier with ME without the paragon/renegade system. If ME3 did one thing right it was how they overhauled that awful mess. Simply because I decided shoot a ****load of people in one situation shouldn't mean that I'm all of a sudden incapable of being charming in a different one. Hell, in real life sociopaths are often extremely charming individuals. 

Even if this is logical, it kill replayability a bit - every Shepard in ME3 has pretty much the same exact options available. On the other hand, ME2 and ME1 rewarded extreme viewpoints. I see both good and bad sides of this system, but I wouldn't like it removed entirely, because that just takes away one layer of the game.

Modifié par Pitznik, 13 août 2012 - 09:10 .

[RiouHotaru]

I'm still waiting for SPECIFIC examples of where the auto-dialog "broke character", honestly.

And if anyone says "The kid", I'll point out there's no reason why Shepard should NOT feel uncomfortable about watching a child die, unless your Shepard is a sociopath.

Also, as far as the "forced friendship" with Liara is concerned?  Why weren't you people up in arms about LotSB?  You were, by your own logic, railroaded into being nice to her and winding up as her BFF when it was all said and done.

And not ONCE did I ever hear of a complaint against that characterization.

Why NOW then do you guys choose to voice complaints about that?

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 13 août 2012 - 09:33 .

[Joccaren]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

1.) Dialogue Wheel responses leading to saying the exact same thing.

So fix this issue rather than basically removing choice dialogue. Have different things said at all times.

2.) DW responses leading to saying the same thing with just slightly nuanced opinion (as opposed to, a contrary opinion).

Can be a part of role playing. Some railroading I can accept. Again, something that should have been fixed rather than removing choice dialogue.

3.) DW reponses assuming your motivations behind a decision. ("I'm not going to let fear compromise who I am!" ugh...)

"We fight or we die".
No choice dialogue assumes more than choice dialogue did, so not a fix.

4.) DW response otherwise not reflecting your opinion on a development.

See above

5.) DW options not always reflecting the actual response very well.

So fix this rather than removing choice dialogue.

6.) Persuation system forcing you to play strictly to one morality to unlock persuation options rather than in-character.

Again, fix this rather than removing choice dialogue. Possibly remove the whole persuasion system all together, seeing as that's basically what is done in ME3, just the coloured boxes stay to inform you that this is the instant win button, incase you needed to know.

7.) Being left with only one (persuation) dialogue response as a result of the above.

See above.

8.) Abundance of forced opinons (friendships, railroading) even before ME3, despite the dialogue-wheel.

Done to a far greater degree with autodialogue, hence autodialogue is not a fix.


Basically it seems to come down to "Its broken, so remove it" rather than "Its broken, so fix it".

[KiwiQuiche]

essarr71 wrote...

Half of what you said is either irrelevant or contraditory to your thesis.

Take that logic somewhere else, ma'am.

Apologizes if you are a bloke

[Joccaren]

RiouHotaru wrote...

I'm still waiting for SPECIFIC examples of where the auto-dialog "broke character", honestly.

And if anyone says "The kid", I'll point out there's no reason why Shepard should NOT feel uncomfortable about watching a child die, unless your Shepard is a sociopath.

Lets be quite honest here. My Shepard lead a team of over 20 men and women to their horrid deaths at Batarian or slaver or something hands in his Origin. He doesn't have nightmares. He doesn't regret it. It was necessary to complete the job.
Another Shepard watched their squad get eaten by a Thresher Maw, or along those lines. No Nightmares.
Another defended their colony against a terminous systems attack, and all the horrors that go with it. No Nightmares.
The child's death, whilst unfortunate, is not tragic or life changing. I offered him the chance at safety and freedom. He refused. He died as a result of his own actions.
Sociopathy is not the only reason for not having nightmares about the kid, though I'm not sure this fits as dialogue.

One rather popular example is "We fight or we die", and a large part of the intro sequence. Or Shepard and TIM. Or Thessia. There are a number of places where autodialogue and Shepard's forced reactions kinda break it for me. I woulda been cracking jokes with Joker after Thessia, not all down and depressed.

Also, as far as the "forced friendship" with Liara is concerned?  Why weren't you people up in arms about LotSB?  You were, by your own logic, railroaded into being nice to her and winding up as her BFF when it was all said and done.

Who said my Shepard did Lair of the Shadow Broker?
He didn't see Liara as worth the time for that.

And not ONCE did I ever hear of a complaint against that characterization.

Why NOW then do you guys choose to voice complaints about that?

Likely because its an extremely prevailent part of the main game that you cannot dodge out of, and that involves all characters rather than one or two that the reactions generally resemble those of a fair portion of fans for, and are entirely optional otherwise.
Granted there were railroading situations in the past. Adding more railroading situations is not the way to fix this, however.

Modifié par Joccaren, 13 août 2012 - 09:48 .

[Someone With Mass]

jeffyg93 wrote...

Man, you guys are really dramatic and excel at exaggeration.

The option to say miniscule things was taken away from me? DIS GAEM IS PRETY MUCH CAL OF DUTY!!!!!!!

Yes. You are totally right. Instead of disagreeing with you I'll just reply to circlejerk and add nothing to discussion. Because playing ME3, a game with a significant amount of recorded dialogue, a game with themes and a focus on story and characters, a game focused on hard decision making reminds me of call of duty or gears of war only because I wasn't able to make my Shepard choose between saying "Who are you?" or "What are you?" And fluid combat is a bad thing. I'd rather control Shepard as if he were a tank and use unbalanced abilities. That's how true RPGs work!

But seriously, no. In the end it doesn't matter what genre label you put on the game. It's a video game. The series overall hasn't changed much gameplay wise since ME1. It's still about taking cover, utilizing abilities to your tactical advantage, maintaining a party, shooting different guns, and utilizing your surroundings. Ya know, like most shooters. Mass Effect is not a unique snowflake. Mass Effect, even your beloved ME1, was never a pure RPG and for good reason. Go back to the old Final Fantasy games if you want some hardcore RPG grinding.

This. 

The whole notion that BioWare can put in a reaction for Shepard from every perspective possible in an argument with another character is preposterous.

Some people's viewpoints are going to be left out, even with lots of dialogue options.

"But they didn't do it as much in ME1!"

Yeah, well, ME1's main story can be beaten in less than seven hours and it has way less dialogues than the other games.

[RiouHotaru]

Joccaren wrote...

Lets be quite honest here. My Shepard lead a team of over 20 men and women to their horrid deaths at Batarian or slaver or something hands in his Origin. He doesn't have nightmares. He doesn't regret it. It was necessary to complete the job.
Another Shepard watched their squad get eaten by a Thresher Maw, or along those lines. No Nightmares.
Another defended their colony against a terminous systems attack, and all the horrors that go with it. No Nightmares.
The child's death, whilst unfortunate, is not tragic or life changing. I offered him the chance at safety and freedom. He refused. He died as a result of his own actions.
Sociopathy is not the only reason for not having nightmares about the kid, though I'm not sure this fits as dialogue.

One rather popular example is "We fight or we die", and a large part of the intro sequence. Or Shepard and TIM. Or Thessia. There are a number of places where autodialogue and Shepard's forced reactions kinda break it for me. I woulda been cracking jokes with Joker after Thessia, not all down and depressed.

Well, for starters, you can't control what you dream about.  You might have nightmares about something whether you want to or not.  And the Sole Survivor background IMPLIES some level of PTSD.

And how is, "We fight or we die" bad?  It's exactly the answer I'd give.  It's straight forward and too the point.  Admittedly, I would've LOVED to smart-ass TIM around during my interactions with him, but since you're sort of operating on a timetable with a rather fixed and intimidating deadline (finish the Crucible, get the Catalyst, or we're DEAD), I can understand being serious.

[RiouHotaru]

Someone With Mass wrote...
This. 

The whole notion that BioWare can put in a reaction for Shepard from every perspective possible in an argument with another character is preposterous.

Some people's viewpoints are going to be left out, even with lots of dialogue options.

"But they didn't do it as much in ME1!"

Yeah, well, ME1's main story can be beaten in less than seven hours and it has way less dialogues than the other games.

Amen.  Bioware cannot and SHOULD not account for every possible Shepard or type of perspective.  Such a thing just isn't a realistic expectation.

[legion999]

Someone With Mass wrote...
This. 

The whole notion that BioWare can put in a reaction for Shepard from every perspective possible in an argument with another character is preposterous.

Some people's viewpoints are going to be left out, even with lots of dialogue options.

"But they didn't do it as much in ME1!"

Yeah, well, ME1's main story can be beaten in less than seven hours and it has way less dialogues than the other games.

Yes it is. And yes that goes without saying. But that doesn't mean the only possible course of action is to make everyone's Shepard respond in the same manner and feel the same way about certain issues.

And ME3 can be beaten in less than seven hours as well, what's your point?

[Someone With Mass]

legion999 wrote...

And ME3 can be beaten in less than seven hours as well, what's your point?

My point it is that is has a lot less content than the rest of the games. Sure, you can beat ME2 and 3 in less than seven hours as well, but you won't get anything good out of it.

[legion999]

Someone With Mass wrote...

legion999 wrote...

And ME3 can be beaten in less than seven hours as well, what's your point?

My point it is that is has a lot less content than the rest of the games. Sure, you can beat ME2 and 3 in less than seven hours as well, but you won't get anything good out of it.

Wait what? Yes main quest wise it is shorter. Which is why side missions exist. And I'm sorry but what? What does that even mean: “you won't get anything good out of it"?

[jstme]

No, you are wrong .
Choosing a line of dialogue is important for the player, even if the character says the same words afterwards.
It is all part of role playing and immersion.One of important bits that create soul of RPG, by the way.
Autodialogue removes it and takes away that part of the soul to make it easier for players who are used to other less role playing genres - like Call of Duty guys for example.
Synthsesis between Mass Effect genre and Call of Duty genre is not a good idea.

Modifié par jstme, 13 août 2012 - 10:26 .

[clarkusdarkus]

Someone With Mass wrote...

legion999 wrote...

And ME3 can be beaten in less than seven hours as well, what's your point?

My point it is that is has a lot less content than the rest of the games. Sure, you can beat ME2 and 3 in less than seven hours as well, but you won't get anything good out of it.

ME3/action mode/6 hours.........and that represents the RPG genre...mwahaha

[legion999]

jstme wrote...

Synthsesis between Mass Effect genre and Call of Duty genre is not a good idea.

Why not? First person shooters are already a part of you#. Can you imagine your life without them?

#you=gaming industry.

Modifié par legion999, 13 août 2012 - 10:28 .

[clarkusdarkus]

jstme wrote...

No, you are wrong .
Choosing a line of dialogue is important for the player, even if the character says the same words afterwards.
It is all part of role playing and immersion.One of important bits that create soul of RPG, by the way.
Autodialogue removes it and takes away that part of the soul to make it easier for players who are used to other less role playing genres - like Call of Duty guys for example.
Synthsesis between Mass Effect genre and Call of Duty genre is not a good idea.

Auto-dialogue comes down to preference, some like me want the dialogue from ME1 and some want like it was in ME3, neither of which can convince the other it's wrong as it's down to personal preference, i want the illusion that every line of dialogue means something like in ME1, it added to the immersion, nothing in ME3 felt immersive and those that played action mode didnt even choose dialogue.............and that alone boggles belief in an RPG.

Modifié par clarkusdarkus, 13 août 2012 - 10:34 .

[Someone With Mass]

clarkusdarkus wrote...

ME3/action mode/6 hours.........and that represents the RPG genre...mwahaha

Who here says it does?

[jstme]

legion999 wrote...

jstme wrote...

Synthsesis between Mass Effect genre and Call of Duty genre is not a good idea.

Why not? First person shooters are already a part of you#. Can you imagine your life without them?

#you=gaming industry.

Sure thing. I enjoy playing Battlfield 3. It is much much much better shooter then ME3 can ever be. I do not play it for story mode or roleplaying so  jumping out of aircraft midflight ,sniping other pilot and taking other his aircraft  thingies do not bother me. Not to mention that i am too bad to ever succeeed in that . I play it when i feel the need to run around for fun, shooting and capturing positions.
But when i want story and immersion i go for Mass Effect.
Overload Battlfield 3 with immersing story (yes i know there is single player campaign and it is even ok one but i did not buy the game for that nor ever intend to replay it), choices and roleplaying ruins all the point of it.
The same with dumbing down ,de-choicing , autodialoguing and de-roleplaying of ME3. ruins the point of it. 
Steak  and apple pie are very tasty. Making steak "apple pie" people friendly and vice versa will result in ruining both. 

Modifié par jstme, 13 août 2012 - 10:41 .