189 réponses à ce sujet

[Gruntburner]

In ME1, there was an annoying amount of times where your input didn't matter at all and whatever you choose gives you the same dialogue. The conversation with Sovereign does this for practically every line. I would rather have exposition and information be woven better into the conversations, along with actual input on dialogue, than redundant and unwieldy investigate options and merely the illusion of choice.

[KiwiQuiche]

o Ventus wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

No they are not.  One of my biggest dialogue pet peeves in the game was Joker's joke after Thessia.  IRL I was pissed and screaming profanity after getting screwed by Kai Leng and then him sending that troll letter of all things.  When I heard Joker make that joke, I stopped yelling obscenities and burst out laughing.  My options to interact with Joker consist of getting snappy and getting snappy.  That was not how I reacted in real life and the two options are virtually the same.  

Plus let's not forget-

Anderson: I'm staying here on Earth!

Paragon response: We're in this fight together, Anderson!

Renegade response: We're in this fight together!

Funny how some folk forget that when they are all in a "OMFG U SAY SAME THING ALL THE TIME IN ME1" rage.

At least only a few parts of the dialogue in ME1 made Shepard look retarded; in ME3 she went full retarded from the start; who the hell was James and why does she know him? (That that infamous intro line as well...)

[KiwiQuiche]

Gruntburner wrote...

In ME1, there was an annoying amount of times where your input didn't matter at all and whatever you choose gives you the same dialogue. The conversation with Sovereign does this for practically every line. I would rather have exposition and information be woven better into the conversations, along with actual input on dialogue, than redundant and unwieldy investigate options and merely the illusion of choice.

Then in ME3 I had Shepard saying dumb sh!t all the time with no imput "WE FIGHT OR WE DIE" "OMFG NO FUNNY JOKER LIARA LET ME HUG YOU" and agreeing with Udina and TIM "So he was right! D: "

Yup, I loved that way more than the illusion of choice; I'm glad Bioware decided to make Shepard a bumbling retard.

[SackofCat]

Most dialogue options in ME1 led to the same lines? Has anyone actually counted what percent of dialogue is identical regardless of choice or are these "estimates" just being pulled out of people's butts?

On that note, has anyone counted the number of times the player has input on what Shepard says and how many options are available and similar to each other?

I can believe that some people believe that the benefits of auto-dialogue outweigh the drawbacks but the argument that ME3 offers a superior role-playing experience to ME1 and ME2 seems a little far-fetched.

[SackofCat]

The second paragraph is in reference to ME3.

[Nachtdaemmerung]

ME1: The dialog was a corner stone of the game. Not always perfect, but well done. I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME2: In my opinion the dialog system was improved with the interrupts...and if three dialog options where present Shepard would say three different things (even if there were only nuances). I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME3: "I'm Commander Shepderp...dialog hurts my brain...I fight or I die. Please switch to Action Mode while I pew pew Cerbderp."

[Kataphrut94]

I liked how all the exposition for the dialogue wheel was moved to the one option on the left. It's like asking a character to basically elaborate on what they're saying, or you could just move on with the next line if you don't feel like it. It's better than the investigate lines in 1 and 2 where it feels like you're standing around reading exposition off a checklist.

I disagree with people who say they got rid of all the neutral lines. Yes, the middle space on the ol' wheel of fortune was mostly empty, but the neutral options just got moved to the bottom right. What they actually got rid of were the stupid racist dick-wit renegade lines, and good ridance to that. I know the official line is "it's war, you can't afford to be neutral", but what they actually should have said was "it's war, being renegade means you should be pragmatic, not a jerk with a permanant stick up your butt."

[halbert986]

This is actually something I can safely blame EA for. I feel they've gotten much of the blame for bioware's shortcomings. But the transition from RPG-action game, to shooter with some choices to make bothered me right off the bat and I'm 97% sure it was a push made by EA to appeal to the masses.

God bless em the gameplay in ME3 is awesome. They really nailed it, it's seamless and quick and the controls work beautifully. But the RPG side is tedious and boring because I run around and press A. I don't have conversations, I watch people have conversations.

[Batnat]

The first time I played ME3 my ("Test")-Shepard seemed on par with BioWare´s Shepard, so I didn´t mind the auto-dialogue that much...or to be more accurate I didn´t even notice it.
As soon as I started another playthrough with one of my "canon" Sheps (paragade, anti-Alliance, not too fond of Earth/humans)...well, let´s just say I DID take notice then.
I have about 20 different Sheps...headcanoning their behavior through ME3 will be more of a challenge than choosing the most fitting ending...*sigh*.

Whereas ME1 and ME2 are RPG/Shooter hybrids, ME3 seems more like a mix between a shooter and an interactive movie like Heavy Rain. Don´t get me wrong, in a stand-alone game I wouldn´t mind that, but to have this change at the conclusion of a trilogy in which I initially could customize the protagonist to a great deal it´s just a big letdown.

[Fredvdp]

LucasShark wrote...

In both ME1 and ME2, virtually every line of dialogue which came out of my Shepard's pie hole was determined by my input.

Not in ME1. Very often all three choices led to the same line of dialog. I think on Feros that happens more often than not.

Modifié par Fredvdp, 15 août 2012 - 11:19 .

[JeffZero]

ME2 was the only entry in the trilogy that got this pretty much spot-on, really.

[halbert986]

Fredvdp wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

In both ME1 and ME2, virtually every line of dialogue which came out of my Shepard's pie hole was determined by my input.

Not in ME1. Very often all three choices led to the same line of dialog. I think on Feros that happens more often than not.

Sure. But the point is not what is said. The point is thinking you said it. Taking away that layer ruins the immersion. I loved "picking" every line even in my replays.

[Apocaleepse360]

Hey remember that time BioWare stopped focusing on what made their games so great and instead focused on "lol shooting stuffz", turning their game into a generic third person shooter? *sighs*

[Little Princess Peach]

you know if they drank more wine they'd whine musch less
they just want somthing to argue about

[Apocaleepse360]

10110001110100 wrote...

Oh come on. Who wants to have to pick what 'ol shep has to say every time? It'd be like having to manage an inventory, explore planets or customise armour for your squad mates. I, for one hope they do away with all this story-based hooey and stick to multiplayer in the future so I can get on with purchasing spectre packs for microsoft points.

Don't forget holding back content for day 1 DLC!

[wright1978]

Nachtdämmerung wrote...

ME1: The dialog was a corner stone of the game. Not always perfect, but well done. I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME2: In my opinion the dialog system was improved with the interrupts...and if three dialog options where present Shepard would say three different things (even if there were only nuances). I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME3: "I'm Commander Shepderp...dialog hurts my brain...I fight or I die. Please switch to Action Mode while I pew pew Cerbderp."

Very much this. Find it funny that they had the gall to call it 'full decions' mode when it was a butchering of the previous excellent dialogue system.

[DanielsMind]

All I read is extended nitpicking.

[Apocaleepse360]

wright1978 wrote...

Nachtdämmerung wrote...

ME1: The dialog was a corner stone of the game. Not always perfect, but well done. I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME2: In my opinion the dialog system was improved with the interrupts...and if three dialog options where present Shepard would say three different things (even if there were only nuances). I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME3: "I'm Commander Shepderp...dialog hurts my brain...I fight or I die. Please switch to Action Mode while I pew pew Cerbderp."

Very much this. Find it funny that they had the gall to call it 'full decions' mode when it was a butchering of the previous excellent dialogue system.

It doesn't even disappoint me any more. It saddens me, because it's not just BioWare that are doing this. Plenty of other games are sacrificing what originally made them great in order to please a wider mainstream audience.

[MissOuJ]

Gruntburner wrote...

In ME1, there was an annoying amount of times where your input didn't matter at all and whatever you choose gives you the same dialogue. The conversation with Sovereign does this for practically every line. I would rather have exposition and information be woven better into the conversations, along with actual input on dialogue, than redundant and unwieldy investigate options and merely the illusion of choice.

So true. I got ME1 about a month ago and I was actually surprised by the amount of redundant choices the dialogue system has... Like at one point when I was trying to break things off with Ashley (she ninja!manced me) my only options were an overly sappy Paragon choice and two identical lines of dialogue with tacky jokes about cold showers and "keeping stiff upper... something".

<_<

I kinda liked the ME2 style, but then the game mechanics often make the neutral option redundant since you're just missing out on Para/Rene points that unlock the best outcomes. I have to say I miss those neutral options in ME3, even thought I didn't really use them before, but in ME3 they could actually be useful. OTOH, ME3's dialogue system is a bit confusing at times since the "upper" choice doesn't alwas get you paragon points and vice versa. Wonder what's going on with that...

[Apocaleepse360]

DanielsMind wrote...

All I read is extended nitpicking.

It's not really nitpicking when in the previous 2 games you got to pick pretty much most of the dialogue that Shepard said. Even if they led to the same things happening, it still gave the games replay value and most importantly, the dialogue was what made Mass Effect what it was. By introducing excessive amounts of auto-dialogue as well as removing the neutral option, BioWare abandoned one of the main systems of Mass Effect, turning from a deep and informative plot to a shallow and mainly action-oriented plot.

You can see the effects of it in Mass Effect 3 itself. The missions with the most dialogue tend to be praised by the fans, such as Rannoch and Tuchanka.

[wright1978]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Nachtdämmerung wrote...

ME1: The dialog was a corner stone of the game. Not always perfect, but well done. I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME2: In my opinion the dialog system was improved with the interrupts...and if three dialog options where present Shepard would say three different things (even if there were only nuances). I could pick almost any of Shepard's responses.

ME3: "I'm Commander Shepderp...dialog hurts my brain...I fight or I die. Please switch to Action Mode while I pew pew Cerbderp."

Very much this. Find it funny that they had the gall to call it 'full decions' mode when it was a butchering of the previous excellent dialogue system.

It doesn't even disappoint me any more. It saddens me, because it's not just BioWare that are doing this. Plenty of other games are sacrificing what originally made them great in order to please a wider mainstream audience.

What saddens me is that ME2 was very successful and yet they just hacked away at its core RPG mechanics to appeal to the even wider pure shooter audience. They tacked on various modes but didn't even give a proper mode for their fans who wanted dialogue control as was in previous games.

[EnvyTB075]

JeffZero wrote...

ME2 was the only entry in the trilogy that got this pretty much spot-on, really.

Honestly, ME2 almost got everything right.

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

Plenty of other games are sacrificing what originally made them great in order to please a wider mainstream audience. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/sad.png[/smilie]

Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six, Dead Space, Acecombat, Need For Speed, Crysis (to an extent), Battlefield 3 (no where near as good as BF2), Operation Flashpoint, TOCA (now known as GRID), Dirt (formerlly Colin Mcrae, now Ken Block), Formula 1....

The list can go on and on. When will devs and publishers alike realise that people who want to play CoD will play CoD, not a slightly similar Ghost Recon? Those who want to play Gears will play Gears, not ME3?

But people still buy it *glares at those using real money to buy spectre packs*

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 15 août 2012 - 11:57 .

[o Ventus]

wright1978 wrote...

What saddens me is that ME2 was very successful and yet they just hacked away at its core RPG mechanics to appeal to the even wider pure shooter audience. They tacked on various modes but didn't even give a proper mode for their fans who wanted dialogue control as was in previous games.

Well, there's RPG mode.

Look, full decisions! All 7 of them!

[KrAzY WiSh]

Nachtdämmerung wrote...

ME3: "I'm Commander Shepderp...dialog hurts my brain...I fight or I die. Please switch to Action Mode while I pew pew Cerbderp."

I lol`d, alot.

Thanks.