73 réponses à ce sujet

[Indoctrination]

Firky wrote...

I have played ME, though, and I don't recall it being line for line, like one line for the NPC, followed by a choice immediately. Surely that would be impossible.

I didn't mean to imply that. For the purpose of my example, "blah, blah, blah" represents the entire paragraph of dialogue a character would be saying.

[Firky]

If we're talking how much money, though, per word and voice acting etc, the number of lines would be relevant, especially if the protagonist speaking is just slotting in within the paragraph. In fact, having the protagonist speaking, within the overall word count, between dialogue choices for the player, might make it more expensive, because an additional voice actor is required.

(Still, DA2 probably had less dialogue overall than Origins, regardless of whether the protag was speaking or not. My point is just that autodialogue doesn't *necessarily* have to be cheaper. The Witcher 2 had a fair bit of Geralt going blah blah blah - edit: actually, I think so, I can't actually remember. Perhaps the paraphrases made me remember that wrong.)

Modifié par Firky, 29 août 2012 - 01:24 .

[Indoctrination]

I didn't do a formal word count or anything, but the conversations in ME3 did not feel longer than the ones in ME2 despite the dialogue in ME3 being almost completely automated. I don't know where you got this idea that automated dialogue means that the word count has simply been redistributed to NPCs. That wasn't my experience with automated dialogue in ME3.

[Firky]

Not *has* been redistributed to the protagonist instead of NPCs. Could be.

(I think we might be misunderstanding each other. But thanks for the conversation. I found it thought provoking.)

[Foolsfolly]

For those who have not played Mass Effect 3, while not especially common you could have entire conversations with some NPCs without ever choosing what Shepard's supposed to say.

Some of the more plot-driven conversations have choices but they tended to be "pick this string and it continues without further input from the player" type of choices.

You had much less control over what Shepard says in ME3 than you did in the first two.

That's what I think is meant with "auto-dialogue" I wouldn't especially say DA2 used auto-dialogue because you had as much choice in what Hawke said as you did with Shepard in ME1 and 2.

[Fallstar]

Foolsfolly wrote...

That's what I think is meant with "auto-dialogue" I wouldn't especially say DA2 used auto-dialogue because you had as much choice in what Hawke said as you did with Shepard in ME1 and 2.

DA2 made extensive use of auto dialogue.

Some of the more plot-driven conversations have choices but they tended
to be "pick this string and it continues without further input from the
player" type of choices.

This sounds absolutely awful.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 29 août 2012 - 03:04 .

[Foolsfolly]

DuskWarden wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

That's what I think is meant with "auto-dialogue" I wouldn't especially say DA2 used auto-dialogue because you had as much choice in what Hawke said as you did with Shepard in ME1 and 2.

DA2 made extensive use of auto dialogue.

Some of the more plot-driven conversations have choices but they tended
to be "pick this string and it continues without further input from the
player" type of choices.

This sounds absolutely awful.

It was awful! Download the demo and see. The first like 20-30 minutes you have maybe 5 dialogue choices. And Shepard isn't quiet during this time he's talking a lot. In fact he's been talking for like 4 minutes straight before you get your first dialogue choice which results in a sentence different of dialogue from Anderson and then it goes into the same dialogue regardless of choice again.

It was a little shocking to play without knowing exactly how much auto-dialogue there was. ME1 and 2 had lines you didn't tell Shepard to say. Like you'd click on option and he'd say that, the character you're talking to would respond, and then Shepard would follow up without choice. But that was usually as far as it went before they let you pick between dialogue options again.

ME3 is nothing like that for 80% of its run-time.

Example after one planet falls to the Reapers Shepard is upset without you giving that imput, apologizes without you having a choice, says they failed without giving a choice, and then the conversation ends all without you getting a choice of how Shepard feels or responds with what could be seen as a failure.

That's a particularly bad example of how on rails the dialogue was in ME3 and there are better conversation where you have more agency... but goddamn is ME3 about as set-in-stone as Shepard's ever been. They even cut out all racist, human supremist, and distrustful dialogue options. In the other games it was possible to play those kinds of Shepards.. now your forced to love aliens, put other races before humanity, and you trust everyone always forever. It was a step back from distrusting Garrus, Tali, and Liara in ME1, Miranda, Jacob, Jack, and Grunt in ME2.

DA2 is loads better on the player controlling conversation than ME3 was.
And as long as DA3 stays close to or a little more specific in terms of
auto-dialogue things will be fine.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

I don't really understand Gaider's post, maybe because English isn't my first language.. what does he mean? Will there be less autodialogue, or less choices?

I thought the autodialogue present in DA2 was bearable.. though I'd really prefer being able to choose everything directly.. I don't know why that was possible in Da1 and Me1+2 and suddenly autodialogue is a must?

[Foolsfolly]

The way I read Gaider's post is it will be about the same as DA2.

[Nomen Mendax]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I don't really understand Gaider's post, maybe because English isn't my first language.. what does he mean? Will there be less autodialogue, or less choices?

I thought the autodialogue present in DA2 was bearable.. though I'd really prefer being able to choose everything directly.. I don't know why that was possible in Da1 and Me1+2 and suddenly autodialogue is a must?

The point of auto-dialogue is to allow for more "cinematic presentation", in other words conversations that flow more naturally and aren't chopped up by having the player make relatively meaningless dialogue choices for lines that aren't expressing PC opinions.  I'm not a fan of auto-dialogue but I do see an argument that it is not really necessary to get player input over lines where the PC is saying hello, or goodbye or saying something unimprtant to keep a conversation going.  Where this becomes problematic (at least for me) is where the game picks your tone for you based on what tone you've used in previous conversations.

[zyntifox]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I don't really understand Gaider's post, maybe because English isn't my first language.. what does he mean? Will there be less autodialogue, or less choices?

I thought the autodialogue present in DA2 was bearable.. though I'd really prefer being able to choose everything directly.. I don't know why that was possible in Da1 and Me1+2 and suddenly autodialogue is a must?

The point of auto-dialogue is to allow for more "cinematic presentation", in other words conversations that flow more naturally and aren't chopped up by having the player make relatively meaningless dialogue choices for lines that aren't expressing PC opinions.  I'm not a fan of auto-dialogue but I do see an argument that it is not really necessary to get player input over lines where the PC is saying hello, or goodbye or saying something unimprtant to keep a conversation going.  Where this becomes problematic (at least for me) is where the game picks your tone for you based on what tone you've used in previous conversations.

I agree on that last part and that was a problem for me in DA2 like the example i gave on the previous page. What i don't understad is that if they use auto-dialogue based on tone they already have recorded three different responses; why then not let us choose from those instead using whatever algorithm they are using to determine personality.

[Iakus]

David Gaider wrote...

Karlone123 wrote...
For me autodialgue was done too much in ME3, I loved conversing with companions but with autodialogue I was been taking out of the conversation for the sake of  "cinematic flow". It's like your character will state his/her own opinions withhout any input from you yet you will stride down corridors making Banshees swoon over you.

Sorry for that last bit but that's how I feel about it. I know ME and DA take influences from each, I just hope autodialgue isn't a overalling factor in influences. I like and support the dialogue wheel from DA2 to be improved not dampened.

I've talked about this before-- the amount of "auto-dialogue" (if that's what you want to call it) is unlikely to change much from DA2. We tend to run with it once the player has made a choice of tone, and avoid the PC expressing opinions without direct input (so any comments are usually intro text or "tell me more" type lines). In fact, there will probably be less need even for those lines, due to things I shan't yet discuss.

I think this is overall a good thing to hear.  I didn't find autodialogue to be a huge deal in DA2 (not like it was in ME3, certainly) And I for one liked the "tones" and would like to see that further developed.

[RedWulfi]

I just hope we get to be something other than a human.

[Nomen Mendax]

Cstaf wrote...

Nomen Mendax wrote...

...

I'm not a fan of auto-dialogue but I do see an argument that it is not really necessary to get player input over lines where the PC is saying hello, or goodbye or saying something unimprtant to keep a conversation going.  Where this becomes problematic (at least for me) is where the game picks your tone for you based on what tone you've used in previous conversations.

I agree on that last part and that was a problem for me in DA2 like the example i gave on the previous page. What i don't understad is that if they use auto-dialogue based on tone they already have recorded three different responses; why then not let us choose from those instead using whatever algorithm they are using to determine personality.

My understanding is that Bioware's goal is to keep conversations flowing as much as possible to give the game more of a cinematic feel.  Your guess is as good as mine as to why their goal is to make the game more cinematic.  To be fair Bioware could have all sorts of perfectly sensible financial or artistic reasons for this but AFAIK they haven't explained them.

[TamiBx]

Do you mean auto dialogue as in the character starts talking by itself in a conversation or those Zaeed style convo (you stand there listening to others talk)?

I had no problem with my Hawke starting a cinematic conversation with a tone she's used before, but I had a hard time with Zaeed-style conversation in ME3 (or party banter without being in a party but being on the Normandy). I can't stand sitting through a party banter when my character isn't on the move (and the other character's aren't moving). I like to be able to actually talk to them, like we did in DA:O and ME1(and ME2, to some extent)

[carine]

TamiBx wrote...

Do you mean auto dialogue as in the character starts talking by itself in a conversation or those Zaeed style convo (you stand there listening to others talk)?

I had no problem with my Hawke starting a cinematic conversation with a tone she's used before, but I had a hard time with Zaeed-style conversation in ME3 (or party banter without being in a party but being on the Normandy). I can't stand sitting through a party banter when my character isn't on the move (and the other character's aren't moving). I like to be able to actually talk to them, like we did in DA:O and ME1(and ME2, to some extent)

Agreed. I was fine with DA2/ME style paraphrasing, but I hated the little one-liners instead of conversations. ME3 had way too much autodialogue in my opinion (though I still like the game) but DA2's didn't bother me at all. Also, comparing DA2 to ME3... DA2 had way more dialogue wheel options and more dialogue wheels.

[nightscrawl]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

If so, one of the problems I have with DA2 is that I want my tone to be different when talking to different people (or people from different groups), and the game doesn't appear to record this information, nor does it really have much of a chance to figure it out given that I might not have many interactions with a particular group.

I want the same thing.

Going further with this, I think it would be interesting if the game classified people in groups and had a hidden meter for those groups. So if the game sees a pattern of you being harsh to mages, then you respond in that tone when dealing with mages. The same would be true for followers and family groups. Of course, the problem with a system like that is you can get overwhelmed trying to classify everyone, and also that some people will overlap. Does the game consider an overall companion meter, or put each of those companions in categories? If you are harsh to mages, it's natural to assume that you would behave similarly to Anders and Merrill, but are you nice to Bethany because she's your sister, despite being a mage? It could get complicated quickly. And how many categories to do we track? Do we track all categories, or only those that are relevant to the plot? The game might watch mages, templars, family, and friends, but should they also watch the Carta, the city guard, and the Tal-Vashoth?

Another method is to keep track of each person you are expected to have repeated interactions with, but that seems a bit excessive...

Going back to the topic... I think the problem is largely due to how the personality system worked in conjunction with the dialogue system. This also can be connected to the friend/rival system. Taken separately I think they're OK, but sometimes there are clashes when they work together that can be jarring, pulling you out of the game, or causing frustration.

However, David's comments give me hope that they are tweaking some of those issues and leave me excited to see what the results are.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I mean like say I pick the snarky option and Hawke says something. Then Isabela responds snarkily back. Then I hear a snarky bit of dialogue as a continuation of that tone choice in that specific conversation.

Rinse and repeat for the other two possible options.

Then the wheel appears to continue onwards.

Oooh I like this! Treating each conversation as an entity unto itself and keeping responses in line with the overall tone that you have chosen in that instance.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 29 août 2012 - 06:25 .

[Pasquale1234]

Nomen Mendax wrote...

Cstaf wrote...

Nomen Mendax wrote...
...
I'm not a fan of auto-dialogue but I do see an argument that it is not really necessary to get player input over lines where the PC is saying hello, or goodbye or saying something unimprtant to keep a conversation going.  Where this becomes problematic (at least for me) is where the game picks your tone for you based on what tone you've used in previous conversations.

I agree on that last part and that was a problem for me in DA2 like the example i gave on the previous page. What i don't understad is that if they use auto-dialogue based on tone they already have recorded three different responses; why then not let us choose from those instead using whatever algorithm they are using to determine personality.

My understanding is that Bioware's goal is to keep conversations flowing as much as possible to give the game more of a cinematic feel.  Your guess is as good as mine as to why their goal is to make the game more cinematic.  To be fair Bioware could have all sorts of perfectly sensible financial or artistic reasons for this but AFAIK they haven't explained them.

That is my understanding as well.  They've been pretty clear about their intention to make the games more cinematic, but have offered no explanation for setting that goal.

I'm still concerned that there will be instances of auto-dialogue that won't fit the player's intentions.

SPOILERS


One example I remember came at the end of "Enemies Among Us", where Anders suggests not mentioning blood magic to Cullen, and the Hawke I was playing had decided to take that suggestion.  The moment I clicked on Cullen to report the quest completion, Hawke starts spouting off about blood magic.


/SPOILERS

There were several other times during the game when Hawke blabbed some things that I felt she would have kept to herself.  Where any auto-dialogue is used, there is always a risk that it will break someone's character.

[Ianamus]

I never really minded the dialogue system in Dragon Age 2. I never felt that there was too much autodialogue and the paraphrasing was usually fine. My one and only concern was that conversations with your companions were too short and there were too few of them. There was a lot I wanted to talk to them about but never got the chance to because we could only speak to them around 2 times an act, and the conversations were focused around whatever was going on at the time.

Modifié par EJ107, 29 août 2012 - 07:38 .

[Nomen Mendax]

nightscrawl wrote...
...

Going further with this, I think it would be interesting if the game classified people in groups and had a hidden meter for those groups. So if the game sees a pattern of you being harsh to mages, then you respond in that tone when dealing with mages. The same would be true for followers and family groups. Of course, the problem with a system like that is you can get overwhelmed trying to classify everyone, and also that some people will overlap. Does the game consider an overall companion meter, or put each of those companions in categories? If you are harsh to mages, it's natural to assume that you would behave similarly to Anders and Merrill, but are you nice to Bethany because she's your sister, despite being a mage? It could get complicated quickly. And how many categories to do we track? Do we track all categories, or only those that are relevant to the plot? The game might watch mages, templars, family, and friends, but should they also watch the Carta, the city guard, and the Tal-Vashoth?

Another method is to keep track of each person you are expected to have repeated interactions with, but that seems a bit excessive...

Going back to the topic... I think the problem is largely due to how the personality system worked in conjunction with the dialogue system. This also can be connected to the friend/rival system. Taken separately I think they're OK, but sometimes there are clashes when they work together that can be jarring, pulling you out of the game, or causing frustration.

However, David's comments give me hope that they are tweaking some of those issues and leave me excited to see what the results are.
...

In my imaginary system for an imaginary CRPG (although I did write an actual proof of concept for the reputation system) you would want reputation (or friendship) with each major group and major NPC, I would think you would want interactions with individuals to override group interactions.  Personally I think this a much more interesting sort of system to explore than cinematic presentation but I'd be surprised if this was a majority opinion.

I think it would be possible to write a robust system that tracked interactions and selected appropriate tone, but I also suspect it would be complex, and therefore expensive.

[lx_theo]

David Gaider wrote...

Karlone123 wrote...
For me autodialgue was done too much in ME3, I loved conversing with companions but with autodialogue I was been taking out of the conversation for the sake of  "cinematic flow". It's like your character will state his/her own opinions withhout any input from you yet you will stride down corridors making Banshees swoon over you.

Sorry for that last bit but that's how I feel about it. I know ME and DA take influences from each, I just hope autodialgue isn't a overalling factor in influences. I like and support the dialogue wheel from DA2 to be improved not dampened.

I've talked about this before-- the amount of "auto-dialogue" (if that's what you want to call it) is unlikely to change much from DA2. We tend to run with it once the player has made a choice of tone, and avoid the PC expressing opinions without direct input (so any comments are usually intro text or "tell me more" type lines). In fact, there will probably be less need even for those lines, due to things I shan't yet discuss.

O.O

Intriguing...

[FaWa]

David Gaider wrote...

Karlone123 wrote...
For me autodialgue was done too much in ME3, I loved conversing with companions but with autodialogue I was been taking out of the conversation for the sake of  "cinematic flow". It's like your character will state his/her own opinions withhout any input from you yet you will stride down corridors making Banshees swoon over you.

Sorry for that last bit but that's how I feel about it. I know ME and DA take influences from each, I just hope autodialgue isn't a overalling factor in influences. I like and support the dialogue wheel from DA2 to be improved not dampened.

I've talked about this before-- the amount of "auto-dialogue" (if that's what you want to call it) is unlikely to change much from DA2. We tend to run with it once the player has made a choice of tone, and avoid the PC expressing opinions without direct input (so any comments are usually intro text or "tell me more" type lines). In fact, there will probably be less need even for those lines, due to things I shan't yet discuss.

Best news I've heard in a while...

[Emzamination]

AndersIsLush wrote...

I just hope we get to be something other than a human.

Hope only leads to heart break, the answer is No.