191 réponses à ce sujet

[Korusus]

MillKill wrote...

The dialogue wheel was just fine. I have no idea what people were complaining about when they said they were surprised at what Hawke said. You can always guess the general gist of what he/she will say from the paraphrase and icon.

It's certainly better than the mute, dead-eyed, puppet Warden that the old system gave us.

2 Things:

1) Dialogue wheel or no dialogue wheel has no real bearing on voice acting or no voice acting.  They could easily have voice acting and no dialogue wheel.

2) By definition:  everyone that played DA2 would have to be surprised at what Hawke said unless you happen to be a writer at BioWare.  Everyone...everyone who plays the game for the first time will never know what Hawke is about to say no matter what the choice's tone is.  That is the weakness of the dialogue wheel.  We can do better I think.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'd like to see the wheel moved to the edge of the screen so that there would be space for longer paraphrases.

[Iosev]

It's strange, I found the DA 2 wheel to be far better than the one used in the Mass Effect series. First, it offered three ways to respond instead of two, with that new response being the sarcasm/charm tone that I absolutely loved. Second, it was organized, particularly with a clear distinction between investigative dialogue and replies that moved the conversation forward. Lastly, it included options that allowed companions to participate, which I would love to see return.

Despite enjoying games like Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age: Origins, I prefer the dialogue wheel over the top-down dialogue menu.

[upsettingshorts]

The biggest advantage Dragon Age 2's dialogue wheel has over Mass Effect 1-2's is that you do not have to take Response Type X solely because you might need to take another Response Type X later.

That's how Paragon/Renegade worked up until Mass Effect 3, where you were penalized for "inconsistency" (read: complexity and nuance) when future options would be grayed out if you did not meet certain qualifications.

In DA2 you can choose any response at any time for any reason and options are not grayed out in the future because of it.

[Korusus]

arcelonious wrote...

It's strange, I found the DA 2 wheel to be far better than the one used in the Mass Effect series. First, it offered three ways to respond instead of two, with that new response being the sarcasm/charm tone that I absolutely loved. Second, it was organized, particularly with a clear distinction between investigative dialogue and replies that moved the conversation forward. Lastly, it included options that allowed companions to participate, which I would love to see return.

Despite enjoying games like Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age: Origins, I prefer the dialogue wheel over the top-down dialogue menu.

It only had extra dialogue choices compared to Mass Effect 3 which removed the neutral dialogue choice because *insert inane bad logic here*.  Involving the companions in the conversation isn't something that is new to DA2 nor would it have to be restricted to the wheel.  The problem with organizing the investigative and move conversation choices on left and right is you will always know which of the dialogue is fluff and throw-away and which is relevant to the conversation.  Indeed, it almost forces the BioWare writers to assume some of the dialogue (the investigative options) will never be seen by a large percentage of the players.  It also trains them to think of those choices as "extra" which influences how and what they write.

I appreciate that some prefer the dialogue wheel, but I don't think its fair to assign it beneficial qualities that aren't unique to it, nor is it fair to outright ignore the biggest problem which is the summaries/paraphrases.

Modifié par Korusus, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:07 .

[Wulfram]

I'd like the ability to choose tone as well as action on major character defining moments.

I'd prefer if they used words instead of icons, in order to convey more precisely the tone that will be used.

[upsettingshorts]

Korusus wrote...

The problem with organizing the investigative and move conversation choices on left and right is you will always know which of the dialogue is fluff and throw-away and which is relevant to the conversation.  Indeed, it almost forces the BioWare writers to assume some of the dialogue (the investigative options) will never be seen by a large percentage of the players.  It also trains them to think of those choices as "extra" which influences how and what they write.

Pretty sure they've talked about this issue.  Also pretty sure they viewed the list dialogue method's lack of distinction between conversation-progressing dialogue options and clarification/investigatory dialogue options as a flaw in the list method, not an advantage.

Furthermore, being able to stick things in the "less critical" investigative tree gives the writers more freedom to play around with characterization.  Everyone's favorite Mordin moment in Mass Effect 2 - the Gilbert & Sullivan - was tucked away in an Investigation option.

[MillKill]

Korusus wrote...

MillKill wrote...

The dialogue wheel was just fine. I have no idea what people were complaining about when they said they were surprised at what Hawke said. You can always guess the general gist of what he/she will say from the paraphrase and icon.

It's certainly better than the mute, dead-eyed, puppet Warden that the old system gave us.

2 Things:

1) Dialogue wheel or no dialogue wheel has no real bearing on voice acting or no voice acting.  They could easily have voice acting and no dialogue wheel.

2) By definition:  everyone that played DA2 would have to be surprised at what Hawke said unless you happen to be a writer at BioWare.  Everyone...everyone who plays the game for the first time will never know what Hawke is about to say no matter what the choice's tone is.  That is the weakness of the dialogue wheel.  We can do better I think.

But you will know the basic idea of what Hawke says. I never once thought, "Wait! I didn't mean that!" I always knew the point he/she would say, just not the exact wording.

If the wheel showed exactly what he/she would say, we'd end up with a system like in the vastly overrated Witcher game. I see exactly Geralt will say. I pick an option. I listen to the same line of dialogue I just read spoken in an overly gravelly trying-too-hard-to-be-a-badass-cool-person voice. It's a redundant waste of time that breaks up the flow of the conversations.

The dialogue wheel allows you to take a quick look at the icon and/or paraphrase and get a general idea of what Hawke will say, allowing the conversations to be more natural, flowing, and organic.

For the record: I never played the Witcher 2 and don't know if they changed the system from the lousy one in the first game.

[Iosev]

Korusus wrote...

arcelonious wrote...

It's strange, I found the DA 2 wheel to be far better than the one used in the Mass Effect series. First, it offered three ways to respond instead of two, with that new response being the sarcasm/charm tone that I absolutely loved. Second, it was organized, particularly with a clear distinction between investigative dialogue and replies that moved the conversation forward. Lastly, it included options that allowed companions to participate, which I would love to see return.

Despite enjoying games like Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age: Origins, I prefer the dialogue wheel over the top-down dialogue menu.

The problem with organizing the investigative and move conversation choices on left and right is you will always know which of the dialogue is fluff and throw-away and which is relevant to the conversation.  Indeed, it almost forces the BioWare writers to assume some of the dialogue (the investigative options) will never be seen by a large percentage of the players.  It also trains them to think of those choices as "extra" which influences how and what they write.

I can't say that I agree.  The investigative options generally help provide a more in-depth understanding of the topics being discussed.  While I always select the investigative responses, even during replays, I also understand that other gamers may not be interested in the more in-depth conversational discussions (my brother often skips them), and instead of forcing every gamer to sit through all of the dialogue, some of the dialogue is better served as optional.

Of course this isn't even considering the gamers who do utilize all of the investigative options their first time, but skip them for convenience during a subsequent playthrough.  Organizing which dialogue is optional and which dialogue progresses conversations helps many of the latter types of gamers.

Modifié par arcelonious, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:29 .

[Fast Jimmy]

The tone and options of DA2 need to be reassessed possibly more than he wheel itself (although its has many limitations and accidental by-products, as listed in this thread).

Aggressive/Diplomatic/Sarcastic are bad for tones. It ignores all possible realms of other emotions. You can be funny and kind. You can be angry and sad. You can be nicely saying things behind nearly-overt threats. The way DA2 came across sometimes was 'choose every investigate option possible, then choose the Aggressive option and say "GET TO THE POIT ALREADY!!!" ??? What kind of psychotic, insane character am I playing?

Aggressive, as a tone and an option, needs to be scrapped. As does sarcastic. Diplomatic needs to not tranafe into 'snooty prude' either. There should just be options - period. Pigeon holing the writers and the player into three extreme personalities does nothing for story or character development. I realize they thought they were trying to put a twist on the Paragon/Renegade aspect of ME, but Renegade Shepherd made sense with his responses. Aggressive Hawke was malicious just for malice'e sake, something that just made no in-game sense.

I agree with others that tone should be a separate option from dialogue. Otherwise, you feel penalized to choose the same tone every time and watch the 'Aggressive Hawke' playthrough. You're not choosing dialogue options, you are simply observing the script written for that tone.

[eroeru]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Make it so that when we choose an option, we know exactly what the PC is going to do as a result.

The maximum acceptable level of surprise is zero.

This. As far as the actions of the PC go.

But as to the reaction (of NPCs) and the function or effect of different lines (to NPCs), it would HAVE to be more unexpected.

For this, please remove the icons and the fixed positions of every line (i.e. Investigate to the left with sublines that have no function at all, 1-upper-right, 2-middle-right, 3-bottom-right). This was horrible in DA2. It killed any sense of involvment, all I had were lines with either no function or EXACTLY ONE AND THE SAME FUNCTION, throughout the game, albeit with different personalities speaking it (also a fault).

But more essentially, have the other functions exist, i.e. let other characters have many different things to say, and have this in large part as unexpected.
I'd love me some natural (in large degree unexpected) surroundings, moreso companions and NPCs.

Also, would always dig more options.

And optional full-lines and toggling the VA are a must as far as I'm concerned.

Modifié par eroeru, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:40 .

[upsettingshorts]

eroeru wrote...

For this, please remove the icons and the fixed positions of every line (i.e. Investigate to the left with sublines that have no function at all, 1-upper-right, 2-middle-right, 3-bottom-right). This was horrible in DA2. It killed any sense of involvment, all I had were lines with either no function or EXACTLY ONE AND THE SAME FUNCTION, throughout the game,

...clarity removes "involvement?"  Only if you allow it to.  This is you playing the game wrong.  

Likewise, in what respect do the investigate options serve "no function at all?"  In what way is that different from investigate options in DAO which were not labeled as such, but still functioned in exactly the same manner?

eroeru wrote... 

albeit with different personalities speaking it (also a fault). 

Explain.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:41 .

[Iosev]

MillKill wrote...


For the record: I never played the Witcher 2 and don't know if they changed the system from the lousy one in the first game.

I've played and enjoyed both games, and yes, for Witcher 2 CD Projekt RED decided to switch from the verbatim style used in the first game, to a more paraphrased system in the sequel, I'm guessing for similar reasons that Bioware does it in their games.  With that said, I agree, I disliked the verbatim approach in the first game.

In general I think different people play RPGs differently.  Some people, for example, want to know everything their character is going to say before they say it, and there's nothing wrong with that.  Others, however, will almost want the opposite, and not want to know exactly how their character will say it, and again, there's nothing wrong with that approach either.  The closest approach of reconcilation between these differing groups of people is the Deus Ex: Human Revolution approach, but I personally found the presentation a bit distracting (too much text on the screen).

Modifié par arcelonious, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:55 .

[WahookaTheGreat]

Kingroxas wrote...

Liked the way Deus Ex: Human Revolution did it.

This

I really disliked the icons in DA2. They made me feel that I was playing a game aimed towards people whose attention span is so low that they can't even read couple of words without being distracted. I know that icons were there to help you to know the tone of the words but still... 

Anyway my point was that deus ex: hr had much better dialogue wheel. Copy it to DA3 if removing the wheel is not possible.

Modifié par WahookaTheGreat, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:52 .

[Allison_Lightning]

I can do the dialogue wheel, it's whenever my emotional act is spelled out that gets to me. I play a morally light character because I want to- all seeing little haloed wings does is make me want to pick another option- just so it feels less rigged- DA2's system felt less like an RPG and more a cinematic reused story.

(Except for the Mage/Templar bits which is my favourite storyline in the series- sorry Archdemon!)

Modifié par Allison_Lightning, 21 septembre 2012 - 06:53 .

[Atakuma]

Bioware just needs to stop being afraid to use words from the actual dialogue in the paraphrases. They also need to stop paraphrasing short sentences.

[hannawald5]

Rojahar wrote...

I'd like to often be given a "..." option. The ability to remain silent, make no comment, be indecisive, etc. One thing that annoys me is the gimmick of choosing dialog and making decisions is often overplayed IMO and comes off like you're forced to play a controlling attention wh*re who has to interrupt everyone every 5 seconds to make comments. I'd like to play a character who may not know what to do in a situation, have nothing to say, or be someone of actions rather than words.

I must say that I agree! I liked the system very well in DA2 but adding an option like this at some places would really add to role playing.

[Knight of Dane]

OOOOOOOoooh finally a link where I can refrence to my signature!

I love the dialogue wheel and I don't feel that it necessarily needs to change, but the usage of it needs to change.

Flirting:
The heart icon should mean "flirt" not "initiate romance" i thought it broke a bit of the immersion that you could just press a button to start a romance. I think characters should have variables that needs fulfilling before it works.

Choise variables:
They need to be improved. Off the top of my head I can only remember one singe instance in DA2 where you can make a choise based on personality alone. Siding with petrice against the Qunari and keeping Ser Varnell and her alive as allies.
You can only do this if you have the direct personality.
There are other instances of course like lying to Karras if you have humorous personality or calm the mob down when you look for Anders in act 1, but those instances can be replaced by Varric and Carver/Bethany.
Make the personality matter. Let there be consequense to your Hawke's behaviour. Be able to save a hostage out of humorous charm, be able to talk a riot down, be able to threaten a guard to let you through a door without it being possible just by picking the right companion. That's too easy.

Choise and response:
Sometimes there would be choises that you could pick that would mirror your personality despite not being personality choises. Like when you assist Aveline in the very end of Act 2 and can talk to the Arishok about the fugitive elves. Here you have the choise mark that displays three arrows in a swastika kind of shape.
This is great stuff. It is not auto dialogue but it showcases what we as players tend to have our character lean towards. You get to be neutral, bad and good and still have your fav personality show, More of that.

ME interrupts.
I'm not a fab of those. I like them in Mass Effect, but this should still be Dragon Age.

Give us a bonus!
Make the personality matter. Make instances where you perhaps meet a certain dude only if he heard about your diplomatic mind, or a elf seeks you out because she has heard of your cunning wit and quick tounge. Or perhaps let a commander ask for your assistance because he heard you get the job done and are effective.
Let it give us a reputation

Let characters comment on it.
This is already done a few times in DA2. More of that, it makes our character seem real.

I'm a huge fan of the dialogue wheel because it's a simple tool to make our voiced protagonist come to life.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Likewise, in what respect do the investigate options serve "no function at all?"  In what way is that different from investigate options in DAO which were not labeled as such, but still functioned in exactly the same manner?

The investigate options in DA2 were risk-free.  The player knows that the NPC will never make a decision or decide the conversation is over based on the PC asking questions.  As such, there's less drama in dialogue selection.

In DAO, you don't know which options will have consequences, so you need to choose more carefully when to ask questions or when to take a stand.  DA2 telegraphs everything for you.

[Wulfram]

Knight of Dane wrote...

OOOOOOOoooh finally a link where I can refrence to my signature!

I love the dialogue wheel and I don't feel that it necessarily needs to change, but the usage of it needs to change.

Flirting:
The heart icon should mean "flirt" not "initiate romance" i thought it broke a bit of the immersion that you could just press a button to start a romance. I think characters should have variables that needs fulfilling before it works.

You needed to complete their quest and have a high friendship/rivalry for the romance to "work".

Choise variables:
They need to be improved. Off the top of my head I can only remember one singe instance in DA2 where you can make a choise based on personality alone. Siding with petrice against the Qunari and keeping Ser Varnell and her alive as allies.
You can only do this if you have the direct personality.
There are other instances of course like lying to Karras if you have humorous personality or calm the mob down when you look for Anders in act 1, but those instances can be replaced by Varric and Carver/Bethany.
Make the personality matter. Let there be consequense to your Hawke's behaviour. Be able to save a hostage out of humorous charm, be able to talk a riot down, be able to threaten a guard to let you through a door without it being possible just by picking the right companion. That's too easy.

Not being able to side with Petrice without being aggressive was stupid.  So was not being able to lie if you didn't make stupid jokes

Choise and response:
Sometimes there would be choises that you could pick that would mirror your personality despite not being personality choises. Like when you assist Aveline in the very end of Act 2 and can talk to the Arishok about the fugitive elves. Here you have the choise mark that displays three arrows in a swastika kind of shape.
This is great stuff. It is not auto dialogue but it showcases what we as players tend to have our character lean towards. You get to be neutral, bad and good and still have your fav personality show, More of that.

These were annoying.  Just because Hawke makes jokes doesn't mean they don't want to tell Merrill they love her.

Give us a bonus!
Make the personality matter. Make instances where you perhaps meet a certain dude only if he heard about your diplomatic mind, or a elf seeks you out because she has heard of your cunning wit and quick tounge. Or perhaps let a commander ask for your assistance because he heard you get the job done and are effective.
Let it give us a reputation

Let characters comment on it.
This is already done a few times in DA2. More of that, it makes our character seem real.

I'm a huge fan of the dialogue wheel because it's a simple tool to make our voiced protagonist come to life.

Dominant tone is annoying and silly enough without making it more important.

[labargegrrrl]

i liked the wheel, the tones, and the fact that sometimes what Hawke said floored me. with snarky and agro Hawke in particular. those ladies said the darnedest things!

but it would have been nice if those tones didn't seem to imply a side you hadn't picked. i'm remembering my agro mage hawke bawling out grace, for instance. or my agro templar hawke agreeing to murder all the templars in dissent, or my anti-blood magic diplo Hawke talking with Merril. my snarky Hawke making a joke about being better off without Beth when she gets kidnapped... just little things like that.

if i'd been given a way to both imply my tone as well as my character's personal polemic in those situations, i think that would have helped a great deal. like a right and left side of the wheel, each with an option to be snide, sweet, or just lay the smack down. and what people have said about neutrality and finding a middle ground? yeah, that would be nice too.

also, with the bribe/donate option, it might have been nice to know how much coin i was dolling out.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In DAO, you don't know which options will have consequences, so you need to choose more carefully when to ask questions or when to take a stand.  DA2 telegraphs everything for you.

Good. 

I thought you hated when the UI was obfuscatory.

I want to know when I am simply attempting to clarify and when I am trying to move on.  In real life, if I wanted to go back and ask a question, I could do that.  In a game, once I have advanced the conversation the investigate options are often gone forever.  Putting them in their own category acknowledges this possibility and gives the player clear options.  

This does not harm roleplaying in any way.  Whether your character would ask an investigatory question, or would select one of the right sided options, has nothing to do with whether or not you, as a player, know only the ones on the right side will "advance" the conversation.  The character has no idea the UI even exists.  It exists for the player's convenience.

You cannot assert on one hand that you are against the paraphrases because they do not telegraph everything for you, and then be against the investigate options being in their own category because they do telegraph everything for you without being inconsistent.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 septembre 2012 - 07:25 .

[Maclimes]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Likewise, in what respect do the investigate options serve "no function at all?"  In what way is that different from investigate options in DAO which were not labeled as such, but still functioned in exactly the same manner?

The investigate options in DA2 were risk-free.  The player knows that the NPC will never make a decision or decide the conversation is over based on the PC asking questions.  As such, there's less drama in dialogue selection.

In DAO, you don't know which options will have consequences, so you need to choose more carefully when to ask questions or when to take a stand.  DA2 telegraphs everything for you.

That reminds me of the conversation with the leader of the dragon cult in the caves behind Haven (Krolgin? Something like that). I remember clicking on what I thought was a relatively innocent question, only to have him whig out at my blasphemy and start combat. 

It surprised the hell out of me, and I was in full-on panic-mode as I tried to juggle the combat along with my own worries of the long-term repercussions of what I had just done. On the one hand, that visceral feeling of surprise at the NPC's reaction was invigorarting and got my adreline pumping. On the other hand, I felt like I had less control over the game.

I know, I still had control over my character. But I distinctly remember the thought, "Stupid game! There should be some sort of indicator that what you're about to do will drastically change things!" But now, after having played DA2 I realized ... I missed it. That feeling of surprise and excitement over how people would react to my words and actions. DA2 felt so ... scripted.