173 réponses à ce sujet

[eroeru]

Dhiro wrote...

The icons are there to clarify the intent of the PC when using that line.

But they do an awful job at that. They give absolutely uncertain and mostly irrelevant hints towards how the protag will act. Worthless really.

The negatives are much more evident. To write it up simply and without further ado - it doesn't come off natural, or in away that supports immersive RP, in the classical sense. Also, it magnifies mannerisms and character-types for different options that are contradictory or simply unsavory with other options - "sarcastic", "diplomatic" and "aggressive" are more like different personalities, as wholes rather than consistent character-shaping options.

It should be seen as this way too - without the red-colored glasses on: with three main options there is too much of a conflict between making the options different, yet retaining the same fluidity of character. For solving this, I'd propose to let go of the rudiments of classical RP-style altogether (though I'd much rather they'd head in opposite direction to go back to Origins' silent PC), rather focusing on different-functioning responses. "Aggressive" should not be very different from the other two from a "distinctiveness" perspective, and rather differ in what way the NPC or the situation will react.

[Vaeliorin]

MorningBird wrote...
Now if I read something, my reaction is more, "Oh, that sounds nice--oh wait, heart icon..."

This is great until you're trying to roleplay your character and the only in character choice has a heart icon for a character your character would never romance. I'd much rather have the character think I'm flirting when I'm not (as occurs in real life) then have to explicitly indicate that I'm trying to flirt with them when I'm actually not to stay in character.

That said, in 8 DA playthroughs I never had the ninjamance problem (in that my character never accidentally slept with anyone...I did have to turn people down, but again...that's how life works, people sometimes take things wrong) so I have trouble understanding how it was an issue for people.

[KiwiQuiche]

King Cousland wrote...

 Almost forgot:

 


 

I believe a dev stated a compass like this couldn't be implemented, but it does represent the range and broadness of responses I'd like to see. Surely it wouldn't be overly difficult to implement something similar?

I WOULD APPROVE OF THIS

[Aulis Vaara]

classifying all possible conversation options into six categories dumbs down interaction to absurd levels.

There's no coy category? Oh well, too bad, you're never going to able to do that. Want to advance your romance? Here pick this option! In Dragon Age: Origins you had interesting conversations, you had to get to know the characters, and you weren't playing one of three character archetypes. You played a real person and NPC's were real people with real feelings and real preferences. In Dragon Age II, they're all just caricatures.

I've noticed a lot of people like things in games that makes it easier for them, so they have to think less. It just makes me want to scream out: "If you want easy, go watch tv or take a nap!"

[Aulis Vaara]

Cultist wrote...

That's exactly what i am talking about - you want interactive movie, where the most complex action you do is click "Continue" button. I want a role-playing game. Where you can fail, where you can screw you romance, where you can say something that will shun other person from you.
I don't want to play a game I can't lose.

Oh so much this. Cultist, I think I might love you

[MorningBird]

Vaeliorin wrote...
This is great until you're trying to roleplay your character and the only in character choice has a heart icon for a character your character would never romance.  I'd much rather have the character think I'm flirting when I'm not (as occurs in real life) then have to explicitly indicate that I'm trying to flirt with them when I'm actually not to stay in character.

Sure, I can agree to that (in fact, I think I already have in a different post...) but DAO doesn't treat an accidently triggered romance as a misunderstanding or mixed signals like you're attempting to imply.

There is no, "Whoa whoa whoa, you misunderstood me, let's back things up!" moment.  The game treats your reading comp failure as the Warden entering into a committed relationship.  You can't say, "You were mistaken." You can only say "We need to end this."

That's my problem. 

"You were mistaken." would go hand in hand with what you are saying, and I am totally 100% cool with that.  Your Warden said something that a companion took as flirtations.  They were wrong, but you can safely say their affections were one-sided and that no romantic relationship was established.

"We need to end this." says something very different.  It's the game telling you that your Warden did flirt with a companion, the companions feelings were not one-sided, your Warden did enter into a committed relationship with them, and they are now breaking it off with them for 'x' reason.

If you never wanted your Warden to have a romantic relationship with that companion at all, this is slightly more problematic than them getting mixed signals.

This is why I prefer the DA2 wheel.  It isn't out of any hate for the Origins system, I just find DA2's wheel easier to follow.  It removed the grey area for me, and honestly, this:

"This is great until you're trying to roleplay your character and the only in character choice has a heart icon for a character your character would never romance. "

Even if there was no heart icon, you would still be flirting/attempting to initiate a romance.  The only difference between Origins and DA2 is that in Origins that heart is invisible, so you may not know what you are initiating.  In DA2, it's visible and you can avoid it.

Modifié par MorningBird, 23 septembre 2012 - 10:27 .

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I'm inclined to agree. I didn't find the icons, as they were in DA2, helpful at all, and would rather not be told in advance how an NPC is going to respond to what my character might say.

I don't view "more information" as ever being a bad thing. I think the icons were a fantastic idea, but they seem to have been applied in a less than ideal manner.

[upsettingshorts]

Aulis Vaara wrote...

classifying all possible conversation options into six categories dumbs down interaction to absurd levels.

There's no coy category? Oh well, too bad, you're never going to able to do that. Want to advance your romance? Here pick this option! In Dragon Age: Origins you had interesting conversations, you had to get to know the characters, and you weren't playing one of three character archetypes. You played a real person and NPC's were real people with real feelings and real preferences. In Dragon Age II, they're all just caricatures.

Confirmation bias, over-simplifying, imagining evidence, hyperbole, opinions masquerading as fact, and a handful of cliches.

I do enjoy hitting BSN bingo reading just one post.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:00 .

[Wulfram]

Replace icons with coloured text that gives an idea of both broad tone and a more nuanced idea of intent.

So:
[Pleading] [Reasoning] [Encouraging]

[Mocking] [Teasing] [Jesting]

[Threatening] [Angry] [Firm]

edit:  Colours never work properly for me on this forum

Modifié par Wulfram, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:03 .

[Luckywallace]

Why not just have multiple 'Heart' icons in a particular conversation. Three choices, all display a heart but with different text.

Eg.
1 - Your the most beautiful gal I've ever met.
2 - I admire your strength and character.
3 - Can I grope you boobies.

All could be a type of flirting but obviously some could be more successful than others.
There was a problem with the Heart = Win approach to DA2 romances, but all you need to do is remove that problem, keep the Heart icon but don't make it always a success, you have to actually consider what the text says.

[Knight of Dane]

Wulfram wrote...

Replace icons with coloured text that gives an idea of both broad tone and a more nuanced idea of intent.

So:
[Pleading] [Reasoning] [Encouraging]

[Mocking] [Teasing] [Jesting]

[Threatening] [Angry] [Firm]

edit:  Colours never work properly for me on this forum

So just a design switch? I thought people were against its function?
But this could work.

[InfinitePaths]

I totally agree with this,I need to have a choice how to approach something,and i want every option to be grey,not direct Diplomatic,Sarcastic,Violent.I want mixtures,like if you go kill someone you press kill option in the dialouge,but in origins i could maybe a funny kill option,first say something funny that indicates that we will kill him,than kill him,thease mixtures of dialouge was what made origins special,I had 5 or more options,some were curius and funny,some were direct but diplomatic and reasnoble,and so on and so fourth,i don't want 3 direct options,i want mixtures and role-play in the way i want not A B or C,maybe in DLC we will get a D option ?!?!?!

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MorningBird wrote...

I prefer DA2's wheel. Just because you read the sentence doesn't mean you interpreted it the way the writer's intended.

The way the writers intended it does not matter.  It never did.

The way the writers intended it does matter.  It always did.

/just reminding everyone this isn't settled and never will be

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:41 .

[Herr Uhl]

There is nothing stopping there from being multiple options with conversation icons. As long as there is a voice over, I vastly prefer some qualifiers to statements. Even in text, knowing the intended delivery can help.

[Vandicus]

While the conversation icons could be improved, to me they were much better than the plain text of DA:O. The issue with DA:O is that most of the time I found myself trying to derive the tone of the PC from the reaction of NPCs. Text, plain and simple, is not clear as to tone or meaning. Sarcasm and humor do not carry over well in text. In many cases its difficult to determine whether a possible option is meant in a joking fashion or is a serious suggestion by the PC, and the only way to tell was when the NPCs reacted or when the party acted upon or dismissed the statement.

[Pedrak]

Cultist wrote...

Along with abominable dialogue wheel and dumbed down dialogue trees we got various conversation icons to indicate out tone, like Diplomatic, Agressive, Sarcastic etc. The problem with them is that they act like background laughter in TV sitcom, telling us "that was a joke". To clarify that "I will kill you and all your family" is agressive and "Let's talk this out" is diplomatic.

Conversations are dumbed down to the point where you may not even read the paraphrases, just go by colour as 90% of all dialogues never go beyond "Yes", "No" and "Investigate".Remove the icons, at least make people
read the lines. They are not mentally challenged imbeciles, who can't understand or figure the meaning of the phrase. make them analyze the dialogue they are in, even the primitive ones we got iin DA2.

Flirt Icon
Almost eveyone took heart icon as a romance initiator. And in any further dialogue with heart icon it was a no-brainer what option to choose. Aveline was the only instance where heart icon would not lead to romance, and Zevran
maybe. So players would not think or read the linesparaphrases - they already knew that choosing heart icon is the only right ontion as it will progress romance one step further. Now compare it with Origins or Baldurs Gate 2 - you have to read carefully and understand what lines to choose. You have to understand each character, because some liked it rough, some preferred direct approach, some delicate, and so on. You have to understand and predict how each character will react to your lines.
Viconia would not be one of the most interesting and captivating love interests in RPGs if along her long romance there would be indicators to hint players - "that anwser will progress romance". And let me remind you that her romance lasted for two games and each dialogue has 5-7 options on each step. And each time you should think what should you answer to another strange line of hers, born out of alien drow mind.
Dragon Age 2 - Gain aopproval by CharmingDimplomatic=>heart=>heart=>heart. the end. that contributed to the disappointment with DA2 characters as game prevented understanding the characters and forced player to chose from 3 options, with one "right", one "wrong" and one neutral, which in most cases were "wrong" as well.

As Devs said that dialogue wheel is here to stay, but can be transformed into something less harmful, take inspiration from Deus EX: HR. they still got tones but you must choose from different options of one tone and each option resulted in different outcomes.

Well said, sir, well said.

[mazariamonti]

Vandicus wrote...

While the conversation icons could be improved, to me they were much better than the plain text of DA:O. The issue with DA:O is that most of the time I found myself trying to derive the tone of the PC from the reaction of NPCs. Text, plain and simple, is not clear as to tone or meaning. Sarcasm and humor do not carry over well in text. In many cases its difficult to determine whether a possible option is meant in a joking fashion or is a serious suggestion by the PC, and the only way to tell was when the NPCs reacted or when the party acted upon or dismissed the statement.

that's why you would keep the VO. (even though it isn't really that hard to figure it out anyway)

[Vandicus]

mazariamonti wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

While the conversation icons could be improved, to me they were much better than the plain text of DA:O. The issue with DA:O is that most of the time I found myself trying to derive the tone of the PC from the reaction of NPCs. Text, plain and simple, is not clear as to tone or meaning. Sarcasm and humor do not carry over well in text. In many cases its difficult to determine whether a possible option is meant in a joking fashion or is a serious suggestion by the PC, and the only way to tell was when the NPCs reacted or when the party acted upon or dismissed the statement.

that's why you would keep the VO. (even though it isn't really that hard to figure it out anyway)

The VO definitely makes tone clear, but there is the problem player doesn't know the tone until after the statement is made. TOR employs such a system and I often find myself hitting esc after listening to the dialogue choices to figure out the tone. Preferrably some sort've system that lets the player know the tone in advance would be used.

[Wulfram]

Knight of Dane wrote...

So just a design switch? I thought people were against its function?
But this could work.

Some people are against the function, I'm not.

(I'd rather go back to silent protagonist, but if we can't then I want as clear information as possible)

[wsandista]

I agree that "tone" icons should be removed. I also think that the paraphrased sentences(if DA3 is keeping the wheel and VO, I feel that silent PC with full text is perfect) and replacing them with actions such as "flirt", "insult", and "comfort" would be much better. That way I will know what the PC is trying to do, which is something I did not with the "tone" icons and paraphrases. Still not as good for me as the silent PC and full text, but much better than the DA2 system.

[AppealToReason]

Please no. I had to be a goody two shoes in DAO because I got sick of picking dialogue I thought was just an angry "No" and instead I end up having to massacre people. Also found myself in a Zevran romance once time when I thought I was just being a bro.

[mazariamonti]

AppealToReason wrote...

Please no. I had to be a goody two shoes in DAO because I got sick of picking dialogue I thought was just an angry "No" and instead I end up having to massacre people. Also found myself in a Zevran romance once time when I thought I was just being a bro.

you just described dragon age 2 only with zevran instead of anders

[AppealToReason]

mazariamonti wrote...

AppealToReason wrote...

Please no. I had to be a goody two shoes in DAO because I got sick of picking dialogue I thought was just an angry "No" and instead I end up having to massacre people. Also found myself in a Zevran romance once time when I thought I was just being a bro.

you just described dragon age 2 only with zevran instead of anders

I was a total dick to Anders. It was super easy.

[eweandwhosearmy]

Replacing the conversation wheel entirely would be a smart move. I know a silent protag is off the table now, but I felt like my Warden in DA:O was much more complex and realistic than Hawke in DA2. Hawke to me felt harder to RP because you were kinda stuck in one of three personality tracts and there wasn't enough player agency. Anyone familiar with ME knows the standard top= good guy, bottom = d-bag formula. Returning to the DA:O style of listed responses, even while voiced, feels less like it's railroading you into a persona.

At the very least, though, get rid of the personality cues for conversation options. I appreciate the intent, but it feels too clear-cut and kind of breaks immersion.