173 réponses à ce sujet

[Aetheria]

Luckywallace wrote...

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.

DA2 already had this in several conversations. For example, in the walkthrough for this conversation with Anders you can see that at some points Hawke can say one of two different flirtatious things, that give different amounts of friendship points, and at others he/she can say something flirtatious that doesn't give relationship points at all.

[eroeru]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

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

It *is* settled that people are unhappy.

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Alternatively, they could remove the paraphrase and icon, and leave one word intent indicators.

Basically this. Playing DA2 i've quickly found myself paying next to zero attention to the paraphrases -- when the icons were there to instantly convey that using given line "PC tries to behave nicely", "PC tries to act aggressively", "PC tries to be funny" etc... they were rendering the paraphrases meaningless and very easy to ignore.

I don't think that was the designers' intentions (as they wouldn't waste their time on making those paraphrases if that was the case) but that's just how it worked out for me. Perhaps in part because those were paraphrases rather than actual lines. As such they were pretty brief and bland, and rarely a rewarding read.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MorningBird wrote...

It... does when you discover that the lines you'd say to a friend are the same lines that mean 'I want to loooove youuuu.'

Honestly, if the game had simply treated the scenario as though Leliana had developed a one-sided attraction to my Warden, ending with her confessing such feelings, I would have been cool with turning her down, even with a disapproval gain.  That doesn't happen, however.  A few nice words, and the game treats your Warden as though you are in a committed relationship with her.

And your reaction to that was to break character and think, "I must have interpreted that line incorrectly."

Why?  Why break character?  My reaction to that is to stay in character and think "Leliana's delusional."

We both got NPC responses we didn't expect, but your reaction is what broke the game.  That suggests to me that the thing that needs fixing isn't the NPC response.

[upsettingshorts]

eroeru wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

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

It *is* settled that people are unhappy.

What else is new?

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Why?  Why break character?  My reaction to that is to stay in character and think "Leliana's delusional."

What happens when you play a different character next who is flirting with Leliana, and she has exactly the same response?  She's no longer delusional, but responds appropriately.

Which character is broken then?  Are there two Lelianas?  As many Lelianas as you have interpretations of that line?  Infinite Lelianas?

At least in the approach that blames a misinterpretation on the part of the player, Leliana remains consistent and unmangled by the contortions of imaginitive re-interpretation of line reads.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 24 septembre 2012 - 05:04 .

[Cultist]

Text additions like [Insult], [Comfort], [Threaten] leave no space for interpretation and people will not be misguided by some red, bue or violet icons. No surprises. No unexpected dialogues. And no "WTF I never meant that!"

[Xewaka]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Why?  Why break character?  My reaction to that is to stay in character and think "Leliana's delusional."

What happens when you play a different character next who is flirting with Leliana, and she has exactly the same response?  She's no longer delusional, but responds appropriately.
Which character is broken then?  Are there two Lelianas?  As many Lelianas as you have interpretations of that line?  Infinite Lelianas?
At least in the approach that blames a misinterpretation on the part of the player, Leliana remains consistent and unmangled by the contortions of imaginitive re-interpretation of line reads.

Two persons can have a different, sometimes wildly varying, opinion about a third.
If you ask two eye witnesses of the same event to describe it, you'll get two different reports.
It is a matter of perception. Each character perceives Leliana in a different manner.
And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

Modifié par Xewaka, 24 septembre 2012 - 07:40 .

[upsettingshorts]

Xewaka wrote...

Two persons can have a different, sometimes wildly varying, opinion about a third.
If you ask two eye witnesses of the same event to describe it, you'll get two different reports.
It is a matter of perception. Each character perceives Leliana in a different manner.

This I can buy.

Xewaka wrote... 

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

This I... [explodes].

[Allan Schumacher]

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

There's a great number of people that disagree given that they feel that "bisexual love interests" is a huge detriment to their believability.

(Predicts I tossed a hand grenade into this thread...)

[Xewaka]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Xewaka wrote... 
And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

This I... [explodes].

SUCCESS.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

There's
a great number of people that disagree given that they feel that
"bisexual love interests" is a huge detriment to their believability.
(Predicts I tossed a hand grenade into this thread...)

See above. The line was there specifically for that reaction. The actual argument (Each character will perceive the companions as a different individual) still applies, and it's the actual meat of the argument.

Modifié par Xewaka, 24 septembre 2012 - 08:44 .

[Icinix]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

There's a great number of people that disagree given that they feel that "bisexual love interests" is a huge detriment to their believability.

(Predicts I tossed a hand grenade into this thread...)

*raises hand* I'm one of those people - but more because I prefer engaging in stories where NPC's are always the same character.

Anyway - I'd actually like to see the abolishment of the wheel - unless its a bigger wheel with more choices - I feel too much like choices are made to fit the number of options in the wheel - as opposed to their existing the choices that make sense.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MorningBird wrote...

It... does when you discover that the lines you'd say to a friend are the same lines that mean 'I want to loooove youuuu.'

Honestly, if the game had simply treated the scenario as though Leliana had developed a one-sided attraction to my Warden, ending with her confessing such feelings, I would have been cool with turning her down, even with a disapproval gain.  That doesn't happen, however.  A few nice words, and the game treats your Warden as though you are in a committed relationship with her.

And your reaction to that was to break character and think, "I must have interpreted that line incorrectly."

Why?  Why break character?  My reaction to that is to stay in character and think "Leliana's delusional."

We both got NPC responses we didn't expect, but your reaction is what broke the game.  That suggests to me that the thing that needs fixing isn't the NPC response.

Attempting to interpret writer intent allows for a more fluid story experience. Because you don't need to assume that a number of characters have mental or serious communication issues. They are then better represented as individuals within an existing world that you may interact with. 

[the_one_54321]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

There's a great number of people that disagree given that they feel that "bisexual love interests" is a huge detriment to their believability.

(Predicts I tossed a hand grenade into this thread...)

Those of us that reasonably object have no issue with rampant bisexuality. What we take issue with is universally protagonist focused sexuality. 

At any rate, if I'm interacting with a world, the world should have previously existed in the same manner every time I first enter it. It can then react in many many different ways based on the many different things I can do. But it should always be the same at the beginning. 

[wsandista]

Cultist wrote...

Text additions like [Insult], [Comfort], [Threaten] leave no space for interpretation and people will not be misguided by some red, bue or violet icons. No surprises. No unexpected dialogues. And no "WTF I never meant that!"

Well I have been advocating for something like that for a while now. Of course silent PC with full text lets us put whatever reasoning/intent behind the line as we want, but I son't see that happening in DA3.

[wsandista]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

And, if Leliana IS a different character from game to game, nothing is lost, as it adds to replayability.

There's a great number of people that disagree given that they feel that "bisexual love interests" is a huge detriment to their believability.

(Predicts I tossed a hand grenade into this thread...)

Those of us that reasonably object have no issue with rampant bisexuality. What we take issue with is universally protagonist focused sexuality. 

At any rate, if I'm interacting with a world, the world should have previously existed in the same manner every time I first enter it. It can then react in many many different ways based on the many different things I can do. But it should always be the same at the beginning. 

I think you might have just dropped a nuke. Soon this thread will be flooded with those attacking you for wanting to destroy love.

FWIW, I agree with you.

[Vandicus]

Personally I view the the NPCs as the same people in every playthrough. Its me as the PC who is a different person. Their reactions to me are because I'm different, not because they are different.

[Aulis Vaara]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

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.

Yes, my point was oversimplified, however, the fact remains that having categories pigeonholes all conversation options into those categories. Not having categories allows for much more context driven, and thus organic, conversations.

On top of that, the player actually has to think how he can achieve what he wants to, rather than just selecting blue, red, or heart whenever they come up.

Maybe you should try actually discussing the ideas next time, it is much more useful than throwing random words around. Oh, and I oversimplified, because I don't think people are stupid.

Modifié par Aulis Vaara, 24 septembre 2012 - 03:25 .

[Siegdrifa]

I agree with OP.
At first in DA2 i was thriled to test out the icone, i thought it could only provide advantage though more clarity... but shortly after i had 2 major problem with them:

1- what the character said didn't had any importance, what was import is how to say it "be nice, be sarcastic, be bad"...
2- I felt that the writting were too much focused on how to say it, to make sure the icon match and justified, rather than what we actualy talk about.

If i compar to DAO, i was more intrested on my choice and how the diaogue were heading; on DA2, too often i got the feeling that what we were talking about wasn't that smart or relevant to the plot and what was left for me was only acting like a carebear, a sarcastic troll or a brainless dick, making the mixe of them even more disconnected.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 24 septembre 2012 - 03:29 .

[Iakus]

Icinix wrote...

*raises hand* I'm one of those people - but more because I prefer engaging in stories where NPC's are always the same character.

Anyway - I'd actually like to see the abolishment of the wheel - unless its a bigger wheel with more choices - I feel too much like choices are made to fit the number of options in the wheel - as opposed to their existing the choices that make sense.

Same here.

And yes, the wheel can use more spokes.  Though as long as there is a  wheel  in place some sort of mood/stance indicator will be needed to give us the tone of what will be said.

[Todd23]

Why not have two options? Each dialogue you pick not only what to say, but how you say it?

[legbamel]

I absolutely hate the idea of one-word "intent" indicators instead of kmowing what will come out of my character's mouth. I don't choose a response based on whether I'm playing a sarcastic or mean character (though that does play into it) but on what that PC has to say about a particular situation. There were enough WTF lines with the paraphrases. We don't need to blindsided by our own characters saying things we never intended.

Considering the rage over the (to me perfectly imaginary) Anders ninjamancing in DA2 even with the heart icons, I can't imagine BioWare doing away with any sort of indicator for a response that will start a romance. There is, however, plenty of room for more subtlety between utter abandon and a more reserved liking or less adoring/rockier relationship. I don't know that you'd need icons for such conversations once you'd established the relationship.

[Xewaka]

Todd23 wrote...
Why not have two options? Each dialogue you pick not only what to say, but how you say it?

That would the necessary budget for voice acting in a x3 factor, way past above any acceptable cost/reward level.

[Xewaka]

the_one_54321 wrote...
At any rate, if I'm interacting with a world, the world should have previously existed in the same manner every time I first enter it. It can then react in many many different ways based on the many different things I can do. But it should always be the same at the beginning.

So you would agree with the following statements:

Two persons can have a different, sometimes wildly varying, opinion about a third.
If you ask two eye witnesses of the same event to describe it, you'll get two different reports.
It is a matter of perception. Each character perceives Leliana in a different manner.

Which is the position I understand Sylvius is fowarding.
(The character changing from run to run was a line thrown to mess with a friend).

[the_one_54321]

Xewaka wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
At any rate, if I'm interacting with a world, the world should have previously existed in the same manner every time I first enter it. It can then react in many many different ways based on the many different things I can do. But it should always be the same at the beginning.

So you would agree with the following statements:

Two persons can have a different, sometimes wildly varying, opinion about a third.
If you ask two eye witnesses of the same event to describe it, you'll get two different reports.
It is a matter of perception. Each character perceives Leliana in a different manner.

Which is the position I understand Sylvius is fowarding.
(The character changing from run to run was a line thrown to mess with a friend).

Entirely acceptable. For me, not explicitly necessary though desirable. Leliana should always be exactly the same person every time I sfart a new game. Nothing about my character creation should trigger anything about her character creation. From that point on, she and my character should have free reign to interpret each other. Potentially mistakenly, but jn my preference