390 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Again, why does every line need to be paraphrased? It seems to be the central issue for most people. The same problem popped up in Mass Effect. It also uses the dialogue wheel. Hmm...

If the line will fit, they should just give us the line.

[Fast Jimmy]

Yes, we're never playing the character.

Just like we're never storming the beaches of Normandy, or playing in the Superbowl, or being a super agent sneaking into a top-secret facility. We are all aware of what video games are. We are all aware the technology, resources, programming limitations and time prevent from having an ultimate gaming experience. And that, since it is a video game, we will never -actually- be doing any of these things.

That doesn't mean we want to throw the attempt at realism or the flexibility of different characters out the window. Otherwise, why not just play a game that is a movie with combat? It's the choice of defining you character that has been Bioware's signature in their games, and has been the signature of wRPGs for decades.

I've played games with voiced characters, silent characters, lists and even ME's wheel. I only find the interface to be TRULY detrimental to my enjoymet of the game with DA2.

Edit: The interface itself is not broken, but it's design results in a broken experience. It's like playing DE:HR with the Social Enhancer upgrade - it flags how your responses will be perceived. To have all of that meta-information, but to be deprived of the actual line, is not a conversation interface, in my opinion. It's something new entirely, which neither gives you the ambiguity of third person role playing, nor the control of first person. It's a weird limbo where you feel you are just being passive during every conversation. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 04 octobre 2012 - 08:59 .

[Wissenschaft]

abnocte wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...

First, err, we are playing a game, not real life. But thats besides the point, My point was that in DA:O and the mass effect games, the option I select could have different tone then what I was expecting and therefore the result was not my intention. That takes me out of immersion and makes me angry at the game.

Ok, now I understand better your issue.
I think the main difference is that you consider that your interpretation of the line is wrong based NPC reaction.
I try to consider the NPC reaction just a miscommunication because I chose the words based on who I want my PC to be.

Let me ask you something. Let's take Aveline as an example and let's forget that we know she isn't romanceable.

In DA2 you can pick a flirt option more than once when talking with Aveline.
The game clearly tells you that your intent is flirting with her with <3 icons.
But you are never able to start a romance with her, even though your intent ( as clearly stated by the game ) was to romance her.

Does that break immersion for you?

No, I am use to failing in my attempts, in real life, at hitting on butch women. 

My complaint was more I can more easily tell what I dialogue to pick to ****** off or make happy an NPC. Joking around and exploiting people during serioues business can annoy Aveline. This means should watch your use of the sarcastic and money icons if your trying to friendship her. This would be a bit harder in DA:O. The writers might  intend the line to be a nasty joke and thats how aveline takes it to be but it went over my head. So know I'd be confused why I made her angry. I suppose you can say that is just like real life but bah, I'm playing DA to escape real life. If only for a little bit. 

"What I was complaining about is that I didn't know what words my Hawke would say, so I was unable to determine that my Hawke would

1.- accuse Merrill of summoning demons in the city and outright insult her
or
2.- declare her love for Merrill and bed her

made even worse by of the lack of other options due to us being in the rilvary path."

But the second option clearly has a big X smybol which represents rejecting a quest and rejecting relationships. Not sure where the confusion is from. Besides, don't worry about Hawke's responce being more nasty then you intended. X symbol options don't tend to create massive blows to reputation with that character (which won't matter if your going for the rivalary path anyway)

"I fully agree with you in this part, but the good thing about full text is that I can see and compare the different lines and choose accordingly in one try, because for me it's not just about an intent but how my character expresses it."

And thats my problem. Whatever tone I imagine my character to have may not be the tone an NPC is written to hear. Thats what breaks imperssion for me.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 04 octobre 2012 - 09:37 .

[Galactus_the_Devourer]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I like your engagement and interaction here Allan and enjoy reading your posts, but this doesn't parse. Maybe I am not getting what you mean by "functionally". The paraphrasing of dialogue choices is NOT same as DAO. Is this not included under the rubric of "function"? Now, we have heard that apparently the wheel CAN display the entire intended line, but the devs chose not to (which, is seems, is a huge concession to console design, saving space and making the choices more easiably navigatable on a controller).

What I'm saying is that, completely from an underlying system level, one cannot look at a conversation and how it is structured within the toolset and be able to tell whether or not it was a DA2 or a DAO conversation, without looking at the actual content (i.e. this says "kirkwall" or "this line has a paraphrase).

If you were to look through and understand the tutorial here for how a Dragon Age conversation and its elements are set up, there's very little difference with DA2.

We made some improvements with how some of the windows look and stuff like that to make it a bit better to use and other things like that, but in order to create a conversation, but my point is that how conversations is created is independent on how we decide to display said conversations on the screen. The workflow isn't dictated by any sort of arbitrary "this has a heart, so the PC must reply in such a way and this is a mechanical limitation of the wheel that writers must work around" which was an idea being put forth in this thread.

I suggest a toggle for full lines of dialogue response, as well as icons in the wheel, which is an aesthic choice, since you said they are functionally indentitcal there is reason to go with one over the other on a PC version. Problem solved.

Unfortunately, people have this idea that options are inexpensive. Many times, they aren't. From just a QA perspective alone, you have straight up doubled the workload of the live playthrough simply by having this option in. Unless you'd prefer we don't test your option at all during live playthrough (something I wouldn't be comfortable being associated with, and we frankly wouldn't be able to because there's no guarantees that we'd pass any of the console certification processes, and it certainly wouldn't go over well with many of our fans that DO play on consoles that wouldn't have such an option available to themselves).

Because we do have goals in our reporting in being able to see that we have in fact hit every single line of dialogue in the game during testing.

So, straight from the horse's mouth, "Bioware screws over PC gamers to please console gamers"?

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Wow, that was totally uncalled for. Especially when Allen was saying LITERALLY the exact opposite.

[Galactus_the_Devourer]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

Wow, that was totally uncalled for. Especially when Allen was saying LITERALLY the exact opposite.

Hence the ":p"  Although he did say the views of console gamers would determine what would get on the PC version. 

[Wissenschaft]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Now you'll probably say that with full-text I wouldn't have any more options.  That's been Allan's position throughout this thread, as well.  But with full-text and a silent PC, every option can be delivered diplomatically.  There, I would choose the option that didn't divulge the information I wanted to keep secret, and decide myself that it was delivered diplomatically.  Then the NPC would react accordingly.  If he reacted well, it was probably because my diplomacy was successful.  If he reacted badly, it was probably because I didn't tell him what he wanted to know.

DA2 doesn't offer that level of nuance.

That just seems a really werid way to look at a silent protgonist's lines. Imagineing every line to be in a diplomatic tone doesn't make the line diplomatic. By that logic I could just ignore the whatever text is written and imagine my character saying something completely different. And if the NPC doesn't react the way I want then I can just imagine  any justification I want  to explain it away.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 04 octobre 2012 - 10:09 .

[Wissenschaft]

Galactus_the_Devourer wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

Wow, that was totally uncalled for. Especially when Allen was saying LITERALLY the exact opposite.

Hence the ":p"  Although he did say the views of console gamers would determine what would get on the PC version. 

Not quite, he said that a list doesn't add anything over a wheel hence theres no point dedicating resources to add a list option that will only be avalible on the PC when the wheel works just fine for both PC and Console.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Again, why does every line need to be paraphrased? It seems to be the central issue for most people. The same problem popped up in Mass Effect. It also uses the dialogue wheel. Hmm...

If the line will fit, they should just give us the line.

But what if they want one option on the wheel to make hawke say several lines. The full chat won't be able to be displayed. I know more than one bioware teammember has mentioned this more than once.

They are not going to spend resources to add a feature that will only sometimes be used unless it does something significant.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 04 octobre 2012 - 10:19 .

[Firky]

Galactus_the_Devourer wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

Wow, that was totally uncalled for. Especially when Allen was saying LITERALLY the exact opposite.

Hence the ":p"  Although he did say the views of console gamers would determine what would get on the PC version. 

I just read that as .... testing it would be twice as time consuming. If they didn't test one or the other option, it wouldn't pass console certification. The QA dept wouldn't be comfortable not testing it on PC, either, but they could probably ship it buggy. (I don't know if that's true. Just how I read it.)

It would be detrimental to all platforms. (Not that I'm personally saying I wouldn't want that option. I would.)

Modifié par Firky, 04 octobre 2012 - 10:40 .

[Nomen Mendax]

Wissenschaft wrote...
But what if they want one option on the wheel to make hawke say several lines. The full chat won't be able to be displayed. I know more than one bioware teammember has mentioned this more than once.

They are not going to spend resources to add a feature that will only sometimes be used unless it does something significant.

I've made this point before - and it's the only convincing reason I've heard (other than cost) not to give us the full line. But a paraphrase of a single line is just as bad in this situation (arguably worse). Therefore they would need to do something different from either full text or paraphrase. CrustyBot's Explanatory Thought Process (page 3 of this thread) would probably be a good starting point.

Modifié par Nomen Mendax, 04 octobre 2012 - 10:50 .

[Nomen Mendax]

double post

Modifié par Nomen Mendax, 04 octobre 2012 - 10:49 .

[Yuoaman]

I had absolutely no problems with the way DA2 handled dialog, mostly because it's one of the few games where I can snark like there's no tomorrow as I am wont to do while not mistakenly choosing the **** responses because I couldn't tell the tone from the line itself.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wissenschaft wrote...

That just seems a really werid way to look at a silent protgonist's lines. Imagineing every line to be in a diplomatic tone doesn't make the line diplomatic.

Yes it does.  That's the point.  With a silent protagonist, we actually get to decide what the tone is.

By that logic I could just ignore the whatever text is written and imagine my character saying something completely different. And if the NPC doesn't react the way I want then I can just imagine  any justification I want  to explain it away.

Yes, we could do that, too.  Though I don't really want to do that (much - I do massage phrasing here and there), it's certainly possible under the old game design.

But the voiced protagonist and cinematic presentation take these options away from us.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wissenschaft wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If the line will fit, they should just give us the line.

But what if they want one option on the wheel to make hawke say several lines. The full chat won't be able to be displayed. I know more than one bioware teammember has mentioned this more than once.

Right.  Then the line won't fit.

I used a conditional.

[Fast Jimmy]

I don't see why the interface has to have any lines said by the PC that aren't controlled or chosen by the player.

The often-quoted line of Sten: 'No.' is a perfect example. The player had to choose a line of dialogue to pose to Sten. After his one line response, it was time for the player to interact again.

Why was this not a problem in DA:O, but suddenly if a dialogue choice happens longer than 200 seconds apart, it is a huge issue? People blame the voiced PC and dialogue wheel because things like this happened in DA:O and are suddenly taboo in future games. If its not the dialogue wheel and voiced PC, then I guess I just have a proble. With whatever design/concept changes happened in the DA team between 2008 and 2010.

[Wissenschaft]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...

That just seems a really werid way to look at a silent protgonist's lines. Imagineing every line to be in a diplomatic tone doesn't make the line diplomatic.

Yes it does.  That's the point.  With a silent protagonist, we actually get to decide what the tone is.

By that logic I could just ignore the whatever text is written and imagine my character saying something completely different. And if the NPC doesn't react the way I want then I can just imagine  any justification I want  to explain it away.

Yes, we could do that, too.  Though I don't really want to do that (much - I do massage phrasing here and there), it's certainly possible under the old game design.

But the voiced protagonist and cinematic presentation take these options away from us.

Couldn't you just turn subtitles on and mute the sound?

[Wissenschaft]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If the line will fit, they should just give us the line.

But what if they want one option on the wheel to make hawke say several lines. The full chat won't be able to be displayed. I know more than one bioware teammember has mentioned this more than once.

Right.  Then the line won't fit.

I used a conditional.

Yes, but they are not going to implement full text only in certain cases. Its a waste of effort, time, resources to half implement a feature thats not needed.

[TCBC_Freak]

After everything Allan has said if anyone has an issue with the wheel other than, "It's just that I don't like the look," they have just checked their brains at the door. Allan has pointed out that there is no difference mechanically, and in fact you can do more (i.e. have more options to grow your character through dialog) with the additions to the new mechanic using (but not limited to) the wheel as it's interface. He has addressed every issue that has been put forward and responded with facts and logic... and above all has said the most important thing, It's okay not to like the wheel because of how it looks. So lets be honest, you just don't like it, and that's okay, but accept that it is purely artistic and they are the artist and most people don't mind the wheel so they are sticking with it. Thinking that it limits choice isn't true, that's fact, you may feel that, but that's personal, so just be honest. It's all personal taste. Argue that, because there is not mechanical or writing argument against using the wheel of lines or the other way around.

[Allan Schumacher]

I need to point out how crazy this is.

If I receive a game A, and it has feature B, and I like it, that's good.

If someone else then received game A, and it has features B and C, that has no effect at all onthe game I'm playing. that someone else has an option makes no material difference to the content of my game. I still have the game I like, so there's no reason for me to be upset.

You're saying that the people in the first group would be annoyed if the second group had an extra feature, but f that's true then the only way to make fix it is to give the extra feature to everyone. Taking away a feature from the second group doesn't affect the first group at all, so it shouldn't make them less annoyed.

I'm not saying you didn't accurately describe how people behave. I'm saying that the behaviour you've described is insane.

I have a feeling that Sylvius wouldn't be happy if we released a version of the game with full lines of dialogue only for the consoles. It'd mean that we made a decision to actually release different versions of the core game for different people.

This isn't the same as a high resolution texture pack or something that is more possible on a PC due to hardware. This isn't something like a toolset which isn't possible on a console. This would be a feature that would have no technical reason to not be available in all SKUs being stripped out for a reason that certainly isn't going to make fans happy (the reason being "we didn't want to bother testing it for the consoles.")

The only reason why you think it's crazy is because you have this idea that the feature as you want it is so close and the only reason why you're not getting it is because we're releasing core features into the game.

But if you're okay with, say, silent protagonist and full lines of dialogue as console exclusive, I can go talk with Mike and Mark and see if we can make it happen. (besides, even without a rigid cert process, we're still not going to release a feature that has had zero QA time on it. Sorry).

I don't even agree that it's possible for the game to do that.  Unless
we can read the NPCs minds, we can't know why they responded the way
they did.  As such, it's not possible for their response to tell us that
the line was misinterpreted.

I don't know what it's like in the life of Sylvius the Mad, but my face to face interactions are rarely fraught with misinterpretations of dialogue.  Particularly among people I interact with on a daily basis.  Nevermind the vital importance of body language and non-verbal communication.

I learn how my friends are and am able to straight up state an insulting line to them in a sassy way because I know they're not going to be offended because they understand me too.


Then again, I'm able to strike up conversation with random people I don't know and am still my usual sarcastic self and I don't have to deal with people misinterpreting me.  They can see that I'm smiling as I'm making such comments and given how prevalent verbal irony is in humor nowadays, people laugh along.  Of course, if I see that the person has a stern look on their face and are displaying other nonverbal cues such as some sort of oral fixation (particuarly with their tongue), I recognize that striking up a random conversation, particularly with a sarcastic comment, isn't something I should bother doing.  I recognize that the likelihood of having my statement misunderstood is greater.


This is why I said it's mental gymnastics.  For me, CRPGs are missing mountains of information that allow me to appropriately gauge characters.  The only game that came close is Torment and that's because you get novels for dialogue options, but it still wasn't perfect, so I recognize the limitations of the medium and don't let it drag my experience down, and work with what I have.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 05 octobre 2012 - 04:06 .

[Icinix]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I need to point out how crazy this is.

If I receive a game A, and it has feature B, and I like it, that's good.

If someone else then received game A, and it has features B and C, that has no effect at all onthe game I'm playing. that someone else has an option makes no material difference to the content of my game. I still have the game I like, so there's no reason for me to be upset.

You're saying that the people in the first group would be annoyed if the second group had an extra feature, but f that's true then the only way to make fix it is to give the extra feature to everyone. Taking away a feature from the second group doesn't affect the first group at all, so it shouldn't make them less annoyed.

I'm not saying you didn't accurately describe how people behave. I'm saying that the behaviour you've described is insane.

I have a feeling that Sylvius wouldn't be happy if we released a version of the game with full lines of dialogue only for the consoles. It'd mean that we made a decision to actually release different versions of the core game for different people.

This isn't the same as a high resolution texture pack or something that is more possible on a PC due to hardware. This isn't something like a toolset which isn't possible on a console. This would be a feature that would have no technical reason to not be available in all SKUs being stripped out for a reason that certainly isn't going to make fans happy (the reason being "we didn't want to bother testing it for the consoles.")

The only reason why you think it's crazy is because you have this idea that the feature as you want it is so close and the only reason why you're not getting it is because we're releasing core features into the game.

But if you're okay with, say, silent protagonist and full lines of dialogue as console exclusive, I can go talk with Mike and Mark and see if we can make it happen. (besides, even without a rigid cert process, we're still not going to release a feature that has had zero QA time on it. Sorry).

I would give up my PC buying habits and buy them on console were this to happen.

[Allan Schumacher]

You can heart-icon Aveline all you want, yet she is never going to start
a romance with Hawke, so why my Hawke can't say those exact lines with
another intent? may be she just wants to mock/tease/joke around with
Aveline, why the game is telling me my Hawke really meant those words
when she says them?

You're absolutely right.  This is an explicit limitation of CRPGs in general and has nothing to do with full lines of dialogue, icons to show intent or anything like that.  I 100% agree with what you say, and I agree that it happens in all RPGs.

Had the lines of dialogue with Aveline been full lines without any sort of intent, she still responds the same way.  It still represents a failure because here's a person that knows the PC for a long time, and yet here she is STILL responding as though you are genuinely hitting on her.  This has gone from no longer just being a simple misinterpretation, to just breaking the setting and making the character less believable.


I'm very glad you used this example, as I find it particularly striking because this exact situation exists on my volleyball team.  There's a girl on it and we went out on a date.  Was nice and all but in the end she wasn't interested in pushing it further.  But we've become friends and I will occasionally tease her or make a joking flirt.  She knows me and I know her, and there's no miscommunication and we laugh and have fun.  Yet, in a situation like Aveline, no matter how much you wish to infer that you're making the comments without any sort of romantic intent, will still take the comments with a romantic intent.  Aveline is now behaving in a way that I find rather stupid, and unfortunately it's not isolated to characters like Aveline.  I find it happens all the time in my experiences with CRPGs.


At any given time in real life, there's essentially an infinite number of things I could say to another person.  In a video game, we'll maybe be able to choose between 3-5.  Since I have pretty much always recognized that the writer will write their responses based on inferred intent based on how they wrote the responses, making the transition from full lines of dialogue to something like the dialogue wheel is essentially a lateral move for how I play my games.

What I like about something like the heart icon, is that it grants me additional information to prevent the very jarring situation of being (yet again) misinterpreted because I didn't fully recognize how the writer was intending the line to be written.  Now this doesn't mean that my spoken lines may not be misinterpreted.  There's nothing preventing the game from having an NPC respond to my "diplomatic" response by thinking I'm being rude to them.  At least I understand that there is in fact a misunderstanding and (hopefully) can respond to it in a particular way.


As it stands now, there's rarely any sort of recourse that would prevent a misunderstanding from persisting.  In real life, if someone does misunderstand me, I'm usually able to recognize this very quickly and can set the course straight.  In video game land, there's no "Oh I'm sorry!  I think there's been a misunderstanding" unless the writer puts it in.


I have always been of the opinion that the only options available to us in dialogue are the ones that the writer provides for us, since they are essentially DMs that have the disadvantage of having to set up an entire campaign without the ability to react to any of the decisions that I make.  They have to proactively make assumptions about how their lines are written and will be inferred and present the dialogue in a context appropriate way.

[Allan Schumacher]

I just read that as .... testing it would be twice as time
consuming. If they didn't test one or the other option, it wouldn't pass
console certification. The QA dept wouldn't be comfortable not testing
it on PC, either, but they could probably ship it buggy. (I don't know
if that's true. Just how I read it.)

This is exactly what I was saying!

[Fortlowe]

I've no problem with how the wheel functions, only the scope of its function. It seems narrow and shallow and as has been pointed out, is fundamentally only an aesthetic leap from the list based conversation interface we had in DA:O.

Look at how much praise The Walking Dead Game is getting. Telltale took the dialogue wheel and spruced it up with a timer, conversations that include movement instead of only talking heads,and notifications of plot influence.

Bioware could do all that and more rather handily, I think. How about a tone toggle? This way when I have a question like "What did you do that for? I can, for instance, hold down L for one tone or R for another when I make the selection:
L button:lol:"What did you do that for?"
R button :crying:"What did you do that for?"
A button :huh:"What did you do that for?"

How about breaking the wheel? DA has party based combat, why not inlcude the party in the conversations? For instance: An NPC has just alerted my character that in the Village Chantry lies a key to the magical Mcguffin. The camera pulls out and smaller dialogue wheels pop up under one two or three of my  companions. I can have an aside with one, some or all of the party members with wheels or I can ignore them and continue talking to the NPC if I don't like the options I have for talking to my companions.

Just some for instance. Gonna drop a link to this thread as a quick reference on some of the ideas that have been expressed on the topic previously.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 05 octobre 2012 - 05:00 .

[Allan Schumacher]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

After everything Allan has said if anyone has an issue with the wheel other than, "It's just that I don't like the look," they have just checked their brains at the door. Allan has pointed out that there is no difference mechanically, and in fact you can do more (i.e. have more options to grow your character through dialog) with the additions to the new mechanic using (but not limited to) the wheel as it's interface. He has addressed every issue that has been put forward and responded with facts and logic... and above all has said the most important thing, It's okay not to like the wheel because of how it looks. So lets be honest, you just don't like it, and that's okay, but accept that it is purely artistic and they are the artist and most people don't mind the wheel so they are sticking with it. Thinking that it limits choice isn't true, that's fact, you may feel that, but that's personal, so just be honest. It's all personal taste. Argue that, because there is not mechanical or writing argument against using the wheel of lines or the other way around.

Just to be clear, there are differences in how the data is presented (since that's what a view in the model-view-controller) does.  I think I'm going to have a hard time explaining this without sounding a bit too techie, but essentially:

• Model: The raw data.  How the conversation is set up, how the game code knows how to deal with choices and responses and progression through the dialogue tree.  The meat and potatoes.
• View:  How the data is presented to the user
• Controller:  The rules for how user input is managed

It's a cycle, in that:

• User performs input
• Controller interprets input and passes on the appropriate message to the model
• The model takes the message received and does whatever is appropriate for that messages, and notifies the view
• The view receives the updates, and presents the information the model passed it to the user
• User now performs input based on the updates he sees on screen, and we repeat

What the wheel does is act as the view and controller.  It presents the information to the player (the view) and receives and interprets the input the player makes (the controller).

In this sense, the model (data) for DA2's conversation is essentially unchanged.  The flow for how to create conversations and how they are saved, what sort of limitations and whatnot that exist.  How a writer wishes to create and organize a conversation is done by the same means in the DA2 toolset as it was done in the DAO toolset.

There are some extra hooks into the model, because the view needs some additional information.  The controller feeds into these hooks based on how the GUI is programmatically set up.


Essentially, what DA2 has done is allowed us alternative ways to display the same information.  How we use the wheel is what bothers people (which is a valid complaint), although the wheel does implicitly provide some advantages to how the writers can organize their conversations in the model.  There's more control over where the information is displayed, which is nice for ensuring what is showing up on the screen is where you'd expect it to be.  We could create an equivalent to "investigate" with the list, but given the nature of the list sometimes it'd be the 3rd, 4th, or maybe 5th item in the list.  Or maybe something bad happened and it's been pushed right off the edge of the list and all the dialogue options for it don't even appear in game.  It'd require a modification for how we display our list (a modification to the view and controller) so in this sense, the wheel is a bit more flexible as it currently stands compared to the list from DAO.

I know some don't like how we use this, but this is what I mean when I was trying to differentiate between the functional capabilities of the wheel compared to a design decision.

So I don't think it's entirely fair to say that they "just don't like the look of it" because we do use it to provide a different look and for intended purposes.  Some people don't like those purposes, some do, and some are mostly indifferent to them.


I'd really like it if someone non-techie at least understood what the heck I was talking about though.... >.>
Sorry if that was confusing and perhaps unpleasant for some people to read...

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 05 octobre 2012 - 05:12 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

That's pretty much the way I interpret it when there's a mismatch in DA:O, or an IE game, or anything else using that system. I can't force bizarre interpretations of NPC behavior on myself when I know that's not what's actually happening in the game

Don't break character.  Your character doesn't know he's in a game at all.  If you don't break character, then your knowledge is never relevant.

Can't help it; if I see that there's a mismatch between what the dialogue writers thought my character was saying and what I thought he was saying, I've seen it and can't unsee it.

If you want to say this means I'm a bad role-player, I can live with that.

Modifié par AlanC9, 05 octobre 2012 - 05:47 .