390 réponses à ce sujet

[jillabender]

Fortlowe wrote…

Ideally I'd see the personality building mechanic become more sophisticated. For instance it could score how often I select a gracious option alongside how often I select a sarcastic tone, so that I develop a selfless and humorous personality, Or a selfless and surly one. Or a Cruel and charming one. Or a selfish and witty one, etc, etc. Perhaps it can keep track of how my PC treats characters individually. For example I can make my character be hard and uncompromising in general, but with one NPC they are gentle and limitlessly understanding and the game takes note of the soft spot.

That's aiming pretty high, I imagine, but a good thing to reach for, I think. All possible with the modification of adding a tone toggle to the wheel. I've read and participated in a few of the threads about how dialogue is handled. Most of the gripes people (gamers and devs) have about the wheel/list seem to center around tone. Some control over it seems, to me, to be a likely solution.

I think the tone toggle is an excellent idea!

I think the dialogue wheel has a lot of potential, but I ran into difficulty with the way it was handled in DA2 because the tone icons were presented in a way that seemed to conflate demeanour and intention with personality – I wasn't always sure, for example, whether I was choosing for my character to respond aggressively to a situation, or to act in a way consistent with being an aggressive person.

Speaking aggressively out of general frustration or impatience is different from speaking aggressively out of personal anger or a desire to intimidate someone – but DA2 usually offered only one "aggressive" option in each conversation.

Certain shades of "aggressive" don't really fit a character who's not aggressive or abrasive by nature, just as certain shades of "diplomatic" don't really fit a character who's not warm and caring by nature; and the paraphrases in DA2 didn't always make it clear whether the particular shade of "aggressive" or "diplomatic" portrayed in the response would fit with the kind of personality Hawke had displayed previously.

The toggle idea seems like it could go a long way to address that, by letting us choose, for example, a "gracious" dialogue option to select how the PC should act, along with a "witty" tone to select the manner in which the PC should be gracious.

Modifié par jillabender, 07 octobre 2012 - 07:32 .

[Fortlowe]

Thanks! Your example illustrates precisely the error in which the icons were implemented in DA2 and the resulting problems that error produced. Just because my character aggressively objects to a particular subject, doesn't mean that he/she is innately aggressive; just not spineless. Or just because they agree with someone doesn't mean they like that fact and selecting agreement then selecting a hostile tone would convey this intent with little room for misinterpretation.

A tone toggle allows us to distinguish what we say and why/how we say it. Reducing the amount of uncertainty for the information we input.

[Cimeas]

You can't learn everything from a book. What if there's no book about what you want to learn?

Sylvius, you say you create characters in advance and are subsequently annoyed if you cannot play them in the way you imagined once you're actually in the game.

That is fundamentally the wrong way of playing Bioware's newer games. Accept it and move on, stop arguing, stop trying to persuade because it won't happen, it will NEVER happen at Bioware, and I would be willing to bet any amount of money on it.

David Gaider said the worst threads on these forums are the 'what is an RPG' threads and the 'should we have a silent protagonist' ones. You fan the flames in both with your outdated arguments that no longer relate to Bioware's games. They, as the biggest story-driven RPG developer in the world, have decided what they want to do, and they're doing it.

Quite frankly please discuss the games at hand and what could be done to *improve* (not completely redo) them, rather than your 'vision' for a DA RPG that is entirely incompatible with what the devs want to do.

[ledod]

I prefer the origin conversation layout. DA2's symbols were far too ambiguous to satisfy my image of Hawke. (There were too many instances where the assumed response from choice "X" yielded a completely unexpected/unmeaningful response from Hawke).

[Amycus89]

so... maybe I have missed something, but what is going to be DIFFERENT with the dialogue system in DA3 compared to DA2? Because so far it seems that the devs intend to keep:
*voiced protagonist (that might not be any surprise by now)
*Dialogue wheel
*Symbols to indicate tone
*A different set of base personalities.

I know that Bioware hasn't really released any screenshots or the like on how the DA3 system will actually be like, but so far I can't spot any differences from DA2, and since I loathe all the above points, especially the way they were implemented in DA2, I can't help but get worried...

Assuming that this is really the case though, let me list some smaller changes to these that would at least make the dialogue system a bit more bearable for me:

1)Voiced protagonist
One of the larger problems with the voiced protagonist is that any character you create of the same gender will have the same voice. So after I have made my first playthrough with one character, I start a new one with a different face and, in my mind, different personality. Then I am suddenly greeted to long scenes where my new character speaks the exact same lines, with the exact same movements, with the exact same voice, with a different face - this feels extremeley jarring, and forces me to always make my characters look the same as the first too. So if you do choose to have a voice protagonist, at least consider the ability to chnage the pitch of the voice, or even release "voicepacks" as DLC.

2) I have seen the pictures illustrating how the amount of options supposedly are the same in DA2 as in DA:O. However, it sure doesn't feel like it is the same amount of options, especially so since there never seems to be any negative consequences of ever choosing all the alternatives in the "investigate" sections.

You can compare it to the way companion interaction was handled in DA:O and DA2. I remember that there were a lot of complaints about DA2 having less companion dialogue than in DA:O, but I remember that a dev stated that there were actually the same amount of voiced dialogue between companions in both games. That might not be impossible, but it sure FELT shorter.

3)Symbols to indicate tone
There is nothing wrong with describing the tone of a line, but "colourful symbols" are not the way to go. They will either be far too few types of symbols to accurately describe all possible tones, or too many to learn for the average player. The only "symbols" I remember from DA2 was green, purple and red. Use words to describe the tone instead, like [angry], [furious] [irritated], etc. And please stop using the "one top option being paragon, one middle option being sarcastic, one bottom one being renegade" format. Give me a reason to look through all my available options before I make my final choice.

*Different set of base personalities.
As it was in DA2 this, combined witht he bad paraphrases, just led to that people picked resposnes based on what they wanted this base personality to be, instead of thinking "how would my character actually react in this, CURRENT situation?". Either remove it completely, or make the "base personality" reset in the beginning of each conversation. People usually have different tones depending on who they speak to, and the current situation anyways.

Modifié par Amycus89, 07 octobre 2012 - 01:38 .

[Fortlowe]

*Deleted after better judgement*

Modifié par Fortlowe, 07 octobre 2012 - 01:46 .

[Cimeas]

I certainly don't mean it as a personal attack, indeed Sylvius is a great person to have a discussion on such a topic with, however it is important to remember that we are discussing what dialogue changes we want for DA3 when it is already confirmed that the wheel is coming back.

EDIT: This was replying to the above post which has since been removed. 

Modifié par Cimeas, 07 octobre 2012 - 01:51 .

[Naughty Bear]

Do what Human Revolution did.

Just like in real life, every question can be answered in a different tone. No good or evil, just the tone such as sarcastic, cold, friendly, helpful etc.

I dont just want a good choice where you donate 100,000 coins to help or the bad choice involves mass murdering for no apparent reason. I want the responces to actually fit the tone and the question itself,

[Sir JK]

Amycus89 wrote...

.. or even release "voicepacks" as DLC.

You know... this idea is actually quite interesting. Probably non-trivial and unlikely... but interesting nontheless. Nice idea.

*Different set of base personalities.
As it was in DA2 this, combined witht he bad paraphrases, just led to that people picked resposnes based on what they wanted this base personality to be, instead of thinking "how would my character actually react in this, CURRENT situation?"

Out of curiosity, how big is this problem really? I mean, can it actually be supported by anything other than pure speculation or assumtion? Is there anything at all supporting that people (as in a plurality or majority) actually did this?

I don't mean this question as an accusation. Nor is there any judgement impaired on anyone who did. I'm just curious if this actually is a phenomenom.

[Fortlowe]

Sir JK wrote...

Amycus89 wrote...

.. or even release "voicepacks" as DLC.

You know... this idea is actually quite interesting. Probably non-trivial and unlikely... but interesting nontheless. Nice idea.

*Different set of base personalities.
As it was in DA2 this, combined witht he bad paraphrases, just led to that people picked resposnes based on what they wanted this base personality to be, instead of thinking "how would my character actually react in this, CURRENT situation?"

Out of curiosity, how big is this problem really? I mean, can it actually be supported by anything other than pure speculation or assumtion? Is there anything at all supporting that people (as in a plurality or majority) actually did this?

I don't mean this question as an accusation. Nor is there any judgement impaired on anyone who did. I'm just curious if this actually is a phenomenom.

I also thought the idea of voice dlc was rather intruiging and worth entertaining, even if only in theory. Practically it'd be a dicey venture at best. I'd like to think I'd purchase it, but I don't know.

So far as the personality building mechanism as it was in DA2? Well I wouldn't call it a deal breaker, but it obviously does need refinement. There's no reason for it to remain as unwieldy as it was before in the next game when the obvious solution is to somehow seperate tone and intent from aligment and disposition.

[abnocte]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

First, I didn't doubt that you worked as a programer. It's not something that I thought you were lying about, sorry if it came out that way.

No problem.

TCBC_Freak wrote...

Second. Yes I understand that the wheel and the player character model are not coded together as one line or layer, or however you want to say it. But that being said the wheel is how the user picks a line of dialog, which lets the engine know what dialog to load, which then loads the proper voiced line for audio, which then has to sync with the facial movements of the PC and each gender has different facial models. Thus, if a the mechanic that is used to tell the whole system which dialog is needed is not functioning then it might load up Male PC's voice over Female PC's voice (but it might never do it if you only play as a male) because the input mechanic was off for the Female option of dialog. Remember that nothing is in a vacum, each gender does effect which lines become avalable (in the same way that a Male PC runs in a different maner than a Female PC), so having the option to alter which lines become avalable (or even just how they are seen on screen) can effect one gender model differently than another as selecting Gender also places a limitation on the dialog to be presented at a later date, thus anything effecting said dialog presentation could (and I say again could) be effected. Of course this all hinges on the type of codeing and the engine being used as well.

The dialogue wheel already does that since Mass Effect, that is its core functionality. That is not something they need to implement again or modify in any way.

The wheel used in DA is the same that the one in ME, just with a different interface that shows an icon in the center instead of using color coded text.

What I was suggesting is for the wheel to allow an extra user input that allows us to change the icon in the center. It just visuals. It wouldn't affect at all how the wheel fetches the conversation node and fires the audio ( if the wheel is actually in charge of firing the audio, and highly doubt it is in charge of lip sync ).

Now we move the mouse around and left-click to select a dialogue option.
The idea was to have our mouse on top of the desired option an then, before left-clicking, allow other input ( right-click, mouse-wheel, or something ) that allows us to move among all the intent icons, and select the one we want. Left-click and everything plays out just the same as when we can't change the icon.

[TCBC_Freak]

abnocte wrote...

TCBC_Freak wrote...

First, I didn't doubt that you worked as a programer. It's not something that I thought you were lying about, sorry if it came out that way.

No problem.

TCBC_Freak wrote...

Second. Yes I understand that the wheel and the player character model are not coded together as one line or layer, or however you want to say it. But that being said the wheel is how the user picks a line of dialog, which lets the engine know what dialog to load, which then loads the proper voiced line for audio, which then has to sync with the facial movements of the PC and each gender has different facial models. Thus, if a the mechanic that is used to tell the whole system which dialog is needed is not functioning then it might load up Male PC's voice over Female PC's voice (but it might never do it if you only play as a male) because the input mechanic was off for the Female option of dialog. Remember that nothing is in a vacum, each gender does effect which lines become avalable (in the same way that a Male PC runs in a different maner than a Female PC), so having the option to alter which lines become avalable (or even just how they are seen on screen) can effect one gender model differently than another as selecting Gender also places a limitation on the dialog to be presented at a later date, thus anything effecting said dialog presentation could (and I say again could) be effected. Of course this all hinges on the type of codeing and the engine being used as well.

The dialogue wheel already does that since Mass Effect, that is its core functionality. That is not something they need to implement again or modify in any way.

The wheel used in DA is the same that the one in ME, just with a different interface that shows an icon in the center instead of using color coded text.

What I was suggesting is for the wheel to allow an extra user input that allows us to change the icon in the center. It just visuals. It wouldn't affect at all how the wheel fetches the conversation node and fires the audio ( if the wheel is actually in charge of firing the audio, and highly doubt it is in charge of lip sync ).

Now we move the mouse around and left-click to select a dialogue option.
The idea was to have our mouse on top of the desired option an then, before left-clicking, allow other input ( right-click, mouse-wheel, or something ) that allows us to move among all the intent icons, and select the one we want. Left-click and everything plays out just the same as when we can't change the icon.

Got ya. My brain was in a total different place on that one, didn't fully get what you had said and I was thinking of it from an xbox mindset so I was also thinking off into what button you'd use and how that might effect something else and yeah, my bad, lol. I get what you're saying now.

[Bondari the Reloader]

jillabender wrote...

Fortlowe wrote…

Ideally I'd see the personality building mechanic become more sophisticated. For instance it could score how often I select a gracious option alongside how often I select a sarcastic tone, so that I develop a selfless and humorous personality, Or a selfless and surly one. Or a Cruel and charming one. Or a selfish and witty one, etc, etc. Perhaps it can keep track of how my PC treats characters individually. For example I can make my character be hard and uncompromising in general, but with one NPC they are gentle and limitlessly understanding and the game takes note of the soft spot.

That's aiming pretty high, I imagine, but a good thing to reach for, I think. All possible with the modification of adding a tone toggle to the wheel. I've read and participated in a few of the threads about how dialogue is handled. Most of the gripes people (gamers and devs) have about the wheel/list seem to center around tone. Some control over it seems, to me, to be a likely solution.

I think the tone toggle is an excellent idea!

I think the dialogue wheel has a lot of potential, but I ran into difficulty with the way it was handled in DA2 because the tone icons were presented in a way that seemed to conflate demeanour and intention with personality – I wasn't always sure, for example, whether I was choosing for my character to respond aggressively to a situation, or to act in a way consistent with being an aggressive person.

Speaking aggressively out of general frustration or impatience is different from speaking aggressively out of personal anger or a desire to intimidate someone – but DA2 usually offered only one "aggressive" option in each conversation.

Certain shades of "aggressive" don't really fit a character who's not aggressive or abrasive by nature, just as certain shades of "diplomatic" don't really fit a character who's not warm and caring by nature; and the paraphrases in DA2 didn't always make it clear whether the particular shade of "aggressive" or "diplomatic" portrayed in the response would fit with the kind of personality Hawke had displayed previously.

The toggle idea seems like it could go a long way to address that, by letting us choose, for example, a "gracious" dialogue option to select how the PC should act, along with a "witty" tone to select the manner in which the PC should be gracious.

I agree with both of these ideas, and I think the tone toggle idea could help clear up a lot of problems. I'm not sure we could ever hope for a personality system that sophisticated, but if it could keep track of more than just one thing (our tone choices) that would already be an improvement.

The section I bolded highlights my biggest problem with the tones. As implemented, they left no room for situational differences. A generally diplomatic character who wants to speak aggressively would probably still be relatively calm about expressing her anger, but if a "blue" character chooses the red option she could just as likely end up screaming and threatening to kill the NPC. If players could choose their own tone, or at least be given multiple responses for each tone, I think that would help a lot.

[LinksOcarina]

Anyone play Alpha Protocol?

No...well the conversation system in that game comes to mind as a good example of how to do something, where instead of a paraphrased sentence, we get the tone written out (sarcastic, angry, kind, sauve, agressive, etc.) And what you can do from there is expand it (ask companions, have actions written out, etc.) and we can see how it works.

Makes more sense to me to do that since the tone of what is said is usually more important over how it is said, especially if we have a voiced protagonist.

[reddead136]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

DA2 compounded this even further, with the conversation icons, in my opinion. Now, not only do I know what conversation options are totally safe and just provide information and which ones advance the conversation, but NOW I know exactly what these lines will result in. Want to auto-win a romance? Just click the heart. Want to auto-win because you are a mage? Just click the magic star. Want to auto-win because you have Varric in the party? Just click on his picture.

.

^^^  Thank you for saying everything I've totally wanted to say about the dialogue in DA:2. Especially when it comes to the romantic / flirt options. The Heart options were one of the biggest irritations I had with the speech choices because to me it felt like it took away depth from those moments. I didn't have anywhere near as much fun as I did in Origins carefully making choices based on the character I was talking with and trying to successfully flirt (failing sometimes ) as I did simply picking the auto-win I am cupid reincarnated fall for me button XD.

[abnocte]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

Got ya. My brain was in a total different place on that one, didn't fully get what you had said and I was thinking of it from an xbox mindset so I was also thinking off into what button you'd use and how that might effect something else and yeah, my bad, lol. I get what you're saying now.

Ok. No problem. 
May be I should have explained myself better before but I didn't want to sound too techy!