243 réponses à ce sujet

[FINE HERE]

I really disliked the DA2 personality system. It felt way too much like Commander Shepard in Thedas.

I played the beginning again using a different tone every time/dialog option(first aggressive, then snarky, then good) and it sounded like someone suffering from split personality disorder. It was weird, like Hawke wasn't the same person everytime she opened her mouth.

There's no middle ground, no 'I can be sweet sometimes, but don't insult my family or I will get mad." And I agree with people that most of the time to go against someone, you have to act like a massive ******. If I, say, wanted to rival Anders but still support mages, I'd have to yell at him that mages don't deserve freedom, then go behind his back and rescue every single mage in danger. It seemed a bit... weird to do that.

[Firky]

Fortlowe wrote...

GithCheater wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Also, the dialogue wheel offered more dialogue options and directions than the list in DA:O, not less. Fundamentally, the wheel is the list. Except with paraphrasing and alignment data. In other words, conversations in DA2 were more intricate, not less. What the wheel actually did was highlight the fact that tone is not being simulated within the current conversation structure (neither the list or the wheel).

How so?  Can you please provide an example?

Pages 1 (Mary Kirby; diagram) and 5 (Allen Schumacher) in this thread have responses from Bioware devs explaining how the wheel is the same as the list.

I was reading that thread really carefully and I still don't get what Allan was saying about how DA2's dialogue is structured.

I think he was saying that dialogue for DA2 would look pretty much the same as in the Origins toolset, at one point, just with each line then having some kind of additional tab for paraphrase and tone. (Like the cinematics tab.)

So, that suggests to me (but I might be wrong) that the dialogue is written as it is written, then attributed paraphrase and tone later. I assume the writers would have the tones in mind as they are writing, but I think it's a subtle difference.

This is guesswork, but I don't think the tones should affect the plot very much at all, if the process is like this.

PS. Whoops. I got sidetracked. More on topic. *If* it's structured like Origins, and the process for creating dialogue is similar, I think they could certainly make consequences for an aggressive tone on a line by line basis. Keeping a count of aggressive responses would either be complicated, or handled elsewhere. (Just a guess.)

But I like the idea of Hawke, or protagonist 3, getting a reputation for being aggro.

Modifié par Firky, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:03 .

[Stippling]

motomotogirl wrote...

Honestly, I'm playing DA:O right now (with my current avatar) and I don't see what people are talking about. It isn't all that different from DA2 except that it's unvoiced.

This. I am replay as well and I have noticed this as well. Only difference is that the investigate options are often blended into the tri-toned dialogue advancement. Sometimes it's even hard to tell what will investigate into the conversation and what will end it.

Some could argue this makes it more fluid and natural, but sometimes I want to know more and not have it end the conversation (unless the situation calls for it... i.e. "You're a heartless shrew, you know that?":P.

In general I think more options are always welcome, but to say that there is less dialogue options just because your inner voice interpretation multiplies each choice is kind of silly. The protagonist will be voiced. Just have one hand on mute whenever you click your dialogue choice.

Modifié par Stippling, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:02 .

[Todd23]

What I hate is the game assuming my tone based on what I used the most. When I'm trying to get my family away from the darkspawn, yes I'm going to be serious. When Aveligne's husband dies suddenly I'm a dick about it. Maybe I'm concerned, serious, or making jokes at completely different times. When I'm responding to someone I want to pick a response, not a tone.

[coldSnap]

I was thinking, why not just allow the player to select their charcaters overall tonal personality in the character creator, and then in game still have the same, agressive, diplomatic, and neutral choices, but this time mix the tone with the reponse.

By this i mean, say your Inquisitor's overall personality is sarcastic/snarky. If you chooose the agreesive option in game it comes off more as playfully bi***y, kinda like back-handed compliments

or you have a inquistor with an overall diplomatic/kind tone, but you choose an agressive response in game, the comment sounds more passive agressive than outright confrontational or threatening.

I realize that this particualr dialogue system im suggesting would require more voicing, but i personally think its worth it. Thoughts?

Modifié par KaidanLover, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:09 .

[jillabender]

KaidanLover wrote...

I was thinking, why not just allow the player to select their charcaters overall tonal personality in the character creator, and then in game still have the same, agressive, diplomatic, and neutral choices, but this time mix the tone with the reponse.

By this i mean, say your Inquisito'rs overall personality is sarcastic/snarky. If you chooose the agreesive option in game it comes off more as playfully bi***y, kinda like back handed compliments

or you have a inquistor with an overall diplomatic/kind tone, but you choose an agressive response in game, the comment sounds more passive agressive the outright confrontational.

I realize that this particualr dialogue system im suggesting would require more voicing, but i personally think its worth it. Thoughts?

I think that's a great suggestion!

Modifié par jillabender, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:10 .

[deuce985]

David Gaider wrote...

GithCheater wrote...
In comparison, I seem to recall that DAO conversations were often more intricate than DA2 conversations.

Sorry, but you recall incorrectly.

Perhaps there is vaseline on the lens, or perhaps you are confusing your overall impression of the dialogue with it working differently on a mechanical level, I don't know. But if you play DAO again you will realize that we have the same "tone hub" as we had in DA2... as in there are three flavors of responses (along with Investigates, which in DAO were not put into a separate hub) which are used primarily for roleplaying purposes to move the dialogue along. If they had any effect in DAO it was on follower approval, nothing more.

Actual choice hubs-- as in the player is selecting a choice which actually affects the plot-- were separate entities both in DAO and in DA2. In both games, such choice options were toneless. DA2's choice options had a toned response that varied on your current dominant tone, but you didn't pick that one the wheel.

Do you think it's possible we could see more variations of personality/tone types or would that be too costly? As an example, you use three specific personality tones in DA2 - diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive. In the diplomatic response, you could sometimes get the helpful response to replace diplomatic. Is it possible to see more personality types like this in DA3? Assuming you use the same dialogue wheel.

Something like this:

Diplomatic+Helpful+Compassion
Sarcastic+Charming+Amiable
Aggressive+Direct+Emotionless

IMO, some areas in DA2 would've benefitted with more emotional responses that aligned with your personality. It seemed that you were limited to only two types of responses for each personality type. Adding more could make some situations feel less awkward. When mom dies, you're limited to these responses when I think you probably needed more emotional responses like "sad" in that situation. They would only appear in certain situations. Just like responses like "Charming" Or "Helpful". They're not always there. Does that make sense?

Modifié par deuce985, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:18 .

[Maria Caliban]

That would double the amount of voice acting they'd need for the PC. I'd rather they have a second PC race.

[Firky]

I'm picturing not just more voicing ...

I'm trying to recall how much the protagonist talked in games like BG2 and the IceWind Dales (and the custom party), because you could pick a voice/voices which reflected a range of "personalities."

I think it was more like, click to move and the protagonist would growl at you or go, "sure." Actually, I really miss what I'm (possibly incorrectly) remembering. Nostalgia.

[Dominus]

That would double the amount of voice acting they'd need for the PC. I'd rather they have a second PC race.

That was one of the issues that occurred to me when I heard Fast Jimmy mention this, way back when. It's a question of 'is this idea worthwhile enough to spend said amount of resources on them?'

[scootermcgaffin]

Firky wrote...

I'm picturing not just more voicing ...

I'm trying to recall how much the protagonist talked in games like BG2 and the IceWind Dales (and the custom party), because you could pick a voice/voices which reflected a range of "personalities."

I think it was more like, click to move and the protagonist would growl at you or go, "sure." Actually, I really miss what I'm (possibly incorrectly) remembering. Nostalgia.

How quickly we forget "How about I find you a ladder...so you can get off my back!"

[kingjezza]

Todd23 wrote...

What I hate is the game assuming my tone based on what I used the most. When I'm trying to get my family away from the darkspawn, yes I'm going to be serious. When Aveligne's husband dies suddenly I'm a dick about it. Maybe I'm concerned, serious, or making jokes at completely different times. When I'm responding to someone I want to pick a response, not a tone.

Totally agree with this.

A game forcing me in a certain direction based on previous dialogue choices is a big no no as far as I'm concerned.

[jillabender]

DominusVita wrote...

That would double the amount of voice acting they'd need for the PC. I'd rather they have a second PC race.

That was one of the issues that occurred to me when I heard Fast Jimmy mention this, way back when. It's a question of 'is this idea worthwhile enough to spend said amount of resources on them?'

Well, I personally think it would be a worthwhile use of resources, because I think it would go a long way toward addressing some things that frustrated me about the dialogue system as it was in DA2. But of course, it's ultimately up to BioWare to decide what they think will provide the most satisfying experience. And when I have the chance to play DA3, I'll get to find out whether I agree with them.

Modifié par jillabender, 17 octobre 2012 - 11:19 .

[Maria Caliban]

As far as I recall, every decision with the companions is done through dialogue, not PC actions.

In Mass Effect, I only recall the last choice (red, green, or blue) to involve actions instead of dialogue.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 17 octobre 2012 - 10:24 .

[deuce985]

KaidanLover wrote...

I was thinking, why not just allow the player to select their charcaters overall tonal personality in the character creator, and then in game still have the same, agressive, diplomatic, and neutral choices, but this time mix the tone with the reponse.

By this i mean, say your Inquisitor's overall personality is sarcastic/snarky. If you chooose the agreesive option in game it comes off more as playfully bi***y, kinda like back-handed compliments

or you have a inquistor with an overall diplomatic/kind tone, but you choose an agressive response in game, the comment sounds more passive agressive than outright confrontational or threatening.

I realize that this particualr dialogue system im suggesting would require more voicing, but i personally think its worth it. Thoughts?

This is a good suggestion but I'm not sure it would be worth the resources. I like it personally.

[Emzamination]

Wait...There are 3 different dialogue tones in origins?

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

But if you play DAO again you will realize that we have the same "tone hub" as we had in DA2... as in there are three flavors of responses (along with Investigates, which in DAO were not put into a separate hub) which are used primarily for roleplaying purposes to move the dialogue along.

Of course, because the DAO lines were unvoiced, there were many more than three flavours available.  You only wrote three lines, but there were many more than three ways to deliver or intend them.

Nuance matters.

Does it? The NPCs react to what the writer thinks your PC said, not what you think your PC said. I imagine DG will come down on the side of the "real" game being the actual code, rather than the representation of the game in the player's mind.

[AlanC9]

Emzamination wrote...

Wait...There are 3 different dialogue tones in origins?

I don't believe they all appear in every interaction.

[frostajulie]

Wow thats probably why the dialogue options in DAO seem ti be so much better than DA2 to me. they may have been written in 3 different flavors but with no voice actor I could rp the various shades of possible delivery within that tone such as a bored or tired aggression a volatile expression or coldly furious add to the fact that I could have the same conversations in a variety of locations and differ the pacing of those discussions based on my character and how I forsaw their story arc developing and I think it was not that there were more options in DAO but the game tended to draw more on players imagination and rp ability. Looking back I can see how that made my playthrus much more dynamic even though the dialogue was the same and the discussions were the same.

I love DAO it really worked out MY imagination muscle/

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Of course, because the DAO lines were unvoiced, there were many more than three flavours available.  You only wrote three lines, but there were many more than three ways to deliver or intend them.

Nuance matters.

Does it? The NPCs react to what the writer thinks your PC said, not what you think your PC said.

The NPC doesn't react at all.  The NPC behaves as scripted.

But from the PC's perspective, the NPC reacts, and why the NPC reacts as he does is unknowable to the PC.

I imagine DG will come down on the side of the "real" game being the actual code, rather than the representation of the game in the player's mind.

Any aspect of the code that makes no material difference within the game is not a relevant part of the game's content.  No matter what tone the writers think is attached to any given line, that line still produces the same scripted outcomes.

The tone doesn't matter.  The writers' intent doesn't have any direct effect on how the content is perceived.

[jillabender]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

But if you play DAO again you will realize that we have the same "tone hub" as we had in DA2... as in there are three flavors of responses (along with Investigates, which in DAO were not put into a separate hub) which are used primarily for roleplaying purposes to move the dialogue along.

Of course, because the DAO lines were unvoiced, there were many more than three flavours available.  You only wrote three lines, but there were many more than three ways to deliver or intend them.

Nuance matters.

Does it? The NPCs react to what the writer thinks your PC said, not what you think your PC said. I imagine DG will come down on the side of the "real" game being the actual code, rather than the representation of the game in the player's mind.

Well, as Upsettingshorts said in another thread, it depends on what's more important to you – reactivity, or role-playing freedom.

For some people, imagining things about their characters adds to the experience even when what they imagined isn't directly aknowledged by the game. For example, I like to imagine that Tamlen and my male Dalish rogue were "friends with benefits," even though there will never be any dialogue to that exact effect in the game. Other people, on the other hand, don't see the point in imagining things that aren't directly reacted to by the game.

It's not really a question of what's "real" – the act of using my imagination to build on the game's authored narrative is a very real experience. The question is what you as a player find rewarding in the context of a particular kind of game.

Modifié par jillabender, 17 octobre 2012 - 11:58 .

[Emzamination]

AlanC9 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Wait...There are 3 different dialogue tones in origins?

I don't believe they all appear in every interaction.

Oh. No wonder I didn't notice.

[Sylvius the Mad]

frostajulie wrote...

Wow thats probably why the dialogue options in DAO seem ti be so much better than DA2 to me. they may have been written in 3 different flavors but with no voice actor I could rp the various shades of possible delivery within that tone such as a bored or tired aggression a volatile expression or coldly furious add to the fact that I could have the same conversations in a variety of locations and differ the pacing of those discussions based on my character and how I forsaw their story arc developing and I think it was not that there were more options in DAO but the game tended to draw more on players imagination and rp ability. Looking back I can see how that made my playthrus much more dynamic even though the dialogue was the same and the discussions were the same.

I love DAO it really worked out MY imagination muscle/

Exactly.  This is why the silent protagonist works so well, and so much better for some of us that the voiced protagonist does.