81 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

This thread exists, partly, in the vain hope that this "feature" will be discussed (by devs) (around now).

To a greater degree, it exists to question the idea that we need auto-dialogue to create a dynamic interaction between the PC and NPCs. Had I bookmarked the quotes from ME3 I would have them here, but that's the justification.

As the worst (but better than auto-dialogue) solution I can think of, even adding a timer to certain conversations wouldn't make it as bad. Because if you miss the timer you get auto'd, but you have at least a chance to save the remants of your PC from being overriden.

Other ideas/thoughts?

[Xewaka]

Kill it with fire.

Less succintly, Autodialogue is a terrible idea. Considering one of the main purposes of palying a Roleplaying game is to interpret a character, every instance of autodialogue is a direct aggresion on that end. For each line of autodialogue, another bit of agency is robbed from the player. It's something that should not be allowed in cRPGs, even with a pregenerated character.

Modifié par Xewaka, 22 octobre 2012 - 03:56 .

[Berty213]

Please, just no....

Modifié par Berty213, 22 octobre 2012 - 03:55 .

[ianvillan]

In Exile wrote...

This thread exists, partly, in the vain hope that this "feature" will be discussed (by devs) (around now).

To a greater degree, it exists to question the idea that we need auto-dialogue to create a dynamic interaction between the PC and NPCs. Had I bookmarked the quotes from ME3 I would have them here, but that's the justification.

As the worst (but better than auto-dialogue) solution I can think of, even adding a timer to certain conversations wouldn't make it as bad. Because if you miss the timer you get auto'd, but you have at least a chance to save the remants of your PC from being overriden.

Other ideas/thoughts?

I would hate having a timer on the dialogue if paraphrasing is still included because I have no way of knowing what my character would say and dont want to be rushed even if I did know what I was going to say.

I also dont believe we need auto-dialogue in the game at all.

[upsettingshorts]

In banters I'm okay with it, if only because hearing the companions talk about the protagonist like he/she isn't standing right there is really weird.

Otherwise I think the use of it in Mass Effect 3 (talking purely about style, not frequency here) was only just okay as the lines themselves were kept fairly banal - which isn't really acceptable given how much it annoys people in principle.  Dragon Age 2 was frequently so bad it was downright comical. The infamous example of a personality-tracked Aggressive Hawke returning the remains of a man's sister with the phrase, "Here's your lost garbage."

I think there's a (very small) window of cases where autodialogue can work, but it should be limited to instances when player input would be clumsy or terribly awkward, and the protagonist saying nothing at all could be a bit jarring. Like party banters. But I agree with the broader argument that autodialogue should be limited.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 octobre 2012 - 03:58 .

[The Hierophant]

No thank you.<goes to get torch, and pitchfork before gathering a mob.>

[In Exile]

Xewaka wrote...

Kill it with fire.

I'm thinking this is the kind of thing not even fire can kill.

ianvillan wrote...
I would hate having a timer on the dialogue
if paraphrasing is still included because I have no way of knowing what
my character would say and dont want to be rushed even if I did know
what I was going to say.

Not saying a timer is good (I hate them). Just, better than auto-dialogue.

Upsettingshorts wrote...

In banters I'm okay with it, if only because hearing the companions talk about the protagonist like he/she isn't standing right there is really weird.

Okay, that's a fair point. I didn't actually mind the auto-dialogue in the party banter. It really bothered me the Warden couldn't reply to things like "Mr.  Let's Make Kissy Faces"

Dragon Age 2 was frequently so bad it was downright comical. The
infamous example of a personality-tracked Aggressive Hawke returning the
remains of a man's sister with the phrase, "Here's your lost garbage."

Now I need I clearly need to see ... Dominant Aggresive Hawke ... (I see why you went with tracked.)

[The Elder King]

The least possible aumont of autodialogue, the better.

[Wulfram]

I believe the official word is that there'll be about the same amount as in DA2.

For me, auto-dialogue is OK for pure action stuff. I don't need to tell my character to yell "watch out" when a dragon attacks the party.

Stuff that speaks to characterisation on the other hand really does need to be selected by the player as far as is possible.

I don't think it's bad if the PC continues a conversation in line with their previous choice, or asks an obvious question that their previous choice raised, though that needs to be handled carefully. And having stuff go on too long with my input can just make me feel bored and disengaged, even if the PC isn't acting out of character.

Modifié par Wulfram, 22 octobre 2012 - 04:27 .

[wright1978]

Wulfram wrote...

I believe the official world is that there'll be about the same amount as in DA2.

For me, auto-dialogue is OK for pure action stuff. I don't need to tell my character to yell "watch out" when a dragon attacks the party.

Stuff that speaks to characterisation on the other hand really does need to be selected by the player as far as is possible.

I don't think it's bad if the PC continues a conversation in line with their previous choice, or asks an obvious question that their previous choice raised, though that needs to be handled carefully. And having stuff go on too long with my input can just make me feel bored and disengaged, even if the PC isn't acting out of character.

Agree completely. Where it is simple stuff like that i'm fine. Banter while walking has to be handled carefully but  i can sort of handle it as that's just not workable to have me pick the line.

Personally i found the excuses they tried to use for the abominable characterising auto-dialogue used in ME3 comical.

[Atakuma]

What Wulfram said.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

Autodialogue............ burn it with fire.

[Patchwork]

I'm okay with auto-dialogue for party banter and combat barks but beyond that what the pc says should under the player's control.

[Palipride47]

Wulfram wrote...

I believe the official word is that there'll be about the same amount as in DA2.

For me, auto-dialogue is OK for pure action stuff. I don't need to tell my character to yell "watch out" when a dragon attacks the party.

Stuff that speaks to characterisation on the other hand really does need to be selected by the player as far as is possible.

I don't think it's bad if the PC continues a conversation in line with their previous choice, or asks an obvious question that their previous choice raised, though that needs to be handled carefully. And having stuff go on too long with my input can just make me feel bored and disengaged, even if the PC isn't acting out of character.

[AntiChri5]

Auto-dialogue when there is no realistic way for the player to provide input (banters, combat shouts) without breaking the flow is fine so long as it is highly conditional.

Dominant personality and the like. Preferably more sophisticated though.

[Emzamination]

I don't want anymore of that bollocks where I click on a companion and they repeat the same lines over and over.They need to go back to the origins design, where clicking on a companion opened a full dialogue.

[Maria Caliban]

Dragon Age 2's auto-dialogue was fine.

Mass Effect 3's auto-dialogue failed because much of the time Shepard blathered on in an uninteresting way about things I didn't much care about. The dialogue for Shepard was poorer than the dialogue for the NPCs as they went for 'generic space marine badass' as her personality.

[hoorayforicecream]

When I think about the place to use auto-dialogue, I am immediately reminded of a conversation infodump situation. Let's say, for example, that some character has a rather involved backstory or history that requires a more elaborate explanation. During such discussion, there's usually conversation that goes on and not just one person talking forever. The listening party often puts in statements like "Go on", "Ok, I get it. So then what happened?", "But you're here, not there" just to break up the speech in order to preserve the state as a conversation.

The options to interject there would basically be binary: please continue, or stop now. Preserving the flow of the conversation can be important, and that's where I expect them to use auto dialogue. I can see how somebody might want to stop, but I would argue that having the person stop would be strange since the person just asked the other to explain. It would also be strange to disallow the player's character from saying anything, since then it becomes more of a monologue situation and just feels unnatural. So you provide auto dialogue to preserve the flow of the conversation.

YMMV. Some people would rather sacrifice the flow of conversation for the agency of selecting "Go on" or "Stop now". Others may not.

[LobselVith8]

Xewaka wrote...

Kill it with fire.

Less succintly, Autodialogue is a terrible idea. Considering one of the main purposes of palying a Roleplaying game is to interpret a character, every instance of autodialogue is a direct aggresion on that end. For each line of autodialogue, another bit of agency is robbed from the player. It's something that should not be allowed in cRPGs, even with a pregenerated character. 

I feel the same way about auto-dialogue. I see it as a hindrance.

[Wulfram]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

YMMV. Some people would rather sacrifice the flow of conversation for the agency of selecting "Go on" or "Stop now". Others may not.

If your conversation is an info dump with occasional "go on" or "stop nows", it's probably not a particularly well written scene in the first place.

[tfive24]

it's coming. what happens in ME gets put in DA and vice verse

[Nashimura]

Xewaka wrote...

Kill it with fire.

Less succintly, Autodialogue is a terrible idea. Considering one of the main purposes of palying a Roleplaying game is to interpret a character, every instance of autodialogue is a direct aggresion on that end. For each line of autodialogue, another bit of agency is robbed from the player. It's something that should not be allowed in cRPGs, even with a pregenerated character.

This....

Make it dead.

[syllogi]

It didn't really bother me in DA2, it was often amusing to hear what Hawke would say based on the dominant tone.

It did actually pretty much ruin ME3 for me, however, because it was not based on tone, and there was SO much of it. Combined with knowing that pretty much all roleplaying options other than black and white renegade versus paragon choices were taken away...yeah, no. I could deal with a lot of things, even the endings (GASP), but the autodialogue killed my enjoyment pretty thoroughly.

[thebigbad1013]

Xewaka wrote...

Kill it with fire.

This.

I hated the auto dialogue in ME3 and I wouldn't want to see it in DA3 as well. It was just way too much.