74 réponses à ce sujet

[Asch Lavigne]

Personally I hate timed things in games. Missions especially. I always feel rushed and this may sound weird, but I also feel unable to think clearly since my mind is on the remaining time.

[thebigbad1013]

No thanks. I dislike the pressure it puts on you to make a decision within a certain period of time. I really disliked the system in Alpha Protocol because I sometimes felt so rushed that I just ended up clicking on one of the answers almost at random. To me this is one of those cases where the idea itself sounds appealing in many ways but ultimately it's just a bother to have to deal with in game.

[nightscrawl]

While I can appreciate that it does make conversations more realistic, or might be a tool used in a high-pressure situation, I don't want it.

There are moments in the game where I actually do take time and thought to decide how I will answer. Whether it be from an RP standpoint and figuring out how a certain answer goes along with my character's motivations/goals, or a moral issue where I am trying to do the right thing.

[Tootles FTW]

ledod wrote...

Tootles FTW wrote...

But then when will I get my bathroom breaks?!

Gurl, you need to hold it- there is an achievement for that

Oh, oh!  Is the reward bladder damage?? 

[Teddie Sage]

I also vote no because I hate QTE in my RPGs.

[Sandy]

It works really well in some games, like the Walking Dead, but I don't want to be rushed when playing Dragon Age. I say no to this in DA3.

[Palipride47]

ledod wrote...

teehee, imagine the context:

Miranda, the deviant apostate-terrorist-mage with a complex, onion-layers-like heart-of-gold: "Player, a lava flow approaches! Your thoughts!?"

Player:
Diplomatic: "We should respectfully run from in the opposite direction of the flow; no need to offend our imminent deaths."
Troll: "Bet you wish your volcano was hot like me"? /trollface
Bastard: "Idiot. Let's run"

(real player thinks on response to miranda)

*two seconds later*

Forced cutscene:

Miranda: "You took too long to respond, now we are burn-OH MY MAKER, IT BURNS!"

YOUR JOURNEY ENDS HERE

But....but I needed to use the bathroom!!!!!!! 

On point, yeah no. During cutscenes, "player" respond = run that quick errand, bathroom break, etc. Or taking a few minutes to weigh the pros and cons of hitting that Merrill "flirt" icon. 

Also, timed anything is kinda off in a game that gives you achievements for obsessively hunting for reagants like some sort of plant/poisonous substance hoarder.

Modifié par Palipride47, 30 octobre 2012 - 04:28 .

[Uccio]

No. As a non english speaking I need more time to understand the text before I choose my response. Timing in DE:HR was actually a big annoyance for me since I wanted to think about the conversation more.

[xAmilli0n]

I for the most part don't like timed conversation, but something like the renegade interrupt during the Citadel coup in ME3 was incredibly effective during my first playthrough. Pure instinct moment. So...it depends on execution? I know a lot of the timed things in The Witcher 2 just annoyed me.

[Khayness]

In crucial and important moments they can add a lot to the atmosphere.

[Iakus]

Nashimura wrote...

What about when you have say...two options - two kill or not to kill. Normally these are not associated with a stance, i assumed it picked these moments at random.

That I couldn't say.  I've let the timer run out on dialogue options before, but not in two-choice actions

[Sylvius the Mad]

No.

While it's true that the PC doesn't have an unlimited amount of time to consider his options, the player is not the PC. The player doesn't necessary think the way the PC thinks. As such, it may well take the player longer than the PC to make certain kinds of decisions. Forcing the player to make the decision quickly forced the PC to be bound by the player's limitations, and that breaks roleplaying.

Also, if they don't put a PAUSE feature in conversations and cutscenes (and it's still up in the air whether they will), then having to go deal with some other real-life thing could cause an entire conversation to play out while you're AFK. That's not okay.

Timed conversations are a terrible idea in every game in which they've occurred.

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

Not really a fan of this. As other people have stated this is when I can do other things if I need to. Also I find that if I am forced into a time limit sometimes I choose an option I didn't want to chose because I have to time to think about what I want to do.

[Bob Garbage]

I liked the option in the Witcher 2, and it works really well in the Walking Dead game as it increases your stress levels a lot which only adds to the experience.......but I'm not sure if it belongs in my Dragon Age. DA time is relax time for me usually hah.

[Sanunes]

I didn't care for them in Alpha Protocol because I like to think through my options I can see how it can add to the game, but its a tricky thing to balance especially if you are unable to pause and real life gets in the way. I personally like how Mass Effect 2 and 3 did something similar, but not exactly the same way with the interrupt system, its a bonus that if you miss out on pushing the button in time its not the end of the world and the rest of the conversation goes the way you wish it to.

[CrazyRah]

I would greatly prefer if the games avoid timed conversations. The amount of tiems i've had to put the headphones down and complete random urgent task is countless

[Miquel93]

I don't think it would work in a Dragon Age game, not without completely changing the dialogue system, but I really like the idea behind timed conversations (at least for voiced PC. Don't know if it would even work with a silent protagonist)

Alpha Protocol did it great, facing the player with tough choices, with impredictable outcomes, with a time limit. The time limit makes you to doubt about the choice you just made, thinking that maybe the other choice was better. I think this is really satisfying as a player, and in a game with heavy choices & consequences, the timed conversations give more weight to it.

But I think is a bit difficult to implement. Alpha Protocol does it perfectly because of being an Spy RPG, with a dialogue system created especifically for being timed, and with heavy impact of your choices. In Dragon Age I only see this working as CD Projekt did it with The Witcher 2, but I'm not fond of ocasional timed dialogs. I guess it's better having important choices with a timer, to give them more weight, than none, but it doesn't feel natural to me.

So I would say, I don't want them in DAIII (unless they change the dialogue system, which is not going to happen) but I definitely want to see more games that use entirely timed conversations.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

I don't think having this feature would be strictly necessary. Funny, I never got far enough in Alpha Protocol before trading it in to notice that such a feature existed. Didn't mind it in Witcher 2, although it surprised me the first time.

[DialupToaster]

Nashimura wrote...

iakus wrote...

Nashimura wrote...

iakus wrote...

I liked them in Alpha Protocol and the Walking Dead. They add an element of tension in certain situations where you gotta think fast.

THat said, it's understandable that some people wouldn't like them, and of course there's the problem of being distracted by RL matters...

I think the flaw (In AP at least, yet to play Walking dead) is that they pick a random option when you are too slow, rather than have you not do anything. If its a normal conversation there should be no timer if its a "Pick someone to die" moment with a timer, no action from the player should = no action from the character and in this example both dying.

Actually, I think in AP it defaults to whichever stance you used last..

What about when you have say...two options - two kill or not to kill. Normally these are not associated with a stance, i assumed it picked these moments at random.

Actually it picked what slot you had it last on so if kill was suave then it went there.

[Parmida]

No, I didn't like alpha protocol's and deus ex's conversations.
I just had to rush and click on dialogues so fast that it turned to something so bad at the end and I couldn't enjoy the conversations like I do in dragon age.
I had to reload many times just to have the conversation the way I like.

[Fiacre]

I'm not the biggest fan of timed conversations, though I think there can be situations were it is done well. IMHO, it worked when it was used at the beginning of Fable 3 -- the timer was long enough that you could give the decision some thought, the game (at least the 360 version) lets you pause during cutscenes and it gave you a third option to add to possible characterization -- something the game would have needed more of, as well as less autodialogue -- and gives Logan some more characterization as well.

[fchopin]

No.

[hitenchi]

Elfman wrote...

Why do people crave realism in a FANTASY game?

I am not sure if these really deserves an answer but anyway, when people say realism they tend to me two different types of realism. Obviously with the fantasy genre where magic is one of its staples you need some suspension of disbelief to enjoy the game. What people tend to want is realistic  gameplay and characters from that. Just because it is a fantasy doesnt me people have to explode or drop from random places in builds/ appear out of nowhere, that is just lazy. Also there is nothing wrong with realism that doesn't effect the creativity, since it it just makes more sense. Which is why a lot of fantasy books often explain how and why people can use magic, to a greater or lesser extent, and why there are restrictions to it.
            Realism in some forms promotes cohesion and structure to a story/ game which allows people to follow it, which makes more sense then having loads of random things happening. So in general 'realism' in reference to the fantasy setting tends to mean that there are 'sensible/ structured' reason for what happens in it and that characters and world seems believable rather than random stuff.  Also even in fantasy setting games that try to be 'realistic' tend to be more imersive because they are easier to relate with.


NOW more on topic, the timed conversation idea seems like an interesting one, trying to emulate how conversation happens in real life. However i think in the end it would be too annoying for players to deal with, because it is easier to have time before you are forced to answer a question and wouldnt make sense in all scenarios you could have. Also if you couldnt pause it during conversations it would be annoying and if you could it would make the feature kind of, but not completely, pointless.

[Pedrak]

It can work in games with a strong action component, where "tension" and quick choices are inherently part of the gameplay.

More thoughtful, reflexive, tactical games like the DA series should keep away from it.

[Iosev]

I think the urgency that a timed conversation could potentially create is easily nullified by the ability to reload from a previous save. I can see a timed situation/conversation work in a game where you can't keep more than one save per character (e.g., Dark Souls), but in the Dragon Age series, I can easily imagine people simply reloading to their last save if they did not like the consequence of a timed conversation.  While I have enjoyed playing The Witcher 2, I can't say that I'm a fan of the timed conversations.

Modifié par arcelonious, 31 octobre 2012 - 09:18 .