224 réponses à ce sujet

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

 

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Perhaps they should grant you the official forum troll role since you actively "persuade" other people who disagree with you to quit BioWare games and forum.

There is a world of difference between this and what I actually do.

You're in this thread saying people who subvocalize are "weird" and asserting a system BioWare has chosen to use in four straight games - five with DA3 - is "100% broken."

 You admit it yourself broaden players intents will not remove all incongruencies. Why would  incongruencies
exist if  it's "perfectly 100% working?"

Upsettingshorts wrote...

My "offensive" post is simply a summary of how compatible these notions are with the present state of affairs.  As such, you can either choose to adapt, opt out,

I do not need you tell me to opt out from the game I may or may not buy. If I ask for your opnion, I would do so. But I don't. I'm not interested with you telling me what to buy or not. I could ask you to opt out of this discussion if that's what your intention is.

Upsettingshorts wrote...


or - and I assume this is the option you're going with - continue to tell everyone who actually likes voiceovers and paraphrases that they're wrong.

or you continue to tell everyone who actually want to see dramatic changes ( not removal ) over voice protagonist  to stop buying BioWare games and leave BSN. In anyway,  I couldn't I care less 

Upsettingshorts wrote...

But seriously, nothing substantial has changed from either of our positions - OR THIS ENTIRE DEBATE - since over a year ago.

Except BioWare picked paraphrases again.  

You are right. Nothing change after over a year ago argument. I remain disagree with all your points. But I have no intention to derail this topic further. 

You forget to add - except a year ago you did not actively campaign against anyone who disagree with you to quit the forum and stop buying BioWare game. 

So here's the thing. If you don't have anything to reply beside your usual comment, "If you don't like the game, don't buy and leave the forum," I suggest you to shut up. It's really not up to you to tell what other people want to buy or not or whether they should post in the forum or not.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:18 .

[upsettingshorts]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

 You admit it yourself broaden players intents will not remove all incongruencies. Why would  incongruencies
exist if  it's "perfectly 100% working?"

I'd be perfectly willing to engage in a discussion over how to do paraphrases better.  

Threads that demand they be removed altogether, or naively suggest a toggle, do not contribute to such discussions.

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

You forget to add - except a year ago you did not actively campaign against anyone who disagree with you to quit the forum and stop buying BioWare game.

I do two things:

Suggest that there is a 1st person vs. 3rd person gamer dichotomy, and recent BioWare games have come down clearly in favor of the latter.  The implication is that 1st person gamers are, evidently, losing when it comes to BioWare games.  I have not had many people dispute this.

Suggest that anyone who cannot possibly compromise acknowledge this and consider their options.  Often, it's because I simply don't understand why said people would remain here.  Though just as often its because I see these people insulting me and people who share similar preferences.  At least Sylvius, for example, explains that he advocates the positions he does in order to normalize compromises he would find acceptable. 

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

So here's the thing. If you don't have anything to reply beside your usual comment, "If you don't like the game, don't buy and leave the forum," I suggest you to shut up. It's really not up to you to tell what other people want to buy or not or whether they should post in forum or not.

Perhaps not.  But I'd argue it's equally as productive as telling BioWare to remove an announced feature a year before release of the game its announced for, or telling posters who accept/approve of that decision that they're doing it wrong.  

If "don't buy and don't post" is too strong a position to advocate unsolicited, what about a question:

Why is your potential purchase of DA3 up in the air?  Why do you post in threads arguing over announced features and established trends you universally dislike?

Given your previous responses, I should make clear that I understand I have no authority to demand an answer.  But I'm asking.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:32 .

[Taint Master]

Upsettingshorts (wtf) is right Scared_Fantasy. Accept it and move on, or don't. Whining about it like a child won't change anything now.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

 You admit it yourself broaden players intents will not remove all incongruencies. Why would  incongruencies
exist if  it's "perfectly 100% working?"

I'd be perfectly willing to engage in a discussion over how to do paraphrases better.  

Threads that demand they be removed altogether, or naively suggest a toggle, do not contribute to such discussions.

Did you ever find me suggest for paraphrasing removal? Did you naively think that I'd completely ignore BioWare insistance on paraphrasing? I support the suggestion of toggle on this thread only because OP want another options and because BioWare have remain silent of how much clarity would they plan on improving paraphrase system. At this point, I'll support any recommendatiion for more options.    

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

You forget to add - except a year ago you did not actively campaign against anyone who disagree with you to quit the forum and stop buying BioWare game.

I do two things:

Suggest that there is a 1st person vs. 3rd person gamer dichotomy, and recent BioWare games have come down clearly in favor of the latter.

Suggest that anyone who cannot possibly compromise acknowledge this and consider their options.  Often, it's because I simply don't understand why said people would remain here.  

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

So here's the thing. If you don't have anything to reply beside your usual comment, "If you don't like the game, don't buy and leave the forum," I suggest you to shut up. It's really not up to you to tell what other people want to buy or not or whether they should post in forum or not.

Perhaps not.  But I'd argue it's equally as productive as telling BioWare to remove an announced feature a year before release of the game its announced for, or telling posters who accept/approve of that decision that they're doing it wrong.  

If "don't buy and don't post" is too strong a position to advocate unsolicited, what about a question:

Why is your potential purchase of DA3 up in the air?  Why do you post in threads arguing over announced features and established trends you universally dislike?

Given your previous responses, I should make clear that I understand I have no authority to demand an answer.  But I'm asking.

I'm here because I want to know if DA 3 will be attractive enough for my purchase. It's the last opportunity for BioWare to prove whether they're still selling the games for me.  The announcement mentioned nothing yet. If you think voice protagonist is my problem with BioWare games, then you are dead wrong. As much as I favor Skryin and First person roleplaying, voice protagonist never actually bother me. And so do millions over people who play Skyrim, I think. As a matter of fact I do favor male Hawke's subtle voice tones in DA 2. It's how BioWare present generic PC protagonist through cinematic acting that bother me. Part of it due to paraprashing and dialogue wheel isn't optimised to accomode more options as it was intented.  

I would chose to opt out from BioWare games and BSN once I view the actual DA 3 game either through demo or reviewers trailers but at this point, most of what BioWare had laid out so far are mostly positive, such as companion customization, more available companions options, Reaction to dialogue wheel, BioWare interest with Skyrim direction, Frostbite 2 engine etc...This is the reason why I remain in the forum. To see what have been changed to Bioware game since our last "First Person Vs Third Person roleplaying debate" over a year ago.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:56 .

[unlimited_sake]

David Gaider, 2 years from now, will write...

Okay, last time I will go through this particular argument-- in the future, I'll simply link to this if I must.

Allowing the player to select the difficulty level does not work for us. We investigated it. We tried it out, and discussed it, and ultimately discarded the idea.

I get that some people feel they need challenge in order to enjoy a game-- and they feel that being able to select the difficulty will give them that challenge. It won't. Or, I should say, it will... but it will be just as tedious as watching your party auto-engage its way to victory on easy. Which is to say not very tedious, but tedious enough that you start to wonder why we put combat in our games in the first place. The only way that wouldn't be the case is if we started designing encounters/mechanics as if tactical combat weren't a secondary consideration, as in Origins.

Also, there are a significant number of people who would be greatly annoyed by reaching a difficult boss and being unable to advance. Your response might be "well, they shouldn't play on hard then." But many people will. They'll see it in the list of options and think "oh, that's an option that will make the game more challenging? More challenge is better!" and they'll select it... and then be annoyed by the result. So we would be trading one group of people who believe this is what they want for another group who would take the option and make it a poorer experience for themselves.

And, yes, that is something we must concern ourselves with. We do not offer, support and test options unless we believe they work as a viable option for the game as we intend it to be played. And you might say to that "well, I think it would make the game better for me", but I'd suggest you're largely wrong in that. It doesn't actually address your base problem, which is with the streamlined combat design. At best we'd be going out of our way to not really solve your issue while actively making the game worse for others.

This is not to say there aren't things we can do to make the system better other than simply removing more filler combat.  Not having enemies respawn in same-ish waves that come out of nowhere is one, but there are others... which we will discuss at a later time. Implementing difficulty levels is not, however, going to be one of those things.

[upsettingshorts]

@unlimited_sake: Strawman, slippery slope, and a reductio ad absurdum!.

I can't wait to see the sequel. Hopefully there will be just as much in the way of action-packed fallacies.

@Sacred_Fantasy: Fair enough, though perhaps that means I was simply premature.

[unlimited_sake]

To be honest, I don't particularly care about the dialogue wheel in Dragon Age 3, and I'm not trying to argue that this will lead to the removal of difficulty levels in later games or any such nonsense if that's what you meant by slippery slope.  It was more the tone of his argument that I found objectionable.

This is the second time I've seen David Gaider advance the idea that players will spoil some aspect of a game if given the ability to configure it as they like because they might select an option in a menu that they end up disliking and, I suppose the theory goes, not realize they can change it back.  It's patronizing as hell, and in this case has additional condescension in the form of the idea that he knows better than the players what they want - both the players whom he claims will opt to see full dialogues only to end up annoyed by them and the person to whom he was responding, whose objection, he claimed, was really to voiced protagonists.  Because it couldn't possibly be the case that some people would, in fact, prefer to see the exact dialogue rather than a paraphrase.  (And yes, I looked at the original thread, and yes, it still reads that way in context.)

It's along the lines as if I were to reply to his post by saying that the real reason he doesn't want to include the full dialogue is because then it would become more apparent that many of the choices result in the same line being spoken*.  Arrogant, presumptuous, and dismissive.

* At least this was the case in the Mass Effect games.  I haven't played Dragon Age 2.

[Fredward]

Conduit0 wrote...
I've played three games with Bioware's conversation wheel, ME2, ME3, and DA2. Three games, with a dozen playthroughs between them, representing hundreds of hours of playtime, and a veritable mountain of dialogue, and I can honestly say that I can count on one hand the number of times I've had a "wtf, thats not what I thought (s)he was going to say" moment.

So I can only come to the conclusion that the complainers are grossly exaggerating the issue, and to be blunt, if you need to exaggerate to make a point, you don't have a valid argument to begin with.

I agree with this, I don't know if it was the tone icons in DA2 but I was only very rarely totally taken by surprise there. ME too, but that might have been because Shep just had three modes, neutral questions, freakishly nice and hardass responses.

Someone pointed out that Origins had the same problem. You have the full sentence in Origins but you don't know how it is delivered, and I know people say this allows you to project your own intentions on the line, but there are times it doesn't. There was more than a few times I thought I was making a joke and it would be like -10 000 approval and [enter companion name here] hates you forever. Made me very, very wary of choosing responses that weren't sickeningly sweet.

[nightscrawl]

SKRemaks wrote...

When you bring Alistair to Redcliffe for the first time, and he's telling you about being Maric's son.  The line, "So, you're not only a bastard, you're a royal bastard?"  I would NEVER, EVER say that.  Ever.  To me that sounds horrible.  Why would you ever say that to someone unless you were being a major jerk?  I had no idea that it was supposed to be a joke.  Even after I found that out, I still won't say it.  It's just a nasty thing to say to someone.  

That's just one of the lines I had a problem with.  Things that you think are innocuous, make people angry.  Things that you think are funny, upset people.  You think you're just commenting on Leli's hair, and the next thing you know, she's accusing you of cheating on her.  It's insane.

The above example at Redcliffe is a great one, and my experience matches yours exactly. It wasn't until after I had played DAO a couple of times and started going to the wiki that I learned he took it as a joke.

Although this seems more like an argument for the intent icons rather than about paraphrasing. If you say the line "So you're not only a bastard, you're a royal bastard" in a serious or aggressive tone (red) versus a humorous tone (purple) it comes across really differently. Yes, the icons only measure PC intent and someone can still take offense even if you are joking, but I think the icons and voice acting would have made a difference with that particular line.

[n7stormrunner]

to be fair to david gaider when the fan base seems like they hate everything you no matter what ,which at times bioware fans seem like, and still buy your then say how much they hated it then next game do it again I don't think I would think they know what they want ether.

p.s. yes I know diffence of opinion and all that, bioware does to. or at least I'm fairly sure they do

[Lotion Soronarr]

Parapharsing? It's not for RPG's... i'ts for games with set characters.

People who like it aren't true roleplayers - they are bad, their ideas are bad and they should feel bad.
FEEL BAD!

There was more than a few times I thought I was making a joke and it would be like -10 000 approva

Happens in real life too more than often enough.

I joke most of the time and people get offended most of the time.

[Allan Schumacher]

Happens in real life too more than often enough.

I joke most of the time and people get offended most of the time.

I joke most of the time. People laugh most of the time.


Although on these very forums, I had someone get defensive because they thought what I was writing was snarky.  It wasn't, but that's the price you pay when you just use words to communicate.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 26 novembre 2012 - 09:42 .

[esper]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Happens in real life too more than often enough.

I joke most of the time and people get offended most of the time.

I joke most of the time. People laugh most of the time.


Although on these very forums, I had someone get defensive because they thought what I was writing was snarky.  It wasn't, but that's the price you pay when you just use words to communicate.

There are also the difference between real life and game that most of the times when people in real life get offended by a joke they say it, show it or otherwise make it clear and then you can make your intent clear. You can't do that in a game.

[Cain Corvin]

I agree with this, YOU choose which reply YOU want to give. It is an RPG... it doesn't make any sense that you cannot controle how you reply.

[Fast Jimmy]

esper wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Happens in real life too more than often enough.

I joke most of the time and people get offended most of the time.

I joke most of the time. People laugh most of the time.


Although on these very forums, I had someone get defensive because they thought what I was writing was snarky.  It wasn't, but that's the price you pay when you just use words to communicate.

There are also the difference between real life and game that most of the times when people in real life get offended by a joke they say it, show it or otherwise make it clear and then you can make your intent clear. You can't do that in a game.

To be fair, in real life if you make a joke and it offends someone, it then doesn't make that person like you more if you have offended them in the past (like the Rivalry mechanic does). To my knowledge, Bioware has never attempted a conversation simulator in their games. Even the BG or NWN games were not conversation simulators, they just had conversation options. 

[FaWa]

unlimited_sake wrote...


This is the second time I've seen David Gaider advance the idea that players will spoil some aspect of a game if given the ability to configure it as they like because they might select an option in a menu that they end up disliking and, I suppose the theory goes, not realize they can change it back. .

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read and I pray not an actual quote. 

[Fast Jimmy]

FaWa wrote...

unlimited_sake wrote...


This is the second time I've seen David Gaider advance the idea that players will spoil some aspect of a game if given the ability to configure it as they like because they might select an option in a menu that they end up disliking and, I suppose the theory goes, not realize they can change it back. .

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read and I pray not an actual quote. 

Eh. Roughly.

Gaider said comments that are somewhat similar to this when discussing a mute option for the PC (for those who don't like the voiced protagonist) or a full-text option of being able to see what the voiced character will say, instead of just the paraphrases alone.

He made very good points that a mute button wouldn't fix the fact that your character would still say the line with facial expressions, movement, actions, etc. and that just adding a mute button because people ask for a mute button would not give people the experience they claim they want (like an experience of a silent protag). And that their real problem was with the voiced PC, not with the fact that you could hear the VA's voice or not.

So... in  a sense, yes, this is what he said. But at the same time, its an out-of-context, soundbite snip.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:05 .

[Leoroc]

It is very frustrating when the paraphrase is a better line than the voiced. Happens a lot in SWTOR. DA2 not as bad though.

[SpunkyMonkey]

They could just have avoided all this by not having a voiced protagonist *facepalm*

[SpunkyMonkey]

GlaberN7 wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

They could just have avoided all this by not having a voiced protagonist *facepalm*

Except that having a protagonist who talks via telepathy is totally inmersion breaker for a lot of people.

Why don't you speak the words yourself then? Just a thought.

[Fredward]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

GlaberN7 wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

They could just have avoided all this by not having a voiced protagonist *facepalm*

Except that having a protagonist who talks via telepathy is totally inmersion breaker for a lot of people.

Why don't you speak the words yourself then? Just a thought.

Because that is utterly bizarre. XD

Not that I mind non voiced all that much really but reading the lines out loud to the computer would be hilarious.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

GlaberN7 wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

They could just have avoided all this by not having a voiced protagonist *facepalm*

Except that having a protagonist who talks via telepathy is totally inmersion breaker for a lot of people.

Why don't you speak the words yourself then? Just a thought.

Because that is utterly bizarre. XD

Not that I mind non voiced all that much really but reading the lines out loud to the computer would be hilarious.

lol

You really think so though? I don't tend to speak the words but I mentally read them is if the character is reading them.

Seriously, it's rather worrying how people feel the need for a voiced protagonist for "immersion" reasons. BG2 only had sporadic dialogue, yet was extremly immersive.

If I read a book I can picture people speaking to each other, and back in the old tabletop D&D days you used to say spells, scrolls etc.

To me it says that something is missing from the player that they need a voiced protagonist instead of being able to use a touch of imagination, or if they can't do that mimic the words.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:56 .