125 réponses à ce sujet

[SpunkyMonkey]

JWvonGoethe wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
[...]And as for more options it would just require the odd extra line of dialogue - it wouldn't be needed during every conversation, just thrown in enough to help create the illusion that anything could happen during any conversation.

Give the odd situation 4 or 5 responses & outcomes, and whenever the player is given 4 or 5 options they will assume that there are 4 or 5 outcomes, as opposed to the standard 1, 2 or 3.[...]

Although I suggested something along these lines myself a few posts back, there is a notable problem with doing this. Outside of the Investigate tree, Bioware seem to always make sure that the three dialogue options on the right hand side (diplomatic/sarcastic/aggressive) move the conversation onto the next node. Meanwhile the left hand side options (where Investigate is) keep the conversation in the same place. Placing conversation-progressing dialogue options on the left hand side would result ininconsistency which would likely confuse people.

Obviously this is not an insurmountable issue. I would say continue having only three options, placed on the left hand side, which progress the conversation. These should be the more complementary options of Friendly/Diplomatic/Renegade tones as opposed to the current diplomatic/sarcastic/aggressive options, which clash too much. Then on the Investigate side include two roleplaying options that do not progress the conversation. Because these options could be ignored if the player thinks neither of them are appropriate, they could get away with being more explicit in tone (so being, for example, sarcastic, flirtatious, aggresive.)

On a related note, the Investigate branch is problematic in that it doesn't appear to provide any substantial roleplaying opportunities for the player. You could kill two birds with one stone here by having the two extra dialogue options functioning as the PC's response to an answer given by the NPC during an Investigate sequence. This already happens sometimes, but I think if it become standard that could solve a lot of the perceived problems with the dialogue wheel. And, to make up for the extra lines of dialogue, I'd be happy to sacrifice more conversations over-all.

Anyway, sorry for going off on a long tangent. Just find this kind of thing interesting.

No need to apologize mate, you raise some great points.

You see, for me it's the whole streamlining which take away the RPG feel of concequence to the game. I don't want to know whether a question or statement will progress something, I just want to say what I feel. That's how life works and how RPG's should work - people don't wait around for you to ask them all the questions under the sun, and when you say something that triggers a chain of events then that should happen. Giving the player a "safe" option to ask things without progressing them isn't realistic, I mean, all you have to do is ask a woman what her favourite baby name is and some will take that as a green light to buy a cott, teddy bear and have a baby! lol.

I know this may mean that you miss the opportinity to say certain things, but that's life - live for the moment and all that. If I'm in with a shout of sleeping with a woman, then I ask her what her favourite football team is and she hates football so much that she decides to cross her legs then that's a concequence of my action and something that should happen.

I think Bioware need to be careful how they try and appease the fans, and remember that all suggestions/changes should always focus on making the best RPG experience, not the most accessable or streamlined game.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 27 novembre 2012 - 12:33 .

[Caiden012]

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

[esper]

Caiden012 wrote...

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

No it didn't,  nine time out of ten. And that one or two time it did, it also did so in da2. One of Fenris' conversations springs to my mind on top of my head.

[Caiden012]

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

No it didn't,  nine time out of ten. And that one or two time it did, it also did so in da2. One of Fenris' conversations springs to my mind on top of my head.

As I said before this happens mostly with party members. I could ask Alistair about Duncan and then me and him would get into a conversation about the Grey Wardens or Duncans life. I could ask Morrigan about her life in the forest and it would continue into multiple diolouges. This also happens with other NPCs but just not as often or as indepth. 

When talking to party members in DA2 it felt as if the conversation was guilded in one direction and I didn't get much of a chance to ask a question and start a whole new conversation. But again that is really not the fault of the diolouge wheel.

Modifié par Caiden012, 27 novembre 2012 - 05:33 .

[AlanC9]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
You see, for me it's the whole streamlining which take away the RPG feel of concequence to the game. I don't want to know whether a question or statement will progress something, I just want to say what I feel. That's how life works and how RPG's should work - people don't wait around for you to ask them all the questions under the sun, and when you say something that triggers a chain of events then that should happen. Giving the player a "safe" option to ask things without progressing them isn't realistic, I mean, all you have to do is ask a woman what her favourite baby name is and some will take that as a green light to buy a cott, teddy bear and have a baby! lol. 

But this is an argument about the dialogue itself as well as the interface, isn't it? It's not like you couldn't usually work out for a DA:O dialogue node which lines advance the dialogue and which lines are just for more information.

Or is it that you want this to be work for the player? Sometimes I see objections to DA2 that boil down to the presentation being too clear.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 novembre 2012 - 05:34 .

[esper]

Caiden012 wrote...

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

No it didn't,  nine time out of ten. And that one or two time it did, it also did so in da2. One of Fenris' conversations springs to my mind on top of my head.

As I said before this happens mostly with party members. I could ask Alistair about Duncan and then me and him would get into a conversation about the Grey Wardens or Duncans life. I could ask Morrigan about her life in the forest and it would continue into multiple diolouges. This also happens with other NPCs but just not as often or as indepth. 

When talking to party members in DA2 it felt as if the conversation was guilded in one direction and I didn't get much of a chance to ask a question and start a whole new conversation. But again that is really not the fault of the diolouge wheel.

Correct. It is the consequence of not having a talk to the companions anytime and has nothing to do with investigations options. The investigaitons options works mechanically the same in both games.

Talking with Alistair about Duncan and the Grey Wardens worked like this:

Duncan was a subject for himself. You had no choice, but having it branch out in 'life with the grey wardens'. The same with Morrigans talk about living in the wild. 

The grey wardens topic looked like this:

Warden: I have question about the Grey Wardens
Alistair: Ask
Warden: Option 1, 2, 3.

Modifié par esper, 27 novembre 2012 - 05:40 .

[Caiden012]

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

No it didn't,  nine time out of ten. And that one or two time it did, it also did so in da2. One of Fenris' conversations springs to my mind on top of my head.

As I said before this happens mostly with party members. I could ask Alistair about Duncan and then me and him would get into a conversation about the Grey Wardens or Duncans life. I could ask Morrigan about her life in the forest and it would continue into multiple diolouges. This also happens with other NPCs but just not as often or as indepth. 

When talking to party members in DA2 it felt as if the conversation was guilded in one direction and I didn't get much of a chance to ask a question and start a whole new conversation. But again that is really not the fault of the diolouge wheel.

Correct. It is the consequence of not having a talk to the companions anytime and has nothing to do with investigations options. The investigaitons options works mechanically the same in both games.

Talking with Alistair about Duncan and the Grey Wardens worked like this:

Duncan was a subject for himself. You had no choice, but having it branch out in 'life with the grey wardens'. The same with Morrigans talk about living in the wild. 

The grey wardens topic looked like this:

Warden: I have question about the Grey Wardens
Alistair: Ask
Warden: Option 1, 2, 3.

But thats my point. You had more investigation options. It normally worked as

Warden: "I have a question"
Alistair: "Ask away."
Option A,B, or C

Option A: I have a question about the Grey Wardens

This leads to option A, B, C, and D

In DA2 you normally got to do

Investigation
Option A,B, or C

You pick option A and the the NPC talks to you for a bit and then you are at pick option B or C. There was just less in the ways of investigation and diolouge that wasn't about your main quest or a centered topic.

[esper]

Caiden012 wrote...

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...

 My problem with the investigation with the diolouge wheel vs investigation with the tree is I feel like I hit more dead ends with the wheel. In DA2 I might enter investigation and ask "What do you like to do?". They would give a response and then I would end up back at the wheel with one less investigation option. In DA:O I found that an investigation option would lead to further diolouge before taking me back to where I began. Such as asking "What do you like to do?", my character gets a response and they I could say "Why would you ever do that?". It would continue for a bit until taking me back to where I began. I found this happened most often when talking to party members.

Honestly this is probably not the fault of the diolouge wheel but it has caused me to have a bit more faith in the tree just because I had a better experience with it. Also I prefer the tree just because it was used for my favorite Bioware RPGs (KOTOR and DA:O).

No it didn't,  nine time out of ten. And that one or two time it did, it also did so in da2. One of Fenris' conversations springs to my mind on top of my head.

As I said before this happens mostly with party members. I could ask Alistair about Duncan and then me and him would get into a conversation about the Grey Wardens or Duncans life. I could ask Morrigan about her life in the forest and it would continue into multiple diolouges. This also happens with other NPCs but just not as often or as indepth. 

When talking to party members in DA2 it felt as if the conversation was guilded in one direction and I didn't get much of a chance to ask a question and start a whole new conversation. But again that is really not the fault of the diolouge wheel.

Correct. It is the consequence of not having a talk to the companions anytime and has nothing to do with investigations options. The investigaitons options works mechanically the same in both games.

Talking with Alistair about Duncan and the Grey Wardens worked like this:

Duncan was a subject for himself. You had no choice, but having it branch out in 'life with the grey wardens'. The same with Morrigans talk about living in the wild. 

The grey wardens topic looked like this:

Warden: I have question about the Grey Wardens
Alistair: Ask
Warden: Option 1, 2, 3.

But thats my point. You had more investigation options. It normally worked as

Warden: "I have a question"
Alistair: "Ask away."
Option A,B, or C

Option A: I have a question about the Grey Wardens

This leads to option A, B, C, and D

In DA2 you normally got to do

Investigation
Option A,B, or C

You pick option A and the the NPC talks to you for a bit and then you are at pick option B or C. There was just less in the ways of investigation and diolouge that wasn't about your main quest or a centered topic.

No you didn't.
You simply had three dialogs about the grey wardens. As said a consequence of talking anytime and not how investigation works in dialog. It was not an investigation option as the ? mark in da:o and da2. It was a 'let's pick a topic to talk about'. I could still ask Alistair about grey warden after I had picked 1, 2, 3 no the dialog just look liked this:

Warden: I have a question about the Grey Wardens.
Alistair: Ask.
Option: ....
[Warden have to leave the sub-hub because there are no option]

See. It was simply a way to get into a sub-hub that made you start a dialog. Investigations in an already occurring dialog worked like in da2.

[Caiden012]

Over time you could talk to Alistair (and any party member) about more things. I talk to Morrigan a bit and use up her A,B,C options, which could be

A: Is your mother really Flemeth? (Leads into extensive dialogue)
B: What was life like in the wilds? (Extensive dialogue)
C: Were you ever lonely in the wilds (Leads to more dialogue)

I get her to like me some more and then there is a new set of A,B,C (And at times D and E)

You could do the same with Alistair and also get the option to ask about the grey wardens which those options would eventually run out.

But in DA2 you get to go talk to you party member every once in a while and talk about a single topic and any investigation you did or anything you did to try and deter from that one topic didn't really go anywhere.

Modifié par Caiden012, 27 novembre 2012 - 06:06 .

[Dragoonlordz]

The dialogue wheel has four problems for me.

1. It's style, artwork does not feel fantasy based to me, the colours too bright and icons too in your face blatent. My personal perception. This is subjective in sense I can see why people might like it but I do not.

2. The paraphrasing due to space limitations and the age old overused arguement of redundancy resulting in confusion, what was chosen was not said.

3. The positioning of choices and structure of the wheel, meaning having a blatent invesitgate option on one side and impactful choices which result in consequences on the other is detrimental to my enjoyment. Now I do expect not many people feel this way but to me it is annoying that you know as the player all choices on one side will result in no outcome outside of an information dump while the other side is the one with actual potential impact not limited to whether companion x, y or z likes you more or less. I enjoyed DAO method where I the player did not know which conversation flow direction will lead to a resulting consequence, impact or action taken.

4. The restriction from my interpretation of responses, due to icons removing any interpretation I might have and enforcing Biowares. This partly relates to VO though so would be unfair to just say it's a icon issue and the problem exists to me because of both elements combined not just one or the other but both play a part. The icons add to the removal my perceived tone and interpretation of responses but the VO also plays a major part in this.

I am fully aware the amount of dialogue options are probably about the same in DAO and DA2 but the major difference in is one left more to the player and the other restricted that players interpretations and perceptions. It's holding the hand of the player going from his (percieved) character towards enforcing Biowares character. While to Bioware it might be removing confusion (though making it far more confusing due to paraphrasing) they might think they are making things simpler, to me it is restricting my character and forcing third person roleplaying by removing and alternative perception of my responses.

In DAO I could read the same line twice and interpret in more than one way, in DA2 because of being voiced and icons there is only one way. Two potential characters perceptions become one which is a restriction to me. They might have desired a sarcastic response in a chosen DAO line but because was not voiced or used blatent tone icons all the time I was free to interpret it another way. Its one of the few occasions where the lack of ability to convey emotion through text on a screen works in a good way imho.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 novembre 2012 - 06:22 .

[esper]

Caiden012 wrote...



Over time you could talk to Alistair (and any party member) about more things. I talk to Morrigan a bit and use up her A,B,C options, which could be

A: Is your mother really Flemeth? (Leads into extensive dialogue)
B: What was life like in the wilds? (Extensive dialogue)
C: Were you ever lonely in the wilds (Leads to more dialogue)

I get her to like me some more and then there is a new set of A,B,C (And at times D and E)

You could do the same with Alistair and also get the option to ask about the grey wardens which those options would eventually run out.

But in DA2 you get to go talk to you party member every once in a while and talk about a single topic and any investigation you did or anything you did to try and deter from that one topic didn't really go anywhere.

yes and those are a consequence of being able to talk to you companions whenever. They were not equal to investigations hubs in da2 or da:o during a conversation, but was simply for you the player to start a conversation up.

[Caiden012]

esper wrote...

Caiden012 wrote...



Over time you could talk to Alistair (and any party member) about more things. I talk to Morrigan a bit and use up her A,B,C options, which could be

A: Is your mother really Flemeth? (Leads into extensive dialogue)
B: What was life like in the wilds? (Extensive dialogue)
C: Were you ever lonely in the wilds (Leads to more dialogue)

I get her to like me some more and then there is a new set of A,B,C (And at times D and E)

You could do the same with Alistair and also get the option to ask about the grey wardens which those options would eventually run out.

But in DA2 you get to go talk to you party member every once in a while and talk about a single topic and any investigation you did or anything you did to try and deter from that one topic didn't really go anywhere.

yes and those are a consequence of being able to talk to you companions whenever. They were not equal to investigations hubs in da2 or da:o during a conversation, but was simply for you the player to start a conversation up.

I believe the DA:O way of going about that is better. I would much rather talk to my party members whenever I want to instead of being told when I can. Because honestly I got more out of it. I felt as if I could learn more lore and move the conversation in the way I wanted to. Where in DA2 to you could only respond to a conversation your party member had entered you into. The only control you have over the conversation is how to respond to the one topic you have been give and a few investigations that do little to nothing for the conversation.

Modifié par Caiden012, 27 novembre 2012 - 06:33 .

[Fredward]

AmstradHero wrote...
This is the point where your argument breaks down. You can't find a reasoned rebuttal, so you just immediately say "the other person is stupid".

I'm going to state this simply: Perceptions are not stupid. They are an observation based on presentation.

The issue here is that the presentation makes people think they are getting fewer options that they believe they should have or that they would like. The issue is not whether they are getting fewer options, but that the presentation makes them feel like they are. This distinction is very important.

The core issue seems to be the points where players get more than three roleplaying choices, where they have slightly different nuance in tone and delivery that provides them with greater roleplaying and character defining flexibility. It's the difference between:

1. I'll do anything to save your daughter.
2. Your daughter will be safe.
3. I will do what I can.
4. Your daughter is probably already dead.
5. Go save her yourself, weakling.

and

(Diplomacy) I'll do whatever I can to help.
(Humour) I guess you should have locked the door behind you.
(Aggressive) You're pathetic if you can't rescue her.
... (NPC dialogue) ...
(Yes) I'll save your daughter.
(No) I don't have time for this.

Technically in the second case, you get an extra possible permutation of choice, but it doesn't feel as though you're roleplaying as much as if you get the five choices in the first example.

This matters. It is not stupid, and insulting people for perceptions is completely uncalled for.

This is where the difference between opinion and perception comes in handy. It can be my opinion that the sky is made of blue cheese, opinions do not have to be based in reality (sadly), they just have to be BELIEVED. So it can be someone OPINION that the dialogue wheel offers less choice or whatever because when shown contrary evidence they can just go "NANANANNAA I'M NOT LISTENING." That's the beauty of opinions. Opinions are your own personal beliefs. They only become an issue when you try and FORCE other people to share them but that is a WHOLE different argument.

Now perceptions are based in reality. If I go "the sky is made out of blue cheese" and I present this as fact I am wrong. If I am shown contrary evidence that directly refute my perception yet I continue to hold that perception than I'm either being willfully ignorant, or yes, stupid.

Btw, LOVED your Alley of Murders mod.

[JoltDealer]

I've been on the Bioware forums since 2006. I love the company and I love their games, but in my experience, the dialogue wheel is the one thing Bioware will not budge on. In fact, more often than not, we're told it will improve, but I've not seen any significant changes in it since Mass Effect. Dragon Age 2 added the personality system, but that was it.

I'm not agreeing with the OP's complaints, but this is far from the first person I've heard complain about the wheel. I see issues pop up here on the forums and with friends online and offline. I'm just saying that it looks bad when so many have a problem with a gameplay element and the response addressing it is a statement that politely says, "We ain't changing a thing. Bye."

Modifié par Crimson Sound, 27 novembre 2012 - 10:43 .

[GithCheater]

http://social.biowar...ndex/14916937/4

I am hopeful that a better plot in DA3 will change the perception that the dialogue wheel is "at fault". 

David Gaider wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...
Maybe it just felt that way because of the Dialouge Origins player's had to go through to resolve certain quests, Bercillian Forest & Zathrian, Isolde & Conor. The Warden had to give a certain set of responses in order to reach a "good" outcome. In DA2 the choices were all laid out in front of you, There was no Dialouge Option that lead to a choice the PC could "discover" if you will. Maybe that's the difference, regardless of how much the two systems relate. Just Sayin.

The majority of the quests in DA2 were smaller than in DAO (though there was more of them overall), and they were also more linear. That has nothing to do with the dialogue system itself. I know people like to conflate the two ("I liked the plot less, and the dialogue presentation changed, so it must be responsible"), but between that and having people argue based on their feelings... well, it's a tad hard to parse into something useful.

What I often get out of these discussions is "Do it better".

Hopefully the quests in DA3 will be more complex and less linear than DA2, and lead to choices that the PC can "discover"  that will have different effects on the plot outcomes.   I think the Fenreyel secondary quest in DA2 is an excellent example of "Do it better" with the Dialogue wheel, and this gives me hope for DA3.

Modifié par GithCheater, 28 novembre 2012 - 03:48 .

[In Exile]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
3. The positioning of choices and structure of the wheel, meaning having a blatent invesitgate option on one side and impactful choices which result in consequences on the other is detrimental to my enjoyment. Now I do expect not many people feel this way but to me it is annoying that you know as the player all choices on one side will result in no outcome outside of an information dump while the other side is the one with actual potential impact not limited to whether companion x, y or z likes you more or less. I enjoyed DAO method where I the player did not know which conversation flow direction will lead to a resulting consequence, impact or action taken.

I know you said you know people will  disagree, but I feel compelled to point out how much I hated this part of DA:O. It makes no bloody sense! If I have questions to ask, I won't just stare dumbstruck at the person because they changed a topic. I will change it right back to what it is I want to know. In DA2 (or ME games) we don't know when the right hand option will actually end dialogue - we just know it advances from our questions (i.e., it lets us pick when to stop asking questions!).

Anything else makes conversation so artificial that, for me, it breaks my immersion.

[AmstradHero]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
This is where the difference between opinion and perception comes in handy. It can be my opinion that the sky is made of blue cheese, opinions do not have to be based in reality (sadly), they just have to be BELIEVED. So it can be someone OPINION that the dialogue wheel offers less choice or whatever because when shown contrary evidence they can just go "NANANANNAA I'M NOT LISTENING." That's the beauty of opinions. Opinions are your own personal beliefs. They only become an issue when you try and FORCE other people to share them but that is a WHOLE different argument.

Now perceptions are based in reality. If I go "the sky is made out of blue cheese" and I present this as fact I am wrong. If I am shown contrary evidence that directly refute my perception yet I continue to hold that perception than I'm either being willfully ignorant, or yes, stupid.

I'm upfront in that I agree that DA2 and DAO offer roughly the same level of choice in dialogue. However, as I've said, the problem is that they don't appear that way. What's more, your analogy helps me demonstrate why.

The sky and cheese are both immediately observable. You can look at the sky, then look at a piece of cheese, you can observe that they don't look the same, therefore you can immediately say "the sky isn't made of cheese.". You're doing a comparison on what is immediately obvious and can be seen straight away. If you apply this to DAO and DA2, then you end up coming to the exact same erroneous conclusion you're arguing against.

In DAO, players see that they get offered more than three choices at the same time as a means to progress a conversation. In DA2, they almost always get offered only three choices at the same time as a means to progress a conversation. Yes, there are investigate hubs where DA2 can sometimes get more options, but these are clearly marked as such and very obviously denoted as "you are just finding out information".  So what conclusion do players make? DAO has more choice than DA2. It's really that simple.

The vast majority of players won't come to these forums to talk or complain about the issue, they'll just take it at face value, and make a judgement based on that. Even if they do complain, developers can say that there's just as many options, but they can't do anything to prove it to the people who disbelieve, because they can't show them the guts of the conversations.

A more appropriate analogy would be to compare DAO and DA2 to car engines. Let's call DAO a V6 engine, and DA2 a finely tuned straight 4. Now, both of these engines might be able to output the exact same horsepower, but if you show them both to someone and ask them "which is more powerful", they're almost certainly going to pick the larger one because they can observe that it's larger. It's got more cylinders, a larger displacement - it has to have more power, right?

Now, from a personal perspective, I know that I roughly got a similar level of choice of roleplay in DAO and DA2. I know there are certain character ideas that I couldn't really make happen in DAO because I couldn't roleplaying them with the options provided, and different character ideas in DA2 that couldn't happen for the same reason. This is partially attributable to the writing, but also partially attributable to the fact that DAO does give you some cases where you have more than three "roleplaying" choice options by combining roleplay and choice into a single choice node.

I know this is happening, and I understand the reasons behind that because I care about the design aspects, but despite that, DA2's system still feels more constraining at times. Yes, that's an opinion, but when we're talking about roleplaying and defining the characterisation of a protagonist, that is a fairly important aspect of the RPG genre.

This opinion doesn't change the fact that there were more times in DA2 where I had the feeling "Well, I'm not really sure that my character would pick any of those options, but I guess I'll have to pick X", when I compare it to DAO. Again, this is important because we're talking about the RPG genre, and the player's ability to define their character's personality is a fairly key aspect of BioWare's titles. If that's something they're choosing to change, then they will need to expect some resistance and backlash to that change, because that is something that has appealed to many of their players.

This really isn't a simple or straightforward subject, and there are a heck of a lot of design factors that are involved in dialogue creation.

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
Btw, LOVED your Alley of Murders mod.

Haha, thanks! I hope you'll try The Shattered War once it's done!

[nightscrawl]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I modify the tone of my speech constantly depending on the desired effect of the statement. Most people I know also do this. Many characters in media also do this. Why can't our protagonist do it?

My Hawke was generally diplomatic to moderates on both sides, and impatient with extremists. If something was funny, he commented on it. It wasn't an issue.

I've mentioned this in other threads. In my plays where I'm more focused on developing my character rather than other meta-gaming aspects like gaming the friend/rival system or keeping with a specific personality, I will do this.

Which leads to...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

To me it was just done badly. The tone and demenour of Hawke seemed to totally change and it just didn't feel like the same person.

The way I see it, part of this problem is the sliding personality scale that they used. Picking a majority diplomatic choices made you diplomatic personality, and so forth with the other options. Sometimes if you picked a contrary option for your character's personality it came off as inconsistent, particularly with the aggressive choice that suddenly seemed as if Hawke flew into a rage for no reason, or decided to be particularly hurtful at the end of an otherwise mundane conversation.

You also had the risk of unwittingly changing your personality. If you had decided to be a snarky Hawke that was also against mages, you might find yourself during several consecutive quests picking the aggressive options because that is how you believe your character would respond. This had the unintended consequence of changing your character's personality. You then might find yourself in the unfortunate position of having to pick dialog options that you might not necessarily want just to remain in the personality you have chosen.

This has happened to me on numerous occasions, and most of the time I tend to slide back toward the diplomatic side by the end of the game because of the choices I make.

AmstradHero wrote...

In DAO, players see that they get offered more than three choices at the same time as a means to progress a conversation. In DA2, they almost always get offered only three choices at the same time as a means to progress a conversation. Yes, there are investigate hubs where DA2 can sometimes get more options, but these are clearly marked as such and very obviously denoted as "you are just finding out information".  So what conclusion do players make? DAO has more choice than DA2. It's really that simple.

I would really like to know how many players routinely go through all of the investigate options, in both games. I say this because I have never thought that DA2 had fewer options, because of the fact that I do read them all. Even after playing both of them several times, I still go through all of the options. I look at it more like crafting a conversation (I also pick investigates in the order that seems most logical, rather than strictly in the order they are listed), so I go though them all, and use that information, even though I as a player have already heard it several times before, to make my PC's decision.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 28 novembre 2012 - 03:04 .

[Pheonix57]

This is a good topic. The best thing about DA:O was all of the available dialogue. When the game was over I really felt like I knew the characters. So no matter what, Bioware needs to reincorporate the varying dialogue.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

DE:HR style / Mass Effect style hybrid.

[Viktoria Landers]

People feel that way because many times Hawke spoke without you clicking an option but when it comes to the amount of dialogue choices, it is pretty much the same with DAO. But sure, when it comes to the amount of available choices and freedom you had in DAO, then it certainly outclasses DA2.

[sully.nathan]

http://www.ign.com/b...ialogue-trees-2 . I like this system better

Modifié par sully.nathan, 28 novembre 2012 - 11:16 .

[Sidney]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

The dialogue wheel has four problems for me.

1. It's style, artwork does not feel fantasy based to me, the colours too bright and icons too in your face blatent. My personal perception. This is subjective in sense I can see why people might like it but I do not.

2. The paraphrasing due to space limitations and the age old overused arguement of redundancy resulting in confusion, what was chosen was not said.

3. The positioning of choices and structure of the wheel, meaning having a blatent invesitgate option on one side and impactful choices which result in consequences on the other is detrimental to my enjoyment.

4. The restriction from my interpretation of responses, due to icons removing any interpretation I might have and enforcing Biowares.

I'm going to be harsh here but i mean well...

1. What? Seriously?  While lines of text seem "fantasy" to you?

2. This is the most overused and 95% silly argument. People are either not capable of understanding paraphrases (as in their issue not the game's) or they're deliberately obtuse.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter. In any dialog system the dirty peasant asks for your help you get Yes, No. It isn't like you get 3 or 4 forms of yes or no to pick from . I still challenge anyone to give me a place in DA2 where the line of dialog spoken would change your selected style of response.

3. This is an awful argument. I guess it makes people feel smart to say this. First, having a player have access to information is good. Heck, the info is a repsonse to people saying "I didn't want to start a war just compliment her hair" in other games. Second, the wall of text did the same thing. You had [Intimidate] tags for example bt also go back and the top option is "good" warden and the second option is "bad" warden.

4. This is another pointless argument. You have no voice. Period. The game knows what your intent is based on the lines you select because it is coded to respond in one way.  When I picked "I like shoes" in DAO I didn't want to sound nice, I wanted to sound derisive to Leliana. What reaction do I get? "Me too" and a big, NIG gain to my friendship. Now I know I've had the "People misunderstand in real life" response to this but that's not a good answer in a game otherwise it legitimizes ANY repsonse to dialog. Purely random reactions become acceptable because people are confused and it equially allows me no agency to say that I wanted to be blantantlky derisive as opposed to subtle where mayb misunderstanding could happen. Your control is a lie and illusion..

[Malanek]

I'm not sure why you think the dialogue wheel was simple. When selecting from a line you know exactly what you are going to say and from that you can usually work out the tone. With the DA2 wheel there were about 10 different icons you had memorize and some of them were used infrequently. Occasionally what ended up being said was also quite surprising.

My biggest concern about it though was the extreme nature of the responses. In general the previous system had shorter more neutral responses whereas DA2 seemed to be over the top quite often. It was hard to get immersed in the character without always selecting the same tone, because different tones resulted in things the same person would never say.

So many times in DA2 I would have rather said exactly what the paraphrase was.

Modifié par Malanek999, 29 novembre 2012 - 12:04 .