Cstaf wrote...
It's been many years since i've played BG2, which the enhanced edition will remedy when it comes out, but if i remember correctly the 17 choices at once is during the riddle in Spellhold maze. I might be wrong though.
WazzuMan wrote...
My honest response is if I can navigate the dialogue this and future games without as many headaches as I got with the system in DAO and DAA, then I'm happy. Seriously, in Awakening I cannot talk to Oghren, every time I tried I think I ended up insulting him in some form.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
Cstaf wrote...
It's been many years since i've played BG2, which the enhanced edition will remedy when it comes out, but if i remember correctly the 17 choices at once is during the riddle in Spellhold maze. I might be wrong though.
Ah, I apologize.
I was able to find a screenshot of it... but unfortunately, it is tied to another rather inflammatory image...
Cstaf wrote...
Hmm, well that is not BG2. What game is that? I cannot recognize it.
Herr Uhl wrote...
Cstaf wrote...
Hmm, well that is not BG2. What game is that? I cannot recognize it.
Planescape Torment.
Modifié par AlanC9, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:13 .
Cstaf wrote...
Herr Uhl wrote...
Planescape Torment.
Ah, or as i call it - "the one that got away". Never did get by and played it; yet still heard it is one of the best RPGs ever made. You know if it is available for MAC?
Modifié par supremebloodwolf, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:21 .
Ash Wind wrote...
Unfortunately
xsdob wrote...
Bioware should abandon it's new system of dialogue that offers more options than traditional tree dialogue lines with no real downsides and instead do something revolutionary and different from everyone else, like going back to the old system that everyone else uses.
RPG logic, I don't get you.
Ross42899 wrote...
Hopefully DA3 will use the dialogue wheel. I really like this system.
The only thing DA3 does NOT need is auto dialogue.
Modifié par Redbelle, 10 janvier 2013 - 11:27 .
SpunkyMonkey wrote...
Good posts cstaf & redbellexsdob wrote...
Bioware should abandon it's new system of dialogue that offers more options than traditional tree dialogue lines with no real downsides and instead do something revolutionary and different from everyone else, like going back to the old system that everyone else uses.
RPG logic, I don't get you.
"No real downsides" is something that simply isn't true.
Even if you are not convinced by any of the arguements in any of the numerous threads that appear on the subject, the very fact that there are so many debates relating to it suggest that many see downsides with it.
You may dispute the validity of the downsides, but disgregard them so easily is out of touch with a large number of players on here.
Modifié par xsdob, 10 janvier 2013 - 11:53 .
Guest_Lathrim_*
False. The amount of dialogue available depends on the amount of lines to be recorded. The cost of displaying some extra words on screen is negligible compared to the cost of a voice actor.xsdob wrote...
Than again, I don't really see abbreviations as a bad thing since they allow for more dialouge to be in the game, what with the dialouge budgets that all games have in them.
To put it simply: because then you don't know what your character will say. You might have a general idea of the gist of what can maybe come out of your character's mouth, but by the time you know what your character will say it's too late. Some people want to make their dialogue choice knowing what their character will say. Being surprised by your own character is extremely annoying and can break the experience.xsdob wrote...
A lot of the arguments I've seen about how bad the dialouge wheel is seem to just say it's bad due to abbreviations, but I don't really see how that's a bad thing in all honesty.
Some people have exprerssed this same opinion, mainly due to subvocalization issues.xsdob wrote...
Deus ex tried to do a middle ground, and while some feel it did a good job, I feel that having the full dialouges, espically in a voiced game, don't work.
It's about two to four lines per choice, for a total of at most sixteen lines. Your post already contained more than that.The only way I can see DXHR lines as "too much to read" is if the player is effectively a functional iliterate that requires more than a minute per line.xsdob wrote...
The reason being that there is a lot of dialouge said in games, and having the entire thing written out is a lot to read through.
The dialogues are not timed. The characters interrupting while you're reviewing your options with a phrase to the effect of "cat got your tongue" is a nod to the fact that it would feel awkward to pause that long outside the environment of the game. And even then, it is only long and awkward if you take several minutes to review each option. Most people can read subtitles faster than the voice actor can deliver the line, "taking a long time to read" is not a valid argument. It should take, at most, 20 seconds to review all options.xsdob wrote...
This was a very big problem in deus ex where the dialouge choices were timed, but even if they weren't, such a systems could cause the game to kinda come to a screeching halt. What I mean by that is that it would take much longer to read through all the dialouge on certain choices, and thus would result in long, awkward breakes in between scenes and make the flow of the story hampered.
You're combining several arguments here, but since most people do, I can hardly blame you. Most of the people who argue agaisnt the wheel care less for the actual graphic display than for the fact that with paraphrasing you simply don't know what your character will say, and that is unacceptable.xsdob wrote...
That is just my opinion on it though, and one that apparently isn't very good according to the forums. I just don't see a real benefit to switching back to the dialouge tree system.
Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2013 - 09:18 .
xsdob wrote...
SpunkyMonkey wrote...
Good posts cstaf & redbellexsdob wrote...
Bioware should abandon it's new system of dialogue that offers more options than traditional tree dialogue lines with no real downsides and instead do something revolutionary and different from everyone else, like going back to the old system that everyone else uses.
RPG logic, I don't get you.
"No real downsides" is something that simply isn't true.
Even if you are not convinced by any of the arguements in any of the numerous threads that appear on the subject, the very fact that there are so many debates relating to it suggest that many see downsides with it.
You may dispute the validity of the downsides, but disgregard them so easily is out of touch with a large number of players on here.
Many people also debate that pepsi has downsides to coke, and vice versa. Does that mean the pepsi cola wars are legitimate? How should I know? It's all just cola to me.
Than again, I don't really see abbreviations as a bad thing since they allow for more dialouge to be in the game, what with the dialouge budgets that all games have in them.
A lot of the arguments I've seen about how bad the dialouge wheel is seem to just say it's bad due to abbreviations, but I don't really see how that's a bad thing in all honesty. Deus ex tried to do a middle ground, and while some feel it did a good job, I feel that having the full dialouges, espically in a voiced game, don't work. The reason being that there is a lot of dialouge said in games, and having the entire thing written out is a lot to read through. This was a very big problem in deus ex where the dialouge choices were timed, but even if they weren't, such a systems could cause the game to kinda come to a screeching halt. What I mean by that is that it would take much longer to read through all the dialouge on certain choices, and thus would result in long, awkward breakes in between scenes and make the flow of the story hampered.
That is just my opinion on it though, and one that apparently isn't very good according to the forums. I just don't see a real benefit to switching back to the dialouge tree system.
Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 11 janvier 2013 - 11:16 .
Icesong wrote...
Or you don't apologize, you don't have a conversation, and no one cares for long.
This is well-known from everyday life.
If I decide a character of mine was misunderstood once it's not as if
I've doomed them to being misunderstood forever.
And if they were
misunderstood it was most likely by an NPC I'll never have a
conversation with again.
Xewaka wrote...
Until you're able to do this as well (takeback
and explanation) with a dialogue wheel pick, using it to dismiss the
flexibility of non-explicit tone it is not a valid counter-argument.
SpunkyMonkey wrote...
As Xewaka so finely points out it's
implementation is not of the level yet which allows us to converse as we
would in real life. therefore the best we can hope for currently is a
system which reflects real life, but is practical enough to be
implemented in a game.
The dialogue tree and non-voiced protagonist system allows the player
freedom of imagination to compenstate for any "gaps" in conversation
(examples which I've outlined in previous posts)
By trying to fill these "gaps" by labeling and bracketing them it just
kills that freedom, can cause conflicting messages and creates an issue.
Also, In general I believe RPG's much like fantasy novels should, IMO,
allow the participant freedom to manouver mentaly and create a bit of
the experience themselves.
Like you both say, I was just saying one of the reasons why I play and what I enjoy about RPGs
Cstaf wrote...
Stop being such a drama queen. He is stating his opinion of what the point of an RPG is, he is not claiming it to be the universal truth for everyone.
Modifié par In Exile, 11 janvier 2013 - 04:32 .
Xewaka wrote...
To put it simply: because then you don't know what your character will say. You might have a general idea of the gist of what can maybe come out of your character's mouth
Modifié par AlanC9, 11 janvier 2013 - 05:26 .
I don't think you can deny that "the gist of the line" and "the line" are not the same thing. With "what the characterIn Exile wrote...
That's wrong. To you, knowing the gist is not enough for you to feel as if you know what the character will say. But that is in itself part of our debate - whether knowing "the gist" is good enough, and (secondly, and impliedly) whether Bioware does a good job of giving us the gist.
It's possible to agree that the gist is good enough and Bioware's paraphrasesare bad.
Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2013 - 06:05 .
The devil is in the details.AlanC9 wrote...
I guess my question is why isn't it enough to know the gist? If I know enough about the choices so I'm choosing the same option I'd choose if I did know the exact lines, I don't see how knowing the exact line would be helpful to me. I can't think of more than a couple of cases in the whole ME trilogy where the paraphrase was bad enough that my character said the wrong thing, and one of those was because of me not understanding how Bio thought P/R applied to the situation.
I don't remember the specifics of the second case; the only thing that stuck in my mind was that I should remember that the system did fail once, since I was going to be in a thread like this again.
Xewaka wrote...
I don't think you can deny that "the gist of the line" and "the line" are not the same thing.
With "what the character will say" I refer specifically to the entire line.
I can respect that the gist is enough for you. And I think we both agree in tha tthe headscratching limitation of never repeating the words in the full line in the paraphrase didn't help in the clarity department.
Xewaka wrote... Now, based exclusively on the paraphrasing, try to navigate the conversation without bringing Cerberus up. Short of trial and error, there's no way to know which lines will bring it up and which won't. Situations such as this one is why the gist isn't enough.
The thing is, you actually can hide that information (the VS brings it up instead). And you're still getting the gist of the conversation with the paraphrases (As the focus of Shepard lines is not his affiliation with Cerberus). That's why detail is important. Because otherwise, you might not even know that the option exists, and it does.In Exile wrote...
No - these situations show that the paraphrasing used was bad. We could have the gist of it - but the conversations that include Cerberus have to include information about disclosing it.
The thing is, Bioware didn't want Shepard to hide that information. It's like how DA:O forces you to declare yourself to be a GW in certain parts, and your party still assumes you're a GW even if you tell them you're not.
Modifié par Xewaka, 11 janvier 2013 - 06:25 .
Retour en haut