330 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Icesong wrote...
I just listened to it(flicked my headphones, literally) and if someone said that to me my heart would stop.

This also brings up the point that tone is far and away more important than intent. There's a way to say what she said and still be congenial about it.

What was the line?

BasilKarlo wrote...

Part of the problem in DA2 was outright misleading paraphrases that were barely even similar
to what Hawke ended up saying. The paraphrases could have been longer
to be more precise, and they absolutely needed to be more accurate. The
problems are solvable. They obviously think that the wheel is the way to
go. Hopefully they don't muck it up this time.

Believe it or not, that was intentional. Unless gramatically impossible, I believe the rule was no words in common between paraphrase and spoken line.

[Icesong]

In Exile wrote...

Icesong wrote...
I just listened to it(flicked my headphones, literally) and if someone said that to me my heart would stop.

This also brings up the point that tone is far and away more important than intent. There's a way to say what she said and still be congenial about it.

What was the line?

"Keep your personal issues to yourself. Our relationship is strictly professional."

[In Exile]

Icesong wrote..
"Keep your personal issues to yourself. Our relationship is strictly professional."

I just don't recall ever hearing that line. Or anything like it. I'm going to check the wiki for conversation triggers.

[Steppenwolf]

In Exile wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

Part of the problem in DA2 was outright misleading paraphrases that were barely even similar
to what Hawke ended up saying. The paraphrases could have been longer
to be more precise, and they absolutely needed to be more accurate. The
problems are solvable. They obviously think that the wheel is the way to
go. Hopefully they don't muck it up this time.

Believe it or not, that was intentional. Unless gramatically impossible, I believe the rule was no words in common between paraphrase and spoken line.

It seems like you intentionally missed the point of my post. I said what ended up happening was the paraphrases did not even come close to representing what Hawke ended up saying some of the time. I highly doubt Bioware wanted us to pick one thing and get another.

[SparksMKII]

Meh as long as it has no color coding and switches the helpfull/diplomatic and sarcastic/arrogant around from time to time I can live with it. I mean not always having the goody two shoes response in the top right for example.

I don't want to be spoon fed what's the "right" answer or not.

Modifié par SparksMKII, 07 janvier 2013 - 08:10 .

[In Exile]

BasilKarlo wrote...
It seems like you intentionally missed the point of my post. I said what ended up happening was the paraphrases did not even come close to representing what Hawke ended up saying some of the time. I highly doubt Bioware wanted us to pick one thing and get another.

No, I didn't. I'm not kidding when I say it was an intended feature that the paraphrase and spoken line not have words in common. Bioware expected that the paraphrase gave you the gist of the line, but it was the express aim to have us pick one paraphrase, and hear a sentence that shared (almost) nothing in common with it (in terms of the words shared).

So an example would be:

Paraphrase: We have to run!
Line: Everyone, flee immediatelly before the demon escapes! 

[In Exile]

SparksMKII wrote...

Meh as long as it has no color coding and switches the helpfull/diplomatic and sarcastic/arrogant around from time to time I can live with it. I mean not always having the goody two shoes response in the top right for example.

You mean like how in DA:O the options always went good - aggressive from 1-3, only rarely broken up by having questions or binary choices?

I don't want to be spoon fed what's the "right" answer or not.

Maybe all the writing should be in Chinese and we should get a dictionary with the game.

[SparksMKII]

In Exile wrote...


You mean like how in DA:O the options always went good - aggressive from 1-3, only rarely broken up by having questions or binary choices?

I don't want to be spoon fed what's the "right" answer or not.

Maybe all the writing should be in Chinese and we should get a dictionary with the game.

The:
Option 1 is Good
Option 2 is Neutral
Option 3 is Agressive really got to me I'd like to see it spiced up a bit by throwing off this "rigged" dialogue mechanic so sometimes 1 would be Agressive, 3 would be Good etc. Maybe it's just me but I much prefer a more difficult to discern moral system implemented.

Yes allow me to decode codex entry's in Chinese also that should be an instant 20hrs added to gameplay right?

[AlexJK]

SparksMKII wrote...

I'd like to see it spiced up a bit by throwing off this "rigged" dialogue mechanic so sometimes 1 would be Agressive, 3 would be Good etc. Maybe it's just me but I much prefer a more difficult to discern moral system implemented.

How in the world does *shuffing the order of the dialogue responses* accomplish anything other than irritating the player?

[upsettingshorts]

The flavor options were emphatically not a moral system, nor is Diplomatic "good" or Aggressive "bad" or charming "neutral."

They are simply cues to tell you, the player, the intended effect of the resulting line.

There is no reason whatsoever to stick to any of them for the sake of foolish consistency. They are not Paragon/Renegade.

In short, if you think DA2 "spoon fed you the right answer" you were quite literally playing the game wrong.

[Plaintiff]

Icesong wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Icesong wrote...
I just listened to it(flicked my headphones, literally) and if someone said that to me my heart would stop.

This also brings up the point that tone is far and away more important than intent. There's a way to say what she said and still be congenial about it.

What was the line?

"Keep your personal issues to yourself. Our relationship is strictly professional."

I don't see what's so brutal about it. There are far worse ways to be shut down.

[Icesong]

Plaintiff wrote...

Icesong wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Icesong wrote...
I just listened to it(flicked my headphones, literally) and if someone said that to me my heart would stop.

This also brings up the point that tone is far and away more important than intent. There's a way to say what she said and still be congenial about it.

What was the line?

"Keep your personal issues to yourself. Our relationship is strictly professional."

I don't see what's so brutal about it.

Maybe I'm not the only socially incompetent one.

[Plaintiff]

Icesong wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Icesong wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Icesong wrote...
I just listened to it(flicked my headphones, literally) and if someone said that to me my heart would stop.

This also brings up the point that tone is far and away more important than intent. There's a way to say what she said and still be congenial about it.

What was the line?

"Keep your personal issues to yourself. Our relationship is strictly professional."

I don't see what's so brutal about it.

Maybe I'm not the only socially incompetent one.

Well it could be much worse. LadyHawke could laugh in Anders' face. ManHawke could punch him in the face, like I've heard straight men say they would do if a homosexual made a pass at them.

I think Anders is being let down fairly gently.

[Weskerr]

MinttyMint wrote...

Yes it will I believe they confirmed it and added that they may tweak it or something along those lines. I don't think its that bad, it's the icons that irk me. I mean really? Take a good feature from Mass Effect and dumb it down.. Really? Okay... Sure.

The icons are the worst feature about it. One needs to look only at the symbol attached to each dialogue option to know how the PC will deliver the tone of the line. Thinking about what the dialogue choice actually means is unecessary. Not much worse, but still a fundamental flaw, is that the structure of the dialogue wheel makes it so that the top right option is always diplomatic, the middle option is always joking/sarcastic, and the bottom right option is always aggressive. The consquence is the dismemberment of critical thinking on the part of the player, which in turn diminishes immersion into the world and roleplaying.

I've said this for a long time: The dialogue wheel should be removed. In it's place should be a system that requires the player to think carefully when choosing a dialogue option. This means randomizing where a diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive, or any other kind of dialogue answer is placed on the screen. 

[upsettingshorts]

Maybe you stopped thinking.

But I didn't.

And the wheel itself does not mandate that you do.

[Icesong]

Plaintiff wrote...

Well it could be much worse. LadyHawke could laugh in Anders' face. ManHawke could punch him in the face, like I've heard straight men say they would do if a homosexual made a pass at them.

I think Anders is being let down fairly gently.

Indeed, it could always be worse. Negative visualization is a good way to live but not much of a point.

But it's not just that he was let down. Wouldn't even call it that really. He was let down in the actual romance dialogue, and that I would call fairly gently. Here he's just feeling out a friendship and you basically completely reject him as a person.

[upsettingshorts]

Homophobia aside, the reason people objected to that scenario with Anders was two fold:

* It was very early, so a Rival hit of that size seemed like a lot more than it ended up being in the grand scheme of things.

* Anders does not take being let down well, which is in-character for him, but the player will still feel bad.

The line Hawke gives works if you're playing Hawke who looks at Anders as a crazy, dangerous abomination, and the further your interpretation gets from that the less applicable it probably is. But it's an execution problem, it's not something endemic to the system.

[Weskerr]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maybe you stopped thinking.

But I didn't.

And the wheel itself does not mandate that you do.

The dialogue wheel makes it very easy to think less about what is going to be said. You don't need to have a great imagination to see why it can have this effect.

[upsettingshorts]

Weskerr wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maybe you stopped thinking.

But I didn't.

And the wheel itself does not mandate that you do.

The dialogue wheel makes it very easy to think less about what is going to be said. You don't need to have a great imagination to see why it can have this effect.

It can, but it doesn't have to.  Like I said, if you want to turn your brain off and always pick top right, or whatever, that's your problem.

Not mine.

[SparksMKII]

Weskerr wrote...

The icons are the worst feature about it. One needs to look only at the symbol attached to each dialogue option to know how the PC will deliver the tone of the line. Thinking about what the dialogue choice actually means is unecessary. Not much worse, but still a fundamental flaw, is that the structure of the dialogue wheel makes it so that the top right option is always diplomatic, the middle option is always joking/sarcastic, and the bottom right option is always aggressive. The consquence is the dismemberment of critical thinking on the part of the player, which in turn diminishes immersion into the world and roleplaying.

I've said this for a long time: The dialogue wheel should be removed. In it's place should be a system that requires the player to think carefully when choosing a dialogue option. This means randomizing where a diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive, or any other kind of dialogue answer is placed on the screen. 

It's like you can read my mind.

AlexJK wrote...
How in the world does *shuffing the order of the dialogue responses* accomplish anything other than irritating the player?

It doesn't or are you implying it would be too difficult for the modern
group of casual gamers to discern the difference between.

1. Nice to meet you
2. Who are you?
3. ****** off!

or

1. ****** off!
2. Nice to meet you
3. Who are you?

No more automatic clicking the top/middle/bottom answer please let us think before we speak again.

Modifié par SparksMKII, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:40 .

[Xewaka]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
It can, but it doesn't have to.  Like I said, if you want to turn your brain off and always pick top right, or whatever, that's your problem.
Not mine.

Sometimes it comes to either that or ragequitting the game because of the complete pointlessness of trying to deduce the content of the line from the paraphrase, when the paraphrase, by design intention, does its best not to reproduce any of the content.
If you can't know what your character will say beforehand, you end up not caring.

Modifié par Xewaka, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:44 .

[Weskerr]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maybe you stopped thinking.

But I didn't.

And the wheel itself does not mandate that you do.

The dialogue wheel makes it very easy to think less about what is going to be said. You don't need to have a great imagination to see why it can have this effect.

It can, but it doesn't have to.  Like I said, if you want to turn your brain off and always pick top right, or whatever, that's your problem.

Not mine.

Well, for me at least, it's not a matter of shutting down my brain. Even if I try to focus on the lines only and completely ignore the symbols and the position of the lines in relation to the wheel, I can't do it. These two aspects of the wheel - the symbols and the placement of the dialgoue - always influence my expectations of how I think the line will be delivered and how it will be received.

[upsettingshorts]

This argument misses the point of the icons completely.

After Mass Effect 1 was released, there were two common criticisms of the dialogue system:

* The paraphrasing made it difficult to discern the content of the full line (This is still a criticism)
* The actor's delivery was sometimes surprising and changed the suspected meaning of the paraphrase.

The tone icons are meant to solve the second problem by describing to you, the player, how the actor and thus the character will deliver the line their intent in doing so. It is informative, and nothing more. That players, real or imagined as part of the usual scapegoating of imaginary stupid "casuals," decided to pick the same option repeatedly is a flaw in understanding this. Not a failure inherent in the system itself.

Therefore:

If you were just clicking the top/middle/bottom answer, stop doing that. It's your own fault you are not thinking.

If someone else is supposedly clicking the top/middle/bottom answer, tell them to stop doing that. They probably think Dragon Age is like Mass Effect, despite the fact it is not.

If you're arguing that providing that information - tone and delivery - to the player, is somehow dumbing down the experience of guessing what the hell your character is gonna do when you pick an option, I don't know what to tell you.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:46 .

[esper]

SparksMKII wrote...

In Exile wrote...


You mean like how in DA:O the options always went good - aggressive from 1-3, only rarely broken up by having questions or binary choices?

I don't want to be spoon fed what's the "right" answer or not.

Maybe all the writing should be in Chinese and we should get a dictionary with the game.

The:
Option 1 is Good
Option 2 is Neutral
Option 3 is Agressive really got to me I'd like to see it spiced up a bit by throwing off this "rigged" dialogue mechanic so sometimes 1 would be Agressive, 3 would be Good etc. Maybe it's just me but I much prefer a more difficult to discern moral system implemented.

Yes allow me to decode codex entry's in Chinese also that should be an instant 20hrs added to gameplay right?

First off, diplomatic =/= good and agrressive =/= bad, sarctic =/= neutral the two have nothing to do with a moral system (my diplomatic Hawke was hardly a good person). The whole talk about morality has nothing to do with tones, this is not mass effect.

As it has nothing to do with moral I see no point in add a fake diffuculty to the game. It is much easier systemize when the same tones (mostly, because sometimes one tone had an extra option) is in the same place.

After all I am roleplaying a charcters personality, not guessing the right answer in the nearest pop quizz I don't see why I should add difficulty to it.

Modifié par esper, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:50 .

[Weskerr]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

This argument misses the point of the icons completely.

After Mass Effect 1 was released, there were two common criticisms of the dialogue system:

* The paraphrasing made it difficult to discern the content of the full line (This is still a criticism)
* The actor's delivery was sometimes surprising and changed the suspected meaning of the paraphrase.

The tone icons are meant to solve the second problem by describing to you, the player, how the actor and thus the character will deliver the line their intent in doing so. It is informative, and nothing more. That players, real or imagined as part of the usual scapegoating of imaginary stupid "casuals," decided to pick the same option repeatedly is a flaw in understanding this. Not a failure inherent in the system itself.

Therefore:

If you were just clicking the top/middle/bottom answer, stop doing that. It's your own fault you are not thinking.

If someone else is supposedly clicking the top/middle/bottom answer, tell them to stop doing that. They probably think Dragon Age is like Mass Effect, despite the fact it is not.

If you're arguing that providing that information - tone and delivery - to the player, is somehow dumbing down the experience of guessing what the hell your character is gonna do when you pick an option, I don't know what to tell you.

Solutions to problems can sometimes present more problems - as in side effects. Whether the symbols in the DA2 dialogue wheel were meant to solve

The actor's delivery was sometimes surprising and changed the suspected meaning of the paraphrase.

or not is not relevant. In solving one problem, it's created another.