330 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Then why were you arguing with me? I said that the paraphrases didn't correlate with the spoken lines and you started telling me that it was supposed to be that way.

I'm not trying to argue with you. I just thought I'd add a funny tidbit that Bioware created this problem themselves, and then you were just not getting me, so I keep trying to explain it in different ways.

[Yuqi]

Hopefully it's not as bad as the ME3 dialouge wheel.

[Weskerr]

[quote]In Exile wrote...


[quote]Weskerr wrote...
I guess it's a stupid question if you want to dumb down the game. Who wants to think about what tone a particular piece of dialogue will communicate when the game can tell you, right? While we're at it, why not include an icon next to every piece of dialogue that will tell you beforehand, just like the tone icons, how an NPC will react to it? [/quote]

This isn't about dumbing down the game! This is about providing important information to the player. Do you think making the paraphrases clear dumbs down the game because the player isn't left guessing what the hell the paraphrase might actually have your character say? [/quote]

Yes, I do. The icons oversimplify the whole process of player engagement with the dialogue. You say "guessing" while I say "careful consideration." Determing how the PC will deliver a line of dialogue is not a guess in the dark. There are things called context, implication, insinuation, intent, and so on that help you determine how the PC would probably say a line. If there is ever a time in the game where a paraphrase is chosen in which the player expects the PC to say something in one way, but says it in another, unexpected way, that is the fault of  the writer not writing the paraphrase well, the voice actor not delivering the line as the writer wanted, or the player misunderstanding the intent of the writer.

[quote]In Exile wrote...
Because that's the argument that you're making. And it's stupid. [/quote]

The argument I'm making is the icons take it too far. In their attempt to make it simpler for players to know the tone in which a piece of dialogue is said, they oversimplify it. "Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler."

[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]Again, bother to read my points. I never take issue with paraphrasing. [/quote]

Bother to read mine. Because your argument as to why the tone icons dumb down the game is an argument for making the paraphrase misleading, so the player can "think" about what the PC will say.[/quote]

For making the paraphrasing misleading? No. Making it better worded, perhaps. Or having the voice actor say it in a way that accurately reflects the paraphrasing. 

[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]Granted, choosing a piece of dialogue soley based on the tone icon will not always work out in your favor.. The problem is that many times it does. Meryll, for example, usually responds well to sarcastic and diplomatic dialogue choices. Rarely, if ever, does she respond well to aggressive ones. [/quote]

Merril responds well to diplomatic choices, sometimes. She responds well to humour, sometimes. But not always. Humour dialogue can get rivarly. You have to think about it. [/quote]

When does choosing an aggressive option ever yield friendship points with her?

[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]Aveline is indeed an example in which the player cannot rely on the tone icons alone. These examples are few and far between, however.[/quote]

And they disprove your BS point. Whether or not the tones always lead to the right result has nothing to do with the fact that they have crucial information for the player. [/quote]

 Because there is one exception does not mean my argument is BS. 

[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]Weskerr wrote...
I'm glad you cited a specific set of dialogue choices from DA:A. Notice
how all the dialogue choices are laid out in no particular order. There
is no top right, middle, or bottom right, so you have no idea how the
Warden would deliver any of the lines - that is, until you start thinking about it. See how the dialogue wheel would cut that thinking part out?[/quote]

There's absolutely no need to think about it. Again, what the hell sort of thinking do you need to do between:

"Miss your little kitty, do you?"
"You had a cat?"

More importantly, Bioware often used that format to hide which questions were investigate questions from you. Are you going to tell me that randomly having the conversation advance is "intelligent", and it requires the player to think about what questions the designers gated to advance the conversation?

[quote]Of course, there are no tone icons either. So far so good. The player
needs to read each line and think about how the line might be delivered
to Anders, and how Anders would react.[/quote]

What the hell? No. Unless the player has a serious mental deficiency, it requires very little thought to figure out how Anders would react. It's a conversation about a cat.

If you need to take the time to think about how Anders will react to a cat, woe be to you when you encounter the dangers of an untied shoelace. [/quote]

What the conversation is about is irrelvant. What's important to getting a succesful response from Anders is knowing Anders himself. "What's Ander's personality type?" and "How important is this cat to him?" are questions a player needs to ask himself.

[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]You've designated the effect each line would have if picked. As you
know, the player has no knowledge of this. He or she still has to
carefully consider which dialogue option to choose. However, put in the
dialogue wheel with the tone icons and careful consideration can take a
back seat.  Now say hello dumbed down dialogue system.[/quote]

It's a conversation about a cat. What is there to think about?
[/quote]

As I said, the subject matter (a cat) is not relevant in this case. What's relevant is how important the cat was to him. 

[esper]

I don't know about Merrill, but I do know that the aggressive response yielded positive reactions from Anders on some occassions. (Mostly when my characther was all: The templars will die and this is war.) I also know that diplomatic yields rivalry with Varric at one point at least. (At the deep road).

I liked the icons. I disliked in da:o, I didn't know the tone of how my character said stuff since the npc's reacted to the tone the writer intented in the text. The tone icons inform me on how my character reacts. I like that, I should have no trouble guessing how my character reacts depending on my choices, how the npc react have nothing to do with the icons. If they make the parafrases better so that all (I have no problem with them, but some do) can guess the meaning from them, then we have a good system. We should know how and what our character says and that should be difficult at all.

The icons or something similary are necessary for that with a voiced protagonist (I would also agrue that they are necessary without a voice, but that is something else).

[Siegdrifa]

Yuqi wrote...

Hopefully it's not as bad empty as the ME3 dialouge wheel.

Fixed

[Naitaka]

If possible I'd love the option to change the paraphrase into the full line when you hover over the choice, that way everyone's happy.

[demont0]

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

[esper]

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

The npc's clearly hear the written tone.

[Naitaka]

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

Depends on how you define the tone of a line. Unless you literally meant the acting of the voice-over then I would certainly think that you CAN give a written line a certain tone. Otherwise, all written dialogue would be without emotion unless the author specficially writes "so and so said sarcasitically".

Modifié par Naitaka, 08 janvier 2013 - 10:58 .

[demont0]

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

The npc's clearly hear the written tone.

Because that's the developer's intent.

Non-spoken lines are subject to interpretation by the individual, and it is up to the individual to now how the npc being talked to, will respond to each choice.

[SilentK]

esper wrote...

I don't know about Merrill, but I do know that the aggressive response yielded positive reactions from Anders on some occassions. (Mostly when my characther was all: The templars will die and this is war.) I also know that diplomatic yields rivalry with Varric at one point at least. (At the deep road).

I liked the icons. I disliked in da:o, I didn't know the tone of how my character said stuff since the npc's reacted to the tone the writer intented in the text. The tone icons inform me on how my character reacts. I like that, I should have no trouble guessing how my character reacts depending on my choices, how the npc react have nothing to do with the icons. If they make the parafrases better so that all (I have no problem with them, but some do) can guess the meaning from them, then we have a good system. We should know how and what our character says and that should be difficult at all.

The icons or something similary are necessary for that with a voiced protagonist (I would also agrue that they are necessary without a voice, but that is something else).

Same experience for me. I much prefer knowing the tone when speaking. For me DA:O was irritating when I didn't know what happened until I saw the reaction on the person that I was speaking to. Very happy that they are keeping the wheel . Hope there will be icons as well.

[esper]

demont0 wrote...

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

The npc's clearly hear the written tone.

Because that's the developer's intent.

Non-spoken lines are subject to interpretation by the individual, and it is up to the individual to now how the npc being talked to, will respond to each choice.

No it is not. If the npcs reacted like I was sarcastic or joking, I would like to know that the line I pick was sarcastic before picking it.

One thing is the npc's misunderstanding my intent. Another thing is my as a player misunderstanding the tone of my characther. Written mediums doesn't convey sarcasm and joking tone well, unlike the spoken medium, but that doesn't mean that the tone doesn't exist or that the npc's doesn't hear the tone in the non-dialog from the warden. It was a massive headache for me in da:o because the others companions were voiced.

[Biotic Sage]

I don't care if it's a wheel or not, but if they keep the "intention symbols" next to each selectable line of dialogue I will be quite happy. My hope is that they create even more intention symbols and and mix up their placement orders to encourage more authentic roleplaying.

[AlexJK]

Biotic Sage wrote...

My hope is that they create even more intention symbols and and mix up their placement orders to encourage more authentic roleplaying.

Why does mixing up the order "encourage more authentic roleplaying"?

[esper]

AlexJK wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

My hope is that they create even more intention symbols and and mix up their placement orders to encourage more authentic roleplaying.

Why does mixing up the order "encourage more authentic roleplaying"?

That one, I don't understand either. Why make it complicated for the sake of making it complicated. I wouldn't mind more intent symbol or perhaps having more of them out at once. (There were six symbols after all)

[demont0]

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

The npc's clearly hear the written tone.

Because that's the developer's intent.

Non-spoken lines are subject to interpretation by the individual, and it is up to the individual to now how the npc being talked to, will respond to each choice.

No it is not. If the npcs reacted like I was sarcastic or joking, I would like to know that the line I pick was sarcastic before picking it.

One thing is the npc's misunderstanding my intent. Another thing is my as a player misunderstanding the tone of my characther. Written mediums doesn't convey sarcasm and joking tone well, unlike the spoken medium, but that doesn't mean that the tone doesn't exist or that the npc's doesn't hear the tone in the non-dialog from the warden. It was a massive headache for me in da:o because the others companions were voiced.

I agree with you, a tone for what is being said needs to be estabished, in a game with a voiced PC and dialogue options anyway.
I'm just pointing outthe fact that DA:O and DA2 has different ways of dealing with dialogue, as a different way of dealing with dialogue is necessary with a voiced PC, mainly because you can't interpret dialogue in your own way anymore, and you need to know how the VA will say the line being said.

[Wulfram]

AlexJK wrote...

Why does mixing up the order "encourage more authentic roleplaying"?

I assume the logic is that it would force the player to put more thought into their choice, rather than just automatically picking the same tone every time.

[AlexJK]

Wulfram wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Why does mixing up the order "encourage more authentic roleplaying"?

I assume the logic is that it would force the player to put more thought into their choice, rather than just automatically picking the same tone every time.

Yes, that's what it seems some people (Biotic Sage and others) are suggesting; I just think it's a bizarre idea and I don't understand why they want it. You wouldn't shuffle the hotbar at the start of each combat encounter to "encourage better tactics", so why shuffle the dialogue options during each conversation?

If the player wants to read and consider each dialogue option before choosing one, then they will do so. If they don't, then they won't (and why should we care if some players just choose aggressive every time?)

The order of the options really does not matter.

Modifié par AlexJK, 08 janvier 2013 - 11:40 .

[esper]

demont0 wrote...

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

esper wrote...

demont0 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
The warden does put tone into those lines. You simply don't hear it. The writers have explicitly said that every line of dialogue in Origins has a specific tone.

That's quite possibly, the most nonsensical thing i have ever heard.

You cant put a tone into a voice, if one doesn't possess a voice >_>. 
That's like making a hand gesture with no hands.

The npc's clearly hear the written tone.

Because that's the developer's intent.

Non-spoken lines are subject to interpretation by the individual, and it is up to the individual to now how the npc being talked to, will respond to each choice.

No it is not. If the npcs reacted like I was sarcastic or joking, I would like to know that the line I pick was sarcastic before picking it.

One thing is the npc's misunderstanding my intent. Another thing is my as a player misunderstanding the tone of my characther. Written mediums doesn't convey sarcasm and joking tone well, unlike the spoken medium, but that doesn't mean that the tone doesn't exist or that the npc's doesn't hear the tone in the non-dialog from the warden. It was a massive headache for me in da:o because the others companions were voiced.

I agree with you, a tone for what is being said needs to be estabished, in a game with a voiced PC and dialogue options anyway.
I'm just pointing outthe fact that DA:O and DA2 has different ways of dealing with dialogue, as a different way of dealing with dialogue is necessary with a voiced PC, mainly because you can't interpret dialogue in your own way anymore, and you need to know how the VA will say the line being said.

You couldn't interprent it your own way in da:o either, because the companions were voiced and I could cleary hear with their reaction with tone my warden had used.

I would have given much for a intent, say our warden said something like:
You could fight darkspawn with it.
i would have given much for an intent so I knew which of these were the ones my warden was saying:
(joke) You can fight darkspawn with it,
(taunt/challenge/I don't know the exact enlighs word here:?) you can fight darkspawn with it.
(serious) You can fight fight darkspawn with it.

[Kidd]

Weskerr wrote...

We're in total agreement when it comes to not putting any uncessary complexity into the dialogue wheel. We should, as players, be safe in thinking that our PC will say something in the way we expect them to say it. This said, I think the tone icons oversimplify the player experience. The writers are holding us by the hands because they don't think we're intelligent enough to figure out how a certain dialogue option should be said by the PC.

If the writing is good and the voice acting is good, then we should know every time how our PC will say something without being led by the hand with tone icons.

We "should" know how our PC will express themselves, yes. But what if we don't? You may feel the icons are superfluous and aren't needed to understand the intent behind the written lines we choose between. In most cases I agree, too. But sure, even if they're superfluous, why shouldn't they be there? You may feel it's obvious. Another player may not.

For instance, in DAO when asking Leliana about her past relationship with Marjolaine, I've always read most of the statements as purely friendly. You're asking a friend about their past, consoling them. What I've understood from Leliana's replies however (and this is where I call ninjamancing) is that my character says a few of these lines in a flirty tone. My character was flirting without me meaning to.

To you, this may have been obvious. To me it wasn't. So by not having the icon, it leads to me doing a reload and you enjoying your game as usual. If there was an icon however, I would be enjoying my game as usual and you would simply have more information than you needed. You knew from the written words that your character would flirt when picking that phrase, so what does it matter if there's an icon that tells you that you indeed read the reply the right way?

By the way, you mentioned the icons aren't required if the writing and voice over was done well enough. The quality of voice acting is irrelevant though, since we only hear the voice over after we've already clicked our reply.

[Biotic Sage]

AlexJK wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Why does mixing up the order "encourage more authentic roleplaying"?

I assume the logic is that it would force the player to put more thought into their choice, rather than just automatically picking the same tone every time.

Yes, that's what it seems some people (Biotic Sage and others) are suggesting; I just think it's a bizarre idea and I don't understand why they want it. You wouldn't shuffle the hotbar at the start of each combat encounter to "encourage better tactics", so why shuffle the dialogue options during each conversation?

If the player wants to read and consider each dialogue option before choosing one, then they will do so. If they don't, then they won't (and why should we care if some players just choose aggressive every time?)

The order of the options really does not matter.

True it doesn't matter that much.  It's not really a big deal either way in terms of the order, I just said it because sometimes it does feel a bit...cheap, shall we say...to decide "I'm gonna play a nice guy!" and then just keep your left thumb glued to the same angle through every dialogue sequence.  I think the priority should definitely go to creating more dialogue choices in general and perhaps more intent icons to choose from as well.  What would be truly amazing (and I know this would never happen) would be to have us select a line of dialogue and THEN select the intent/tone that we want to accompany it, leading to different responses from NPCs.  Of course this would be a nightmare for writing and V/O recording...but a dream come true for me!

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 08 janvier 2013 - 01:11 .

[TheJediSaint]

Biotic Sage wrote...


True it doesn't matter that much.  It's not really a big deal either way in terms of the order, I just said it because sometimes it does feel a bit...cheap, shall we say...to decide "I'm gonna play a nice guy!" and then just keep your left thumb glued to the same angle through every dialogue sequence.  I think the priority should definitely go to creating more dialogue choices in general and perhaps more intent icons to choose from as well.  What would be truly amazing (and I know this would never happen) would be to have us select a line of dialogue and THEN select the intent/tone that we want to accompany it, leading to different responses from NPCs.  Of course this would be a nightmare for writing and V/O recording...but a dream come true for me!

I'd like to point out that tonal choices and moral choices in the Dragon Age 2 were completetly separate.   You could be a total DiploHawk and still go around killing people you don't have to and betraying your friends every chance you got.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 08 janvier 2013 - 02:12 .

[Urzon]

                                                                    ~*Urzon's Choices of Replies*~


: While I am not sure on the matter, there is a high probability that it will make a return. I'm sorry for your lose.

: I'm positive it won't be returning now. After reading this post, and the numerous others, I'm sure Bioware had a change of heart on the matter! Just like they are bringing back the old elf looks, and the Warden!

: NO! Why does everyone keep asking this question? Maker!

Modifié par Urzon, 08 janvier 2013 - 02:10 .

[WazzuMan]

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.

Modifié par WazzuMan, 08 janvier 2013 - 02:29 .

[AsheraII]

I don't mind the dialogue wheel as such. I just feel that:
1) the cheat icons are a bit over the top, and I'd like them removed entirely
2) the short version displayed should better reflect what is actually said. I'd rather see the dialogue wheel take up half the screen but display everything you're going to say, then those short lines that leave too much room for interpretation, and can result in mistakingly picking options totally different from your actual intentions.