41 réponses à ce sujet

[Emzamination]

Contrary to the negativity they received, I found them quite helpful in allowing me to role play a consistent persona, which was neer impossible in origins. I hope they haven't been cut and make a comeback in Da3.

Modifié par Emzamination, 18 janvier 2013 - 12:00 .

[Sylvianus]

That's the thing. To be able to imagine whatever the identity we'd like to. My Hero doesn't need to be always an angrypants because most of my choices are renegade choices. That's just too simple to my tastes.. In my head, my Hawk was simply extremely rational and pragmatic. Otherwise he should have been a good guy, kind to his friends, lovers, and most people as wished. But no, just a jerk to everyone.

Hawk was often unecessarily and automatically adversial with Isabela or anyone else, regardless of my will, while my intent was to be nice with the wheel... Didn't make sense.

As you can see, It didn't help me to roleplay a consistent persona with what I had into my mind. I want to be able to create complex personalities.

So no, I hope they scrap the tone identity since I don't see how it could be improved without seeing the same issue again.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 17 janvier 2013 - 11:39 .

[Emzamination]

Eeeek sorry, I meant tone identity symbols >_<. The symbols themselves were helpful is was I meant.

[xAmilli0n]

This was one of the things I really liked in DA2. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it greatly added to the player's (at least for me) ability to roleplay. So I would like to see both the tone symbols and identify back in DA:I

[Swagger7]

I want them back, just without the associated autodialogue.

[Renmiri1]

Please have sarcastic PC / Goody goody PC and Rude PC back, I loved them all. Sarcastic was my favorite!

[Starfang]

Agreed. The symbols were a great help in choosing between lines that were more or less the same (just with a different tone) or choosing a line when I wasn't quite sure what the actual line was going to be from the summary. At least with the symbols I knew if I clicked line A it was going to be nice/polite response.

[AshenShug4r]

Please give us a neutral option too, maybe?

[Faust1979]

I hope they bring them back

[Fast Jimmy]

I'd rather see the icons without having to hover over it. Having to swing around to each area to read the text and see the respective text made it sometimes a bit of a memorization game when lots of options are present.

Just fires up DA2 for the first time in over a year and this is something that is freshly sticking out in my mind. It's hard to really appreciate times when there are a lot to dialogue choices that are differentiated from Dip/Sarc/Agg when you have to keep track of their respective positions, paraphrase and icon.

[Scarlet Rabbi]

God, I hope not.

[Kenny Da Finn]

I found the tones symbols helpful although it became pretty obvious top was nice/good middle was sarcastic/joking and bottom was aggressive/angry.

[Plaintiff]

They'd damn well better be. The worst thing about DA:O was that I never knew whether or not my character was flirting.

Maybe some people think a silent PC allows them to imagine whatever meaning they want, but the fact is Bioware affixes a specific tone and context to every dialogue line, and I want to know if the line I'm picking is going to be sarcastic or sincere.

[AlanC9]

Plaintiff wrote...

They'd damn well better be. The worst thing about DA:O was that I never knew whether or not my character was flirting.

Maybe some people think a silent PC allows them to imagine whatever meaning they want, but the fact is Bioware affixes a specific tone and context to every dialogue line, and I want to know if the line I'm picking is going to be sarcastic or sincere.

Yep. Apparently they imagine different line readings for the PC's lines and then imagine different mental processes for the NPCs when they hear the lines. Obviously, Bio's characters can only respond to the line readings Bio expected.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The tone icons in DA2 were awful. Because they were not precisely defined, I didn't know what they meant, but they encouraged the writers to rely on them to impart meaning, thus making the paraphrases even less informative.

DA2's tone icons had negative effectiveness. They were literally worse than useless.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

Maybe some people think a silent PC allows them to imagine whatever meaning they want, but the fact is Bioware affixes a specific tone and context to every dialogue line, and I want to know if the line I'm picking is going to be sarcastic or sincere.

Since we cannot perceive that specific tone and context for each dialogue line, whether BioWare affixes one is immaterial.

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Maybe some people think a silent PC allows them to imagine whatever meaning they want, but the fact is Bioware affixes a specific tone and context to every dialogue line, and I want to know if the line I'm picking is going to be sarcastic or sincere.

Since we cannot perceive that specific tone and context for each dialogue line, whether BioWare affixes one is immaterial.

You don't actually perceive what the Warden says, either. What guarantee do you have that the lines shown on screen precisely match the ones he would actually speak, were his voice audible to the audience?

Maybe it's immaterial to you. It's not immaterial to me. DA:O is reading my lines as flirtation/insult/joke/whatever when I did not intend those meanings. There is no ambiguity except in your own mind. The coding of the game does not allow for alternate interpretation. There is one absolute meaning, and I want to know what it is, rather than being forced to guess.

By concealing the tone, and thus the meaning of what I'm about to say, I'm being denied far more information in DA:O than what the paraphrases of DA2 hide. I'd sooner make do with just the tone icons and no text at all, than go back to all text and no tone.

[Fredward]

I actually want the tones back, the pictures were helpful but I didn't need a [dove] to tell me that my Hawke was being nice when he said "Let's make Kirkwall a better place for everyone" at which point I puked a little and never again touched the nice button.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

You don't actually perceive what the Warden says, either. What guarantee do you have that the lines shown on screen precisely match the ones he would actually speak, were his voice audible to the audience?

Because I decide it to be so by executive fiat.  Since that tone is never revealed to us, I can happily continue as if I am correct, without ever being contradicted.

Maybe it's immaterial to you. It's not immaterial to me. DA:O is reading my lines as flirtation/insult/joke/whatever when I did not intend those meanings.

Only if you decide that it is.  Just because Leliana responds exactly the same way to the same line every time doesn't mean that she did so for exactly the same reason.  We don't evn havereason to believe that Leliana is exactly the same person from playthrough to playthrough.

There is no ambiguity except in your own mind. The coding of the game does not allow for alternate interpretation. There is one absolute meaning, and I want to know what it is, rather than being forced to guess.

Only by making that tone explicit are you ever forced to guess.  With a silent protagonist, you get to decide.  That's different from guessing.

By concealing the tone, and thus the meaning of what I'm about to say, I'm being denied far more information in DA:O than what the paraphrases of DA2 hide. I'd sooner make do with just the tone icons and no text at all, than go back to all text and no tone.

The meaning of what you say is contained entirely in the words.  The words are all that matters.

Denotative meaning > Connotative meaning.

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Because I decide it to be so by executive fiat.  Since that tone is never revealed to us, I can happily continue as if I am correct, without ever being contradicted.

How nice for you.

Only if you decide that it is.  Just because Leliana responds exactly the same way to the same line every time doesn't mean that she did so for exactly the same reason.  We don't evn havereason to believe that Leliana is exactly the same person from playthrough to playthrough.

How a character responds is irrelevent to my issue. Leliana could be indifferent or even hostile to flirtation, but that does not change the "flirtation" lines into something else. The game still reads them as flirts. I don't care about Leliana falling in love with me, I care about the game assuming that I wanted a relationship with her, but not telling me it was going to do that.

Only by making that tone explicit are you ever forced to guess.  With a silent protagonist, you get to decide.  That's different from guessing.

The tone is explicit. In the coding. You don't see it, but that doesn't mean it does not exist.

The meaning of what you say is contained entirely in the words.  The words are all that matters.

Denotative meaning > Connotative meaning.

On the contrary. Words without tone have no meaning at all.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 18 janvier 2013 - 07:00 .

[Kidd]

Sylvianus wrote...

That's the thing. To be able to imagine whatever the identity we'd like to. My Hero doesn't need to be always an angrypants because most of my choices are renegade choices. That's just too simple to my tastes.. In my head, my Hawk was simply extremely rational and pragmatic. Otherwise he should have been a good guy, kind to his friends, lovers, and most people as wished. But no, just a jerk to everyone.

My first Hawke had (rough estimate) about 55% of her dialogue options as diplomatic ones, 30% sarcastic and 15% aggressive. Her auto-dialogue stayed diplomatic through the entire game and I was free to joke and be angry as much as I wanted her to be. Nothing wrong with mixing up your replies, that's usually how you have to do it to have a more interesting and three-dimensional personality imho. Don't think I've ever picked anything but the aggressive options during the confrontation in All That Remains for instance.

If you mean that you can't express certain opinions without also resorting to a certain kind of tone, yes you're sadly somewhat stuck with that. I wish that wasn't so, but it's for budget reasons. This applies just as much to ME (what you're describing your character as is much like Shepard as a renegade, no?), only ME ties things together differently. You can't be a racist without the incredibly badass and snarky remarks for instance, and you can't be an arse socially if you want to endanger a mission for the life of an innocent. DA has similar limitations, they're just different.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

How a character responds is irrelevent to my issue. Leliana could be indifferent or even hostile to flirtation, but that does not change the "flirtation" lines into something else. The game still reads them as flirts.

Which can't possibly matter from an in-character perspective.  That's metagame knowledge.

I don't care about Leliana falling in love with me, I care about the game assuming that I wanted a relationship with her, but not telling me it was going to do that.

Unless the game forces your character to act based on that assumption, who cares?  And if it does force your character to act based on something you didn't explicitly select, that's a huge problem, yes, but we needn't break the dialogue system to make it better.

You're fixing the wrong feature.

The tone is explicit. In the coding. You don't see it, but that doesn't mean it does not exist.

If it makes no material difference, it doesn't matter whether it exists.  There's no consequence that demonstrably flows from that designation.

On the contrary. Words without tone have no meaning at all.

Dictionaries beg to differ.

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvianus wrote...
That's the thing. To be able to imagine whatever the identity we'd like to. My Hero doesn't need to be always an angrypants because most of my choices are renegade choices. That's just too simple to my tastes.. In my head, my Hawk was simply extremely rational and pragmatic. Otherwise he should have been a good guy, kind to his friends, lovers, and most people as wished. But no, just a jerk to everyone.

My first Hawke had (rough estimate) about 55% of her dialogue options as diplomatic ones, 30% sarcastic and 15% aggressive. Her auto-dialogue stayed diplomatic through the entire game and I was free to joke and be angry as much as I wanted her to be. Nothing wrong with mixing up your replies, that's usually how you have to do it to have a more interesting and three-dimensional personality imho. Don't think I've ever picked anything but the aggressive options during the confrontation in All That Remains for instance.
If you mean that you can't express certain opinions without also resorting to a certain kind of tone, yes you're sadly somewhat stuck with that. I wish that wasn't so, but it's for budget reasons. This applies just as much to ME (what you're describing your character as is much like Shepard as a renegade, no?), only ME ties things together differently. You can't be a racist without the incredibly badass and snarky remarks for instance, and you can't be an arse socially if you want to endanger a mission for the life of an innocent. DA has similar limitations, they're just different.

I'd take a wager you played as a FemHawke.

Just another recent observation I had - Aggressive femHawke is much realistic. Well, realistic in the sense that choosing an aggressive option and hearing a response in that tone didn't sound like someone with a psychosis. It actually sounded like someone talking, but with just a hint of menace and barb in their tone, not full on psychotic yelling.

To date, I'd only player a female sarcastic Hawke. I had no idea that most of my problems with the dominant tone were more tied to the male voice actor for Hawke being insanely over the top.

Still, the fact that I cannot be aggressive to a faction I don't support (Templars) and diplomatic to one I do (Mages) and then just joking with my family without the game flip flopping constantly between what it views not as an appropriate response to whom I'm talking to, but how many times I've used that tone, Is inherently a little skewed.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 18 janvier 2013 - 11:29 .

[Noviere]

I'd prefer if the tone icons were used in some way, but that the whole "3 tones" idea wasn't used for every conversation. In hindsight, it feels restrictive, because your tone often determined your action/opinion. I'd rather have general dialogue options, with the occasional "extreme" choice which requires a tonal distinction.

Does that make sense to anyone?

Modifié par Noviere, 18 janvier 2013 - 11:42 .