Aller au contenu

Photo

Dragon Age: Inquisition dialogue system, exploration details come out of PAX Australia panel


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
130 réponses à ce sujet

#1
ViSeiRa

ViSeiRa
  • Members
  • 2 396 messages
According to the article posted at VG24/7:

Dragon Age: Inquisition will contain a revamped dialogue system, according to a BioWare panel at PAX Australia, and the change up is thanks to suggestions made by players of the previous entries in the series.

According to the panel notes takes on the BioWare forums and spotted by NeoGAF, players felt the prior games contained too many “simplistic binary choices,” and while the detailes are still being sorted, a better conversational flow seems to be the way it’s going.

The flow will tie into your character statistics and companions and may become more dramatic based on previous choices.

BioWare is also looking to fix variances between text and character stated options.

Inquisition, as noted previously, will also contain more exploration options, more landscapes, and new enemies such as a formidable demon and Nightmare – a skeleton type enemy.


And apparently all that news and more were posted here first by ElitePinecone in the Twitter thread, here's the original post:

Stop press: just heard that Gamespot AU recorded the entire panel, it'llbe uploaded most likely tomorrow Australia time (so 12-24 hours from now). I'll link to it if I can, but somebody else will probably find it first. 

Bioware panel - PAX Australia
First of all, everyone from Bioware was incredibly nice and enthusiastic, and Patrick Weekes is genuinely hilarious. They couldn't say much about DAI *at all*, and so the response to almost every question was "we can't
talk about that yet". Cameron had a presentation prepared but most of the session was Q&A. 

I wasn't able to copy exactly what people said in many cases, so don't overanalyse the language I'm using here - I got pretty much everything related to Dragon Age down on paper, but it's not exactly using the words that the Bioware staff used. 

- The E3 trailer was made by approximately 30 people and took 5-6 weeks - they deliberately included certain scenes and characters because they wanted to get a few messages across to the fans.  

- The DAI artwork of the Inquisitor reaching for a helmet (and wearing rings) is more about a representation of the player being immersed into the game, and that it's *our* story. This was a theme that they constantly repeated, they want DA Inquisition to feel like "our" story. Cameron said people had wondered a lot about who the helmet figure was, and what the rings were for - he never really explained either of them, though. 

- They want to emphasise "an epic story and a world in chaos". A bigger, broader story like Origins. Cameron pointed to a few of the new creatures in the trailer: one is a new type of demon, the crystal/rock monster thing has a giant club to use in combat, and the thin, skeletal one is called a "Nightmare". At the same time as a demon invasion is happening from a breach in the Veil, chaos also engulfs human nations and factions as they go to war with each other. The story is a long one (that sounds obvious but it was part of a larger sentence and I forget
the second part). 

- Another section of the E3 trailer was intended to represent "decisions that matter". The scene with Varric and
the dead bodies actually occurs in the game - a village is destroyed and its people wiped out because of actions that the Inquisitor did, or failed to do. They want consequences for our choices to ripple through
the game. 

- Old news, but the player leads the Inquisition - and the Inquisition is not part of the Chantry. 

- The map scene with Cassandra from the trailer was the Inquisition plotting and planning an attack, with various people gathered around the table, plotting. 

- Cameron showed a screenshot from the E3 trailer of the environment/fortress where lightning strikes (the one
dotted with statues, I don't have a picture) and said this place appeared normal but strange things happened there. This location has been something they've been working on for the last few months. 

- Three new pieces of concept art (I don't have pictures, but people were taking them):     

       - A desert scene, Cameron mentioned it had oases, with a door and some kind of symbol above it.      
       - A swamp landscape, "hidden ruins"     
       - A really interesting shot of a qunari sitting/lying in a sandy/arid location, next to a large-ish reptilian animal      (someone said "dragon" but it didn't look like it?) that had *qunari-shaped horns*. Cameron made the connection between the qunari's horns and the animal's, which were exactly the same shape and type. 

- Again, they're aiming for a mix between the tactical combat of Origins and the "fluidity" of DA2.

- Patrick Weekes seemed to imply that the tensions or conflict between Empress Celene and Grand Duke Gaspard will be a significant plot point in DAI. The reason he's writing The Masked Empire is that (to paraphrase) they wanted to give more background about internal Orlesian politics and the characters of Celene and Gaspard, and a novel was the appropriate narrative method to do it justice in terms of length, etc. 

- Karin Weekes said dealing with the writers was occasionally like, I quote, "herding rabid cats"

- Lots of exploration, they mentioned Bioware's history of exploration inprevious games and said it was a theme they were returning to.          
 
- The player can explore maps and find new things, including (I have it quoted as, by Cameron) "small dungeons or big dungeons". 

- DAI has a diverse range of environments. Patrick said (like Mike has said at other events) there won't be the same cave repeated seventeen times, etc. The team went through and listed some, as well as showing
all the concept art we've seen so far (including the new ones they showed at PAX Aus).       
           
- Desert, swamps, mountains, grasslands, ruins, snowy locations - possibly some more but I didn't catch them. 

- On save-files, they can't reveal anything yet but decisions will carry across. 

- They're not going to scrap "Bioware-style choices", and there was an interesting discussion of persuasion options (Patrick said Mass Effect arguably became 'pick the glowing blue/red option to win'). They want to
have *some* other influence on dialogue and choice outcomes, whether that be stats-based, or having certain options require having a particular companion present, or having dialogue or choices dependent on other things said earlier in the conversation.

- Patrick said the best choices are the ones that get people genuinely thinking and debating the one they chose. He wants to write them so that each choice looks "right", depending on the player's worldview or philosophy - not
just "save the baby or save the warlock", which are absurdly obvious binary good/evil choices. 

- Patrick, Cameron and Chris (I think Chris was involved) talked about the proposal of using random numbers in
determining the outcome of dialogue options or choices, and said they've basically rejected doing this. Players like seeing the consequences of their choices, and seeing a cause -> effect relationship, and introducing an element of randomness to choices/dialogue could be seen as unfairly punishing them. Also, players would reload if they "randomly" got a "bad" outcome, or something they didn't want, and anything that forces the player to constantly reload their saves isn't very fun gameplay. 

- On dialogue:       

    - Patrick Weekes was talking about the reaction to Hawke and the way dialogue in DA2 was affected by previous things the player had said in the conversation. He said some players found this confusing and that
they were looking at it for DAI.        

      - Patrick also said (unprompted) that they're aware of the backlash against ME3's 'autodialogue'       
 
      - People were also occasionally frustrated by dialogue paraphrases in DA2 (where the dialogue option they picked didn't really sound like what Hawke actually said), Patrick and Karin Weekes had an interesting
and entertaining conversation about the difficulty of paraphrasing. It's an issue that they're kept in mind when developing DAI.

- Finally, they said more information is coming, eventually. They're asking us to be patient, but with an extra year of development the panel really seemed to be positive about DAI's potential. 


Also, one of the new artwork pieces shown at the panel, captured by HD3 at the Dragon Age Wiki.

Image IPB

What do you think guys?

Modifié par ViSeirA, 19 juillet 2013 - 06:38 .


#2
Heimdall

Heimdall
  • Members
  • 13 240 messages
I think I want to know more

#3
Catroi

Catroi
  • Members
  • 1 992 messages
I trust Weekes, he's a very good writer and the big boss behind the awesome tuchanka plot-arch of ME3

#4
Heimdall

Heimdall
  • Members
  • 13 240 messages

Catroi wrote...

I trust Weekes, he's a very good writer and the big boss behind the awesome tuchanka plot-arch of ME3

Rannoch too if I'm not mistaken.

#5
Guest_Guest12345_*

Guest_Guest12345_*
  • Guests
I just finished reading this, I have to say, thank god. The binary morality of Mass Effect was one of the worst aspects of that game series. Dragon Age has always been a bit better in terms of moral ambiguity, but I am glad to hear they are focusing on this.

#6
Mr Cloud

Mr Cloud
  • Members
  • 539 messages
For now, their promises sure are tempting, but they're only promises (yes, I'm reffering to ME3).
I'm waiting for at least gameplay examples.

Another section of the E3 trailer was intended to represent "decisions that matter".


It's kinda foolish to mentions such a touchy topic after what happened to ME3.
 

They want to emphasise "an epic story and a world in chaos". A bigger, broader story like Origins.


It'll be hard to achieve, as DA:O was in development for 7 years or so. Stories amidst BW games are usually good, so rather no worries here.

As of now everything sounds promising. I need to read into it a bit more though.

Modifié par Mr Cloud, 19 juillet 2013 - 03:57 .


#7
frostajulie

frostajulie
  • Members
  • 2 083 messages
I love that they are being tight lipped about everything. Better to keep us in suspense then to overhype the game and make statements that would later look like lies. This way when the actual game comes out everyone can be happy because no one was ever misled intentionally or otherwise.

#8
garrusfan1

garrusfan1
  • Members
  • 8 079 messages
also they confirmed the save imports which rocks

#9
Felya87

Felya87
  • Members
  • 2 960 messages
so..."the player leads the Inquisition - and the Inquisition is not part of the Chantry."

so, no real motivation to have a forced human protagonist. AGAIN.

Hawke 2.0 is coming.

#10
Star fury

Star fury
  • Members
  • 6 412 messages
Sounds promising. Devs look to get inspiration from older games, that's really reassuring. But since DA2 & ME3 & Tortanic I have very low expectations for Bioware

#11
The Elder King

The Elder King
  • Members
  • 19 631 messages

Felya87 wrote...

so..."the player leads the Inquisition - and the Inquisition is not part of the Chantry."

so, no real motivation to have a forced human protagonist. AGAIN.

Hawke 2.0 is coming.


Since the problem with Hawke was caused by the dialogues, and not strictly his 'humanity', I don't see the relationship with the Inquisition (which we know months ago that it wouldn't be tied with the Chantry. Though se don't know yet who formed the Inquisition). Or do you believe that Hawke would've been fine with the race choice?
Beside, I don't remember that for DAI they said that the plot demands a human PC.

#12
Felya87

Felya87
  • Members
  • 2 960 messages

hhh89 wrote...

Felya87 wrote...

so..."the player leads the Inquisition - and the Inquisition is not part of the Chantry."

so, no real motivation to have a forced human protagonist. AGAIN.

Hawke 2.0 is coming.


Since the problem with Hawke was caused by the dialogues, and not strictly his 'humanity', I don't see the relationship with the Inquisition (which we know months ago that it wouldn't be tied with the Chantry. Though se don't know yet who formed the Inquisition). Or do you believe that Hawke would've been fine with the race choice?
Beside, I don't remember that for DAI they said that the plot demands a human PC.


one of the first things confirmed was the human protagonist, but most people said it was beacuse "of course, the Inquisition derive by the Chantry, is logical there is no elf/dwarf protagonist".
and I don't know here on BSN, but in most of the forums I usually visit (non english) the lack of races was a big handicap in liking Hawke. even more than the dialogues, since the human races feel too much "canonical" and too banal.

#13
azarhal

azarhal
  • Members
  • 4 458 messages
Seems like ElitePinecone wasn't the only one that took notes at the panel. HD3 on the dragonage.wikia made a blog on it.

#14
Jaison1986

Jaison1986
  • Members
  • 3 319 messages
I like how they mention how many choices will depend more then just how diplomatic or agressive you are, but certain choices might only be avaliable depending if you brought a certain companion or what you did in previous quests. Similar to the outcomes of the Tunchaka and Rannoch arc, that heavily depends on the player actions during the previous games.

#15
wright1978

wright1978
  • Members
  • 8 116 messages

- Another section of the E3 trailer was intended to represent "decisions that matter". The scene with Varric and
the dead bodies actually occurs in the game - a village is destroyed and its people wiped out because of actions that the Inquisitor did, or failed to do. They want consequences for our choices to ripple through
the game. 


- On save-files, they can't reveal anything yet but decisions will carry across. 

- They're not going to scrap "Bioware-style choices", and there was an interesting discussion of persuasion options (Patrick said Mass Effect arguably became 'pick the glowing blue/red option to win'). They want to
have *some* other influence on dialogue and choice outcomes
, whether that be stats-based, or having certain options require having a particular companion present, or having dialogue or choices dependent on other things said earlier in the conversation.

- Patrick said the best choices are the ones that get people genuinely thinking and debating the one they chose. He wants to write them so that each choice looks "right", depending on the player's worldview or philosophy - not
just "save the baby or save the warlock", which are absurdly obvious binary good/evil choices. 


- On dialogue:       

    - Patrick Weekes was talking about the reaction to Hawke and the way dialogue in DA2 was affected by previous things the player had said in the conversation. He said some players found this confusing and that
they were looking at it for DAI.        

      - Patrick also said (unprompted) that they're aware of the backlash against ME3's 'autodialogue'   
   
 
    


I have to say all these things really have my excitement building(i'll have to check it somewhat till i see some gameplay). Really happy that about the awareness of the ME3 autodialogue problem & at the news that they hope to implement choices that really get people thinking & that we may see the consequences of some of the choices rippling through the game.

#16
The Elder King

The Elder King
  • Members
  • 19 631 messages

Felya87 wrote...
one of the first things confirmed was the human protagonist, but most people said it was beacuse "of course, the Inquisition derive by the Chantry, is logical there is no elf/dwarf protagonist".
and I don't know here on BSN, but in most of the forums I usually visit (non english) the lack of races was a big handicap in liking Hawke. even more than the dialogues, since the human races feel too much "canonical" and too banal.


At first, yes. But some months ago Gaider said in a thread that the player wouldn't be forced on expressing an Andrastian view and joining or being under Chantry. Considering that we knew that the player was a member of the Inquisition, it's logical that the Inquisition couldn't be' part of the Chantry. Though this doesn't mean that it'll not be a human-founded organization.
About races, people can have different reasons to not like Hakwe, true. From your post, I was assuming that your 'Hawke 2.0' was referred to how Hawke acted in-game and the lack of race option, not only the latter (since we already know the human-only PC feature, so it's obvious that in this matter, we'd get an 'Hawke 2.0'); in the former case, the PC could be a lot different from Hawke, based on a lot of reasons (better dialogue system, a deeper role in the game of backgrounds, classes and specializations), so it's early to say if the PC will be as Hakwe.

#17
addiction21

addiction21
  • Members
  • 6 066 messages

Felya87 wrote...


one of the first things confirmed was the human protagonist, but most people said it was beacuse "of course, the Inquisition derive by the Chantry, is logical there is no elf/dwarf protagonist".
and I don't know here on BSN, but in most of the forums I usually visit (non english) the lack of races was a big handicap in liking Hawke. even more than the dialogues, since the human races feel too much "canonical" and too banal.


Which I find a load of crap since the problems with Hawke and DA2 would still be there if he/she were an elf or dwarf.

#18
The Elder King

The Elder King
  • Members
  • 19 631 messages

addiction21 wrote...



Which I find a load of crap since the problems with Hawke and DA2 would still be there if he/she were an elf or dwarf.

 
 
I agree, though people have different opinions. Someone could be fine or like the DA2 system, and have problems only with the lack of race options.

Modifié par hhh89, 19 juillet 2013 - 05:02 .


#19
addiction21

addiction21
  • Members
  • 6 066 messages

hhh89 wrote...

 
I agree, though people have different opinions. Someone could be fine or like the DA2 system, and have problems only with the lack of race options.


I understand there are different opinions and I do understand many are disappointed in a Human only protag again. So am I, but it wouldn't change those problems of DA2 if Hawke was a Elf or Dwarf.

Anyway the notes about what was said look interesting but I will continue to wait for more concrete information.

#20
Guest_Raga_*

Guest_Raga_*
  • Guests

ViSeirA wrote...
Patrick also said (unprompted) that they're aware of the backlash against ME3's 'autodialogue'       


:o  Assuming "awareness" translate into "we recognize autodialog sucks and are trying to fix it."

#21
schalafi

schalafi
  • Members
  • 1 167 messages
http://www.vg247.com...-australia-pane

A few new screenshots, and some more info.

Modifié par schalafi, 19 juillet 2013 - 05:41 .


#22
FenrirBlackDragon

FenrirBlackDragon
  • Members
  • 364 messages
Finally! Some news! Sort of... At least an update of sorts. Well, This information has me really excited about how the dialogue system is going to work. I am wondering if there is any more about a 'reaction' wheel or some choice as to how our character acts emotionally towards things, not just what they say.

#23
Plaintiff

Plaintiff
  • Members
  • 6 998 messages

Felya87 wrote...

so..."the player leads the Inquisition - and the Inquisition is not part of the Chantry."

so, no real motivation to have a forced human protagonist. AGAIN.

Hawke 2.0 is coming.

The Inquisition could still very easily be a racist organization, and even if it wasn't, it's not likely that the leaders of Thedas would give a crap about what some elf had to say.

#24
Aolbain

Aolbain
  • Members
  • 1 206 messages

Star fury wrote...

Sounds promising. Devs look to get inspiration from older games, that's really reassuring. But since DA2 & ME3 & Tortanic I have very low expectations for Bioware


Tortanic?


Edit: Wait, I figured it out. 

Modifié par Aolbain, 19 juillet 2013 - 06:36 .


#25
ViSeiRa

ViSeiRa
  • Members
  • 2 396 messages
Image IPB

That's the only captured photo of the artwork showed at the panel so far, it was posted by HD3 at the Dragon Age Wiki, I'll be on the hunt for the rest... probably appear first at NeoGAF :P