208 réponses à ce sujet

[NM_Che56]

Wheel...scrolling...I don't care. The wheel doesn't necessarily limit the options, since you can always have a "click here for more" spoke.

They did say that they were going to make it so that the consequences of your selection are clearer and describe more of "what happens next".

[Paul E Dangerously]

The funny thing about the heart icon is that people were 'accidentally' doing things like tripping Zevran's romance, and wanted to prevent that. Therefore, heart icon. Then, Bioware goes and makes that pointless by having characters like Anders (in name only) just humping your leg from the get-go, and being forced to take a penalty to avoid the romance option. Whoops.

[Ziggeh]

Ieldra2 wrote...

This echoes what I said earlier: the wheel works well for those who don't care about the details of what their character says, as long as it's something a generic good guy bad guy) would possibly say. I don't mind such a style of playing is possible, but it shouldn't make playing more nuanced characters such a trial.

This might be a semantic point, but while this doesn't make your statement entirely untrue (it would work for such people), you appear, perhaps unintentionally to be implying that if the wheel works for you, you don't care and/or cannot have a complex character.

I find that incorporating the occasionally surprising results of the paraphrase system into a character makes them remarkably nuanced. Far from breaking my characters, such events add complexity, define and redefine who I believe them to be. 

It's not inherently a problem if my results are incongruous, but I certainly care.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 05 septembre 2013 - 03:50 .

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote..

There is a lot of truth here. One could easily use the dialogue wheel to "Investigate, investigate, Investiagte, Paragon/Diplomatic option" and not put any thought whatsoever to what their character was saying. While it makes the interface easier to use, it also can make the choice in dialogue nearly mindless.

You mean like how people pressed "1" for the lightside options in KoTOR and then exploded in rage when for one significant choice Bioware inverted the LS and DS options? 

Because that happened almost a decade ago, and it was a sight to behold. 

[In Exile]

Ieldra2 wrote...
This echoes what I said earlier: the wheel works well for those who don't care about the details of what their character says, as long as it's something a generic good guy bad guy) would possibly say. I don't mind such a style of playing is possible, but it shouldn't make playing more nuanced characters such a trial.

You can't make characters that are nuanced in an RPG. The pre-written dialogue forbids it. The best example being how - for however long there have been Bioware games - it is impossible to do a good deed and say that it was for a selfish purpose, especially to selfish characters (like Morrigan) who object that you are doing it. 

Edit: The one comical exception to that is in DA2 of all things, when in a rivalry conversation Isabella can ask you why you constantly save people and you can say that it gives you power/standing. 

Modifié par In Exile, 05 septembre 2013 - 03:55 .

[Jamie9]

Ziggeh wrote...
I find that incorporating the occasionally surprising results of the paraphrase system into a character makes them remarkably nuanced. Far from breaking my characters, such events add complexity, define and redefine who I believe them to be. 

Yeah, paraphrasing allows you to roleplay and control your character, but also gives them a little life of their own.

It's safe to say that paraphrasing is not objectively bad. Not many things are when you're talking about video game design.

[d4eaming]

Ieldra2 wrote...

d4eaming wrote...
When my character finds out about Alistair being a half-blooded prince, I picked the option "so you're a royal bastard?" expecting it to be insulting- Alistair sort of giggled and smiled "haha yeah, yeah, I guess you could say that!" and says something about using that line later.

The actual line was "So you're not just a bastard but a royal bastard". I think the joke is clear in that.

Maybe it is to you, but it wasn't to me. It could have easily been said in a snide voice that, while the phrase itself could be taken as a joke, the tone it was presented in could actually be scathing.

I work with people who say things like this. They will say something that, if it were written on paper would look very neutral or even positive, but the tone and inflection they actually use comes across as demeaning and sarcastic.

So no, it's not clear, not at all.

[Ziggeh]

Jamie9 wrote...
Yeah, paraphrasing allows you to roleplay and control your character, but also gives them a little life of their own.

Oh no, I find it the opposite. It allows them to act in a manner I may not have considered. I then incorporate this manner into who they are and into future decisions. It allows them to develop and have character arcs. There is interaction between myself and the authors. I find the process fascinating. 

[Jamie9]

Ziggeh wrote...
Oh no, I find it the opposite. It allows them to act in a manner I may not have considered. I then incorporate this manner into who they are and into future decisions. It allows them to develop and have character arcs. There is interaction between myself and the authors. I find the process fascinating. 

That's a pretty cool way of doing things actually. It always interests me to see people make choices in video games in completely different ways.

It's a strength of the medium that no other has.

In terms of interaction between the player and the author, I love it when a game can convince you to change your mind or opinion on something through it's development.

[d4eaming]

Ieldra2 wrote...

This echoes what I said earlier: the wheel works well for those who don't care about the details of what their character says, as long as it's something a generic good guy bad guy) would possibly say. I don't mind such a style of playing is possible, but it shouldn't make playing more nuanced characters such a trial.

Ok, so basically what I am getting out of this conversation is that you...

1.) think people who enjoy the wheel don't care about their characters
2.) want a quick visual so they can slam a response with no thought (for reasons in number 1)
3.) don't know how, or care, to create a unique character (after all, we just want to slam a response per number 2, for reasons number 1)
4.) and, assuming numbers 1 thru 3 are true, we are not roleplaying correctly (but you, with your ambiguous list with obfuscated tone and intent, are)
5.) so therefore, the wheel should be taken away from the people who prefer it, in preference for how you like to do things.

How about, "no"?

I can create a "nuanced" character, as best as Bioware's dialogue options will allow me, just as well as you can. And at least I will be able to clearly choose the tone I want to convey my character's feelings and responses without all this "but people misunderstand in real life!" bollocks. A single line can be spoken both sweetly and scathingly, using the exact same phrase, and make it abundantly clear the intention behind it, so that the other person/NPC can react accordingly.

If the NPC does, in fact, misunderstand, BW has done a good job of actually showing that fact. That isn't possible with a toneless list such as in DAO, because I don't have the option to make the same basic statement in a different tone, thus effecting how the NPC takes it and reacts.

[Ieldra]

Ziggeh wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...
Yeah, paraphrasing allows you to roleplay and control your character, but also gives them a little life of their own.

Oh no, I find it the opposite. It allows them to act in a manner I may not have considered. I then incorporate this manner into who they are and into future decisions. It allows them to develop and have character arcs. There is interaction between myself and the authors. I find the process fascinating. 

I can see that there might be some value in that, adding the writer's imagination to mine to create a more complete character. Problems start when your character says something that goes against your vision of them. This mostly pertains to matters of philosophy and morality. The obvious solution - don't let characters say anything of the kind - makes characters more bland, which is also undesirable..

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 septembre 2013 - 04:18 .

[Ieldra]

@d4eaming:
There are two aspects to this: the wheel mechanic itself and the paraphrasing. I have already conceded the point about the former, but I maintain that paraphrasing causes more problems than it solves and that it does indeed make playing a nuanced character much more difficult.

[d4eaming]

Ziggeh wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...
Yeah, paraphrasing allows you to roleplay and control your character, but also gives them a little life of their own.

Oh no, I find it the opposite. It allows them to act in a manner I may not have considered. I then incorporate this manner into who they are and into future decisions. It allows them to develop and have character arcs. There is interaction between myself and the authors. I find the process fascinating. 

I actually love this, too. I am building my own character, but I am also exploring the minds of the BW writers. I've never felt like my Hawke or my Shepard weren't my own, and it's felt like an evolution of the character as I explore more dialogue content (save for Shepard's Thessia issues, that did annoy me quite a bit, but that is one small complaint in an otherwise excellent game).

[Neon Rising Winter]

Ooh I like that description of it as an interaction. There's no way the character is entirely mine, their background, life history, potential interactions are all defined by the writer. The fun of it is, within those parameters, getting to know the character and putting your own twist on it. One of the things I enjoy with the more traditional tabletop roleplaying is that collaborative element, rather than just sitting down defining everything yourself, you bounce ideas off other people.

[Palidane]

Ieldra, I've been following this thread so far, but I'm not really understanding you're perspective. Could I get some more context for your earlier example with Isabela and the Tome? Why was it so out of character for your Hawke to say she did the right thing?

[Ziggeh]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I can see that there might be some value in that, adding the writer's imagination to mine to create a more complete character. Problems start when your character says something that goes against your vision of them. This mostly pertains to matters of philosophy and morality. The obvious solution - don't let characters say anything of the kind - makes characters more bland, which is also undesirable..

I don't assume I know everything about them, and allow for the possibility that they may have changed, or that they may be having a bad day. If they say something that is counter to my vision of them, I change my vision. It's an additive process that generally results in a fair amount of depth.

I have had characters say or act in contradictory manners, in which case I get to choose whether they were doing or saying one set for a reason or effect, or to just brace for the dissonance. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

thats1evildude wrote...

Your mileage may vary on how "intuitive" the list was. I found it to be about the same between both games, but by isolating the 'investigate' options, there was less chance of accidentally advancing the conversation.

Whereas I didn't find that helpful at all, because I needed to break character in order to be aware of that risk in the first place.

From an in-character perspective, isn't all conversation advacement accidental?

But the biggest reason for going to the wheel was so that icons reflecting the tone of dialogue options could be better displayed.

That's obviously false, as the first game with a wheel (ME) didn't have tone icons.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

You can't make characters that are nuanced in an RPG. The pre-written dialogue forbids it. The best example being how - for however long there have been Bioware games - it is impossible to do a good deed and say that it was for a selfish purpose, especially to selfish characters (like Morrigan) who object that you are doing it.

But you can still do good deeds for selfish reasons.  And with the full dialogue text we generally had the opportunity to evade those questions.

With the paraphrase, we cannot evade, because we don't know what we're going to say.

Evasion requires precision, and the paraphrases deny us that.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 05 septembre 2013 - 04:43 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ziggeh wrote...

I don't assume I know everything about them, and allow for the possibility that they may have changed, or that they may be having a bad day.

How do you make their choices, then?  If you don't know everything about them, on what basis do you choose one option over another?

[leaguer of one]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

Your mileage may vary on how "intuitive" the list was. I found it to be about the same between both games, but by isolating the 'investigate' options, there was less chance of accidentally advancing the conversation.

Whereas I didn't find that helpful at all, because I needed to break character in order to be aware of that risk in the first place.

From an in-character perspective, isn't all conversation advacement accidental?

But the biggest reason for going to the wheel was so that icons reflecting the tone of dialogue options could be better displayed.

That's obviously false, as the first game with a wheel (ME) didn't have tone icons.

1.Did you just missthe fact here that it helps you roleplay batter by not let have to worry about accidentally ending the conversation?
2. He's talking about the additions to the wheel for DA2.

[ThatGamerWithSouvlaki285]

d4eaming wrote...

When my character finds out about Alistair being a half-blooded prince, I picked the option "so you're a royal bastard?" expecting it to be insulting- Alistair sort of giggled and smiled "haha yeah, yeah, I guess you could say that!" and says something about using that line later.

So, dialogue wheel haters- poof, there, my character just did something out of his nature because there was absolutely no way, whatsoever, to infer it was a joke and not an insult. At least if the line had been purple, I'd have known in advance what to expect.

Also, I despise it when people say "well they just misunderstood you, people do that in real life all the time!" Everyone does? Every time I open my mouth, all of my acquaintances and friends misunderstand every last thing I say? ...no. That's stupid.

I dont think it so much there misuderstanding of the statement, more the difference of how one want to inturpet that line. The same why as swearing at friend whould get a different respond to swearing at an older idividual like a parent despite the tone. myself if the statement was said to me, as it was made in a form of a question which indicate the person ones a furher understanding of the situation i would have taken it similarly to alistair. If the statement was said "So you are a royal bastard." of course my response would be less positive.
To the matters of the whole the dialogue wheel or text list is purely  just a matter of asthetics and doesnt change at all the dialogue or the amount there of. Either way there will be a difficulty in interpretation because we are limited by the fact it is a game and there is only a limited and predifined way of doing things which will not always match what you intent. In my opinion i dont mind either,

[Neon Rising Winter]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In Exile wrote...

You can't make characters that are nuanced in an RPG. The pre-written dialogue forbids it. The best example being how - for however long there have been Bioware games - it is impossible to do a good deed and say that it was for a selfish purpose, especially to selfish characters (like Morrigan) who object that you are doing it.

But you can still do good deeds for selfish reasons.  And with the full dialogue text we generally had the opportunity to evade those questions.

With the paraphrase, we cannot evade, because we don't know what we're going to say.

Evasion requires precision, and the paraphrases deny us that.

From my reading of this, you're using a lack of precision in the tone of the full text dialogue to give you the freedom of multiple interpretations. And because the paraphrases don't let you see the text in advance this becomes a lot more difficult. But given that, whether paraphrased or full text, that dialogue is now going to be spoken, and the tone of that delivery will likely provide interpretation of the intent behind the line, will you not run into the same problem either way?

Modifié par Narrow Margin, 05 septembre 2013 - 04:57 .

[macrocarl]

I've played on both PC and a console and the biggest advantage of the wheel is the icons and how the text information is displayed. While you could do that as a list too obviously, BW has said that the wheel is the way they are going to continue to use. Since it can be done both ways I would say they are trying to brand it as the Biowheel

[Gewehr_fr]

Plaintiff wrote...

and having the wheel at the center of the screen necessitates the paraphrasing, which means a huge loss in player agency.

And not knowing the intended tone of a line of dialogue isn't a huge loss in agency? Frankly, I think knowing whether or not my character is being sarcastic or sincere is way more important than merely knowing the specific combination of words that he uses to communicate that feeling.

Well here's the core of the problem. 

For me knowing the exact words being used is much more important than being told the intent. Reading the line was always enough to know if I was being sarcastic or not in my case. It isn't a loss of agency in the slightest. And if the person in front of the player didn't react accordingly it means he/she missed the joke/sarcasm/whatever, which happens quite often in real life.

I don't mind the wheel either way - and I know the writers love it - but I still believe the lines of dialogues, preferably but not necessarily along with a silent protagonist is the best way to deal with dialog in a RPG.

[BraveVesperia]

People keep strangely saying that the wheel has something to do with it being 'easier for console players'.

Not sure how many of the people saying this have used a controller, but they have these analogue sticks that allow you to scroll up and down a list. It's really quite easy and no more complicated than selecting on a dialogue wheel. You scroll up the list, you scroll down the list, you press 'a'/'x' on your selection.