208 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

MerinTB wrote...

In real life verbal conversations, do you often find yourself either confused or seeking clarification on what people mean?

I'm confused at how other people interpret what I say.  I don't have any trouble interpreting them.

[SNascimento]

I will only say I'm glad they're keeping the dialogue wheel for DAI.

[Ziggeh]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But it would destroy any of BioWare's beloved flow, as I would need to take time every line to work out exactly what that spoken line meant for my character's current state of mind, and then interpret the NPC response (which has already happened, so I will have to have committed it to memory) from that new perspective.

Most of it happens intuitively, I guess because it's essentially what I've always done with rpgs, not coming from table top experience.

I would also say that a reasonable amount happens away from the game. Something comes up that strikes me as odd, being overly nice or aggressive, and I'll either stop or carry on without a solid understanding until I've done for that day. Either temporarily ignoring that element, or making choices in the vein without a strong understanding, using some vague reason, such as a particular dislike for unknown reasons, and fill in that reasoning afterwards (usually on my way to and from work), which will then inform all future choices.

But there have definitely been points at which I've stopped during dialogue to consider the impact of new information.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 05 septembre 2013 - 09:59 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

In real life verbal conversations, do you often find yourself either confused or seeking clarification on what people mean?

I'm confused at how other people interpret what I say.  I don't have any trouble interpreting them.

So... when  traditional RPG dialogues fail they fail in the same way that RL conversations occasionally fail for you? I'm talking about the situation where the designer intended a tone/inflection for the line that you didn't intend your character to use, and the NPCs respond to the writer's intended tone rather than your intended tone.

I'm also a little skeptical that you really do interpret people correctly, since you botched In Exile's emoticon example so badly.

Modifié par AlanC9, 05 septembre 2013 - 10:06 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

So... when  traditional RPG dialogues fail they fail in the same way that RL conversations occasionally fail for you?

As I've said before, I think DAO's dialogue system mimics real world conversations just about perfectly.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

So... when  traditional RPG dialogues fail they fail in the same way that RL conversations occasionally fail for you?

As I've said before, I think DAO's dialogue system mimics real world conversations just about perfectly.

I'm starting to see why it's true.

[Mr Fixit]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm also a little skeptical that you really do interpret people correctly, since you botched In Exile's emoticon example so badly.

If I know Sylvius, he's being literal, as usual. Since it's up to him to interpret what others said, it's not relevant if said interpretation is in tune with what others meant. Sylvius would probably go one step further and say that it's objectively impossible to receive the message the way it was sent, which therefore means there can be no way for either side to know the position of the other with any certainty. (Which has some truth to it by the way, but not in a binary way as Sylvius views the matter).

He essentially dogded the question, though as In Exile mentioned, even avoidance can be informative. Whether he does it intentionally, I don't know.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 05 septembre 2013 - 11:25 .

[d4eaming]

Mr Fixit wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm also a little skeptical that you really do interpret people correctly, since you botched In Exile's emoticon example so badly.

If I know Sylvius, he's being literal, as usual. Since it's up to him to interpret what others said, it's not relevant if that is what others meant. He essentially dogded the question, though as In Exile mentioned, even avoidance can be informative. Whether he does it intentionally, I don't know.

I can't imagine IRL conversations with him being anything than absolutely infuriating.

I am pretty socially awkward, but I can easily infer intention through body language and tone, even if the same line is spoken in multiple different ways, to mean multiple different things.

Any attempt to see him communicating in general just leaves me boggled, if his interactions on the forums are any indication of his communication in person.

[Sidney]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

I think I actually prefer the dialogue wheel. Intent is something that I often found missing in earlier games. I remember instances in KotoR, for instance, where you said one thing, and had an unexpected reaction because the thing was (not) interpreted in the proper way. So that issue existed in the older games as well. Only there it was the tone that was lacking.

The only issue with the dialogue wheel is that it needs extremely good paraphrasing. I think they'll succeed better the longer they work with it.

I like voiced protagonists. I like unvoiced protagonists. They both have their pros and cons. Can't say I prefer one over the other.

The tone indicator was a nice help in terms of interpreting the way a line would be delivered. 

I was never knocked back by the paraphrasing contrasting with the spoekn dialog but then again I have low expectations my character will say what I wanted. The writers aren't me so the odds that they say or write what I think my character should actually say at that moment is almost nil.

[Taura-Tierno]

Sidney: I agree. In my opinion, you are just as frequently bereft of an, according to you, appropriate option with either dialogue system. I can't say how many times while playing any of the KotoR games, for instance, when I've been annoyed that the only evil option boils down to: slaughter everything. It as just as bad as when there's a paraphrasing whose intent you did not anticipate. Or when there's a lack of something in the dialogue wheel, for that matter.

And none that can be completely avoided in a CRPG. Most of the time, Bioware handles it well enough for me to enjoy. In my opinion, DA:O did a really great job with the dialogue options. Likewise, I always enjoyed the ME3 dialogues, especially as a renegade.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mr Fixit wrote...

If I know Sylvius, he's being literal, as usual. Since it's up to him to interpret what others said, it's not relevant if said interpretation is in tune with what others meant. Sylvius would probably go one step further and say that it's objectively impossible to receive the message the way it was sent, which therefore means there can be no way for either side to know the position of the other with any certainty. (Which has some truth to it by the way, but not in a binary way as Sylvius views the matter).

He essentially dogded the question, though as In Exile mentioned, even avoidance can be informative. Whether he does it intentionally, I don't know.

I wasn't even addressing whether I was correctly determining what people mean.  As you correctly state, that's unknowable.

But I'm pretty sure I correctly interpret what they say.  What they say might be meaningless nonsense, but as long as I identify it as meaningless nonsense then I have succeeded.

[AlanC9]

EntropicAngel wrote...
So, on topic, I dislike the dialog wheel, but with more neutral dialog and the removal of dominant tone (and the new reaction wheel) I think DA I's version will be interesting. Better than DA ][, to be sure, hopefully better than ME's. We'll see.

Is there a concise explanation up about how DAI will be handling tone and how the wheel will work? I'm a lot more confused about these than I should be.

[Eterna]

Kind of a moot discussion since there is now an option in DA:I that shows exactly what your character will say word by word in a blurb above the dialogue wheel when you hover over a response.

[Fast Jimmy]

Eterna5 wrote...

Kind of a moot discussion since there is now an option in DA:I that shows exactly what your character will say word by word in a blurb above the dialogue wheel when you hover over a response.

Thats not true. It shows the general intent of the dialogue "this option will order your troops back to the Keep" or "this option will send your troops to defend the town" but it doesn't lay out the exact words you will use. 

[Ieldra]

Eterna5 wrote...
Kind of a moot discussion since there is now an option in DA:I that shows exactly what your character will say word by word in a blurb above the dialogue wheel when you hover over a response.

They're still using the wheel mechanic, and I wanted to know why they didn't simply revert to the old list system. That question has been answered to my satisfaction.

[Ieldra]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Kind of a moot discussion since there is now an option in DA:I that shows exactly what your character will say word by word in a blurb above the dialogue wheel when you hover over a response.

Thats not true. It shows the general intent of the dialogue "this option will order your troops back to the Keep" or "this option will send your troops to defend the town" but it doesn't lay out the exact words you will use. 

Argh. Really? We're still stuck with not knowing what we're going to say? Can anyone confirm or deny this, please, since almost everyone seems to think we'll be able to see what we're going to say?

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I have to disagree. Even the way someone evades a question is informative. Being combative versus polite versus dismissive, for example.

That you like to draw inferences from it does not mean that the information is there.

It comes back to what we do with speech, Sylvius. I don't use speech as a form of abstract expression. Speech, to me, is instrumental. All that matters to me is the impression I give you. If you believe that I was not ambigous, then I've failed to be ambiguous.

You cannot know what I think.  If you're measuring your success based on my conclusions, then you have no tools with which to measure your success.

Questions can't be separated from tone. Regardless of how the question is worded, the tone it is delivered in can be quite informative.

Again, that you draw inferences from them does not mean they are informative.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

I don't really get how the wheel is so great for controllers compared to a list when all controllers have a D-pad, but I really couldn't care less whether it's a wheel or a list. They convey the same thing as far as I'm concerned.

I would like the options to be numbered, regardless of how they're arranged.

And the numbers should be displayed.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Hybrid dialogue system:

1 - bigger wheel, moved to the side insted of center. Only half of it is showing. Stretch it a bit vertically.

2 - on the outer edge, place for emoticons/icons (if necessry)

3 - the rest of the screen is free for lots of dialgue. Full lines possible. More than 4-5 options possible.

It's almost a list, but it's not.

[zyntifox]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Kind of a moot discussion since there is now an option in DA:I that shows exactly what your character will say word by word in a blurb above the dialogue wheel when you hover over a response.

Thats not true. It shows the general intent of the dialogue "this option will order your troops back to the Keep" or "this option will send your troops to defend the town" but it doesn't lay out the exact words you will use. 

Argh. Really? We're still stuck with not knowing what we're going to say? Can anyone confirm or deny this, please, since almost everyone seems to think we'll be able to see what we're going to say?

Afraid so. It's been my biggest disappointment of the information revealed so far (except perhaps the combat system reveal). When i first saw they had a "trigger" when hovering over a paraphrase i was extremely pleased. Been asking for this ever since Bioware made it clear  it's sticking with the paraphrasing system. Unfortunately it's simply a clarification of the consequences of the dialogue option which is something i am not very interested in using.

[Ziggeh]

Filament wrote...

I don't really get how the wheel is so great for controllers compared to a list when all controllers have a D-pad, but I really couldn't care less whether it's a wheel or a list. They convey the same thing as far as I'm concerned.

It's one key press versus scrolling through a list. Doesn't seem that major but economy of action is an important part of game design.