544 réponses à ce sujet

[Pasquale1234]

Sir JK wrote...

The difference between real communication and that in the game is that if I notice or suspect that what I said was misunderstood I can always clarify or repeat. If someone laughs when I wasn't joking I can tell them I wasn't joking or that it isn't funny. If someone starts explaining something I already know I can tell them I know what it is.

Sometimes you can come to clarity in the wake of misunderstandings - but not always.  There are times when a speaker is not even aware that they were misunderstood - and times when, the more you try to explain yourself, the muddier things become.  Or people are like, yeah, okay, i understand now - when they really don't.

But this would be completely ungainly in game. You can't have an option to clarify every single line in the game. That's a completely hopeless errand.

i agree - but I wouldn't ask for it in-game.  I'm okay with leaving some ambiguity there.

I can tolerate people misunderstanding me in the heat of the moment, like under stress or when it's made part of characterization (like say, Aveline missing that you flirt with her or Merrill's general failure to understand sarcasm). But I'd have a hard time standing people consistently misunderstanding my character and having no tools whatsoever to make sure they get the message.

I enjoyed those moments.

I can appreciate your frustration with idea of being consistently misunderstood, and I wouldn't advocate that in a game.  I do, however, think that having it happen occasionally can add a lot of flavor to a game.

And, really, we're only talking about the potential for it.  A player who chooses to deliver a text line with the tone / motive the author intended will get the intended reaction.  It is only when a player chooses an unintended tone / motive that any ambiguity might surface.

EDIT: To perhaps frame better why I'd have such a time standing it. It's because if someone misunderstands me, I always blame myself first. I see it as my failure to communicate my intent/message. As such, a game that wouldn't recognice my intended message and provide no means for me to clarify would be one huge excersize in frustration.
Fortunantely it does not happen very often.

I feel your pain.

IRL, I choose my words very carefully.  I say exactly what I mean and mean exactly what I say.  Unfortunately, as in the examples I provided, the meaning is still often misconstrued - and I don't always know about it, so cannot always try to correct it.  With so many different filters, so much personal baggage, so many personal agendas - I am surprised when we manage to communicate effectively at all.

I think this is my frustration with paraphrases / tone versus actual words.  Because, imho, words are among the most powerful things in the universe.

"Words are our most inexhaustible source of magic. The are potent forms of enchantment, rich with the power to hurt or heal".-- J.K. Rowling via Albus Dumbledore

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 29 janvier 2014 - 09:39 .

[PinkysPain]

I wonder if the designers would have a problem with showing full text if the writers used USA today type writing (tiny vocabulary). The writers would never go for it of course ...

PS. in the absence of full text I'd like a button to pick randomly.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 29 janvier 2014 - 09:36 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

You might "play the game better" by accepting that the paraphrase will be simply thematic, rather than an accurate summary. In other words, don't expect it to be right.

I don't understand what that means for the paraphrase to be "thematic".  By what mechanism do I then choose dialogue options?  How do I design a character such that the dialogue won't break that character?
 

[Sylvius the Mad]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

If it is only in your head, then it had no impact on the game world, making it meaningless to the game world.

But that's not true.  It was only in yiour head, but that's also where all the decision-making happens, and those decisions do impact the game world.

There was no direct impact, but there was impact.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

Trust me, I sympathize. I may not agree with you what the optimal dialogue system would look like, but I don't wish you to suffer through that.
I truly do hope that whatever improvements Bioware has made it'd make it at least a little more accurate for you.

So do I.  And I'm hopeful - their public statements on the issue suggest that they do now understand the problems the new system created, and that they would like to address them.

Whether they'll be able to address them within the constraints of the voiced protagonist remains to be seen, but DAI seems to be their first attempt to do so.  So I can't judge them yet.

[Naesaki]

 @Sylvius

I think DA II focused more on the three personality traits over the accuracy of the paraphrases, so in essence you couldn't design your character around the dialogue options but rather around the personality type

Which overall seems to be your main problem with it, well in DA II's case anyway. with DA : I's being neutral this time round, hopefully they've focused on the paraphrase accuracy more so you can make a good judgement on what may/will/should be said.

So hopefully your fears will be addressed in the coming months

Modifié par Naesaki, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:01 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

To me, what I say is much more important than how I say it, so I'm always going to care more about the actual words than the delivery. But beyond that, the icons in DA2 were so poorly documented that I had literally no idea what they meant, aside from the attack icon.

It reminds me of how, in ME2, I was trying to be obsequious when talking to the Illusive Man, and I couldn't figure out whether that would be Paragon or Renegade behaviour.  To that point, in both games, Paragon had generally been polite, so I tried that, only to see Shepard pick a fight with TIM.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:07 .

[Naesaki]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

To me, what I say is much more important than how I say it, so I'm always going to care more about the actual words than the delivery. But beyond that, the icons in DA2 were so poorly documented that I had literally no idea what they meant, aside from the attack icon.

They weren't exactly rocket science to figure out =/ so I fail to see how it was poorly documented and a chart was quickly made to explain them all 

http://dragonage.wik.../Dialogue_wheel


as for Paragon shepard, he is a case of beware the nice ones, he can only tolerate so much BS, and the Illusive Man was one of those guys who represented everything he hated, so even a Paragon would snap at him eventually.

its like with David Archer in that overlord DLC

Modifié par Naesaki, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:13 .

[CybAnt1]

You also has to pick the correcdt tone of your voice. If you walk in to the resturant and scream at the top of your lungs that you would like a burger. You will be asked to leave since you are making the other customers uncomfortable.

You know what's odd? I just said that. 

This I can guarantee, nice or mean, you won't get a hamburger unless you use the words "I want a burger". 

In DA:O we had no knowledge of the tone of voice our wardens used. 

Ok. Once again watch. I am using the same words. Maybe you need to pay attention. Or you don't know symbolic logic. 

Didn't != Couldn't.
(By that, I mean, the developers could have used that existing framework to provide tone indicators, so that we, the fans, could have knowledge.) 

They could have stuck with trees, and given bracketed tone indicators.

BTW, they also could have used icons next to each item in the tree, but that might require changing the normal method of coding for presentation of the tree.

In DA2 we had incomplete knowledge of what would be said word by word. In DA:O we had.

So let's see ... we traded imperfect knowledge of 3 possibly expressible tonalities, for imperfect knowledge of what words are going to come out of our mouth.

In my sector of the universe, that's called a raw deal. 

Ignoring that a fistfight is also a form of dialogue, a game is not build up solely by text. A well written script allows for good cinematography, which create capturing scenes. There is MUCH more to a captivating story, than simple conversations between characters.

It has been said that many heroes speak with their fists, but I kind of always considered that metaphor. 

Of course you can do storytelling without dialogue. I think most of the Lassie TV shows were about the dog finding its way back home, escaping wild bears, etc. The dog didn't talk. The movie Koyaanisqatsi contains no spoken words. 

Generally, if it involves human beings who communicate, then there is human language, i.e. dialogue. Expectations, and all that. 

I could play a RPG or other game in which no one speaks. Perhaps a monastery sim where everyone participating is a medieval monk with a vow of silence. 

I think it would suck, but tastes differ. 

[CybAnt1]

And knowing is half the battle.

You know, here I thought Gaider was just one of the lead writers, not the head of the DA3 project (I thought that was a Mike Laidlaw feller), nor the CEO of Bioware, but yeah, I keep learning new things. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

CybAnt1 wrote...

And knowing is half the battle.

You know, here I thought Gaider was just one of the lead writers, not the head of the DA3 project (I thought that was a Mike Laidlaw feller), nor the CEO of Bioware, but yeah, I keep learning new things.

Actually, the head of the project is Mark Darrah.  Mike Laidlaw is merely Lead Designer.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Naesaki wrote...

They weren't exactly rocket science to figure out =/ so I fail to see how it was poorly documented and a chart was quickly made to explain them all 

http://dragonage.wik.../Dialogue_wheel

Those aren't nearly clear enough.  Aggressive toward whom?  Charming in what way?  What sort of humour?

The only one I found worked at all was Direct, because then Hawke tended to say something that at least vaguely resembled the paraphrase.  Unfortunately, sometimes I wanted to say different things, and Direct was only ever one option.

as for Paragon shepard, he is a case of beware the nice ones, he can only tolerate so much BS, and the Illusive Man was one of those guys who represented everything he hated, so even a Paragon would snap at him eventually.

If I can't control how the character behaves, what is the point of playing the game?

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:28 .

[Naesaki]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Naesaki wrote...

They weren't exactly rocket science to figure out =/ so I fail to see how it was poorly documented and a chart was quickly made to explain them all 

http://dragonage.wik.../Dialogue_wheel

Those aren't nearly clear enough.  Aggressive toward whom?  Charming in what way?  What sort of humour?

The only one I found worked at all was Direct, because then Hawke tended to say something that at least vaguely resembled the paraphrase.  Unfortunately, sometimes I wanted to say different things, and Direct was only ever one option.

as for Paragon shepard, he is a case of beware the nice ones, he can only tolerate so much BS, and the Illusive Man was one of those guys who represented everything he hated, so even a Paragon would snap at him eventually.

If I can't control how the character behaves, what is the point of playing the game?

because unlike other RPG's, Hawke and Shepard aren't complete blank slates, I think thats the main thing you keep forgetting, they aren't designed for you to completely imprint yourself on them. They are already pre-defined people, you are seeing the world through their eyes, but in the case of Shep and Hawke you merely influence their personality and actions, rather than control their entire being. 

[CybAnt1]

Actually, the head of the project is Mark Darrah.  Mike Laidlaw is merely Lead Designer.

Ok thanks. As to another point, I realize Gaider speaks for more than himself, and when he uses the royal "we" he's referring to more than just the writing team. I guess also the UI design team, since he says "we" tried adding this to the interface (full-text tooltips) and it didn't work. (How many people tried, and why didn't it work? Forgive me, I'm still hazy on it.) 

Making games is a bit like making sausage. Maybe the less we know the better. I just don't know when somebody says "we" don't want this or can't make it work, how much of the entire production team of hundreds they're really speaking for. Of course, I recognize games have to agree on a unified design, and thus their reps speak in/for a unified voice. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:44 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Naesaki wrote...

because unlike other RPG's, Hawke and Shepard aren't complete blank slates, I think thats the main thing you keep forgetting, they aren't designed for you to completely imprint yourself on them. They are already pre-defined people, you are seeing the world through their eyes, but in the case of Shep and Hawke you merely influence their personality and actions, rather than control their entire being.

So, again, what's the point?

How can I make decisions on behalf of a character if I don't know the mind of that character?

I want never to play a roleplaying game wherein my character has a pre-written personality.  I don't even think those can be roleplaying games.  That's why I didn't play ME3.

[CuriousArtemis]

Nah, I would hate to have the whole dialogue written out before I even say it, or what's the point? I agree some of the paraphrases are off, but they showed in the demo video that they're working on that.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

If it is only in your head, then it had no impact on the game world, making it meaningless to the game world.

But that's not true.  It was only in yiour head, but that's also where all the decision-making happens, and those decisions do impact the game world.

There was no direct impact, but there was impact.

The decision made is completely independant of the tone of voice imagined. Either way the game does not react to your imagined tone of voice, or even your reasoning behind the decision made, making the tone of voice 100% head-canon and irrelevant to the game world.

[Naesaki]

@Sylvius
The RPG genre is much broader and wider than it used to be, might not be what you want ,but a ton of people like the approach DA and ME use now, I like both approaches tbh so everything you are getting upset over honestly I just can't fathom / comprehend it :/

I don't think the future ME and DA games are going to be for you anymore since it looks like Bioware have found the direction they want to keep exploring. They aren't the type of games with a blank slate protagonist anymore.

You really should look into Pillars of Eternity and Wasteland 2 , they are more the type of role-playing experience you crave

Modifié par Naesaki, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:54 .

[CybAnt1]

I never played any of the MEs because I had honestly never played a third-person shooter with cover before.

And I guess it would have been cool to try such a game, I was a bit shocked to first encounter that play style in an (action-)RPG.

That and the wheel ... deal breakers. OK, I guess I could have gotten over my unfamiliarity, but just didn't have the motivation.

OK, it also was a bit of the problem that they wouldn't do Mac ports, and at least at the time of ME1, around 2007, I had to do the Bootcamp thing to run Windows games. And decided I wasn't gonna. :innocent:

Modifié par CybAnt1, 29 janvier 2014 - 10:55 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Naesaki wrote...

because unlike other RPG's, Hawke and Shepard aren't complete blank slates, I think thats the main thing you keep forgetting, they aren't designed for you to completely imprint yourself on them. They are already pre-defined people, you are seeing the world through their eyes, but in the case of Shep and Hawke you merely influence their personality and actions, rather than control their entire being.

So, again, what's the point?

How can I make decisions on behalf of a character if I don't know the mind of that character?

I want never to play a roleplaying game wherein my character has a pre-written personality.  I don't even think those can be roleplaying games.  That's why I didn't play ME3.

Uhm.... The same way that an ACTOR can ROLEPLAY a certain ROLE that is given to them in a movie or stageplay?
Roleplay is not just "rolecreator" as you want . Sometimes you are given a role to play.

[CybAnt1]

motomotogirl wrote...

Nah, I would hate to have the whole dialogue written out before I even say it, or what's the point? I agree some of the paraphrases are off, but they showed in the demo video that they're working on that.

1) here's the point: a tooltip means you get to see it if you want to, and don't have to see it if you don't want to. 
That is what they call a 'win-win'.
2) They are working on it. If we knew exactly how they were working on it, I agree this discussion would indeed be pointless. Since we don't, I do consider it relevant.
3) Once we know their final decision on how to do it, we can commence ****ing about how we do or don't like it, but at that point if there are to be any tweaks, changes, supplements, or scrapping, it won't be until DA 4. Should there be one, of course. 

[CybAnt1]

You really should look into Pillars of Eternity and Wasteland 2 , they are more the type of role-playing experience you crave

Trust me, he knows about them. 

Also, one should add, Torment: Tides of Numenera. 

The "spiritual succcessor" (and yes they've used those words) of Planescape: Torment, the game I guess some people thought wasn't a game. Coulda fooled me. I enjoyed the hell out of it. 

[CybAnt1]

Uhm.... The same way that an ACTOR can ROLEPLAY a certain ROLE that is given to them in a movie or stageplay?
Roleplay is not just "rolecreator" as you want . Sometimes you are given a role to play.

I'm still waiting for the actor to be handed an emotional tone, a paraphrase, and then told to "wing it". 

That would be an interesting play. 

[Pasquale1234]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Naesaki wrote...

because unlike other RPG's, Hawke and Shepard aren't complete blank slates, I think thats the main thing you keep forgetting, they aren't designed for you to completely imprint yourself on them. They are already pre-defined people, you are seeing the world through their eyes, but in the case of Shep and Hawke you merely influence their personality and actions, rather than control their entire being.

So, again, what's the point?

How can I make decisions on behalf of a character if I don't know the mind of that character?

I want never to play a roleplaying game wherein my character has a pre-written personality.  I don't even think those can be roleplaying games.  That's why I didn't play ME3.

Uhm.... The same way that an ACTOR can ROLEPLAY a certain ROLE that is given to them in a movie or stageplay?
Roleplay is not just "rolecreator" as you want . Sometimes you are given a role to play.

Any halfway decent actor spends a lot of time coming to terms with the mind, thought processes, and motives of a character in order to successfully portray that character.

Also - actors know exactly what the character will say before they say it.

ETA:  I like CybAnt's response better. 

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 29 janvier 2014 - 11:07 .