544 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I proposed a possible solution to this problem some time ago.  I suggested that the writers should write the dialogue, but then the paraphrases should be written separately, by different people, with no knowledge of the context of each line.

But how could you write a paraphrase for dialogue you've never seen?

You'd see just that one line, in isolation.  You'd write the paraphrase without any knowledge of what the line was supposed to do, or what the consequence would be, or under what circumstances it appeared.

Hmmmm. To me, that would seem like it would lead to MORE paraphrase confusion, rather than less.

[Ieldra]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I'd say it is less the number of times the response broke your character or was way off base. More the complete uncertainty when playing if that would happen. It was like conversation/role playing Russian Roulette - you knew the odds were in your favor, but that didn't mean it felt safe.

And here you've described my experience while playing DA2 and the ME games perfectly.. That's how I felt: as if I was gambling with my (!) protagonist's characterization. Will she say what I want next time or will I have to re-load? Will there be an option at all which says somewhat what I want? Because even if there is, I won't know it unless I have cheated and reloaded so many times that I know all possible responses.

I am having real trouble understanding how *anyone* can consider whatever imaginary benefit comes from the paraphasing worth such a cost. It is no solution to anything, it only causes problems.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 janvier 2014 - 08:28 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I'd say it is less the number of times the response broke your character or was way off base. More the complete uncertainty when playing if that would happen. It was like conversation/role playing Russian Roulette - you knew the odds were in your favor, but that didn't mean it felt safe.

And here you've described my experience while playing DA2 and the ME games perfectly.. That's how I felt: as if I was gambling with my (!) protagonist's characterization. Will she say what I want next time or will I have to re-load? Will there be an option at all which says somewhat what I want? Because even if there is, I won't know it unless I have cheated and reloaded so many times that I know all possible responses.

I am having real trouble understanding how *anyone* can consider whatever imaginary benefit comes from the paraphasing worth such a cost. It is no solution to anything, it only causes problems.

You clearly don't understand what your problem is, though, Ieldra. Or how it could be resolved.

Because Bioware has done test scenarios. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 30 janvier 2014 - 08:53 .

[Mirrman70]

but the thing with a voiced character is that they can hold a real conversation with other characters, a nice back and forth. would you want to go back to the selection screen after each response or do you want the entire part of the conversation up till the next choice put out there for you to read fully then listen to. OR just the next sentence the Inquisitor says?

[Ieldra]

Mirrman70 wrote...
but the thing with a voiced character is that they can hold a real conversation with other characters, a nice back and forth. would you want to go back to the selection screen after each response or do you want the entire part of the conversation up till the next choice put out there for you to read fully then listen to. OR just the next sentence the Inquisitor says?

I think in DXHR you only got the first line and that worked well.

Ideally, of course, I would like to select every response separately. After all, it's half *my* task to create a nice back and forth that makes sense, and only half the developers' task. By taking over the whole task, they deprive me of playing my character as I want to. I recall how much satisfaction I got from doing such things in Planescape:Torment.

But then, I guess games aren't made for people who appreciate such opportunities any more. Not the big titles anyway.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 janvier 2014 - 09:09 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Mirrman70 wrote...
but the thing with a voiced character is that they can hold a real conversation with other characters, a nice back and forth. would you want to go back to the selection screen after each response or do you want the entire part of the conversation up till the next choice put out there for you to read fully then listen to. OR just the next sentence the Inquisitor says?

I think in DXHR you only got the first line and that worked well.

Ideally, of course, I would like to select every response separately. After all, it's half *my* task to create a nice back and forth that makes sense, and only half the developers' task. By taking over the whole task, they deprive me of playing my character as I want to.

But then, I guess games aren't made for people who appreciate such opportunities any more.

Agreed. Full character control would be ideal, but if they want to go with the "back and forth" model, then the DE:HR model of displaying the full text of what the character would say, then Auto-dialogue the rest (in the same vein as the original response), that would be much better than paraphrasing.

Because then, you paraphrase the first line AND Auto-dialouge the next. If the paraphrase confused you, it leads to multiple responses being taken out of your control, rather than just what would have been Auto-Dialogue before.

[Mirrman70]

first: its they're character, they own the copyright

Second: these GAMES are not meant to be the ideal roleplaying experience, for most videogame rpgs the focus is the gameplay first the roleplaying second.

Third: you want to create a character go LARPing or join a DnD group. (LARPing is really fun, a mix of outdoors, exercise, roleplay and cosplay.

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I think in DXHR you only got the first line and that worked well.

Ideally, of course, I would like to select every response separately. After all, it's half *my* task to create a nice back and forth that makes sense, and only half the developers' task. By taking over the whole task, they deprive me of playing my character as I want to. I recall how much satisfaction I got from doing such things in Planescape:Torment.

But then, I guess games aren't made for people who appreciate such opportunities any more. Not the big titles anyway.

Unfortunately i think you've hit the nail on the head. The ever increasing dizzying sales requirements seem set to make roleplaying a secondary priority at best. While its still possible i'll make do and mend if the adventure excites me.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Hmmmm. To me, that would seem like it would lead to MORE paraphrase confusion, rather than less.

The objective here is to make it so that the paraphrase is only based on the literal content of the line, because that's the only part of the line the writers actually control, from the player's perspective.

From the writers' perspective, they control things like intent and consequence, so the paraphrases get wriiten within that context.  And when the writers try to determine whether the paraphrases work, they interpret them within that context.  But since that context isn't available to the player (indeed, the player might have invented a different context), the player can't interpret the paraphrases as well.

So I'm suggesting that the paraphrases be written in an environment that more closely resembles the one in which the player experiences them.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mirrman70 wrote...

Third: you want to create a character go LARPing or join a DnD group. (LARPing is really fun, a mix of outdoors, exercise, roleplay and cosplay.

Those are multiplayer.

The whole point of CRPGs is that they are single-player.

[Mirrman70]

you miss the first point. you are roleplaying a character that ultimately doesn't belong to you at all. (maybe in your head but thats the only place)

[Fast Jimmy]

Mirrman70 wrote...

first: its they're character, they own the copyright

Second: these GAMES are not meant to be the ideal roleplaying experience, for most videogame rpgs the focus is the gameplay first the roleplaying second.

Third: you want to create a character go LARPing or join a DnD group. (LARPing is really fun, a mix of outdoors, exercise, roleplay and cosplay.

Computer/video game RPGs were originally created with the express intent to recreate the pen-and-paper expereince. That was their entire purpose. Only technology was what caused a disconnect between the two.

These days, video game RPGs are ACTIVELY moving away from that model in an almost heretical fashion. They are violating the entire premise of original RPG and PnP games, the bedrock on which they were made. As we discussed earlier, it is beginning to be arguable if they are even role playing games anymore, outside of the genre itself bastardizing its own name.

[Ieldra]

Mirrman70 wrote...
you miss the first point. you are roleplaying a character that ultimately doesn't belong to you at all. (maybe in your head but thats the only place)

And you are missing the *whole* point. Roleplaying games are made with the explicit premise that the player can and should take ownership of the character. Not in a legal sense of course, but as the intended way to experience this art form. Who owns which copyright is completely irrelevant.

If a game has roleplaying qualitities is - to a great extent - determined by the degree of ownership the player can convincingly and plausibly take of the character.

Bioware is aware of this, as you can infer from certain things David Gaider has said about DAI. They just think that paraphrasing doesn't present a big enough hindrance to matter to most players, and maybe, for most player, they are even right. I don't know. I do know that it presents a signficant hindrance for me.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 janvier 2014 - 09:59 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Then lock yourself in the bathroom and make your own damn campaign.

That's what I do.  Inside CRPGs.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mirrman70 wrote...

you miss the first point. you are roleplaying a character that ultimately doesn't belong to you at all. (maybe in your head but thats the only place)

That's the only place a character ever belongs to you.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Mirrman70 wrote...
you miss the first point. you are roleplaying a character that ultimately doesn't belong to you at all. (maybe in your head but thats the only place)

And you are missing the *whole* point. Roleplaying games are made with the explicit premise that the player can and should take ownership of the character. Not in a legal sense of course, but as the intended way to experience this art form. Who owns which copyright is completely irrelevant.

If a game has roleplaying qualitities is - to a great extent - determined by the degree of ownership the player can convincingly and plausibly take of the character.

That is actually, more then likely, not accurate at all. I think the writers give you a character so you can experience the story, and have a fractional, and the keyword here is fractional, ownership of the story and the medium for which the story is driven, the character. You can shape the character with pre-made responses, but ultimately you do not own the character. You didn't make them, you had a buffet created for you and you piecemealed a character from avaliable pre-made food items given to you.

To have any form of creative ownership you'd have needed to have made a original creation without the help of others. In other words, you would have needed to cook the food you are eating in your own kitchen your way, and not go to a resturant and pay for others to make your food for you, even if that resturant offers you a buffet style creation of the dishes.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Computer/video game RPGs were originally created with the express intent to recreate the pen-and-paper expereince. That was their entire purpose.

And that's exactly what I want them to do.  Emulate the tabletop roleplaying experience without the need for other players.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 30 janvier 2014 - 09:59 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Then lock yourself in the bathroom and make your own damn campaign.

That's what I do.  Inside CRPGs.

Your characters must be really weird then.

"Dragonborn, please! A dragon is attacking! Get out of the bathroom and help us already!"
"....."
"Why don't they answer!?"
"It's no good, the dragonborn is a voiceless pc. No one can hear them except when they speak dragonese."

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

To have any form of creative ownership you'd have needed to have made a original creation without the help of others. In other words, you would have needed to cook the food you are eating in your own kitchen your way, and not go to a resturant and pay for others to make your food for you, even if that resturant offers you a buffet style creation of the dishes.

Why is where you're drawing the line any less arbitrary?  Why shouldn't I have to grow the crops myself?  As Carl Sagan put it, "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe."  And he was right.  The universe has done most of the work for you by providing you with apples, and the very concept of pie.

We start where the game lets us start.  And if the game lets us start early enough, then the game is fun.

But it's not about their story.  It's never been about their story.  It's about our story.  You're focusing entirely on the authored narrative, without paying any heed at all to the emergent narrative, which for a roleplayer is always the central narrative of the game.  What does your character want to do, and what steps does your character take to achieve it?  BioWare doesn't get the decide the first thing at all.  They never have.

[CybAnt1]

first: its they're character, they own the copyright

That's cool, I wasn't planning on stealing him for my own game title. "Hawke: The BDSM Adventures". 

Second: these GAMES are not meant to be the ideal roleplaying experience, for most videogame rpgs the focus is the gameplay first the roleplaying second.

That certainly was true up until Fallout, then Fallout created a certain set of expectations that you could do both RPG combat (which had been in the old time dungeon crawlers) AND the rest of roleplaying (dialogue interaction, choice & consequence) on a computer. And do both well. 

Sorry, once you create an expectation, then people keep expecting it. They're funny that way. 

Third: you want to create a character go LARPing or join a DnD group. (LARPing is really fun, a mix of outdoors, exercise, roleplay and cosplay.

Why? We have computers and some of us no longer have 5-8 friends who can get together with dice, miniatures, graph sheets, and of course chips and cola. 

As for LARPing & cosplay, I only do that on Halloween. 

Creating a character in a CRPG is something you've been able to do since the 1970s. Why stop doing it now? 

I can replicate the D & D experience on a computer somewhat by getting 5 "virtual" friends together with me on NWN2. Truth is, though, most of the time, I want to game on my time and at my convenience, not when I can get other cyber-folk together. 

So it's either a MMO, or a SRPG. I play both. I prefer the latter, especially when they give me a party of characters to work with. I know I never played that way "IRL" (although there were times an absent friend asked me to play their character, so I did at times play 2) but it's a convention created by the dungeon crawlers, and now that they can be virtual people with personalities and interactions, it's even better. 

Just don't limit my interactions with them. Considering I've already seen how it's been done right, why should I be satisfied when it's done wrong. 

[Fast Jimmy]

^
Arguably, Fallout wasn't the first. Wasteland did a lot of what Fallout did first. But it certainly set the bar for the industry, that's for sure.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Either they think their cinematic way is better or they have a directive to follow. :/ AAA games can't look archaic when everyone else outside of Kickstarter is doing it another way.

...except Bethesda? Who is making more money on RPGs than any other developer in the entire market...? 

Archaic is such a weird word. People act like games aren't still being made (and selling amazingly well) with silent protagonists. Big games. AAA games/developers/publishers. What's changed is that the quality of writing and the amount of divergent content for these games is dropping in favor of larger and larger sandboxes. Bioware with DA:O showed there could be quality story, characters and choice without the need to be a sandbox... until DA2, at least, when they put the voiced protag in and went full tilt on the cinematic bend.

Not that I like Bioware's recent penchant for the cinematic, but it's possible they want to find their own style. Text lists may still be in use, and beloved by many (including me) but that doesn't make them any less old -- dare I say traditional. Much like stat sheets.

In some ways I think it's good that a few companies are pushing the boundaries of what dialogue systems could be capable, but it doesn't stop me wishing Bioware wasn't one of them. :/ It feels like they're pushing in the wrong direction. ie to look shinier on the surface.

[Mirrman70]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Just don't limit my interactions with them. Considering I've already seen how it's been done right, why should I be satisfied when it's done wrong. 

It is not done wrong its done different, that is what a lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand or appreciate. I don't want what happened to FPS's to happen to RPGs, in that they become clones of each other to the extent that you don't know who is copying who.

[x-aizen-x]

Me to. I am usually an evil bastard in RPGs and I just go wild in DA games. But sometimes i like choosing the good option but i hate coming a cross as a soft retard.

[CybAnt1]

It is not done wrong its done different, 

I'm still failing to be convinced why the different is better, though. 

Perhaps you and people who agree with you need to try harder. 

Most of your arguments appear to be pleading for the developers. "But what about their VA budgets?"

Sorry. I don't fight for them. Like Tron, I fight for the users. 

I get the tonal ambiguity problem. I really do. It has lots of solutions. I proposed some. I still am not convinced what we have is the best answer to it. 

If we must stick with a wheel, well, we can always make better wheels. They even seem to be working on that, which suggests it could have used some improvement. 

We can have our cinematic voiced cake, and eat true roleplaying too, just give those of us who give a **** about the latter full-text tooltips. 

Everybody wins. That rarely happens in Thedas. It can happen on the game-designing planet known as Earth.