544 réponses à ce sujet

[Jilinthar]

Examurai1 wrote...

Jilinthar wrote...

Examurai1 wrote...

If I recall, didn't a dev mention somewhere that there will be a toggle available for these paraphrasing. If you do not like it, you could just switch it off.

That'd be awesome! Now all I need is an option to mute my character and all is good.

The quite lip moving would be awkward though.

True... didn't think of that.  
So I'd also need an option to cut out the video sequences that show my character talking then. Meh.

Voiced protagonist just isn't anything I'll ever warm up to I guess.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ieldra2 wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...
^ It was one of the two I linked in my post.

Thanks...

Hmph. I am not at all convinced. "We do not offer, support and test options unless we believe they work as
a viable option for the game as we intend it to be played"?

You know how that sounds to me? "We intend the game to be played in a way that the main character doesn't know their own minds". I take issue with that.

I personally think it has more to do with the dialogue wheel itself. Bioware owns a patent, a legal patent, on the thing. Perhaps there is legal complications to changing it. Perhaps DE:HR patented their design, such that if Bioware were to take their dialogue wheel and add a pop up, it would violate THAT patent. Maybe they just said "we want Bioware to have a united front and use the same UI for all games."

For the record, here is a quote from Gaider after DA2 came out where he sounded somewhat open to the idea of a hover-over option. It sounds much different than the hard line stance in more recent posts. 

http://social.biowar...ex/6993638&lf=8

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 28 janvier 2014 - 12:30 .

[Ieldra]

Jilinthar wrote...

Examurai1 wrote...

Jilinthar wrote...

Examurai1 wrote...

If I recall, didn't a dev mention somewhere that there will be a toggle available for these paraphrasing. If you do not like it, you could just switch it off.

That'd be awesome! Now all I need is an option to mute my character and all is good.

The quite lip moving would be awkward though.

True... didn't think of that.  
So I'd also need an option to cut out the video sequences that show my character talking then. Meh.

Voiced protagonist just isn't anything I'll ever warm up to I guess.

I like my voiced protagonists. I hate that they don't appear to know their own minds.

And YET AGAIN: That hovering line will only appear to explain plot-relevant decisions. That was explained when people reacted with delight to the shown example.

[superdeathdealer14]

Ieldra2 wrote...
As explained before, that will only happen for plot-relevant decisions.

Awww...... I'm disappointed now, very disappointed.

Modifié par superdeathdealer14, 28 janvier 2014 - 12:33 .

[Lolomlas]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Lolomlas wrote...
You do know they have a system similar to the one mentioned above, right? At least that is what I know. If you linger over the answers, short messages will appear, about what will happen if you chose that answer. Just watch one of the gameplay videos taken from PAX and you can see an exsample for this.

That system only pertains to decisions about plot-relevant actions, not to dialogue in general. A description will appear that shows what an option does exactly.  

Where are they mentioning that this system only works for plot relevant actions? I don't remember them saying
 that. And it  wouldn't making sense having it in some dialogue, and not having in others.

[The Elder King]

About the PAX panel choice: does anybody remember if any devs commented about the PAX panel choice not being used in every case in the forums? I remember only the talk during the demo, why isn't definitive evidence.
I still hope the other type of wheels (tone and reaction) present that feature. I howestly don't understand why they'd limit to only one type of wheel.

[Dean_the_Young]

Well, this thread ran into a familiar issue at the title with the claim of 'necessary.'

Poor paraphrase, or subtle irony? Your decision.

[Ieldra]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...
^ It was one of the two I linked in my post.

Thanks...

Hmph. I am not at all convinced. "We do not offer, support and test options unless we believe they work as
a viable option for the game as we intend it to be played"?

You know how that sounds to me? "We intend the game to be played in a way that the main character doesn't know their own minds". I take issue with that.

I personally think it has more to do with the dialogue wheel itself. Bioware owns a patent, a legal patent, on the thing. Perhaps there is legal complications to changing it. Perhaps DE:HR patented their design, such that if Bioware were to take their dialogue wheel and add a pop up, it would violate THAT patent. Maybe they just said "we want Bioware to have a united front and use the same UI for all games."

For the record, here is a quote from Gaider after DA2 came out where he sounded somewhat open to the idea of a hover-over option. It sounds much different than the hard line stance in more recent posts. 

http://social.biowar...ex/6993638&lf=8

Yeah, but he also said those who keep maligning paraphrasing have a "mental block". I take offense with that. My dislike is based on experience. Very unpleasant experience.

It is really odd. In the same thread, DG showed he really *was* aware of the problems with player control when he talked about emotional responses. They appear to have a drastically different attitude when it comes to paraphrasing.

[Ieldra]

hhh89 wrote...
About the PAX panel choice: does anybody remember if any devs commented about the PAX panel choice not being used in every case in the forums? I remember only the talk during the demo, why isn't definitive evidence.
I still hope the other type of wheels (tone and reaction) present that feature. I howestly don't understand why they'd limit to only one type of wheel.

I know that because I reacted with great delight to the news about the hovering info when it appeared - and then was brutally brought back to the real world with a statement - I don't recall who made it but it was a Bioware guy - that this only applied to decision wheels (If that was the name).

Edit:
This may have changed since PAX, but DG's statements make it appear rather final. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 janvier 2014 - 12:48 .

[Ieldra]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Well, this thread ran into a familiar issue at the title with the claim of 'necessary.'

Poor paraphrase, or subtle irony? Your decision.

I am not usually bad in comprehension - what the hell are you talking about? BTW, it was "desirable" before I decided to take a more confrontational stance.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well, of COURSE the problem isn't paraphrasing. ME had it, so it must work fine for every other IP that wants to call itself an RPG, right?

It has to be the dialogue icons. We don't just need diamond, we need ruby, emerald and sapphire. THAT will solve the problem of players not having any idea what their character will say.

As you can tell, it's a subject that irks me. The assumption to say players don't understand why they don't like something when they can go into great detail and specifics on why they don't like it is, to me, a form of arrogance that I don't find appealing in the least. And was quite abundant in the post-DA2 and ME3 days.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:03 .

[Sir JK]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Hmph. I am not at all convinced. "We do not offer, support and test options unless we believe they work as
a viable option for the game as we intend it to be played"?

You know how that sounds to me? "We intend the game to be played in a way that the main character doesn't know their own minds". I take issue with that.

Ironically, I believe this is a neat example to exactly what that post discussed. You interpret it as a rejection of your prefered playstyle, whereas that post strictly discusses the solution in question. He isn't saying that the main character isn't supposed to know their own mind, he is saying that the full line will be a source of confusion just as paraphrases are.

The fact that this sentence can be interpreted in various ways just shows us just that. A full sentence isn't neccessarily solving the problem. It does however add a few new ones (among others that it's aggravating to hear someone enunciate a sentence you've already read a few times).

There's no doubt that the paraphrases need to carry messages better. They even acknowledge that. Main characters should absolutely know their own minds, as you put it. It's just that a full sentence wouldn't accomplish nearly as much as we'd like to think it would.

[The Elder King]

I remember the thread Ieldra, though I didn't recall a Bioware dev responded. I remembered only a posted that pointed out at what Mike stated in the demo.
Anyway, I hope they've changed opinion, or that there's something else to male pharaphrase more clear.

Modifié par hhh89, 28 janvier 2014 - 12:50 .

[superdeathdealer14]

Why does it just have to be plot relevant it isn't fair, IT ISN'T FAIR!!

Modifié par superdeathdealer14, 28 janvier 2014 - 12:56 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

It has to be the dialogue icons. We don't just need diamond, we need ruby, emerald and sapphire. THAT will solve the problem of players not having any idea what their character will say.

 

Worked for Pokemon.

*shrugs*

[fchopin]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@all:
In this thread, David Gaider refers to a long post he made about paraphrasing and didn't want to repeat. Does anyone have a link? I would really like to know the details of their take on it.

http://social.biowar...9639/6#14567693


http://social.biowar...9639/8#14582609

[Dean_the_Young]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Well, this thread ran into a familiar issue at the title with the claim of 'necessary.'

Poor paraphrase, or subtle irony? Your decision.

I am not usually bad in comprehension - what the hell are you talking about? BTW, it was "desirable" before I decided to take a more confrontational stance.

Your claim of necessity is more than confrontational: it's so completely untrue that it's humorous. There's nothing necessary about it, no matter how much you might prefer it. Feel free to pursue what you desire, but prepare to be mocked when you wildly overstate your issue of choice.

'Necessity', along with common appeals to importance such as 'must', 'has to', and 'requires' are some of the more common rhetorical abuses in advocacy arguments. They're also ridiculously easy to disprove by, well, the existence of the alternative.

Of course, I feel your own opening post and thread title make a good case for the merits of a paraphrase over showing complete dialogue, especialy in games which can take a spoken dialogue sequence forward to some extent. Seeing paraphrases of topics makes my selection of options so much easier across this forum than having to trawl through the OPs or entire threads and make my own conclusion. Is it imperfect? Sure. You get innacurate paraphrases, like you here, and topics can diverge later on, but that's still workable. Intent is signaled, even if it's occassionally 'I'm going to make this sound more important than it needs because that's what I think good arguments are made out of.' Totally legit, if laughable.

I mean, really, can you imagine if the games that had character exchanges half as long your your posts tried to shove all that dialogue on the screen? It'd be a pretty disgusting experience to play the game reading through it all just to pick out a more perfect dialogue option the first time rather than, well, accept the already inherent limitations of the medium and simply compare it to the other dialogue the other established ways.

[Naesaki]

I seriously don't get why people are getting so worked up, the Paraphrasing in DA II wasn't great but the symbols were hardly confusing, and it is something they can easily improve upon

[nightscrawl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

The assumption to say players don't understand why they don't like something when they can go into great detail and specifics on why they don't like it is, to me, a form of arrogance that I don't find appealing in the least. And was quite abundant in the post-DA2 and ME3 days.

They probably assume, and rightly so, that if they were to go into more detail about what their internal testing revealed, there would still be players shouting that it doesn't apply to them, that X and Y games did it so much better, and that they should still give the option [toggle] to appease everyone.

I agree that that kind of phrasing from the Bioware folks is irksome. But without seeing their actual testing data and having them explain it, it's a bit presumptuous to assume they're just talking out of their asses on the subject, which many players seem to do.

As I said, I also would prefer to see the full line. I posted a great deal on the various discussions on the dialog in the DA2 forums. But I am willing to wait and see how it is handled in DAI and see the changes that have been made with the paraphrases specifically and the dialog system overall. Right now it seems to me that people are being unnecessarily negative.

They have said they're aware of the problems and are trying to come up with solutions, which to my mind is a lot better than simply disregarding players' feelings altogether to say "We like how dialog was in DA2 and it will remain in DAI, like it or not, we don't care."

[Ieldra]

Sir JK wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Hmph. I am not at all convinced. "We do not offer, support and test options unless we believe they work as
a viable option for the game as we intend it to be played"?

You know how that sounds to me? "We intend the game to be played in a way that the main character doesn't know their own minds". I take issue with that.

Ironically, I believe this is a neat example to exactly what that post discussed. You interpret it as a rejection of your prefered playstyle, whereas that post strictly discusses the solution in question. He isn't saying that the main character isn't supposed to know their own mind, he is saying that the full line will be a source of confusion just as paraphrases are.

The fact that this sentence can be interpreted in various ways just shows us just that. A full sentence isn't neccessarily solving the problem. It does however add a few new ones (among others that it's aggravating to hear someone enunciate a sentence you've already read a few times).

There's no doubt that the paraphrases need to carry messages better. They even acknowledge that. Main characters should absolutely know their own minds, as you put it. It's just that a full sentence wouldn't accomplish nearly as much as we'd like to think it would.

Oh, I rather know they don't really intend that. It just feels that way, and playing with paraphrases does feel as if my characters don't know their own minds, and that regardless of the fact of whether or not they're conveying enough information, just by the fact that the paraphrases are different from the lines that follow. 

So there are two problems here:

(1) I want to have comprehensive information in advance about those things my character will communicate  which are important for their characterization. Now of course it should be possible to convey that without replicating the complete line, but an icon out of a set of a dozen and a seven-word paraphrase are often not enough.

(2) I don't want to feel that my characters don't know their own minds. That often happens if the paraphrase expresses a sentiment (which often happens) and the lines go to express something much more complicated, even if the content is compatible. It's not a problem I can put a finger on like in (1), but it makes me feel disconnected. 

So in the end, maybe Bioware will come up with a workable solution to the primary problem, and if so, I'll accept it. However, likely I will always think it's still a lesser option.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:14 .

[wright1978]

Shame as the hover approach sounded good. Looks like i'll need to carry on with my current paraphrase error workaround of very regular saving and reloading when a line makes me wince. Hardly ideal but just as long as they don't go down the ME3 route of vast swathes of cinematic sequences where i'm not allowed to reload that horrendous piece of protaganist dialogue will 10 minutes later.

[9TailsFox]

I fully agree with op and think David Gaider wrong because DE:HR proved it. I just don't understand what so hard to include optional text whitch is already in the game, in text form (subtitles).

Modifié par 9TailsFox, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:14 .

[abnocte]

Ieldra2 wrote...
*snip*

The main argument brought forward against it is "you don't want to read the lines and then hear them spoken."

*snip*

I don't know how others feel about this, but I do want to read the lines even if I'm going to hear them later.

Why?

I'm not a native english speaker and the games are not voiced in my mother thongue.

The result is that I need to read as fast as I can to follow what the hell is going on. With full text for the PC lines I could focus only on what the NPC was saying, so it was more relaxing. Add to that that DA2 didn't have a dialogue log and half the time a was unsure what the hell was going on...


Some of the improvements they are doing for DA:I seem promising, but I still see myself reloading time and again during dialogue...

I don't know, may be we should create a wiki with the full text for all PC the dialogue so we can check it during our different playthroughs.... I pretty much did this with ME, always played full paragon and full renegade before playing with my "real" Shepards...

[Sidney]

I'm still trying to figure out why. I mean people are really, really really big on this but there are no dialog options really to me in most cases. Never have been going back to BG or Fallout.

There is one option for each "intent" in almost every case. -- Yes I will help -- -- No I won't-- There is nothing about the "yes" option specific wording that will ever make me select the "No" if my character is going to help. I'd love to see more dialog options so i could help but do so because I am greedy or trying to manipulate someone as opposed to being a goodie good for example but even then the specifics of "I want more cash" or "We can use these fools as human shields" specifics won't much matter.