544 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

abnocte wrote...
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...

LOL. That's what I've been saying: to roleplay with paraphrasing, you have to memorize all possible player character dialogue.

Perhaps we should do that indeed.

[nightscrawl]

superdeathdealer14 wrote...

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

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of the description regarding plot choices in DAI. The purpose is not to see the full line of dialog, it is so that there is no confusion when you make an important plot choice. Think of it as a confirmation dialog. "Do you want to save Crestwood? Yes/No." Obviously, the game isn't going to ask that, but it is a clear representation of what will happen when you pick a certain choice.

To use familiar situations, imagine that the same description happened when you are asked to help Redcliffe -- indeed if you do attempt to leave before the battle is complete you will be stopped by an NPC and also given a confirmation dialog --, or when asked to decide between Vigil's Keep and Amaranthine in DAA.

I'm not sure I actually like the idea of having this kind of descriptive plot text, since it seems like it takes away from exploration and finding out solutions (or repercussions) for yourself, and is also rather "gamey," breaking immersion. But we won't be having these often, so I'll have to see how it works out.

Sidney wrote...

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.

Not all dialogs are quests though. In DA2 there were many dialogs, particularly with companions, that were just regular conversation and didn't lead to a yes/no result. Also, many quest dialogs have multiple parts leading up to the accept/decline of the quest that are part of general conversation as well.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:27 .

[CybAnt1]

I
Here's a list of the intended meanings. Needless, to say, they often aren't correct. The diamond icon in particular was often used in confusing ways.

Well, here comes my favorite song & dance number. You've all heard it before. It's not just a paraphrase, which leads to a longer line. 

In a world with varying social situations, not all options should be available. Like being told your mother died, then turning to the Humorous option. Also, BTW, in that situation, I sure would like a Sad/Remorseful response, rather than one that was humorous, aggressive, or diplomatic. P.S. I think the reaction wheel means we're moving toward this, but as always, we haven't seen implementation of options. 

You know what? My dislike of the wheel would be a lot less if this icon showed up close to 100% of the time.

Choice -- Appears when Hawke can choose from multiple responses that all address the situation in different ways. May lead to a rivalry or friendship increase. Your guide should be your knowledge of the person in question.

[end]

Time was when roleplaying was all about "Choice" ... "of multiple responses that address the situations in different ways" ("but aren't conveniently and tonally marked for players in all situations") 

But I'd say I only saw it about 10% of the time. There's the heart of my dislike with the wheel. As the very text for the icon shows, it only showed up in companion conversations (the only people with whom you could have friendship or rivalry). Why not with conversations with other NPCs?

Modifié par CybAnt1, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:30 .

[Ieldra]

9TailsFox wrote...
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).

I've been trying to understand this, and I think there are two issues, one obvious one and one not-so-obvious one:

(1) Often, choosing an option results in a multiple-line exchange between two characters, and making the player be able to choose every line separately is both undesirable because it would interrupt the scene and unnecessary because later lines are a logical continuation of the first. In that case, you'd clog up the screen with vast amounts of text. Not good.

(2) Screenwriting is different from book writing. You can't write a spoken line as if you were writing a written line. It will sound odd, most often dry and the characters might come across as if they read a line from a book. On the other hand, spoken lines can communicate things you can't get from the written lines, by using different tones and stresses. For that reason, showing the spoken lines as text on-screen can be misleading.

So why did it work in DXHR? Well, it worked because Adam Jensen was always deadpan, like JC Denton in the first Deus Ex. The developers wanted to leave Jensen's emotional state completely in the imagination of the player, or they didn't want to bother with the possible pitfalls if they added emotional lines. For that reason, there was never a problem with Jensen's lines being interpreted wrongly - the spoken lines didn't carry *any* specific tone, as much as the voice actor could manage, but there was also a much weaker sense of identity.

Clearly, Bioware feels that having a stronger sense of identity, that the PC is really a real person the player can shape rather than a cipher to be filled by the player's imagination, that the players have to make real first before they can shape them, that this is worth sacrificing some player control for.

The thing is, I don't completely disagree. The Warden - who worked like Jensen because they weren't voiced at all - felt more mine, but Hawke felt more real. Where my ideal character will fall in this continuum, and if it's even possible, I don't know, but I do know I want more control than I had with Hawke, even though Hawke was worlds better than Shepard.

[Sir JK]

Ieldra2 wrote...

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.

Oh indeed, I definantely agree that those are the principal challanges any dialogue presentation system needs to overcome. Present sufficient information and to maintain the illusion of control. I'd say that the third challenge is to provide enough ambiguity in the choices to allow them to cover multiple characters.

I never had a problem with the paraphrases. Between context, the paraphrases and the tonal icons I recieved enough information to never have Hawke do something I did not anticipate, and only once for Shepard (amusingly, that turned out better than I had imagined). On the other hand, I've actually been tricked by the presentation in Origins.
But I understand why some people have. The icons aren't the most reliable tools. Particularly the problem with sentiments is one I've noticed.

Presumably, more icons could be a solution. But then it'd run into the problem of trying to remember the meaning of them all. You wouldn't want to consult a legend just to figure out what exactly this line means.

Modifié par Sir JK, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:42 .

[CybAnt1]

Kaiser Arian wrote...
I prefer this style of dialogues:

Well, that makes two of us. But, we ain't gonna get it. The wheel is in again, that's known. 

So ... I would say I could like it better if it 
a) provided more emotional range and used the "Choice" icon a lot more often
had some way - tooltip seems best, I know there are people who don't care, I'm not one of them - to see what the full line is that's going to be delivered

Thanks to Ieldra for bringing it up. It's like a taboo topic. "But ... but ... what about the voicing of the protag?" 

There is a solution that can make both factions happy. I guess that would be choosing the "Diplomatic" response to the problem. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:39 .

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

They could do it like Deus Ex, where if you lingered over a paraphrase long enough it would show up with the full dialogue so you knew what Jensen was gonna say if you use that line. That way you can have a paraphrase without having the full dialogue clogging the screen if you didn't want to.

I would like something like that very much.

I ended up saving before every conversation in Dragon Age, because it was nearly impossible to tell what was actually going to be said.

[TheChris92]

CrustyBot wrote...

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*

Prof. Oak needs to randomly show up in the beginning of Inqusition, during the CC screen, and ask nonchalantly -- Are you a boy or a girl?

[CybAnt1]

Maybe they just said "we want Bioware to have a united front and use the same UI for all games."

You know, I played ME1's demo. Didn't like that wheel thingy. Wasn't the only thing. But said to myself, well at least they're still doing DA with a dialogue tree. 

Then bam, it was there in DA2. And I think at the time they stated the reason for the design decision was, having implemented it already in ME, it was just a matter of porting over to DA. Fewer zots. Most of the code was already written. 

Not sure if this will start a flame war, but ... I can see why a wheel works for Mass Effect (which is not my cup of tea, but get why it would be others'), it just doesn't work for Dragon Age, which is a different type of RPG. Mass Effect was planned as an action-RPG from day one -- DA wasn't. 

That's it. I figure I can say that, as long as other people have been brave enough to call it the worst design decision eva. 

[Ieldra]

Sir JK wrote...
Presumably, more icons could be a solution. But then it'd run into the problem of trying to remember the meaning of them all. You wouldn't want to consult a legend just to figure out what exactly this line means.

No, but it would be better than having to make test runs and memorize all dialogue before starting any real playthrough.

[Sundance31us]

TheChris92 wrote...

Are you a boy or a girl?

My mind read that in Liam Neeson's voice...does that mean I play too much FO3?

[CybAnt1]

I never had a problem with the paraphrases. 

You want to know something? I honestly, really can't think of a moment in Origins where I picked the wrong text line because it wasn't tonally marked. By that, I mean, honestly, I just don't remember this as a problem, or surely it would stand out in my mind. I can't remember ever flirting and starting a romance by accident, picking a line that was aggressive and started combat without me realizing it was tonally angry, etc. For me, this felt like a solution to a problem that I never experienced - or if I ever did it didn't rise to the level of insurmountable irritation.

Like a lot of gaming design choice faction wars, I think this comes to people experiencing different problems, and not getting what the other side is experiencing.

You never had problems with the paraphrases? I never had problems with text-as-written, without icons. But then I got a solution to a problem I wasn't having. 

[Fast Jimmy]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Maybe they just said "we want Bioware to have a united front and use the same UI for all games." 

 

You know, I played ME1's demo. Didn't like that wheel thingy. Wasn't the only thing. But said to myself, well at least they're still doing DA with a dialogue tree. 

Then bam, it was there in DA2. And I think at the time they stated the reason for the design decision was, having implemented it already in ME, it was just a matter of porting over to DA. Fewer zots. Most of the code was already written. 

Not sure if this will start a flame war, but ... I can see why a wheel works for Mass Effect (which is not my cup of tea, but get why it would be others'), it just doesn't work for Dragon Age, which is a different type of RPG. Mass Effect was planned as an action-RPG from day one -- DA wasn't. 

That's it. I figure I can say that, as long as other people have been brave enough to call it the worst design decision eva. 

A line (and I apologize, I don't have the link - but I think it may have been from the DA2 Strategy Guide, which had a lot of "behind the scenes" stuff in it, so there wouldn't be an online link - was discussing the wheel for DA2, specifically the introduction of the icons. There was talk about making the wheel radically different from ME, but they realized they were just trying to make it different because they wanted to be different as it was a different series. So they went with mostly the ME approach, but added icons to help the player out. A sentiment which I can agree with, but which had me puzzled. 

It sounded a lot less like "this is a great tool me uses, we can totally use a variation of that for DA" and, instead "well, we are being told we have to use this, so let's try and come up with a way to give it a DA stamp of uniqueness." That may be reading too much into it, but it just struck me that the team viewed the wheel not as a new tool they wanted to borrow, but a design decision forced on them that they had to solution for. 

Just my my personal perceptions and musings, pay me no need. 

[nightscrawl]

Ieldra2 wrote...

(2) Screenwriting is different from book writing. You can't write a spoken line as if you were writing a written line. It will sound odd, most often dry and the characters might come across as if they read a line from a book. On the other hand, spoken lines can communicate things you can't get from the written lines, by using different tones and stresses. For that reason, showing the spoken lines as text on-screen can be misleading.

I play the games with subtitles on. I read along as I hear the dialog. In DA2 this included my Hawke as well as the NPCs. Presumably DAI will also have a subtitle option. The written preview wouldn't be written dialog, as in the form of a book, it would be the exact text that is already written for the subtitles, which is a direct transcript of what the characters actually say.

Your book example only partly works. It really depends on the author and their style of writing dialog. Some authors are very loose with dialog and do write it very closely to how real people actually talk (Jeffery Deaver is a good example of this type), while others put in a bit more structure, even with characters who shouldn't have it because of limited education and so forth.

Some authors like to put in authentic regional dialect into their works (the Bronte sisters did this with the Yorkshire dialect in their works, and Stephen King often does this in his, primarily with Maine dialect), while others prefer to simply describe said dialect while continuing to write in a normal manner.

[nightscrawl]

CybAnt1 wrote...

You want to know something? I honestly, really can't think of a moment in Origins where I picked the wrong text line because it wasn't tonally marked. By that, I mean, honestly, I just don't remember this as a problem, or surely it would stand out in my mind. I can't remember ever flirting and starting a romance by accident, picking a line that was aggressive and started combat without me realizing it was tonally angry, etc. For me, this felt like a solution to a problem that I never experienced - or if I ever did it didn't rise to the level of insurmountable irritation.

A dialog example I like to mention from DAO is during the conversation where Alistair tells you about his parentage. One of the lines is "So you're not just a bastard, but a royal bastard?" This is not something I would say to someone. However, Alistair takes it as amusing, and the devs meant for it to be a humorous line, which you can tell by Alistair's response. I never took it that way when I saw it.

As far as ninjamancing goes, you're fortunate then. I'm going to suggest that most of the ninjamances, with Leliana in particular, were from female players talking to her like a close girlfriend, as I did. Then suddenly she starts talking about love when that was something I never intended when talking about our hair.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 28 janvier 2014 - 02:15 .

[Ieldra]

CybAnt1 wrote...
You never had problems with the paraphrases? I never had problems with text-as-written, without icons. But then I got a solution to a problem I wasn't having.

Bioware claims it's a problem that would appear with voiced protagonists, so we don't have a valid comparison.

But yeah, I agree. I never had any problems with things like this in any Bioware game between 1998 and 2009, and not in the other RPGs I've played, not even in those where the main character *was* fully voiced. Never. So it's pretty much not just a solution to a not-existing problem (heh....ME3 comes to mind) but making things worse in an attempt to make them better.

Edit:
Alistair's "royal bastard" line was immediately apparent as making fun of it to me, and I'm not even a native speaker.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 janvier 2014 - 02:16 .

[Sith Grey Warden]

This is pretty much the one thing that could keep me from buying DAI within weeks of launch. If we're given insufficient information to know what the PC is going to do, I'm most likely not getting the game until it's on sale for under $20.

[Sir JK]

Ieldra2 wrote...

No, but it would be better than having to make test runs and memorize all dialogue before starting any real playthrough.

Indeed.

Hmm... just pure speculation here... but a range of icons and an explanation of what they mean at the top of the wheel. Ie. if you have the diplomatic line selected it'd say "Diplomatic" at the top of the wheel. Thus minimizing the risk of confusing one icon with another (or misunderstanding what they mean) and allowing more of them...

I wonder how that would work.

CybAnt1 wrote...
You never had problems with the paraphrases? I never had problems with text-as-written, without icons. But then I got a solution to a problem I wasn't having.

That's not what the paraphrases are supposed to solve though. They're there to solve problems that came with the introduction of full cinematic dialogue, something none of their games with full text had.

[CybAnt1]

Oddly, that could have been handled with a simpler solution. BTW, I'm not trying to recreate those dialogues as this is hypothetical, just showing how it could be done.

1. Alistair, your parentage is fascinating.
2. Alistair, is this why you joined the templars?
3. [Humorous] Alistair, so you're not just a bastard, but a royal bastard?

1. Leliana, you are a great singer.
2. Leliana, you really are good in combat.
3. [Flirt] Leliana, I really like your hair.

It's easy enough to give a tone indicator in a text line. Just use brackets.

But let me just say this -- those problems were occasional right, not constant?

For occasional problems, an occasional tonal marker can help. It's not an argument for them being present for every line.

Granted, and I recognize this, writers sometimes won't know that they've written a crappy, ambiguous line that needs to be tonally marked. That's why there should be an editor, reviewing their work, deciding where a tonal marker has to be there for the player.

As I've said, I like tonal markers. They're definitely needed from time to time. But constantly? Well, not as I see it.

A lot of the time, I can tell an angry line is angry, without a big red fist letting me know it's angry. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 28 janvier 2014 - 02:23 .

[Mr.House]

They should go the way Human Revolutions did it, no excuse not to. Paraphrasing was horrible in the ME series and DA2(the only thing that made DA2 wheel better was its symbols)

[CybAnt1]

Hmm... just pure speculation here... but a range of icons and an explanation of what they mean at the top of the wheel. Ie. if you have the diplomatic line selected it'd say "Diplomatic" at the top of the wheel. Thus minimizing the risk of confusing one icon with another (or misunderstanding what they mean) and allowing more of them...

I don't think that's the issue. I may have fallen out of a turnip truck, but even without looking at the manual I know the difference between a big red fist, an olive branch, and a laughing actors' mask. 

The problem of understanding the icons is not the issue. It of course also helps that there are always in the same position, too. 

So, in essence, do I really need to read the paraphrase? Nah. Just pick the big red fist at the top. I'll say something angry. Eh, who cares what actual words I use. In fact, I should just go "MRRRRRRRRRRRRAWR," turn green and gigantic, and smash something. OK, maybe just the first part. 

Someday there's going to be a Shakespeare play where instead of saying,

To be, or not to be, that is the question—
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?

The actor will see on his script [Melancholy] Life is a bummer. 

[nightscrawl]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Oddly, that could have been handled with a simpler solution. BTW, I'm not trying to recreate those dialogues as this is hypothetical, just showing how it could be done.

1. Alistair, your parentage is fascinating.
2. Alistair, is this why you joined the templars?
3. [Humorous] Alistair, so you're not just a bastard, but a royal bastard?

1. Leliana, you are a great singer.
2. Leliana, you really are good in combat.
3. [Flirt] Leliana, I really like your hair.

It's easy enough to give a tone indicator in a text line. Just use brackets.

But let me just say this -- those problems were occasional right, not constant?

For occasional problems, an occasional tonal marker can help. It's not an argument for them being present for every line.

Granted, and I recognize this, writers sometimes won't know that they've written a crappy, ambiguous line that needs to be tonally marked. That's why there should be an editor, reviewing their work, deciding where a tonal marker has to be there for the player.

As I've said, I like tonal markers. They're definitely needed from time to time. But constantly? Well, not as I see it.

This is a matter of consistency though. To my mind you either have them all have tone indicators, as DA2 had, or none, as DAO had, not some with and some without, as in your example. To me that just looks sloppy.

DAO did have occasional intention indicators and that was for lying. There were specific instances where your character could lie and the option actually showed, "[Lie] No, I didn't take anything." In DA2 this was shown by a "fingers crossed" icon on the wheel.

To me this is part of the conflict between having a silent PC with one type of dialog system and a voiced PC with a different dialog system, and they are both limited by the very nature of it being a cRPG. You can have whatever intention you want with a silent PC when you say the line in your head, but the NPC will react in a certain way regardless of your intention. You can only hope that your intention matches up with what the developer intended when they wrote that line and the NPC's response. On the other hand, your intention with the voiced PC and the dialog wheel is clear. Even if we didn't know exactly what our words would be, the intention to be nice, humorous, aggressive, or flirty was there to see and hear. While the paraphrases were frustrating at times, I think of it as a gain in information, not a loss.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 28 janvier 2014 - 02:37 .

[Ieldra]

CybAnt1 wrote...
Someday there's going to be a Shakespeare play where instead of saying,

To be, or not to be, that is the question—
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?

The actor will see on his script [Melancholy] Life is a bummer.

That's good. Imagine getting that as a paraphase, and after choosing it hearing the famous words. Neatly illustrates much that is wrong with paraphrasing. Can someone *please* make a meme picture of this?

BTW:
Having fallen out of a turnip truck indicates a good Fereldan lineage

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 janvier 2014 - 02:39 .

[Sundance31us]

The can really only think of two suggestions I have (to BW) regarding dialogue/paraphrasing...

1) Get the meaning/context of the paraphrase right.

Example:

Mass Effect 2 the discussion with Jack (this is the one that can lead to the "fling" cut scene); the upper right paraphrase was something like, "No, I'd like to get to know you." What Shepard actually says is, "No, I'd like to get to know you first." That "first" at the end changes meaning/context of that line entirely.

2) Avoid too many extremes.

Example:

DA2 the discussion with Anders after helping him with Karl; it's been a while since I've played the scene, but my recollection of it was that Hawk can either kick the puppy or encourage the relationship. There was no middle ground or gentle rejection.

On a side note I do think the ME team did a beautiful job with the "gentle rejection" in ME3.

[nightscrawl]

Sundance31us wrote...

DA2 the discussion with Anders after helping him with Karl; it's been a while since I've played the scene, but my recollection of it was that Hawk can either kick the puppy or encourage the relationship. There was no middle ground or gentle rejection.

There absolutely was a middle ground. You could pick the purple option in that scene, avoiding encouragement (blue), flirting (heart), or rejection (red).