332 réponses à ce sujet

[Star fury]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Only a mentally ill person thinks sarcasm is appropriate in EVERY social situation,

Posters above do think that "sarcasm is appropriate in EVERY social situation" or so it seems. 

CybAnt1 wrote...

It never made sense to me
that in just about everything Hawke encountered or had to respond to,
there was ALWAYS somehow a sarcastic, aggressive, or peaceful response.
Let alone that those were the only three ways he could respond.

Exactly. I don't get how some don't understand that. Bioware should've greyed out some tones in some dialogues, i.e. sarcastic line when speaking about dead people in front of their relatives.

[Star fury]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

What makes you think they are sticking with a three tone system? They have stated they are not carrying the Dominant Tone into DA:I, which would mean they wouldn't be forced to use the same three tones for most interactions. 

They are indeed sticking with a three tone system. You just won't be forced to have dominant tone when you used one tone too much in DAI.

[Arakat]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Complaining that the sarcastic tone is inappropriate when someone was just killed is like playing a vuvuzela at a funeral and complaining to the creator that the sound it made was contextually inappropriate.

And saying that the person who sold the vuvuzela should have stopped you from buying it because you might play it at a funeral.

If only the "appropriate" tones were availbable in any given situation, it would severely restrict the roleplaying, since not everyone is always playing a polite goody-two-shoes character. Like someone mentioned before, Bioware games have always given the possibility to roleplay the most insufferable jerk in existence.

I'm not saying the DA2 system isn't flawed or occasionally misleading - it definitely is. But complaining about "inappropriate" lines when you were the one who picked them - knowing the intended tone - seems a bit odd imo.

Modifié par arakat, 23 février 2014 - 03:51 .

[CybAnt1]

What makes you think they are sticking with a three tone system? They have stated they are not carrying the Dominant Tone into DA:I, which would mean they wouldn't be forced to use the same three tones for most interactions. 
EDIT: NVM, I must have missed that section when I read Gaider's response earlier in the thread. 

There are going to be three tones, Direct, Clever, Noble.

BTW, beyond that, we don't know whether they will be used on the tone wheel in an exact reduplication of the DA2 sarcastic/aggressive/diplomatic system, or not.

I hope not. Similar could mean != Same. 

(I know you posted NVM indicating you saw what Lord Gaider posted, this is just for general clarification.)

But yes, there is no dominant tone, so being Direct a lot of the time will not increase the "directness" of your Clever or Noble responses - etc, etc. 

[CybAnt1]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Complaining that the sarcastic tone is inappropriate when someone was just killed is like playing a vuvuzela at a funeral and complaining to the creator that the sound it made was contextually inappropriate.

Yes, someone playing a vuvuzuela as a funeral would be considered mentally ill.

So why are we even being given the option to play Hawke as mentally ill, when (presumably) he is sane? 

That option should be grayed out. 

[CybAnt1]

I'm not saying the DA2 system isn't flawed or occasionally misleading - it definitely is. But complaining about "inappropriate" lines when you were the one who picked them - knowing the intended tone - seems a bit odd imo.

Again, it all depends on what one defines as "sarcasm". Not all sarcasm is meant to be deeply insulting, it can also be humorously light-hearted. Mocking a situation rather than a person. 

But here's the most interesting thing of all. Remember the word "sarcastic" is not used to define that choice in game. The icon tones in the game for that choice are actually called "Humorous"/"Charming". 

So here's the real question. Why should someone think playing a vuvuzuela at a funeral is either humorous or charming? 

It seems the real problem the dialogue wheel and tone system now creates is a differential between how players understand tone representation and how the writers understand tone representation. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 23 février 2014 - 04:02 .

[Aner91]

CybAnt1 wrote...

I'm not saying the DA2 system isn't flawed or occasionally misleading - it definitely is. But complaining about "inappropriate" lines when you were the one who picked them - knowing the intended tone - seems a bit odd imo.

Again, it all depends on what one defines as "sarcasm". Not all sarcasm is meant to be deeply insulting, it can also be humorously light-hearted. Mocking a situation rather than a person. 

But here's the most interesting thing of all. Remember the word "sarcastic" is not used to define that choice in game. The icon tones in the game for that choice are actually called "Humorous"/"Charming". 

So here's the real question. Why should someone think playing a vuvuzuela at a funeral is either humorous or charming? 

It seems the real problem the dialogue wheel and tone system now creates is a differential between how players understand tone representation and how the writers understand tone representation. 

I think so too, But why would you pick the Humorous/Charming  tone, when someone has died, in this case a FATHER holding is dead SON. What did you expect Hawke to say? "Well, atleast he wasen't killed by a stampeding horde of froliking elves...".  Nah, you would show some kind of tact, i hope, and choice the "peaceful" tone (If that's what it's called). I have a "Foot-in-mouth" dissorder, but not even i would have said something like that . For DA:I i guess we will have to wait and see what the "new" dialoge wheel will have in store for us=]

[Fast Jimmy]

But yes, there is no dominant tone, so being Direct a lot of the time will not increase the "directness" of your Clever or Noble responses - etc, etc.

True... although Gaider does say that the "Special" sub menu may have options grayed out if you hadn't chosen previous dialogue options.

So it is possible (at least in theory) for dialogue to be locked out if you hadn't been Clever or Direct in previous dealings with an NPC. Which is fair... and something I like in theory. It helps avoid the feeling that the options you see are the only ones available in any circumstance, which diminishes the desire to replay for me, personally.

[CybAnt1]

There are ways to do humor with tact. Sometimes at sad occasions a light joke can help lift the mood. I have heard people say funny stories about dead people at funerals, sometimes a funny anecdote. But they wouldn't mock the person or their family.

So here's the crazy thing.

The thing about reading and seeing dialogue before your character says it is at least you get a chance beforehand to see if what the writer's "reading" of tone and paraphrase (input to output) is similar to yours or not, before something staggeringly odd comes out of your mouth.

This is why some of us crazy folk want it. At the end of the day, maybe we will be choosing between three choices that all seem off, but at least we can pick the "least-off" of the 3.

[KaiserShep]

Star fury wrote...

esper wrote...

Star fury wrote...

If "clever" responses will be as funny as were "sarcastic" lines in DA2, I'm going to throw up. Nothing beats Hawke making fun of dead people in front of their relatives, when you choose sarcastic replies.

http://cloud.steampo...13E1D0910A2CEE/


http://cloud.steampo...49869BDB4118FD/

http://gigglesquee.blogspot.com

Don't pick a respose marked as sarcastic when someone dies then. It is hard not to make that a jerkish line and it really should not surprise you that we can be jerks in a bioware game. We always have had the option to be collosal jerks. espically to authority figures.

Oh, look how some are so touchy with their favourite toy.

Sarcasm is good when it's appropriate, here and there. But it becomes awful when Bioware chose it to make a dialogue tone for the entire game. Bioware writers really struggled with writing sarcastic responses in DA2, i.e. my example above. I'd say sarcastic lines were okay in 1 out of 10 cases at best. Bioware should've made sarcastic replies rare, only when it's appropriate and not in every dialogue.

I really really hope "clever' lines of DAI wouldn't be like sarcastic ones in DA2.

1 out of 10 seems rather low from what I've seen of the interactions in the game. I'd say there were plenty of times when it was totally fitting to joke at another person's expense, more than simply 1 out of 10. But I guess that's the thing: what's considered appropriate is not something we can really agree on completely. Sure, I would agree that being sarcastic to Viscount Dumar would not be appropriate, but that's why I chose the diplomatic option instead. If the complaint is with dominant tone, then that's another matter, because that's not the case in this situation.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

True... although Gaider does say that the "Special" sub menu may have options grayed out if you hadn't chosen previous dialogue options.

I dislike this.  If there's something my character is not allowed to say (because my character lacks relevant knowledge, perhaps), then I'd rather not see the option.

But if I'm not allowed to say it because it leads to a consequence I haven't done the ground work to produce, I would prefer instead that I am allowed to say it and I get a different result.

The dialogue options are a list of things we can say.  If the greyed out option is the one that is appropriate for my character, I will find my inability to select it very frustrating.  I do not think that I should be able, necessarily, to get any converation outcome regardless of what I've done previously, but I should be allowed to say just about anything.

Sometimes saying those things just won't have the outcome it might have under other circumstances.  There's your replayability.

[KaiserShep]

I don't get the greyed out thing. If certain options are unavailable because of prior options you didn't select, why not just leave it out? Example, when Hawke and co reach Kirkwall, you can't tell the guard at the gallows about people being allowed in to engage in legitimate business if you didn't touch on the subject with the first guard at the dock. Maybe I'm missing something. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 février 2014 - 09:49 .

[Reznore57]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I dislike this.  If there's something my character is not allowed to say (because my character lacks relevant knowledge, perhaps), then I'd rather not see the option.

But if I'm not allowed to say it because it leads to a consequence I haven't done the ground work to produce, I would prefer instead that I am allowed to say it and I get a different result.

The dialogue options are a list of things we can say.  If the greyed out option is the one that is appropriate for my character, I will find my inability to select it very frustrating.  I do not think that I should be able, necessarily, to get any converation outcome regardless of what I've done previously, but I should be allowed to say just about anything.

Sometimes saying those things just won't have the outcome it might have under other circumstances.  There's your replayability.

I don't like it either.
Usualy special options in dialogue can solve conflicts (in ME ...) If I can't use it I will probably feel like I've played the wrong way.
I like the fact that In Fallout NV , if your speech/science etc wasn't high enough you could still give an answer.
But I didn't like the fact that those special dialogue were always problem solvers.
It's like you don't even have to read or think about what your character is talking about, you just push the "I win" button.

[EmperorSahlertz]

So people are now complaining that the sarcastic option when commenting on the death of someone's child is being a sarcastic dick? Really? Didn't you ever think NOT to pick the sarcastic option to comment on the death of someone, if you didn't want to sound like a dick? Your own shortcommings in foresight is NOT a fault of the game....

[Realmzmaster]

I do not care to se grayed out options. I rather that option not be present in the responses. I see no purpose in showing responses that cannot be selected.

[CybAnt1]

 'cept it's not called "sarcastic" per se in the manual or the Wiki, Emperor.

Humorous  Core dialogue choice for the Humorous personality type. Rarely causes offense. Hawke makes a sarcastic comment or jokes about the situation. Tends to be a fairly neutral option among companions, though Isabela and Varric oftentimes respond favorably.

Charming  Secondary dialogue choice for the Humorous type personality. Hawke assumes an appealing or smooth tone of voice. Rarely sees rivalry or friendship points added.

So the question is, a Humorous or Charming reaction could be one that doesn't cause offense and is actually appealing to the person being spoken to. 

Or it could be (maliciously) Sarcastic, where it IS offensive to the person being spoken to. 

See, that's the thing. How do you know which kind of response will be generated, if you can't read it before Hawke/you/now-its-the-Quiz speaks? Has the mystic tone icon marker dispelled this ambiguity?

This is why Ieldra and I have been asking for this. Solely for the jelly bellies. :innocent:

Modifié par CybAnt1, 23 février 2014 - 10:00 .

[HiroVoid]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

So people are now complaining that the sarcastic option when commenting on the death of someone's child is being a sarcastic dick? Really? Didn't you ever think NOT to pick the sarcastic option to comment on the death of someone, if you didn't want to sound like a dick? Your own shortcommings in foresight is NOT a fault of the game....

Well, some people are complaining on how every wheel has to involve a sarcastic option no matter the event which is why people advocate for more emotions in DA:I.  Of course, DAII's partial reasoning aside from structure was the dominant tone.

[KaiserShep]

CybAnt1 wrote...

 'cept it's not called "sarcastic" per se in the manual or the Wiki, Emperor.

HumorousCore dialogue choice for the Humorous personality type. Rarely causes offense. Hawke makes a sarcastic comment or jokes about the situation.

It does cause offense for more serious companions and other NPC's however, even if it only occasionally gains rivalry, like if you use the sarcastic comment upon arrival to the docks, it nets you 10 rivalry with Aveline. I'm pretty sure Fenris is finicky about humorous comments too, particularly when he's discussing his past as a slave. In any case, I don't think there's a single humorous or sarcastic response that would be well received by a father grieving over his son's corpse. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 23 février 2014 - 10:05 .

[CybAnt1]

Like I said, I most definitely have heard humor at funerals, if used with tact, no one minds.

Flippant, irreverent sarcasm - usually NOT taken very well: you're absolutely right.

The question is, as I keep asking, what does the tone/icon mean to players (does it mean the same thing to each player?), what does it mean to the writers writing to the dialogue, has it really saved players from the problem of ambiguity?

(Does humorous = humorous with sarcasm (I know YOU view it that way my good Kaiser, the question is does everybody?), or humorous with polite tact? Doesn't "charming" usually require being inoffensive?)

Or: Has it added a different layer of ambiguity? Because different players, and the writers, **are understanding the tones differently**? 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 23 février 2014 - 10:09 .

[javeart]

I can see why someone could pick the "sarcastic" option and still be shocked about what hawke actually says, because they way they're used, the options (diplomatic/agressive/sarcastic) look much more like "personalities" than "tones", so one could assume that the sarcastic option wouldn't be exactly a sarcastic answer, but rather an appropriate reaction from a "sarcastic type of person".... I don't even fully understand why are they called "tones", it's a little bit confusing... And the new categories (noble/clever/direct) sound even more like personality types.

My biggest problem with sarcastic Hawke, anyway, was the way she monopolised all the humour, when there are different senses of humour and I think it wouldn't be out of place if a diplomatic or an agressive answer would be a little bit at least humorous... would it? It would make the diplomatic/noble and aggressive/direct options more atractive, for me at least

And, finally, I'm all in favour of being given the chance to play extreme personalities (like one who jokes a father whose son just died), but when you have only three options... well, to me, sometimes it feels like a waste...

Modifié par javeart, 23 février 2014 - 10:30 .

[KC_Prototype]

over exaggeration much OP?

[AlanC9]

Realmzmaster wrote...

I do not care to se grayed out options. I rather that option not be present in the responses. I see no purpose in showing responses that cannot be selected.

Transparency of the persuasion system doesn't count?

[Heimdall]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Like I said, I most definitely have heard humor at funerals, if used with tact, no one minds.

That's one thing.  A grieving father cradling his son's corpse having just found out is another.

[Heimdall]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

True... although Gaider does say that the "Special" sub menu may have options grayed out if you hadn't chosen previous dialogue options.

I dislike this.  If there's something my character is not allowed to say (because my character lacks relevant knowledge, perhaps), then I'd rather not see the option.

But if I'm not allowed to say it because it leads to a consequence I haven't done the ground work to produce, I would prefer instead that I am allowed to say it and I get a different result.

The dialogue options are a list of things we can say.  If the greyed out option is the one that is appropriate for my character, I will find my inability to select it very frustrating.  I do not think that I should be able, necessarily, to get any converation outcome regardless of what I've done previously, but I should be allowed to say just about anything.

Sometimes saying those things just won't have the outcome it might have under other circumstances.  There's your replayability.

I think replayability is the point, telling the player that "there is another way to go about this if you chose differently".

It strikes me as a fairly crude method.

[Hiemoth]

javeart wrote...

My biggest problem with sarcastic Hawke, anyway, was the way she monopolised all the humour, when there are different senses of humour and I think it wouldn't be out of place if a diplomatic or an agressive answer would be a little bit at least humorous... would it? It would make the diplomatic/noble and aggressive/direct options more atractive, for me at least

That is a good point about the sarcastic Hawke monopolizing the jokes and one I had not personally considered before. In a way I understand their desire to be consistent in that if you choose this tone, there will most likely be a joke, while if you choose that, there will be seriousness, but it would be great to see those touches of humor more prominent with the other tones.

Although to be fair, there was a fair amount of humor also with diplomatic Hawke, including some my favorite funny moments in DA2, but they more often utilize the sheer earnestness and sincerity of that Hawke. For example one of the last discussions with Isabella, where she makes an exaggarated claim about a burning orpahanage, diplomatic Hawke's response killed me. So that would be perhaps an approach I would love to see expanded upon in DAI, with how different tones react in a humorous situation instead of having those jokes spread out in to other tones.