174 réponses à ce sujet

[Vincent-Vega]

I disagree. If Shepard could have interrupted Wrex, the scene would have been far less memorable. The fact that Wrex didn't care what Shepard thought made the scene so special.

[Bob from Accounting]

Whether Shepard can react in time to stop Wrex from drawing his weapon and executing Fist is not dependent on whether Wrex cares or not.

[Vincent-Vega]

Planescape: Torment has some interesting moments like that that I think are pretty magnificently done as well!
 

 

Oh yes, Planescape: Torment. A great game. Definitely one the best games I've ever played.

[Vincent-Vega]

Ok,  "Wrex didn't care what Shepard thought" is my interpretation of the scene and the reason I like it. Just replace it with: "The fact that Shepard couldn't stop him made the scene so special."

[Sylvius the Mad]

Hmm, what exactly do you mean by that? Being able to control our companions in conversations would be a terrible idea IMO. The interjections in DA2 were great and I would like it very much if they returned, but our companions are independent characters and therefore should act like independent characters as much as possible.

If that's true, then they should behave independently in combat and select their own talents at level-up.

 

I'd like to be able to use any party member as party spokesperson (like we could in BG), and DA2 took a big step in that direction.  If the PC isn't the best person to do the talking, he shouldn't necessarily be the one doing the talking.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think that the problems isn't that they aren't supported, it's they never were in the first place and it's just now starting to reach the point where it can't be ignored or missed.

If it could be consistently done then it was supported, regardless of whether that support was intentional.

 

And there was a time when it absolutely was intentional.  Keyword-based dialogue systems clearly didn't assign tone.  BG explicitly allowed the player to control any party member in conversation (the feature was even documented).

 

Moreover, if there's some new way to play the game that is supported, I'd like some indication of what that playstyle is and how to do it.  I've asked many people many times for years, and no one has offered any useful guidance on how to use these paraphrases with the voiced protagonist.

[JadePrince]

I definitely feel like if we have the option to ask our companions for advice or input, we shouldn't automatically know what they're going to say. After all, unless the Rift closing ability has given us ESP, we can't read our companions' minds. I like that there's a certain element of risk-- that we can't be sure what our companions will say or do when we ask them to step in or ask for their input. It makes them feel more like real, fleshed out characters instead of puppets whose every move we direct (even if we can technically do that in battle, haha). 

 

I wouldn't even mind if the companions also had interjections that weren't asked for-- especially if it fit their character. It might make the player think twice about, say for instance, bringing a hot-headed companion into a tense meeting/situation where they might be prone to interrupt or otherwise disrupt negotiations with their strongly-held opinions. Maybe coding something like that would be too complex for this game, but it could be interesting!

 

It always struck me as a little odd in DA2 how there were situations (like letting the escaped mage Emile De Launcet go), where Fenris, for example, really should have said something disapproving, but instead stood there and let me get away with it without even a comment.

[Vincent-Vega]

If that's true, then they should behave independently in combat and select their own talents at level-up.

 

 

Gameplay vs. characterisation. Two very different things.

 

 

I'd like to be able to use any party member as party spokesperson (like we could in BG), and DA2 took a big step in that direction.  If the PC isn't the best person to do the talking, he shouldn't necessarily be the one doing the talking.

 

An interesting idea, I see two problems though: 

1. This would be impossible to implement. Bioware would have to voice each dialogue 9! times. (+4 PCs)

2. Controlling your companions and having them say what you want would be totally ridiculous. E.g. Anders saying: "All mages are a danger and must die!"

[Bob from Accounting]

The player character is in charge.

 

This sounds nice, and can have it's place for big decisions, but ultimately, having companions chide the player every time they might treat someone rudely or be a jerk (which could happen many, many dozens of times throughout a game) as might 'realistically' be proper is not going to be fun for long. It's just going to make players hate the companions and wish they were by themselves. I can see characters commenting on issues their arc is tied to, which they sometimes do in modern games, but that's about it.

 

Making a fun and functioning game has to come first.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Gameplay vs. characterisation. Two very different things.

They shouldn't be.  There should be no divide between gameplay and story or lore or characterisation.  The gameplay should be consistent with the setting, of which the characters are a part.

An interesting idea, I see two problems though: 

1. This would be impossible to implement. Bioware would have to voice every dialogue 9! times. (+4 PCs)

2. Controling your companions and having them say what you want would be totally ridicoulous (which you could do in BG). E.g. Anders saying: "All mages are a danger and must die!"

For the first, this was a big part of why I opposed voicing the PC (or any of the player-selected lines).  That the DAO PC was silent was part of my argument for why we should have been able to use any character as party spokesperson in that game.  All you've really done here is make a strong argument against voices.

 

For the second, companions should leave the party if they don't agree with it.  As the player in a party-based game, you choose the party's direction.  If Anders can't live with that direction, he should leave.  This should be possible at any point in the game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The player character is in charge.

No, the player is in charge.  The player and the player character are very different things.

[AresKeith]

They shouldn't be.  There should be no divide between gameplay and story or lore or characterisation.  The gameplay should be consistent with the setting, of which the characters are a part.

 

By that logic we wouldn't get past the first Abomination we fight

[Bob from Accounting]

They shouldn't be.  There should be no divide between gameplay and story or lore or characterisation.  The gameplay should be consistent with the setting, of which the characters are a part.

 

That's about as useful as saying power plants should run on fairy dust and produce tasty ice cream as a waste product while giving us all free energy.

 

It would be nice. But the universe just doesn't work that way, and that's really the end of it.

[Vincent-Vega]

They shouldn't be.  There should be no divide between gameplay and story or lore or characterisation.  The gameplay should be consistent with the setting, of which the characters are a part.

 

 

For the first, this was a big part of why I opposed voicing the PC (or any of the player-selected lines).  That the DAO PC was silent was part of my argument for why we should have been able to use any character as party spokesperson in that game.  All you've really done here is make a strong argument against voices.

 

For the second, companions should leave the party if they don't agree with it.  As the player in a party-based game, you choose the party's direction.  If Anders can't live with that direction, he should leave.  This should be possible at any point in the game.

 

Ok, I'm totally confused now. It's like you're talking about another game.

[fchopin]

One of the best (IMO) features of DA2 was the opportunity to have characters in the party interject in dialogue based on their specialities or character traits - whether it was Aveline pressuring persons as a city guard or Varric creatively BSing, or even Anders just plain being a healer. 
 
Will this be a feature in DA:I?

Have you an example of this as I don’t understand.

[The Elder King]

Have you an example of this as I don’t understand.

He's talking about the special dialogue options that pop out when a companion can help you. For example, when Bethany/Carver can help you calm the Fereldan group that threaten you in Anders' recruitment quest, or when Merrill/Anders can check if Keran is free of demonic possession in Enemies Among Us.

[The Elder King]

In Dragon age 2, there was a mission where you had to rescue that templar from blood mages. After the mission ended and you begun interrogating him, there was an option to ask merril if the templar was free from blood mage corruption.
 
Merrill is a blood magic advocate in this case and she had the knowledge to make the assessment.

technically the quest allowed Anders to check it too. Though I find Merrill's method better.

[fchopin]

In Dragon age 2, there was a mission where you had to rescue that templar from blood mages. After the mission ended and you begun interrogating him, there was an option to ask merril if the templar was free from blood mage corruption.
 
Merrill is a blood magic advocate in this case and she had the knowledge to make the assessment.

I see, yes nothing wrong with this idea unless they take it too far.

[The Elder King]

I see, yes nothing wrong with this idea unless they take it to far.

What do you mean with too far?

[fchopin]

He's talking about the special dialogue options that pop out when a companion can help you. For example, when Bethany/Carver can help you calm the Fereldan group that threaten you in Anders' recruitment quest.

That was a good scene and we could also avoid fighting so I like this.

[fchopin]

What do you mean with too far?

I meant as long as it is kept just for this and is not extended in to longer sequences for other reasons.

[The Elder King]

  

I meant as long as it is kept just for this and is not extended in to longer sequences for other reasons.

I don't think it'll happen. Maybe there'll be more times when the companion options can pop up (considering we have more companions this time).