154 réponses à ce sujet

[TheJiveDJ]

I'll clarify that what you're complaining about is a result of there being more dialog overall (I think). Which is the same thing, one step removed.

 

But anyway, I obviously can't disagree with your opinion. Personally, I don't find the zoomed-in dialog any less immersive than a cinematic cutscene, as each contributes to the overall experience without breaking immersion. And I also think you're being a bit unfair by referring to the non-cinematic dialog as inferior quality. It's not cinematic, that's it. Unless you literally equate quality with things being animated and camera angles jumping, we can't agree at all. They put just as much effort into writing, editing, and integrating the non-cinematic dialog into the overall story. It's not a throwaway experience.

Curious. Would you hold cinema to the same standard? One director may opt to film a conversation scene with one long, boring wide shot, while another may use some fancy pans, and close ups to make the scene more intimate for the viewer. Sure, both "contribute to the overall experience", as you put it...but are they both truly of equal quality?

[dragonavicious]

I completely agree. I was tslking to my sister about this yesterday. All the side quests feel trivial now, even when they aren't. I always liked that Bioware played like interactive movies or novels.

Even though I am enjoying the game a lot, I find myself only wanting to do main quests for this reason but I know they arent as long as DAO so I dont want to rush through the plot. Its the only time I feel close to my inquisitor. (Althogh still a better protag then my Hawke. I must have accidentally chosen the worst option for everything because she was so useless )

[katzenkrimis]

lousy camera work.

Worst thing about this game.

Aside from the fact that there is an ominous silhouette of a video game console circling above us.

Speaking of which, I wish that damn thing would fly away. Like go hibernate or something. Fly south for the winter.

There must be some ragged mountain peak it can go nest.

And curl up.

To die.

[johnny.temper]

I don't mind them...there's no way we'd be getting even a fraction of the dialog in this game if every conversation had to be it's own cinematic, so very happy with the trade off. And it's not like the game is that short of them, certainly if you include the companion quests and the judgements into the mix...tho I accept that, depending on what stage of the game or what you're doing, they can be a bit few and far between at times.

I think Bioware should continue with this new conversation style - gives us more dialogue, but still voiced. Kind of an amalgamation of old school silent protagonist choice with more recent trend to be more film-like. Next game could benefit from the addition of an auto-correct on body alignments (so when conversation is initiated, both turn to face each other directly automatically) and maybe add zoom to the current camera control (but that might be a little over the top).

[Kage]

the more dialogue, the better. The more story, the better.

so I love the new dialogue system non-cinematic, so they can develop more the characters with the same budget.

[Deamo]

Since the decrease in cinematics is why we are allowed more dialogue overall, I don't mind the switch and find the way it's done to be a very bearable compromise especially as the cutscenes are still there for the very needed scenes. I didn't feel a disconnect from my character or others because I still got enough talk with them to learn about them that way and my character at the same time. That and I use voices as an indicator more than I do faces.

 

My only problem were the times when I accidentally exited a conversation with an NPC because I accidentally triggered an auto-attack.

 

There isn't actually more dialogue in DAI than there was in DA2. DA2 was "short" to some namely because of gameplay mechanics. But as someone who recorded my completionist play of Da2, only recording dialogue, DA2 is a bit over 17 hours long, just dialogue (including all the story DLCs)

 

DAI was 15.5 hours of just recorded dialogue.

 

Mass effect 1 was 9.5 hours of dialogue

Mass Effect 2 was 14 i think, with the DLC (too lazy to check)

Mass Effect 3 was just over 20 with all the DLC.

 

DAO was 27 hours. Though to be fair, silent protagonist so was easier to make more dialogue since had less to record. Also I think that included the awakening expansion.

[Maconbar]

There isn't actually more dialogue in DAI than there was in DA2. DA2 was "short" to some namely because of gameplay mechanics. But as someone who recorded my completionist play of Da2, only recording dialogue, DA2 is a bit over 17 hours long, just dialogue (including all the story DLCs)
 
DAI was 15.5 hours of just recorded dialogue.
 
Mass effect 1 was 9.5 hours of dialogue
Mass Effect 2 was 14 i think, with the DLC (too lazy to check)
Mass Effect 3 was just over 20 with all the DLC.
 
DAO was 27 hours. Though to be fair, silent protagonist so was easier to make more dialogue since had less to record. Also I think that included the awakening expansion.

What do you get if you compare base game DA:2 dialogue hours to DA:I?

[tmp7704]

I think the issue here is parity for some people. I would wager content that lacks cinematics doesn't feel like main plot content - or at least story relevant content.

Yes, which is why I brought up those older titles -- the quests there are, like in DAO/DA2, given identical approach across the board, there isn't souped up main plot and secondary quests with more basic presentation. It's just that particular presentation doesn't involve the cinematics. So it makes me wonder if people who talk here about importance of cinematics needed to get attached to the characters and to treat the plot as important etc... would feel the same playing those older titles, or if the uniform --but limited-- presentation would still allow them to get in the game, despite their thoughts here.

[Zatche]

Cinematic dialogue really humanizes these otherwise faceless NPC's. It is a psychological trick for the most part, but it works.

 

This is a good way of putting it.

 

I actually like the conversation mechanic for certain things like talking to the scouts and merchants, getting the really minor side-quests. It allows the player to not be "stuck" in a dry cinematic used for an exposition-dump. They can easily pop out and continue exploring.

 

But, I think some of the big side-quests could have benefited from them. The Old Crestwood and Choice Spirit quests were pretty interesting, but they weren't very emotionally engaging. It was so weird to read Masked Empire, and then get re-introduced to Michel, who seemed "blank."

 

Though, I do understand that cinematics are an expensive bottleneck on the production of video games.

[Zatche]

Yes, which is why I brought up those older titles -- the quests there are, like in DAO/DA2, given identical approach across the board, there isn't souped up main plot and secondary quests with more basic presentation. It's just that particular presentation doesn't involve the cinematics. So it makes me wonder if people who talk here about importance of cinematics needed to get attached to the characters and to treat the plot as important etc... would feel the same playing those older titles, or if the uniform --but limited-- presentation would still allow them to get in the game, despite their thoughts here.

 

With the older titles, I would be able to treat the plot as interesting and important, but it might not be as emotionally engaging, which is what I prefer. I want "all the feels, ugh."

 

...Well, it might be. It takes a certain mindset to be engaged in plain text. If a game was presented this way with plain texts, without cinematics consistently throughout the whole campaign, I could be emotionally engaged as I am when I read a book. When a game, like DAI, goes back and forth between an assault on the senses style cinematics/combat and dry talking/plain text, it can be difficult to switch mindsets. A certain flow is lost, which is why I rarely ever stop to actually read the codices I find in games.

[Kantr]

No I dont agree. What would more cinematic chats do to make the story feel longer?

 

It's nice to be able to walk away from a chat now

[Deamo]

What do you get if you compare base game DA:2 dialogue hours to DA:I?

 

They're about the same. The first DLC was combat heavy, added about 30 mins total of dialogue, the rest being combat, puzzles etc. The 2nd one was much more dialogue heavy though (the one with Tallis). I believe that added about 1 hour of dialogue. Was a long DLC (good too, one of Bioware's best dlc other than ME3 Citadel DLC).

 

Without the DLC, DA2 and DAI are pretty much the same length, dialogue wise. (Gameplay wise of course DAI is vastly longer due to the constant wandering etc).

 

The difference being, all of DA2's dialogue used the traditional "cinematic" mode. It didn't use this cheap nonsense of a stationary camera pulled far away from the interaction. It was a huge step backwards.

 

If you actually counted hours of "cinematic dialogue", DA2 would pass DAI by many, many, many hours since more than half of the dialogue in DAI uses this stupid pulled out stationary camera.

[In Exile]

Yes, which is why I brought up those older titles -- the quests there are, like in DAO/DA2, given identical approach across the board, there isn't souped up main plot and secondary quests with more basic presentation. It's just that particular presentation doesn't involve the cinematics. So it makes me wonder if people who talk here about importance of cinematics needed to get attached to the characters and to treat the plot as important etc... would feel the same playing those older titles, or if the uniform --but limited-- presentation would still allow them to get in the game, despite their thoughts here.

I think that it's hard to say. Those older games have other issues too. Casual conversations with NPCs feature a lot less vs. newer games. In say BG1 your companions barely talk.

DAI is a lot like ME1 in a lot of regards, where the crit path is not that long and a lot of the side quests are just copy and pasted (almost) and based on a simple design.

[Majestic Jazz]

I don't mind them...there's no way we'd be getting even a fraction of the dialog in this game if every conversation had to be it's own cinematic, so very happy with the trade off. And it's not like the game is that short of them, certainly if you include the companion quests and the judgements into the mix...tho I accept that, depending on what stage of the game or what you're doing, they can be a bit few and far between at times.
I think Bioware should continue with this new conversation style - gives us more dialogue, but still voiced. Kind of an amalgamation of old school silent protagonist choice with more recent trend to be more film-like. Next game could benefit from the addition of an auto-correct on body alignments (so when conversation is initiated, both turn to face each other directly automatically) and maybe add zoom to the current camera control (but that might be a little over the top).

So you want quantity over quality?

[In Exile]

They're about the same. The first DLC was combat heavy, added about 30 mins total of dialogue, the rest being combat, puzzles etc. The 2nd one was much more dialogue heavy though (the one with Tallis). I believe that added about 1 hour of dialogue. Was a long DLC (good too, one of Bioware's best dlc other than ME3 Citadel DLC).

Without the DLC, DA2 and DAI are pretty much the same length, dialogue wise. (Gameplay wise of course DAI is vastly longer due to the constant wandering etc).

The difference being, all of DA2's dialogue used the traditional "cinematic" mode. It didn't use this cheap nonsense of a stationary camera pulled far away from the interaction. It was a huge step backwards.

If you actually counted hours of "cinematic dialogue", DA2 would pass DAI by many, many, many hours since more than half of the dialogue in DAI uses this stupid pulled out stationary camera.

DA2 had one race. DAI has four. That's 8 versus 2 angles.

[Deamo]

For the people defending the new dialogue system that doesn't use cinematic camera... keep in mind, I and I believe others aren't complaining about a lack of cinematic camera for nonsense side quests that ask you to fetch some ingredients or kill ram or whatever. That's fine, DAO and DA2 used bulletin boards for that, so same thing.

 

I am complaining at the fact that more than 1/2 of the dialogues you trigger with COMPANIONS / FOLLOWERS occur in this stupid new camera system. In DAO, DA2 when you spoke to your companions, it always used the up close cinematic view.

 

Within the first hour of the game when you reach Haven, your first conversation with Leliana triggers a 1.5 minute cinematic dialogue. When that ends and you talk to her again, you can now spend 10+ minutes talking to her to learn about her, events from previous games, etc for over 10 minutes... but it all takes place in that impersonal idiotic cheap camera view.

 

That's right.. you get 1.5 minutes of cinematic camera conversation with your first talk with Leliana, which then can be resumed right after for over 10 minutes... in cheap camera mode.

 

You can't tell me that isn't cheap. In DAO and DA2 it would have all been done in cinematic view.

 

I'm 100% convinced this has to be due to Bioware's new engine. It proved problematic / difficult for them I suspect so this was a quick, easy solution compared to their old engine which was able to much more easily implement cinematic dialogues.

[Il Divo]

 

 

I'm 100% convinced this has to be due to Bioware's new engine. It proved problematic / difficult for them I suspect so this was a quick, easy solution compared to their old engine which was able to much more easily implement cinematic dialogues.

 

That or it's (I believe) an issue of cost. Bioware could go the ME2 route and provide cinematic flair for all our conversations, but that's all animation cost, which then means fewer conversations overall.  

 

I admit it's not as flashy, but some companion conversations remain dull no matter how much cinematics are emphasized and vice versa where conversations are engaging because of their content more than how they're delivered. 

[In Exile]

For the people defending the new dialogue system that doesn't use cinematic camera... keep in mind, I and I believe others aren't complaining about a lack of cinematic camera for nonsense side quests that ask you to fetch some ingredients or kill ram or whatever. That's fine, DAO and DA2 used bulletin boards for that, so same thing.

I am complaining at the fact that more than 1/2 of the dialogues you trigger with COMPANIONS / FOLLOWERS occur in this stupid new camera system. In DAO, DA2 when you spoke to your companions, it always used the up close cinematic view.

Within the first hour of the game when you reach Haven, your first conversation with Leliana triggers a 1.5 minute cinematic dialogue. When that ends and you talk to her again, you can now spend 10+ minutes talking to her to learn about her, events from previous games, etc for over 10 minutes... but it all takes place in that impersonal idiotic cheap camera view.

That's right.. you get 1.5 minutes of cinematic camera conversation with your first talk with Leliana, which then can be resumed right after for over 10 minutes... in cheap camera mode.

You can't tell me that isn't cheap. In DAO and DA2 it would have all been done in cinematic view.

I'm 100% convinced this has to be due to Bioware's new engine. It proved problematic / difficult for them I suspect so this was a quick, easy solution compared to their old engine which was able to much more easily implement cinematic dialogues.

Don't confuse my counterpoints with my not having a problem with the lack of cinematics. I don't like it. I would have been better with it if we had more control over the camera. I preferred the old way of doing it. I just think given like you said the switch to FB3 and multiple races that this was the best solution.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In all these games listed below, EVERY conversation whether it be related to the main story, character story, or side quest, ALL received some sort of cinematic/close up camera angle.

KOTOR
Jade Empire
Mass Effect
Mass Effect 2
Mass Effect 3
Dragon Age: Origins
Dragon Age 2

All of them!

Yes, and it was a problem in all of them.

Aside from making the conversations too expensive, it forced us too look at the PC and his emotions all the time. But we had limited if any control over those emotions.

Headcanon is better.

The list you offered excludes what I think are BioWare's best games - BG and NWN - and the lack of cinematic conversations is part of the reason they're great.

I know a lot of people like to explore their characters' personality through watching these cinematics, but I don't think it should be possible to learn about the PC. I think the player should already know literally everything about him. So I love this new direction. It's really a return to form, I think.

With every new feature or change in design, some will like it and some will dislike it. I think this is terrific.

[Elhanan]

I prefer the 'Less Is More' kind of cinematic approach seen in this game. While I enjoyed the ME series as a whole, the long cinematic scenes could mess with the game, esp when some reflex Dialogue choice must be made during the sequence. To reload after such a lengthy scene impedes immersion; does not help it. Only had to do this once or twice here in 120+ hrs.

Sorry; respectfully disagree.

[In Exile]

Yes, and it was a problem in all of them.

Aside from making the conversations too expensive, it forced us too look at the PC and his emotions all the time. But we had limited if any control over those emotions.

Headcanon is better.

The list you offered excludes what I think are BioWare's best games - BG and NWN - and the lack of cinematic conversations is part of the reason they're great.

I know a lot of people like to explore their characters' personality through watching these cinematics, but I don't think it should be possible to learn about the PC. I think the player should already know literally everything about him. So I love this new direction. It's really a return to form, I think.

With every new feature or change in design, some will like it and some will dislike it. I think this is terrific.

DAI is a great deal like BG1. I'd say with the way Bioware uses the word it is very much a spiritual successor. But nostalgia notwithstanding the features a lot of Bioware fans seemed to like about BG that stuck around weren't the core features.

[AshesEleven]

I mean, there really isn't that much of a difference between "cinematic" dialogue and zoomed out dialogue.  Most conversations in the two previous Dragon Age games had nothing interesting going on during them; the same effect could have been had if the camera was at the distance it is now.  

 

I'm about to spout complete bullshit because I have no idea if this is the case, BUT it's possible that the lack of a closeup angle for each and every conversation allows them to do far more interesting things in the other, more important cutscenes, and allows them to have more dialogue in general.  So if the options are 1) Every conversation is close up, but less conversations and not many are visually interesting, or  Many conversations aren't cinematic but there is more conversations and more interesting scenes, I'd take option 2.  

 

Obviously, people will have different opinions of this, but in the end the developers have to make hard choices.  

[Mark of the Dragon]

I just wish that the cinematic sequences themselves were handled better. I do not really care about cinematics when I am talking to people.

 

There were some bad a** cinematic scenes in Dragon Age Inquisition. However there were also a lot of rushed scenes that could have been really epic. There were no scenes like the Battle at Ostagar in Origins that just made the whole game feel more epic. There was never even a cinematic showing you, the leader of the inquisition, leading your army into battle. A lot of the sequences just felt rushed or like they were missing something. 

 

That was my biggest problem with this game. Cinematics are great at building tension and causing the player to feel whatever the developer wants them to feel. Those feelings help the player connect to the characters and story. All that is moot if the cinematics feel rushed and the player is left without a complete emotional fulfillment. I am not saying the game needs tons of cinematics but I do hope they use them better in future DLC and games. 

[Mark of the Dragon]

I just wish that the cinematic sequences themselves were handled better. I do not really care about cinematics when I am talking to people.

 

There were some bad a** cinematic scenes in Dragon Age Inquisition. However there were also a lot of rushed scenes that could have been really epic. There were no scenes like the Battle at Ostagar in Origins that just made the whole game feel more epic. There was never even a cinematic showing you, the leader of the inquisition, leading your army into battle. A lot of the sequences just felt rushed or like they were missing something. 

 

That was my biggest problem with this game. Cinematics are great at building tension and causing the player to feel whatever the developer wants them to feel. Those feelings help the player connect to the characters and story. All that is moot if the cinematics feel rushed and the player is left without a complete emotional fulfillment. I am not saying the game needs tons of cinematics but I do hope they use them better in future DLC and games. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

DAI is a great deal like BG1.

That would help explain why I like it so much.

Honestly, with symmetrical combat mechanics DAI might have been my favourite BioWare game ever.

I'd say with the way Bioware uses the word it is very much a spiritual successor. But nostalgia notwithstanding the features a lot of Bioware fans seemed to like about BG that stuck around weren't the core features.

I don't get the impression that many current players ever played BG.

Which is a shame.