848 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Often, yes, though sometimes there are more than 3 and you get to be a bit more nuanced. It isn't tracked though and the options are not dependent on what you'd said before.  You also know exactly what you're saying.

The extra lines are generally equivalent of the "investigate..." options in the latter games. But yes, there's no paraphrasing and that can make a difference. Unfortunately doesn't seem like BioWare is going to budge on this one.

[Ser Kilroy]

 

Why does this have to be a one or the other thing?  Why do so many in the gaming community have to do this "Us or Them" crap?    

 

I love DA:O and I've been loving Inquisition.  There is game play elements about Origins that I preferred, but there is some elements I liked in Inquisition that Origins didn't offer.  I can understand the OP's requests, but at the same time this shouldn't be about some sort of bizarre competition between fans of the same series.

I agree with this statement 100%

[Natureguy85]

The extra lines are generally equivalent of the "investigate..." options in the latter games. But yes, there's no paraphrasing and that can make a difference. Unfortunately doesn't seem like BioWare is going to budge on this one.

 

It's been awhile since I played Origins, so I could be wrong, but I was thinking more along the lines of the four options given when telling Mordin to keep or save Maelon's data. It's a binary choice, but each has two different mindsets. You can save it because you want the Genophage cured or "just in case". Or you can delete it because you agree with the Genophage or because you think it's too dangerous and trust Mordin's ability to recreate it. The results are the same, but there is role playing value.

[In Exile]

It's been awhile since I played Origins, so I could be wrong, but I was thinking more along the lines of the four options given when telling Mordin to keep or save Maelon's data. It's a binary choice, but each has two different mindsets. You can save it because you want the Genophage cured or "just in case". Or you can delete it because you agree with the Genophage or because you think it's too dangerous and trust Mordin's ability to recreate it. The results are the same, but there is role playing value.

 

Well, sure, but DA:I occasionally has 4-5 dialogue options when you get the reaction wheel. DA:O sometimes let you have a way of saying the same thing with different words, and DA:I does this by changing the words on the paraphrase if you use the investigate option. And sometimes investigate options will advance the conversation in DA:I. The "?" mark doesn't always break up the flow of dialogue, which is something that I hate and am quite disappointed about in DA:I.  

[Skeevley]

You mean except for the part where you were railroaded into identifying with the GWs, being an inspirational leader, and having 3 general personality archetypes in terms of tone like DA:I?

 

To a lot of people the absence of voice allows them an almost unbelievable latitude in terms of headcanon but that's got nothing to do with the actual design. 

 

Hmmm. Well one issue here is that we may have very different types of role-players. The pen-and-paper groups I played with were excellent role-players. Everything focused on the story, the characters, the interactions, relationships, townsfolk, reputation, staying in-character during game-play, etc. Many of us even changed voices / personalities pretty well. Very little of it focused on the mechanics of play, or optimizing character builds (like those darn munchkins!) So to me, the absence of voice is fine, because it enables ME to determine the tone of voice used. VERY VERY often I find that my dialogue choices in DAI lead to something completely different than intended because the tone of voice is NOTHING like my character would use, and this is extremely undermining to my role-playing (such as it is). (Also, sometimes the choices seem to make no sense at all, like zero, as in non sequitur city!).

 

And let's face it, these ARE NOT real RPGs, all they can do is try to fake it as best they can. So, for the most part, RPGs need to have a strong story or they feel "pointless". (Look at FO3 compared to, say, Skyrim. all the difference in the world).

 

 At least in the case of DAI, I would have preferred a silent PC. I certainly think the case could be argued that it ultimately provides a better role-playing experience, at least for those of us who are good PnP role-players. (If given the choice, after hearing the PC voices in DAI, I would have chosen a "silent" voice. Maybe that should have been an option...)

[In Exile]

Hmmm. Well one issue here is that we may have very different types of role-players. The pen-and-paper groups I played with were excellent role-players. Everything focused on the story, the characters, the interactions, relationships, townsfolk, reputation, staying in-character during game-play, etc. Many of us even changed voices / personalities pretty well. Very little of it focused on the mechanics of play, or optimizing character builds (like those darn munchkins!) So to me, the absence of voice is fine, because it enables ME to determine the tone of voice used. VERY VERY often I find that my dialogue choices in DAI lead to something completely different than intended because the tone of voice is NOTHING like my character would use, and this is extremely undermining to my role-playing (such as it is). (Also, sometimes the choices seem to make no sense at all, like zero, as in non sequitur city!).

 

And let's face it, these ARE NOT real RPGs, all they can do is try to fake it as best they can. So, for the most part, RPGs need to have a strong story or they feel "pointless". (Look at FO3 compared to, say, Skyrim. all the difference in the world).

 

 At least in the case of DAI, I would have preferred a silent PC. I certainly think the case could be argued that it ultimately provides a better role-playing experience, at least for those of us who are good PnP role-players. (If given the choice, after hearing the PC voices in DAI, I would have chosen a "silent" voice. Maybe that should have been an option...)

 

I don't want to derail the conversation into a silent PC vs. VO PC thread, but let me just say that I do disagree with you that you could "determine" the tone of voice. I mean, sure, you could pretend like it said whatever you wanted it to say, and it is easier for you to do that when the game doesn't point out that tone, but communication doesn't work in that way. You can't just swap out tones and have the same effect. The absence of VO has a lot of serious issues for conveying information to the player. 

[Lebanese Dude]

Often, yes, though sometimes there are more than 3 and you get to be a bit more nuanced. It isn't tracked though and the options are not dependent on what you'd said before.  You also know exactly what you're saying.

 

There are "more than 3" because Investigate options are mixed in with the dialogue options that advance the conversation. 

 

It is true that you know exactly what you're saying in DAO. On the other hand, you never know how the conversation is going to flow and this can just as easily break immersion.

 

Edit: Oh someone beat me to it

Modifié par Lebanese Dude, 17 janvier 2015 - 05:54 .

[Phoe77]

Perhaps it's just me, but I think it's generally a mistake to go into any video game with expectations that are based upon experience playing tabletops.  No one is going to argue that tabletop roleplaying gives you a much wider latitude in roleplaying your character, simply because there are no limits aside from personal creativity and the constraints of the setting.  Video games make more constraints on player behavior necessary because you have to get to point B in some way.  I know this isn't a revelation to anyone, but it bears mentioning.

 

To me, it seems like Origins does a better job of imitating the freedom that you get from a tabletop game, but it's illusory.  You can imagine how your character is delivering his lines with more freedom, but in the end it results to nothing because the conversation is going to play out in the same way.  I can imagine that I'm being as sarcastic as you please when talking to someone, but they'll still respond as though I'm being completely sincere.  

 

I agree with not bringing up the voiced/non-voiced debate.  My main point is that I believe the people coming in with different expectations is just as significant an issue as people coming in with different roleplaying styles.

[AlanC9]

I said "largely". There wouldn't be much of a game then, now would there? You can say this of any game character ever. It would be a cool story though if the hero tried to abandon the call but the problem catches up with him.

Sure. I do remember an NWN module which starts with the PC being hired for some kind of sketchy mercenary job. The player can just say no to the job. If he says no, the module ends right there with the PC walking out of the tavern. i don't think we're likely to see that in a commercial game.

I only brought it up because it's a real problem in DA:O. BG2 has a similar issue for PCs who didn't like Imoen, though it goes away after Spellhold. It's not much of an issue in BG1 since you aren't necessarily trying to do anything in particular when you progress the main plot. In ME and maybe KotOR your PC is a loyalist or he wouldn't be there in the first place.

[Natureguy85]

There are "more than 3" because Investigate options are mixed in with the dialogue options that advance the conversation. 

 

It is true that you know exactly what you're saying in DAO. On the other hand, you never know how the conversation is going to flow and this can just as easily break immersion.

 

Edit: Oh someone beat me to it

 

How does not knowing how a conversation is going to flow break immersion? Do you somehow know how all your conversations are going to go in real life?

[Phonantiphon]

On the other hand, you never know how the conversation is going to flow and this can just as easily break immersion.
 

...er...?

[In Exile]

How does not knowing how a conversation is going to flow break immersion? Do you somehow know how all your conversations are going to go in real life?

There's a level of dynamism we're missing in-game we have IRL. While we can't predict what's happening on the other side of a conversation we at least know how we're trying to convey information. Silent PC without tone/intention indicators doesn't convey enough information. The UI isn't better for a voiced PC but seeing the consequence of speech on screen lets you evaluate the conversation better.

[Lebanese Dude]

How does not knowing how a conversation is going to flow break immersion? Do you somehow know how all your conversations are going to go in real life?

 

"Oh ****, I wanted to ask him (investigate) about his daddy issues but apparently that's out of the question since I apparently yelled at him when I selected "What is wrong with you?" (advanced the conversation). I meant that in a silly way!!! I should reload, reselect all my previous dialogue choices, and ask that other question so I can ask him about his daddy issues first."

 

That's not immersion-breaking at all to you?

 

You can clearly go back to asking about that person's daddy issues after telling him what's wrong with him by running after him and saying you're sorry but you meant that as a joke. You can't do that in-game except by reloading since the conversation is well and truly over.

 

You have no control over in-game dialogue except what you select. In real life, you can reasonably predict how the conversation is flowing and can react appropriately.

 

A formalized dialogue wheel simply allows you to have more control over a conversation on your end, just like in real life.

[In Exile]

"Oh ****, I wanted to ask him (investigate) about his daddy issues but apparently that's out of the question since I apparently yelled at him when I selected "What is wrong with you?" (advanced the conversation). I meant that in a silly way!!! I should reload, reselect all my previous dialogue choices, and ask that other question so I can ask him about his daddy issues first."

That's not immersion-breaking at all to you?

You have no control over in-game dialogue except what you select. In real life, you can reasonably predict how the conversation is flowing.

A formalized dialogue wheel simply allows you to have more control over a conversation, just like in real life.

While I agree with you 100% DAI reintroduced this problem.

[Lebanese Dude]

While I agree with you 100% DAI reintroduced this problem.

Occasionally, but only when it made sense.

For example :

Spoiler

Solas asking you what hero you'll be and then you asking him about his dreams rather than reply is clearly you switching the subject.

[phantomrachie]

While I agree with you 100% DAI reintroduced this problem.

 

Weirdly I think that depends on the voice actor, I've only played female characters so far but Sumalee's dialogue is very neutral unless the emotion wheel is being used, were as Alix, tends to be more emotive with her dialogue.

 

I prefer the more emotive style, which is why I loved Hawke so much, but someone who prefers silent protagonists might like Sumalee's approach better.

[Skeevley]

I don't want to derail the conversation into a silent PC vs. VO PC thread, but let me just say that I do disagree with you that you could "determine" the tone of voice. I mean, sure, you could pretend like it said whatever you wanted it to say, and it is easier for you to do that when the game doesn't point out that tone, but communication doesn't work in that way. You can't just swap out tones and have the same effect. The absence of VO has a lot of serious issues for conveying information to the player. 

 

Well, different people are different, and we all have different takes on things. For me, this is automatic. I don't have to "pretend" anything, the voice simply is there in my head automatically. I read a LOT, and when I read a book all the characters get distinct voices too, the same way that the words on the page disappear and the story unfolds in my head like a movie (or, in the case of really good books, it almost becomes a real experience, I think many avid readers will tell you the same thing). So for me, no pretending involved really, I never have to think "what should this voice be", it's simply there, as a part of the experience. Thus, having a voice like in DAI which is: often monotone, and often nothing like what I'm thinking in my head, and often nothing like the text would suggest it *should* be, is a big negative. It's a negative that hit-home hard with DAI, but not so much with other games (Witcher 2, DA2), in which my voice and the voice of my PC was, for some reason, close enough not the be a distraction from the game, OR, maybe their voices were done well enough that my own voice wasn't needed. In DAI, however, the voice is just poorly done, and SO wrong, so much of the time, that I wonder if the PC voice-over actors were given ANY context whatsoever, or were just given some lines to read and given a single take, which was used. And let's face it, even though the companion and NPC voice-overs are still "pretty good", they aren't anywhere near as good as DAO or even DA2. Listen to Leliana, or Varric, or Morrigan. There is just something "flat" about the voice-over acting in DAI. It's good compared to most games but poor when compared to DAO and DA2.)

[duckley]

Can I ask the OP a question? Why does Bethesda do open world well? How is Skyrim's open world  it different/better that  from Dragon's Dogma or DA:I?

I am genuinely curious. A big criticism of DA:I  is that there is too much irrelevant stuff to do - I actually find there is much less irrelevant stuff to do in this game than in Skyrim - so I am really confused....

Can someone please shed some light???????

[Natureguy85]

There's a level of dynamism we're missing in-game we have IRL. While we can't predict what's happening on the other side of a conversation we at least know how we're trying to convey information. Silent PC without tone/intention indicators doesn't convey enough information. The UI isn't better for a voiced PC but seeing the consequence of speech on screen lets you evaluate the conversation better.

 

True, the voice allows you to hear how the line is being delivered, but you don't know that when you select the choice. The dialogue wheel indicators can give you an idea, but I found it worse to not have a proper understanding of what would be said.

 

"Oh ****, I wanted to ask him (investigate) about his daddy issues but apparently that's out of the question since I apparently yelled at him when I selected "What is wrong with you?" (advanced the conversation). I meant that in a silly way!!! I should reload, reselect all my previous dialogue choices, and ask that other question so I can ask him about his daddy issues first."

 

That's not immersion-breaking at all to you?

 

You can clearly go back to asking about that person's daddy issues after telling him what's wrong with him by running after him and saying you're sorry but you meant that as a joke. You can't do that in-game except by reloading since the conversation is well and truly over.

 

You have no control over in-game dialogue except what you select. In real life, you can reasonably predict how the conversation is flowing and can react appropriately.

 

A formalized dialogue wheel simply allows you to have more control over a conversation on your end, just like in real life.

 

You break your own immersion by restarting rather than accepting the flow of the conversation. Saying you could apologize and try again in real life is meaningless because you can often think of things you'd like to say or ask that aren't even options. These two things are on the same level. As I said above, while the wheel does give a better impression of tone, I was more often annoyed by the game not saying what I thought it would than not understanding how my character would deliver the line I wanted. In fact, I can't ever remember having an issue with tone or delivery despite the words I wanted being used, but it has been awhile since I went and played Origins or DA2..

[Skeevley]

Can I ask the OP a question? Why does Bethesda do open world well? How is Skyrim's open world  it different/better that  from Dragon's Dogma or DA:I?

I am genuinely curious. A big criticism of DA:I  is that there is too much irrelevant stuff to do - I actually find there is much less irrelevant stuff to do in this game than in Skyrim - so I am really confused....

Can someone please shed some light???????

 

I'm not the OP, but I can't say that I expect many of us who are unhappy with DAI's "endless boring fetch-questy open worldness" would have said the same about Skyrim. (I loved FO3, but hated Skyrim until I modded the living daylights out of it. Why? story story story! Everything in FO3 felt important, everything in Skyrim felt pointless. Much of DAI feels pointless...)

 

And, my guess too is that those who do like Skyrim but are unhappy with DAI might be because they like those experiences to be different, NOT the same. It was nice to have plot and character driven games like DAO, and to have open-world action-quest games like Skyrim. Melding those into DAI really, really, didn't work...

[In Exile]

Well, different people are different, and we all have different takes on things. For me, this is automatic. I don't have to "pretend" anything, the voice simply is there in my head automatically. I read a LOT, and when I read a book all the characters get distinct voices too, the same way that the words on the page disappear and the story unfolds in my head like a movie (or, in the case of really good books, it almost becomes a real experience, I think many avid readers will tell you the same thing). So for me, no pretending involved really, I never have to think "what should this voice be", it's simply there, as a part of the experience. Thus, having a voice like in DAI which is: often monotone, and often nothing like what I'm thinking in my head, and often nothing like the text would suggest it *should* be, is a big negative. It's a negative that hit-home hard with DAI, but not so much with other games (Witcher 2, DA2), in which my voice and the voice of my PC was, for some reason, close enough not the be a distraction from the game, OR, maybe their voices were done well enough that my own voice wasn't needed. In DAI, however, the voice is just poorly done, and SO wrong, so much of the time, that I wonder if the PC voice-over actors were given ANY context whatsoever, or were just given some lines to read and given a single take, which was used. And let's face it, even though the companion and NPC voice-overs are still "pretty good", they aren't anywhere near as good as DAO or even DA2. Listen to Leliana, or Varric, or Morrigan. There is just something "flat" about the voice-over acting in DAI. It's good compared to most games but poor when compared to DAO and DA2.)

I read a great deal, but the voice is always mine. All the voices I hear - male or female, whoever - just sound like me reading out loud. I've never understood how people hear other voices. I do hear other voices when I think about people I know but I have to have heard their voice.

[Natureguy85]

I read a great deal, but the voice is always mine. All the voices I hear - male or female, whoever - just sound like me reading out loud. I've never understood how people hear other voices. I do hear other voices when I think about people I know but I have to have heard their voice.

 

I'm between you two. I do voices that are not mine, but I've noticed they are often similar across characters, as though I only have two male and two female voices to use!

[Phonantiphon]

All Elves speak a mixture of Irish/Scottish - in any game, everywhere.

Personally, I think that random quests, "irrelevant" stuff is important, because it isn't just about finishing the game it's about being in the world and that doesn't necessarily mean that everything has to have a point to it.

Long live fetch quests, I say.

 

I love a world that exists in its own right, and that I can buy into. I can and have bought into Thedas, and the people who live there. For me, that's all I need to inspire me to play the games and read the books and to want more. 

It feeds my imagination and it makes me think about the characters, and you can't ask for more than that.

[sim-ran]

I don't blame Origins or even DA2/Inquisition, because the choice was never going to matter a whole lot. It's simply too much work needed to make them all meaningful choices. Mass Effect had the exact same issue, and most of your choices got delegated to being acknowledged in a single email during ME2. Unless you want to make a sequel that doesn't do anything but show you the result of your choices from the previous game, it generally just isn't going to happen in a high budget game.

I was just setting the record straight that the Dragon Age series(and arguably all BioWare games) never really offered amazing consequences for the majority your choices.

Now, the fact that you can make that choice is still a good thing. It says something about your character: are they somebody willing to put in the extra effort to save the arl's family or are they power hungry and willing to make a deal with a demon? The result is the same in both cases, but it allows for some actual role playing which is presumably what we're here for.

Inquisition I would say offered a good variety of choice in dialogue for a game with a voiced main character and still had choices to make in the main story and even companion quests, but the rest of the side quests not so much. Since they also have a lot more content in the game than they did in Origins and a lot of the extra room got filled up with fetch quests, it can end up feeling like most of it is just pointless busywork. It's something I've already mentioned they should work on in future games.

Either way I still enjoyed the game despite its flaws just as I enjoyed Origins despite its flaws.

I couldn't possibly agree with you more, and I think this really nails why a lot of players of previous Bioware games find the side quests to be somewhat lacking in DAI.

Note - that has nothing to do with this game "not being DAO2", as this is common to all the previous Bioware games.

Jade Empire - bring the drowned children spirits to peace, or satisfy their vengeance?

Origins - kill Ruck or leave him to his misery? Tell his mother he died (true or false) or that you can't find him?

Kotor - tell the destitute widow's to get lost, steal her plate or sell it for her, giving her the real profits, less or more?

ME - tell the Noveria rep to get lost, go along with her plan to bug the competitor, or trick her?

They all have two things in common. One - they involve choices that allow RP and better replay, even though they have no impact on the larger world. Two - they have cinematic dialogue and lots of it, which gets you more interested and invested in the NPCs and the quest.

From what I've seen so far they still did these things well for companion quests, just not side quests. I can't think of a single one I've done yet that I'd care about doing again.