98 réponses à ce sujet

[hanoua]

Yeah they should change the way the camera move around your character when you enter a conversation with a random NPC, it's hard to care about what happening when you're far away of the conversation, it should be like an over the shoulder point of view were you can zoom out and stuff, moving left and right. 

[disi123]

Hm...

While the console has AMD hardware for PS4 and XB1 their architectural implementations differ somewhat. Certain hardware tweaking was done on each side to enhance their view of game performance and how the console would be used, such as, video streaming, internet usage, Multiplayer Gaming with chat capabilities. Maybe even starting your own game server and then inviting your friends over for a game., . On the software side, however, their Operating  System are different.

 

For example:

PS4 runs Orbis OS, a modified version of FreeBSD that’s similar to Linux.

 

XB1 runs a modified Hyper-V which is a Virtual Machine OS that is responsible for allocating system resources for a dedicated "XBOX OS" used for loading the games. This approach gives the developers a sandbox environment... a known quantity to work with.

 

Also, both console APIs have been optimized to be as close to the "metal" as possible and are different from their PC brethren.

 

There is much in common but dismissing the differences is, in my view, a grave error.  Device input control programming appears to be coded in a Monolithic manner instead of Modular.  This hypothesis is based on the "difficulties" the BioStudio has in providing the PC community with prompt DAO/DA2 KB+M controls, as Patch 5 fails to address the simple key-to-mouse bindings, available in the two previous games. Monolithic coding is hell when you need to change something.

 

I may be wrong about this but look at the past four patches. When implemented, they fixed some issues and broke something else.  Changes to DAI seem to be a wee bit more complex than "..only a very few files different between PC and console.."

 

Just saying.

 

I am looking into this at the moment and there are only a few files. The camera pitch for example has a single entry for controllers only, this disables the feature for PC mouse/keyboard users. All the profiling for GUI and input in the game depends on the input device and not the platform.

 

Plug an XBox controller into a Windows or Apple PC and you have the same game as on the console with probably better graphics depending on your hardware specs.

 

As a matter of fact, BioWare kind of limited the PC keyboard/mouse users to a degree. Many of the mouse features are completely ignored and not used (i.e. middle mouse button)

 

On the other hand, these files changed a lot during recent patches and they are working on it

 

Like the test here: http://daitools.free...ntrol-t517.html

[Sartoz]

I am looking into this at the moment and there are only a few files. The camera pitch for example has a single entry for controllers only, this disables the feature for PC mouse/keyboard users. All the profiling for GUI and input in the game depends on the input device and not the platform.

 

Plug an XBox controller into a Windows or Apple PC and you have the same game as on the console with probably better graphics depending on your hardware specs.

 

As a matter of fact, BioWare kind of limited the PC keyboard/mouse users to a degree. Many of the mouse features are completely ignored and not used (i.e. middle mouse button)

 

On the other hand, these files changed a lot during recent patches and they are working on it

 

Like the test here: http://daitools.free...ntrol-t517.html

Well, now... that is interesting..... Thanks for that pointer..

[Sartoz]

My girl and I think it was a lazy mistake. PC people have already made a mod to fix that for the PC. Meaning that if the PC people can do it then we sure as damn well know that BW can fix it for consoles.

I believe it is a design choice placed on BioStudio from EA execs based on:

 

1. "Our games are actually still too hard to learn." --  EA’s chief creative officer Richard Hilleman

Article here: http://mmgn.com/ps4/...rn-ea-executive

 

2. From 1 above the game was simplified and made action oriented. You don't need that many cinematics for action games.

 

3. It took BioStudio 8 man years to adapt the FPS Frostbite 3 engine to handle RPG elements... which leads to:

4. BioStudio ran out of time and EA gave them only one extra month to "fix things" before game launch.

[Hexoduen]

I prefer the closer cameras as in Origins and DA2, not only so I could see the expression of the person I was talking too, but also so I could better hear what they said.

 

In Inquisition dialogue volume seems too low when the camera is further away, but then in a cutscene it's high volume again. Dynamic for sure, but not the best way I think. Choosing 'headphones' in audio options helps a little, but not enough.

[SurelyForth]

I believe it is a design choice placed on BioStudio from EA execs based on:

 

1. "Our games are actually still too hard to learn." --  EA’s chief creative officer Richard Hilleman

Article here: http://mmgn.com/ps4/...rn-ea-executive

 

2. From 1 above the game was simplified and made action oriented. You don't need that many cinematics for action games.

 

3. It took BioStudio 8 man years to adapt the FPS Frostbite 3 engine to handle RPG elements... which leads to:

4. BioStudio ran out of time and EA gave them only one extra month to "fix things" before game launch.

 

This is literally paranoid horsecrap. Cinematics have **** all to do with learning curves or difficulty, and everything to do with time and money. Even simple cutscenes cost more time and money than the third person camera. In order to accommodate the larger number of cutscenes that do exist, they offset the cost with the static camera for short/non-essential conversations. 

[Ash Wind]

This is just me, but I think its a reaction, to the reaction of DA2, which promised a more cinematic approach, which was often critized after the games relase.

 

I recall the cinematics affecting player choice in DA2. One example: Hawke, offers to protect Huron's wife when its learned he has escaped. What happens? Hawke walks into the zone and we were subjected to a ridiculous cinematic of Huron acting all wierd and threatening. Was Hawke allowed to follow through on his/her promise of protection? Which he/she could have easily done as Huron put on his little performance.

 

No.

 

Instead its cinematic time, so Hawke (along with the rest of us) has to watch an absurdly drawn out cinematic as Huron speaks crazily and then eventually kills his terrified wife. #HawkeFail

 

Cinematics surely have their place in games like DA2, but when they affect choice... and more importantly, common sense, its an issue, I perfer the limited effect of cinematics.

 

Let people who make movies, make movies. Let people who make games, make games.

[Nefla]

This is just me, but I think its a reaction, to the reaction of DA2, which promised a more cinematic approach, which was often critized after the games relase.

 

I recall the cinematics affecting player choice in DA2. One example: Hawke, offers to protect Huron's wife when its learned he has escaped. What happens? Hawke walks into the zone and we were subjected to a ridiculous cinematic of Huron acting all wierd and threatening. Was Hawke allowed to follow through on his/her promise of protection? Which he/she could have easily done as Huron put on his little performance.

 

No.

 

Instead its cinematic time, so Hawke (along with the rest of us) has to watch an absurdly drawn out cinematic as Huron speaks crazily and then eventually kills his terrified wife. #HawkeFail

 

Cinematics surely have their place in games like DA2, but when they affect choice... and more importantly, common sense, its an issue, I perfer the limited effect of cinematics.

 

Let people who make movies, make movies. Let people who make games, make games.

That was just a case of poor writing/design in my opinion. If they weren't going to offer you the option to act or not, then they shouldn't put you in a position where a sane person would react and yet your character just stands there. It could have even been as simple as you immediately run up to try and help and are knocked back by magic, giving him enough time to kill his wife. Not having cinematics in DA:I didn't give us any extra choice, in fact only two side quests I came across had any choice: Call me Imshael and Strengthening the Veil each had a choice (though both were anticlimactic) but none of the hundreds of other side quests did. That is unless you count accept quest vs refuse quest as a "choice." Without cinematics or staged scenes we're just blank faced statues standing there motionless talking to even more bland and statue-like NPCs or worse yet, obeying random scraps of paper we find thrown on the floor.

[In Exile]

You can barely make out the faces and expressions of the npcs, though. I suppose I would be happy with an improved zoom function.

Is that a console angles? The camera is never that far for me on PC.

[Hexoduen]

This is how it usually looks on my PC during conversations:

 

 

IMO there is the two-fold problem of the dialogue volume being too low (it's dynamic, so when the camera is close it's fine), and a feeling of disconnect of what's going on, which is a shame because there is a facial expression - I just can't see it.

[Ash Wind]

That was just a case of poor writing/design in my opinion. If they weren't going to offer you the option to act or not, then they shouldn't put you in a position where a sane person would react and yet your character just stands there. It could have even been as simple as you immediately run up to try and help and are knocked back by magic, giving him enough time to kill his wife. Not having cinematics in DA:I didn't give us any extra choice, in fact only two side quests I came across had any choice: Call me Imshael and Strengthening the Veil each had a choice (though both were anticlimactic) but none of the hundreds of other side quests did. That is unless you count accept quest vs refuse quest as a "choice." Without cinematics or staged scenes we're just blank faced statues standing there motionless talking to even more bland and statue-like NPCs or worse yet, obeying random scraps of paper we find thrown on the floor.

 

Of course it begins with the writing, but that doesn't change the fact that the game was overly reliant on cinematics, and instead of playing the game, they thought a dark sinister scene like that would better serve the story than the player actually playing the game. There's a reason why many viewed Hawke as more of an observer in his own game and had few relevant choices to make.

 

I disagree that there are only 2 choices to be made in the game. Still, the assertion that the lack of cinematics didn't affect any choice in DAI is impossible to prove or quantify. If the game was more reliant on cinematics there's no telling what decisions/choices might have been axed in order to provide a predetermined cinematic.

 

The choice of allowing the GWs to stay or exiling them could have been eliminated if somone came up with a somber cinematic of the GWs being forcebly marched out of Orlais.

 

Its all good. We can agree to disagree.

[Wbino]

Interacting with your party at will should be a cornerstone in this series. IMHO

[Wbino]

To the bean counters if every game was exactly the same but earned a profit ..all would be alright with the world.

[AlanC9]

I disagree that there are only 2 choices to be made in the game. Still, the assertion that the lack of cinematics didn't affect any choice in DAI is impossible to prove or quantify. If the game was more reliant on cinematics there's no telling what decisions/choices might have been axed in order to provide a predetermined cinematic.
 
The choice of allowing the GWs to stay or exiling them could have been eliminated if somone came up with a somber cinematic of the GWs being forcebly marched out of Orlais.
 

My understanding of the Bio development process is that it isn't iterative in that fashion -- DLCs excepted. By the time cutscenes are coming out the question will be what to cut, not what to add.

[Brockololly]

I know they were trying to shake things up with how they did the conversations (they say as much in the PAX South panel) but I didn't care for how they ended up. Like others have said, the conversations that happened out and about in the world with NPCs or the non cutscene conversations you'd trigger with companions at Skyhold were just too far detached and boring.

 

I'd just want them to go back to how they handled things in Origins- you click on a companion or NPC to talk and it cuts down to a close up so you can actually see who you're talking to and actually see some of their facial animations and body language.Hell, even in Origins you could do that regardless of the location so that seems like another system BioWare would have to build back into Frostbite.

 

Just a really bizarre design choice to go a towards a more Skyrim style with the non-cutscene conversations considering it basically weakens one of the advantages of a voiced protagonist. The inconsistency in how conversations were presented in Inquisition bothered me.

[Saphiron123]

In DAO you could see a person's expressions and it made them more real. In DAI it's like talking to a stiff-as-a-board quests giver from an MMO.

It feels rushed, and it feels impersonal... It's why dao, despite being 10 years old, feels more real and important then DAI.

[Panda]

I really dislike this decision by Bioware cause I feel lot less.. into the situation, when talking to people this way. Cinematic camera pulled me into discussions and let me see all expressions. Now I'm just howevering over them and find myself lot less immersed and unintrested as well.

[pinkjellybeans]

 

You can barely make out the faces and expressions of the npcs, though. I suppose I would be happy with an improved zoom function.

 

I don't think a zoom option would solve the problem. At least not for me. The NPCs have always the same blank expression on their faces during those conversations and most of the times their posture and gestures doesn't match to what they are saying. (Like those two lovers you encounter in the abandoned tavern in Crestwood. In my game they kept making those weird merchant gestures, ugh. Made me cringe so bad.) If anything, the ability to zoom in would be more frustrating because their lack of emotions/reactions would be even more obvious. Your Inquisitor is like "Your lover is dead." and the NPC is like "Oh nooo, my baby." but their face and gestures are so neutral that if you mute the sound it's like they're talking about the weather.

 

And they used that for companions as well, which was the biggest mistake they could've made in my opinion. Solas has barely any cinematics. Specially if you compare it to Origins where you had TONS of dialogue with your companions throughout the game, all of that with cutscenes that give you unique reactions. So I don't bite the excuse "that way you get more dialogue". It just makes it more obvious that they wasted all of their time and resources on the huge empty worlds and completely neglected everything else.

[Saphiron123]

 

 

 

 

I don't think a zoom option would solve the problem. At least not for me. The NPCs have always the same blank expression on their faces during those conversations and most of the times their posture and gestures doesn't match to what they are saying. (Like those two lovers you encounter in the abandoned tavern in Crestwood. In my game they kept making those weird merchant gestures, ugh. Made me cringe so bad.) If anything, the ability to zoom in would be more frustrating because their lack of emotions/reactions would be even more obvious. Your Inquisitor is like "Your lover is dead." and the NPC is like "Oh nooo, my baby." but their face and gestures are so neutral that if you mute the sound it's like they're talking about the weather.

 

And they used that for companions as well, which was the biggest mistake they could've made in my opinion. Solas has barely any cinematics. Specially if you compare it to Origins where you had TONS of dialogue with your companions throughout the game, all of that with cutscenes that give you unique reactions. So I don't bite the excuse "that way you get more dialogue". It just makes it more obvious that they wasted all of their time and resources on the huge empty worlds and completely neglected everything else.

 

This. Talk to Alistair in origins, is the animation perfect? No. But He has real expressions, he has body language. Now talk to varrick outside of a cutscene, he's rigid as hell. He's a cardboard cutout like a questgiver in WOW.

[KaiserShep]

This. Talk to Alistair in origins, is the animation perfect? No. But He has real expressions, he has body language. Now talk to varrick outside of a cutscene, he's rigid as hell. He's a cardboard cutout like a questgiver in WOW.

 

In fairness to the Varric dialogues, most of the meaningful stuff where he actually expresses more emotion is in cinematic view. The same is generally true for all of the companions. It's the non-party NPC's that typically do not have this.

[disi123]

I just wait and see, if I will play the game through.

 

Once the port from Console to PC is complete and acceptable.

There are no improvements in Patch5, but maybe in a Patch6 or something.

[Saphiron123]

In fairness to the Varric dialogues, most of the meaningful stuff where he actually expresses more emotion is in cinematic view. The same is generally true for all of the companions. It's the non-party NPC's that typically do not have this.

True, but we got those expressions and cinematic for almost everyone.

Now we get them like 1/10th of the time, if that.

 

It was a bad decision.

I love Varrick when he gets a proper camera, he's the type of character who SHOULD be cinematic and expressive.

[Tyrus]

One of my biggest disappointments in Inquisition. I wish we got the product we saw in the 2013 PAX demo instead.