80 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

 

In theory, DAI's approach to most dialogue should be insdistinguishable from cinematic dialogue, correct? The words and options are the same.

 

However, that is simply not true, in my opinion, for two main reasons.

 

1-There is a reason movies and tv series and games tend to have only the character who speaking on screen when he or she is speaking. Because humans communicates as much by their facial expressions and body movements as they do by their words.

Now, imagine watching this scene from a position where you can't see Peter Dinklage's facial expressions.

 

 

 

Same wrods, same acting, but it wouldn't be as powerful, would it?

 

2-If the character we are speaking to isn't even worth cinematic dialogue, we can already tell he or she isn't important. Thus, why should we care about them?

 

Both of these contribute to forgettable NPCs and when a great number of your side quests are already forgettable (clear this pit of corpses so soldiers you can't speak to will teleport here, find this letter which will take you to another letter, which will take you to another letter, quest completed) that makes thwe vast maps you have created a chore to get through on the way to Adamant or Halamshiral.

 

 

 

[Winged Silver]

My hope was that the lack of cutscenes allowing us to fully view the NPCs we spoke with was due to a limit on resources, rather than some form of artistic direction.

 

I certainly agree that many quests became easily forgettable because we didn't have the opportunity to see with whom we were speaking with. Additionally, even speaking to familiar characters was less fulfilling than it could have been. I often found myself swinging the camera around in boredom while companions spoke to me outside of cutscenes.

[katerinafm]

 

 

2-If the character we are speaking to isn't even worth cinematic dialogue, we can already tell he or she isn't important. Thus, why should we care about them?

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

And yes, that's pretty much the point I'm trying to make whenever I bring up why DAI's approach to 80% of the dialogue in-game is bad. No matter how important what's happening is, it doesn't feel like it, and it hurts the already lackluster side quests of the game.

[katerinafm]

My hope was that the lack of cutscenes allowing us to fully view the NPCs we spoke with was due to a limit on resources, rather than some form of artistic direction.

 

While that could be true, they had been using the lack of cutscenes as a selling point in that they were saying 'Ooh, look, you can quit out any time!'. I'd have preferred the decision to have been made due to a lack of resources rather than them actually thinking it was good, because if they thought it was good it means that they could keep doing it no matter what.

[MyKingdomCold]

I don't really have a problem with the non-cinematic dialogue.  I think there are too many people/characters for them to implement cinematics for each one. It doesn't really matter how important/unimportant each person is.  For example, I don't think they should have had to implement cinematic dialogue for the people in Haven/Skyhold such as Segritt, Threnn, Adan, and the others. That's especially true for me when you reach Skyhold and Threnn, for example, only has one line.  

 

That's also true for me when it comes to the companions/advisors.  They should just do what they did. Implement cinematic dialogue for the more important conversations with Cullen for example and when you're asking him about more trivial subjects cinematics aren't necessary.  Or what about the times when I go to talk to a companion/advisor and the only option is "Goodbye'?

[Seraphim24]

 

 

In theory, DAI's approach to most dialogue should be insdistinguishable from cinematic dialogue, correct? The words and options are the same.

 

However, that is simply not true, in my opinion, for two main reasons.

 

1-There is a reason movies and tv series and games tend to have only the character who speaking on screen when he or she is speaking. Because humans communicates as much by their facial expressions and body movements as they do by their words.

Now, imagine watching this scene from a position where you can't see Peter Dinklage's facial expressions.

 

 

 

Same wrods, same acting, but it wouldn't be as powerful, would it?

 

2-If the character we are speaking to isn't even worth cinematic dialogue, we can already tell he or she isn't important. Thus, why should we care about them?

 

Both of these contribute to forgettable NPCs and when a great number of your side quests are already forgettable (clear this pit of corpses so soldiers you can't speak to will teleport here, find this letter which will take you to another letter, which will take you to another letter, quest completed) that makes thwe vast maps you have created a chore to get through on the way to Adamant or Halamshiral.

 

 

 

I think the concepts matter most, doesn't matter how flashy if it gets if I don't care what they're saying.

[Winged Silver]

While that could be true, they had been using the lack of cutscenes as a selling point in that they were saying 'Ooh, look, you can quit out any time!'. I'd have preferred the decision to have been made due to a lack of resources rather than them actually thinking it was good, because if they thought it was good it means that they could keep doing it no matter what.

 

True, though I almost feel like it'd be better if that had just been them trying to put a good spin on it, rather than actually thinking less cutscenes was the way to go. Either way, from what I've seen, it seems that most people either wish for cutscenes to play a greater role in the future, or just don't particularly care either way. I hope Bioware brings back cutscenes to at least some of the more important characters.

 

I don't really have a problem with the non-cinematic dialogue.  I think there are too many people/characters for them to implement cinematics for each one. It doesn't really matter how important/unimportant each person is.  For example, I don't think they should have had to implement cinematic dialogue for the people in Haven/Skyhold such as Segritt, Threnn, Adan, and the others. That's especially true for me when you reach Skyhold and Threnn, for example, only has one line.  

 

That's also true for me when it comes to the companions/advisors.  They should just do what they did. Implement cinematic dialogue for the more important conversations with Cullen for example and when you're asking him about more trivial subjects cinematics aren't necessary.  Or what about the times when I go to talk to a companion/advisor and the only option is "Goodbye'?

 

That's a really good point. DAI's cast of characters - big and small - is large enough to make creating a cutscene for every single one of them difficult, even over the top, in terms of implementation. But I do think for major companions, it would be nice to at least have a static style of cutscene (similar to how DAO didn't have you moving about while talking to NPCs around the camp, or how in ME2, when it wasn't a major dialog scene, the person you were talking with just stayed put in their chair).

 

I do think that certain NPCs definitely don't need a cutscene to provide their given function, but I think a lot of the quests in DAI could have benefited from at least a little something (I'm thinking major quest givers like Fairbanks, the Mayor of Crestwood, etc. Maybe one or two of the more unusual missions, but that would just be icing on the cake, for me, at least)

[Elleria]

I'm all for cinematic dialog, it really brings the character personality, expressions up close.However, I will not want this implemented if it means limiting resources in the gameplay areas that would support longer game life span.

[Lethaya]

This change was probably my biggest issue with DA:I. Cinematic dialogue would do so much to improve the game, helping with investment in side quests and the world itself, and helping to develop our companions and advisers more. The fact that the animations we do get are the same recycled ones for everyone makes it even worse, really. I agree that it was probably done this way to save dev time, but I really hope this doesn't become a thing with future Bioware games. Cinematic style interaction does a lot for gameplay, especially in Bioware games where the writing makes up so much of the experience.

[In Exile]

I know I'm in the minority, but I really and strongly preferred the lack of cinematics. It made the scene flow better. The solution isn't to have further cinematics to get back to that level of connection, but rather to allow us more control over the camera so we can zoom in on those features if we want.

[sandalisthemaker]

Ideally, I would like DA2 levels of cinematic dialogue and cutscenes again. More would be welcome of course. 

 

Hopefully, since they will presumably be using the frostbite engine again for the next game, and don't have to start from scratch, they will have more time/resources to put into cutscenes and cinematics. 

 

I really enjoyed:

 

Seeing my Hawke's face every time he spoke. 

 

Seeing my companion's faces every time they spoke. (Dorian in the dark library is a biggie that I did not like)

 

The overall intimacy of companion scenes at the beginning of each act and during personal quests.

 

Multi-part side quests with cinematic dialogue and cutscenes. (Such as Feynriel's quests)

 

I hope these return in the next game.

[Lethaya]

@ In Exile: Maybe it could be a gameplay setting? Cinematic would be higher preformance, I'd guess. Or you could go the streamlined, more direct route and chose to have the lack of cinematics.

 

Really, though, I'd think it'd be best to have a more balanced mix of the two. Companions get cinematics, as well as any major side quest interactions, while minor fetch quests just use the animation cycle style dialogue instead?

[In Exile]

@ In Exile: Maybe it could be a gameplay setting? Cinematic would be higher preformance, I'd guess. Or you could go the streamlined, more direct route and chose to have the lack of cinematics.

 

Really, though, I'd think it'd be best to have a more balanced mix of the two. Companions get cinematics, as well as any major side quest interactions, while minor fetch quests just use the animation cycle style dialogue instead?

 

Once they've invested in cinematics, setting up a toggle seems like extra and pointless work. I can appreciate why people want them and I'm sure Bioware will invest as much as they have room for the follow-up game. What Bioware really needs is a way to automate the camera a bit.

[Lethaya]

But camera won't make much difference if we still have the lack of facial expressions and the whole, ah. Hand holding, side stepping animation cycle? going on. XD If those two things were changed to allow for more personality, at least in regards to the main cast, I could be up for the camera adjustments as opposed to full out cinematic dialogue scenes, though!

 

I suppose it comes down to just wanting more personality and characterization to help flesh things out. Cinematics can help with that, so I'd love for them to make a come back thanks to that alone, but if other less intensive ways to accomplish that effect exist, that's great too.

[Felya87]

I still don't know what face have characters like fairbanks,Michel or ismael. I don't need complete cinematic. But something like dao or a zoom in like skyrim during dialogue.
As it is now is boring, and even important dialogues feel boring and unimportant.

[Sartoz]

 

 

In theory, DAI's approach to most dialogue should be insdistinguishable from cinematic dialogue, correct? The words and options are the same.

 

However, that is simply not true, in my opinion, for two main reasons.

 

1-There is a reason movies and tv series and games tend to have only the character who speaking on screen when he or she is speaking. Because humans communicates as much by their facial expressions and body movements as they do by their words.

Now, imagine watching this scene from a position where you can't see Peter Dinklage's facial expressions.

 

 

Snip video

-----------

 

Same wrods, same acting, but it wouldn't be as powerful, would it?

 

2-If the character we are speaking to isn't even worth cinematic dialogue, we can already tell he or she isn't important. Thus, why should we care about them?

 

Both of these contribute to forgettable NPCs and when a great number of your side quests are already forgettable (clear this pit of corpses so soldiers you can't speak to will teleport here, find this letter which will take you to another letter, which will take you to another letter, quest completed) that makes thwe vast maps you have created a chore to get through on the way to Adamant or Halamshiral.

 

 

 

                                                                               <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

 

Ah.. but the Dragone Age series have devolved to become an action shooter via 8 button smashing console controllers. What you are asking, I believe (and I support), is more RPGeesh.

That is anti console thinking (from EA's PoV). Besides, the cost of such a game would skyrocket.

 

Game cost break down to ( from google searches):

 

1. 15-18% programming

2. 30-40% art

3. 30-40% marketing

4. remaining = license fees, hard media (dvds), etc

 

However, a good game would become epic!

 

 

Correcting a spelling error

Modifié par Sartoz, 27 avril 2015 - 06:38 .

[Panda]

I wholeheartedly agree, I didn't find myself intresting at all during non-cinematic dialogues. I was just circling around camera, trying to get even somehow close to characters faces. 

 

I think Bioware should cut from game size to deliver better story and characters. They really went Skyrim way with DAI, which took away lot from immersion and story. I don't really think Bioware should improve games in ways that takes away their strong points. Isn't there already many non-story driven open-world fantasy games around with non-cinematic view?

[Sah291]

Yes, I know I kept feeling the need to zoom in closer to the characters during dialogue, and that oftentimes made me feel distant from the action. I don't know if that necessarily means more cutscenes...or just more control over the camera to zoom in and get closeups of faces, etc. But in general, I miss the more cinematic feel that DA2 and ME had. Not that DAI didn't have it for the more important scenes, but I would have liked more.

I understand doing it this way allowed for more content and more dialogue, but something about it felt a bit.... too old school? Maybe that puts me in the "less is more" camp. Or perhaps I've grown used to cinematics now....but it's kind of like going back to a silent protagonist after getting a fully voiced one, I enjoyed it at the time, but it's hard to go back. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy the game. It's just that this was something I thought bioware always did well, and the cinematics we did get were mostly really well done.

[Handsome Jack]

Bioware needs to go back to its Origins writing. DA2 and Inquis dumbed it down beyond belief.

[Kierro Ren]

I honestly liked how they have it, but eh *shrugs* Can't please everyone.

[In Exile]

Bioware needs to go back to its Origins writing. DA2 and Inquis dumbed it down beyond belief.

You mean the brilliant writing where Arl Howe insanely betrays the Couslands without teaming up with Loghain, and then it turns out Loghain just sides with an open traitor who broke every aspect of the feudal contract?

DAOs writing is a mess.

[Massakkolia]

Cinematic dialogue for every NPC conversation would probably be quite expensive (although possibly still worth it). I can do without nuanced facial expressions when I'm talking to a random farmer who's lost his very special ram, but I want to at least see his face.

 

A good example would be Svarah Sun-Hair, who's one of the central characters in Jaws of Hakkon DLC (no spoilers, don't worry). We can play almost to the very end of the DLC without ever seeing her face up close because most of the conversations are done in that god-awful DAI conversation camera. Only near the end there's a short cutscene, and she looks to be about 50-60 years old. Only then I can make a judgement that she's a tough, ageing leader with years of life experience behind her. Before that I had no idea how old she was. Based on her voice, she could have easily been a young woman just starting up as a thane.       

 

This is why having the camera zoom in on faces is so important. Even in real life conversations, we make instant and unconscious appraisals based on appearance and facial expressions. Stonefaced characters I can deal with, but not seeing their faces at all is about the same as talking to them on the phone or shouting at someone from a great distance. My connection to these "distant" characters is very faint and I end up not caring about finding their bloody rams. Even in old isometric games I always cared only for NPCs with character portraits. That's how crucial faces are.

 

I've used mods and cheat engine to fix the camera, but not everybody plays on PC and it's not an ideal solution anyway. I really hope Bioware will address this problem in the next DA game, if not in this one.  

[Madmoe77]

The value far outweighs the expense and expansive worlds. Cinematic scenes can attach us to non-human casts as much as any face we can recognize. Take all of the romance of Mass Effect or even Ironbull in DAI; if it weren't for the dialogue being more expressive it would be very hard to develop such an affinity for these 'alien' characters. You can write as much personification as you like but until you put something relatable into the scene we can't accept them as real. Garrus is not attractive by any human standard, yet he had droves of romantic followers because of his emotive qualities in scenes.

 

Even spoken Darkspawn give a nuance in Awakenings that nearly turns your view of them on it's head. If there were no cutscenes with the Architect, the First or the Disciple; even Corypuss would certainly be less effective. The depth of this deviation from Bioware's core mechanic is what is the issue here.

 

For DAI I felt a decent connection to Scout Harding even though she wasn't completely intended to be that. She just shared enough cutscenes with my Inquisitor to make me feel like I knew more about her than anyone else. Most other characters I experienced in blocks but not necessarily the adventure. I left many companions back at Skyhold after my second playthrough. On to my fifth I noticed there wasn't much I cared to experience again that had the same effect as say any scene with Liara in Lair of the Shadow Broker. Those scenes are important.   

[Aquarius121]

but I want to at least see his face.

 

 

This.

 

When I say I want "cinematics," a lot of people seem to think I mean full-blown multiple camera angles, or perfect lighting, or "I-can-see-the-tears-in-their-eyes and individual-waving-whiskers-in-their-beards" level visuals...when really all I want is a simple close up on their face! Maybe a smirk there, a frown there, maybe not. Of course I'd love more detailed scenes, who wouldn't, but I'm aware that it's not practical to make *all* encounters realistic and nuanced. Hell, most of the NPCs in DAO and DAII were emotionless husks that talked, BUT AT LEAST YOU COULD CLEARLY SEE THE HUSK.

 

Sorry...just so annoyed because the quests and interactions could have been *so* much more meaningful. The waste of potential is sad.

[MisterJB]

To clarify, I do not believe that for every conversation we have, we need to have a fully detailed animation where, through the simple movement of the NPC's eyes, we can see the multiple emotions s/he is feeling at any given moment.

 

On the other hand, I do believe we need to have what we already did which is for the camera to become stationary and to focus on whoever is speaking rather than feeling like it is ten feet away.

 

As in this:
 

 

Rather than this: