45 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

This topic was inspired by yet more discussion in the Twitter thread about the value of cinematic dialogues with NPCs.

 

The debate is whether, upon addressing an NPC (quest-NPCs primarily) the angle should remain static, as it does in Dragon Age: Inquisition, or switch to a cinematic angle, as it did in previous Dragon Age games.

 

The argument for cinematic angles is that conversations are inherently more interesting when you can see the NPC up close, particularly their face. It creates a bit of familiarity and helps to make the NPC feel more like a person and less like a map marker. It's the same reason why people prefer face-to-face interaction in certain scenarios as opposed to, say, phone conversations or e-mails.

 

The argument against varies, but the critical point is the question of resources, and the expense it takes to make "cinematics" for every semi-important NPC in the game.

 

But I think this argument against slightly misinterprets what people actually want. There is a difference between a conversation that features a static, "cinematic" angle and a cinematic scene. The latter is featured in companion cutscenes, where every movement is custom created by the development team. The former is what used to be employed en masse in BioWare games, with the crucial difference that nothing is hand-crafted exactly; character movement and facial expressions depend on preset animations used over and over again. This is evident to anyone who plays BioWare games and has seen the "hold-the-arm" worried animation in KOTOR, or the "lean back and pose" animation in Mass Effect. Other games in the past, such as Divinity II and Witcher 2 just to name a few, utilize this as well. It's a cost-effective way to ape human expression that doesn't require nearly as much model and collision detection as an actual cinematic scene.

 

This is what I, and I suspect many others, would like to see return for future BioWare games. The important point is simply that the NPC is represented on-screen as someone with definable features. This helps create a sense of individuality, which in turn makes the conversations with NPCs more interesting.

[FKA_Servo]

I guess Laidlaw referred to this direction as an experiment, right? Possibly one they'll walk back in future games.

 

Until recently, I'm generally indifferent to them - that's the cost effective way, yeah, but the combination of all those reused animations, combined with the dead-eyed Bioware faces and the fact that excessive cutscenes are just jarring to me. I didn't miss them, for sure.

 

Now that they're able to model characters that actually emote (DAI does this very well, surprisingly) I wouldn't mind it at all. The emotion conveyed in some of DAI's cutscenes are marvelous.

[correctamundo]

I didn't think to much about it at first when playing DAI. But when playing TW3 I can surely see the point in more closer contact in conversation. Same goes for earlier DA games of course. It is not a big thing for me but a more personal touch in conversations would be appreciated.

[Iakus]

As someone who's played a LOT of isometric RPGS like Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity, and such, I'd say that cinematic scenes and angles are not of huge importance to me.  Nice if we can get them, sure.  But i find it more important that the quest and the conversation itself were interesting.

 

I wonder if the complaint about the lack of cinematic conversations is an extension of the complaint of grindy or dull side missions?

[AresKeith]

I don't know about calling it a middle ground but I do feel that some convos don't need a cinematic view. That being said DAI did need more cinematic convos 

[FKA_Servo]

As someone who's played a LOT of isometric RPGS like Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity, and such, I'd say that cinematic scenes and angles are not of huge importance to me.  Nice if we can get them, sure.  But i find it more important that the quest and the conversation itself were interesting.

 

I wonder if the complaint about the lack of cinematic conversations is an extension of the complaint of grindy or dull side missions?

 

I honestly suspect that some of the people who complained about dull side missions wouldn't have even noticed if they were presented in a "cinematic" fashion. Some of them (not all! No one in this thread, so far) seem to be very easily distracted.

[Cheviot]

As someone who's played a LOT of isometric RPGS like Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity, and such, I'd say that cinematic scenes and angles are not of huge importance to me.  Nice if we can get them, sure.  But i find it more important that the quest and the conversation itself were interesting.

The weird over-reaction to it was baffling for a while, but I wonder if it's not as much about the angles as it is the lack of custom animations; I remember RPGs where all characters (if they were animated at all) just cycled through two frames endlessly, but kids today expect more, at least from western RPGs.  A lot of JRPGs and visual novels can still get away with static character pictures and scrolling text.

I wonder if the complaint about the lack of cinematic conversations is an extension of the complaint of grindy or dull side missions?

It's not like you to look for a negative view of Bioware.  Is everything okay?  Anyway, conversations and the missions are two different things, and, if there were going to be any connection, surely it would be that the conversations would be more kindly looked at if the missions were so bad.

[Iakus]

I honestly suspect that some of the people who complained about dull side missions wouldn't have even noticed if they were presented in a "cinematic" fashion. Some of them (not all! No one in this thread, so far) seem to be very easily distracted.

Not saying it would  distract from the quality of the quest, just that it's a contributing factor.  They see an impersonal quest and the less personal conversation set-up is seen as part of the reason.

[nightscrawl]

While I admit that I wouldn't mind the true cinematic dialog when talking to all followers, I don't think it's necessary in every instance, like talking to many quest NPCs. So an unfortunate woman tells me that templars murdered her farmer husband and took his wedding band. It's all of two sentences. So I don't really see the necessity in going into full on cinematic mode just for that.

 

But with all followers or major NPCs? Yes. Even when just doing all of their investigative dialog I would like to be able to enter into a cinematic with the followers just for the reasons that the OP mentioned: seeing facial expressions and talking up-close with someone adds to familiarity.

 

And... you know... seeing my LI's lovely face is a bonus, even if we're just talking about some innocuous thing. (I'm sorry, I just had to say it.)

[CronoDragoon]

I wonder if the complaint about the lack of cinematic conversations is an extension of the complaint of grindy or dull side missions?

 

I don't see it that way. Two separate issues, but they can influence one another. Close static angles can make a person interested in a conversation even if the conversation itself isn't the most interesting thing in the world. In other words, it can make up for a dull conversation a bit. In the same way, interesting dialogue can help poorly animated scenes (like the KOTOR games).

[BansheeOwnage]

This is what I had to say about it in another thread, because there isn't really any point trying to rewrite it:

My problem with the lack of cinematic conversation (primarily for NPCs) is twofold:

 

First, neither your character, the party, nor the NPC in question will have any facial expression. I don't think I have to explain how that is bad for storytelling.

 

Second, you can't get a good look at the NPC's face at all, naturally making them forgettable.

 

On a related note: People like to confuse "cutscenes" with "cinematic conversation". No, I'm not asking for full-blown cutscenes for every interaction, complete with tons of animations and camera angles. I'm just asking for cinematic conversation, à la DA:O camp conversations. Simple over-the-shoulder camera angles so we could see faces. So I hope they go back to DA:O/DA2's system of having that in almost every interaction. It was a lot of work I'm sure, but it was impressive and added a lot to the games. I think they should strive to do at least as well in the future.

 

While I admit that I wouldn't mind the true cinematic dialog when talking to all followers, I don't think it's necessary in every instance, like talking to many quest NPCs. So an unfortunate woman tells me that templars murdered her farmer husband and took his wedding band. It's all of two sentences. So I don't really see the necessity in going into full on cinematic mode just for that.

 

But with all followers or major NPCs? Yes. Even when just doing all of their investigative dialog I would like to be able to enter into a cinematic with the followers just for the reasons that the OP mentioned: seeing facial expressions and talking up-close with someone adds to familiarity.

 

And... you know... seeing my LI's lovely face is a bonus, even if we're just talking about some innocuous thing. (I'm sorry, I just had to say it.)

I'm nitpicky, so I'm going to say that the conversation with the elven widow actually has the Inquisitor ask questions, so it's not a 2-second conversation, but I get your point. And I also don't think it's needed in absolutely every scenario, but most. And like you said, especially inner circle members. It's just jarring not to have them there. They're the most important characters, but you can barely make out their faces (or yours). I'm perfectly content with the amount of actual cutscenes they have, but I'd rather they have cinematic angles 100% of the time, unless they say just one line.

 

And finally, I'll just reiterate that it sounds like a lot of work, but DA:O and even DA2 managed to pull it off (for which I appreciate greatly), so I think it's perfectly possible for them to do again.

[Saphiron123]

This topic was inspired by yet more discussion in the Twitter thread about the value of cinematic dialogues with NPCs.

 

The debate is whether, upon addressing an NPC (quest-NPCs primarily) the angle should remain static, as it does in Dragon Age: Inquisition, or switch to a cinematic angle, as it did in previous Dragon Age games.

 

The argument for cinematic angles is that conversations are inherently more interesting when you can see the NPC up close, particularly their face. It creates a bit of familiarity and helps to make the NPC feel more like a person and less like a map marker. It's the same reason why people prefer face-to-face interaction in certain scenarios as opposed to, say, phone conversations or e-mails.

 

The argument against varies, but the critical point is the question of resources, and the expense it takes to make "cinematics" for every semi-important NPC in the game.

 

But I think this argument against slightly misinterprets what people actually want. There is a difference between a conversation that features a static, "cinematic" angle and a cinematic scene. The latter is featured in companion cutscenes, where every movement is custom created by the development team. The former is what used to be employed en masse in BioWare games, with the crucial difference that nothing is hand-crafted exactly; character movement and facial expressions depend on preset animations used over and over again. This is evident to anyone who plays BioWare games and has seen the "hold-the-arm" worried animation in KOTOR, or the "lean back and pose" animation in Mass Effect. Other games in the past, such as Divinity II and Witcher 2 just to name a few, utilize this as well. It's a cost-effective way to ape human expression that doesn't require nearly as much model and collision detection as an actual cinematic scene.

 

This is what I, and I suspect many others, would like to see return for future BioWare games. The important point is simply that the NPC is represented on-screen as someone with definable features. This helps create a sense of individuality, which in turn makes the conversations with NPCs more interesting.

If TW3 can give us emotional cinematics for hundreds of characters with half bioware's resources, bioware should be able to with the very limited number of npcs actually in inquisition. They don't even have any cities, I bet there's fewer then 100 npcs with dialogue of any kind in the entire game.

Cinematics need a comeback.

 

Tactics need a comeback.

 

And emphasis on story needs a comeback.

 

I'd take attributes too, build my characters the way i want, then some preset progression path that takes control out of my hands.

Sadly nobody from bioware will ever hear this, because they don't come here.

[BansheeOwnage]

Cinematics need a comeback.

 

Tactics need a comeback.

 

And emphasis on story needs a comeback.

 

I'd take attributes too, build my characters the way i want, then some preset progression path that takes control out of my hands.

Sadly nobody from bioware will ever hear this, because they don't come here.

I agree with all of this.

[MPSai]

I definitely feel less engaged with the static angle and I really miss there being cinematic dialog for most things in these games. Even if it's just a simple shot-reverse-shot it's more interesting than just staring at the screen while the characters talk at each other. 

[Zatche]

This is what I, and I suspect many others, would like to see return for future BioWare games. The important point is simply that the NPC is represented on-screen as someone with definable features. This helps create a sense of individuality, which in turn makes the conversations with NPCs more interesting.

 

I don't know if it makes the conversations actually more interesting. I think it more helps the player slow down and focus on it. The player will then remember the context for why they're completing a quest for the NPC.

 

I think this concept could also apply to enemies in DAI, as well. I remember quite a few threads lamenting the lack of gruesome or scary looking monsters. I think if there were a small cutscene to indroduce newly appearing enemies awhile, certain enemies would seem more threatening. For example, with the high camera angle when playing the game, I never knew how freaky DAI's ghouls looked until I saw a screenshot after I played the game all the way through. If there were just a 3 second clip of a ghoul growling, I think that would have gone a long way.

[9TailsFox]

I don't know if it makes the conversations actually more interesting. I think it more helps the player slow down and focus on it. The player will then remember the context for why they're completing a quest for the NPC.

 

I think this concept could also apply to enemies in DAI, as well. I remember quite a few threads lamenting the lack of gruesome or scary looking monsters. I think if there were a small cutscene to indroduce newly appearing enemies awhile, certain enemies would seem more threatening. For example, with the high camera angle when playing the game, I never knew how freaky DAI's ghouls looked until I saw a screenshot after I played the game all the way through. If there were just a 3 second clip of a ghoul growling, I think that would have gone a long way.

This. The I play game I have several times think enemy's so small and insignificant. It was like i was just shooting at same targets This is darkspawn and this is bigger dark spawn, this is human. I never saw how darkspawn look in DA:I.

And in DA:O I saw hurlock in all his beauty.

Spoiler

[Wolven_Soul]

I honestly suspect that some of the people who complained about dull side missions wouldn't have even noticed if they were presented in a "cinematic" fashion. Some of them (not all! No one in this thread, so far) seem to be very easily distracted.

 

Not me.  In fact, I would have forgiven the lack of cinematic conversations if the side content had not been so dull.  I would have forgiven a lot of the flaws in this game for that.

[Wolven_Soul]

While I admit that I wouldn't mind the true cinematic dialog when talking to all followers, I don't think it's necessary in every instance, like talking to many quest NPCs. So an unfortunate woman tells me that templars murdered her farmer husband and took his wedding band. It's all of two sentences. So I don't really see the necessity in going into full on cinematic mode just for that.

 

But with all followers or major NPCs? Yes. Even when just doing all of their investigative dialog I would like to be able to enter into a cinematic with the followers just for the reasons that the OP mentioned: seeing facial expressions and talking up-close with someone adds to familiarity.

 

And... you know... seeing my LI's lovely face is a bonus, even if we're just talking about some innocuous thing. (I'm sorry, I just had to say it.)

 

Is it necessary?  Perhaps not.  But would it have enhanced the mood of the moment to see the woman's anger and grief on her face in a close up cinematic view?  Ohhh yes.  We certainly could not hear it in her voice so much.  

[Wolven_Soul]

I definitely feel less engaged with the static angle and I really miss there being cinematic dialog for most things in these games. Even if it's just a simple shot-reverse-shot it's more interesting than just staring at the screen while the characters talk at each other. 

 

Especially when you take into consideration the fact that unless you stop and square your character up directly with the person you wanna talk to, you can end up with the NPC looking at you and your character in the wrong angle looking off to the side or even with your back to the NPC.

[Wolven_Soul]

I don't know if it makes the conversations actually more interesting. I think it more helps the player slow down and focus on it. The player will then remember the context for why they're completing a quest for the NPC.

 

I think this concept could also apply to enemies in DAI, as well. I remember quite a few threads lamenting the lack of gruesome or scary looking monsters. I think if there were a small cutscene to indroduce newly appearing enemies awhile, certain enemies would seem more threatening. For example, with the high camera angle when playing the game, I never knew how freaky DAI's ghouls looked until I saw a screenshot after I played the game all the way through. If there were just a 3 second clip of a ghoul growling, I think that would have gone a long way.

 

I never thought about this before but your right.  The fight with the broodmother would not have been nearly so freaky and great if we had just walked into the room and started duking it out.  I remember the feeling of tension I had in that moment.  Hearing the dwarven girl's creepy rhyme, watching my character walk around that corner and there she is in all her disgusting glory.  That was a fantastic moment.

[zara]

I agree with the op. For future games I would like the conversations to go back to the way they were done in Origins and DA2.

[thewatcheruatu]

I commented upon this in a different thread, but I'll just sort of reiterate what I said there in this thread in a much more rambling manner.

 

For me, you could eliminate probably half the quests in Dragon Age: Inquisition and I'd be fine with it. I mean, when I first got to the Hinterlands and one of the first NPCs to which I talked asked me to go and gather 8 ram meat (or whatever), I was thinking, "Wait--is this an MMO? What is this rubbish?"

 

People talk so much trash about Dragon Age 2, but what I loved about it is that it didn't really waste your time with a lot of nonsense time-wasting quests. Most of the sidequests felt very relevant to the main plotline and your character's development, and the effect of your decisions sometimes even came back at the end when you didn't necessarily expect it to do so.

 

Basically, there was a lot less to do in DA2, but the quests, themselves, were generally of a pretty high quality, even if BioWare took production shortcuts everywhere else. In short, I felt like it was a game that respected my time and tried to fill it with as much meaning as possible while still allowing me to focus largely on the main storyline.

 

In Dragon Age: Inquisition, it almost feels like BioWare went in the complete opposite direction, since DA2 received such a negative reception. With quests, it's like they threw in everything but the kitchen sink, but I didn't even care about anything outside of the main plotline until I got to Crestwood. And at level 11, that's about the only area that I even liked so far.

 

The lack of cinematic conversations is both a symptom and a source of the problem.

 

It's a symptom, because it's the result of there simply being too many minor quests that it would have been impractical to direct the characters in cinematic conversations for all of them. And do you really need a cinematic conversation with a guy who wants you to go fetch him some ram meat? But why does that quest even exist in the first place?

 

And it's a problem, because the fact that there are so few cinematic conversations kind of adds to me not caring. Your mileage may vary, but for me, I really want to see the characters up close, with camera angles switching to show my character and the characters to which I'm talking, and occasionally switching over to my companions (who don't comment nearly enough in this game). I need to see their facial expressions, which are actually hella good this time around in the few instances that you do see them. I spent a ton of time trying to get my Inquisitor just right, and most of the time, I'm looking at the back of her head? Hell no! That's terrible.

 

In short, fewer quests, better cinematic storytelling. Would have made this game great for me instead of just acceptable.

[vbibbi]

I commented upon this in a different thread, but I'll just sort of reiterate what I said there in this thread in a much more rambling manner.

 

For me, you could eliminate probably half the quests in Dragon Age: Inquisition and I'd be fine with it. I mean, when I first got to the Hinterlands and one of the first NPCs to which I talked asked me to go and gather 8 ram meat (or whatever), I was thinking, "Wait--is this an MMO? What is this rubbish?"

 

People talk so much trash about Dragon Age 2, but what I loved about it is that it didn't really waste your time with a lot of nonsense time-wasting quests. Most of the sidequests felt very relevant to the main plotline and your character's development, and the effect of your decisions sometimes even came back at the end when you didn't necessarily expect it to do so.

 

Basically, there was a lot less to do in DA2, but the quests, themselves, were generally of a pretty high quality, even if BioWare took production shortcuts everywhere else. In short, I felt like it was a game that respected my time and tried to fill it with as much meaning as possible while still allowing me to focus largely on the main storyline.

 

In Dragon Age: Inquisition, it almost feels like BioWare went in the complete opposite direction, since DA2 received such a negative reception. With quests, it's like they threw in everything but the kitchen sink, but I didn't even care about anything outside of the main plotline until I got to Crestwood. And at level 11, that's about the only area that I even liked so far.

 

The lack of cinematic conversations is both a symptom and a source of the problem.

 

It's a symptom, because it's the result of there simply being too many minor quests that it would have been impractical to direct the characters in cinematic conversations for all of them. And do you really need a cinematic conversation with a guy who wants you to go fetch him some ram meat? But why does that quest even exist in the first place?

 

And it's a problem, because the fact that there are so few cinematic conversations kind of adds to me not caring. Your mileage may vary, but for me, I really want to see the characters up close, with camera angles switching to show my character and the characters to which I'm talking, and occasionally switching over to my companions (who don't comment nearly enough in this game). I need to see their facial expressions, which are actually hella good this time around in the few instances that you do see them. I spent a ton of time trying to get my Inquisitor just right, and most of the time, I'm looking at the back of her head? Hell no! That's terrible.

 

In short, fewer quests, better cinematic storytelling. Would have made this game great for me instead of just acceptable.

Very good points, I agree. Some of the criticisms of the smaller fetch quests such as the ram meat or blankets, etc. have been rebuffed by people saying this helps influence the public's attitude and goodwill toward the Inquisition. And I agree, the quests in themselves make sense and shows how we're bringing stability to the region. BUT I don't think it's the player's role to do these minor quests: that is the supposed benefit of representing a larger organization (since we're not yet the Inquisitor at this stage).

 

I would rather have the design be something along the lines of: We speak to several NPCs about problems in the region. Minor quests (ram meat, widow's ring, most gathering quests) would be assigned to a field camp war table, where we direct our troops to fulfill these requests. This still gives us influence and makes a difference in the world, but we don't have to personally see to these tedious tasks. And then more major quests (deal with rebel mage and templar strongholds, bandits occupying fortress leading to lyrium smugglers in the Deep Roads) would be something we should handle directly. It's reasonable to think that Inquisition scouts wouldn't be able to handle these higher-level combat encounters.

 

And then as we increase our agents, we would be able to increase the number of field camp war table assignments we can perform at once. Leave the Haven/Skyhold war table at three for our advisors, but have these minor tasks in each map be completed more quickly depending on how successful we are at recruiting.

 

Kind of a tangent from cinematic conversations, which I agree would also improve reception to quests, but this would also reduce the need for these conversations since less quests would be present.

[In Exile]

Not me.  In fact, I would have forgiven the lack of cinematic conversations if the side content had not been so dull.  I would have forgiven a lot of the flaws in this game for that.

 

When was the side content, ultimately, not dull? DA:O's side content was often fetch-quests or kill quests. There was just more actual conversation with NPCs e.g. Sten's and Morrigan's companion quests were fetch quests (find the sword/tome). Really, Wynne's wasn't that far apart (fetch her former apprentice). But where this stuff happened, Bioware either had some clever trick to make it feel less awful (e.g. Sten's goose chase had some really fun dialogue if you brought Sten along), and even when they used this stuff for the main quest (e.g. find Ruck) had some interesting twists. 

 

Ultimately the quests themselves - and their design - wasn't good, even in DA:O and DA2. But they had better use of dialogue. 

The problem is that Bioware sucks at quest design. That's the first thing they need to fix, not just adding in more conversations. 

[Enigmatick]

There's a lot more potential in real time conversations.

 

We just need to be put in the director's seat.