293 réponses à ce sujet

[Joseph Warrick]

My favourite from SWTOR is available to all classes (I think - I got there with an inquisitor and a warrior). It's in Tatooine, the beginning of the bonus series.

 

Imperial military man: "We're starting big projects out here. Imagine Tatooine as a bastion of the empire on the outer rim!"

Option in the wheel: "You're pathetic."

Line delivered: "Concerned that your current assignment guarding a lifeless desert doesn't suit a man of your stature?"

 

Hearing Xanthe Elbrick's supremely sarcastic delivery was ridiculous fun. Reading it first would have ruined it. I realize other players have other preferences. Fortunately there is more than one game in the market!

[Chealec]

That's not funny. That's infuriating.

If I'm trying to construct and play a coherent character, I cannot have her saying or doing things that contradict other aspects of her personality.

Whenever the paraphrase fails in this way, I must either reload, or just resign myself to no lonher caring about that character or playthrough.

I did a lot of the reloading in ME1. I mostly stopped caring in DA2 and ME2 (which is why I think those were BioWare's worst games by far).

ME3 just has way fewer dialogue wheel events in it, so it's hard to judge on the same scale.

 

'course it's funny - if you don't take the game too seriously.

 

I came to the conclusion, playing ME1 that it doesn't actually make any difference what I do since I'll be dead at the start of ME2 and spend the rest of the time as a clone. Even if you go out of your way to be arsey to your team-mates, or any other NPC for that matter, they never seem to take it particularly badly - about the worst you'll get is "sorry commander".

 

I went around Noveria yesterday deliberately picking the most offensive (or renegade) dialogue options in every conversation and the worst I got was people apologising for not having slept much lately. So when the outcome of what your character says makes very little difference, it makes very little difference what your character says. Pick an option, see what happens... I don't really care enough to try and method act the game tbh.

[CrutchCricket]

It's fine as is. Sure, have explicit lines be an option, if people want it, but not the option.

 

The value of good surprise surpasses the perceived lack of control.

[N7Jamaican]

It's fine as is. Sure, have explicit lines be an option, if people want it, but not the option.

 

Agreed, I prefer Mass Effect remain true to itself.  But if people want that as option, then allow them to select it.  Do not make it mandatory.  Some people in this forum want choice to be taken away from us... In an RPG, where choice is the most important aspect of the game.

[FKA_Servo]

I'm not a fan of surprise in games like this personally, but either way, I don't see what having the full line visible when highlighting an option would take away.

 

I feel the same way about interrupts. Sometimes they're a fun way to step out of character, but if I'm gonna push a dude out the window to his death, I'd like to know that ahead of time.

[CrutchCricket]

I'm not a fan of surprise in games like this personally, but either way, I don't see what having the full line visible when highlighting an option would take away.

 

I feel the same way about interrupts. Sometimes they're a fun way to step out of character, but if I'm gonna push a dude out the window to his death, I'd like to know that ahead of time.

It was blatantly obvious, the way you were backing the dude up that he might take the short way down. Conversely, pushing a dude out the window is and should be a shocking moment. If you get a tip along the lines of "Plummet occuring in 3..2..1" it takes some the impact away.

 

Not seeing the line verbatim allows conversations to feel more natural. Really, even when you talk IRL you're not thinking "I will say this exact thing next, word for word". You have an idea of what to say and the words just come. Maybe some improvements could be made where the "ideas" of the dialogue wheel match up with the delivered line more. But I would not want verbatim lines to select.

[N7Jamaican]

It was blatantly obvious, the way you were backing the dude up that he might take the short way down. Conversely, pushing a dude out the window is and should be a shocking moment. If you get a tip along the lines of "Plummet occuring in 3..2..1" it takes some the impact away.

 

Not seeing the line verbatim allows conversations to feel more natural. Really, even when you talk IRL you're not thinking "I will say this exact thing next, word for word". You have an idea of what to say and the words just come. Maybe some improvements could be made where the "ideas" of the dialogue wheel match up with the delivered line more. But I would not want verbatim lines to select.

 

Truest sh*t spoken thus far in this thread.

[Chealec]

Actually, in ME1 I get the impression that the "summaries" were written first, then the writers came in and tried to fill out the lines. At least, that is what it seems like. Why else would every dialogue wheel have 3 options when probably the majority of the time 2 of the options will have Shepard say the same thing? Often, the top two options will say the same thing, sometimes the bottom two will say the same thing, and in a few case the top and bottom will say the same while the middle one says something different. Or what about those large number of cases where all three options have the same dialogue? "Dream" "Vision" "Nightmare" -> "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, killing organics"

 

It seems as if they had these grand plans for always providing three options, then simply ran out of time or money.

 

I suspect that's probably accurate as you'd want to set the options up to ensure everything works as intended before you get the voice actors to do their stuff; I'd imagine it's much easier to simply merge a couple of conversation branches together if you've initially pencilled in too many options than it would be to have too add in entirely new branches if you'd made too few.

[Nomen Mendax]

Why would that be? If anything, I'd think that people would have become more used to paraphrase systems.

As for an option, that doesn't necessarily solve the problem, even though an option would only hurt people who use it. If someone thinks that he needs the information in the full text he'll be more likely to leave the option on even if that ends up making his experience worse. Some players like to think that they have more control over the PC than they actually do.

I want the option to see the full line. 

 

I concede that reading the full line lessens the impact of hearing the spoken line. But as a player I'm happy to live with that. For me its not even an issue of picking the wrong line (for the PC), its that I do not ever want to be surprised by what the PC says or does. I very much agree with your last line (so I put it in bold). I want the illusion that I have complete control over the PC. I'm obviously aware that I don't but anything that reminds me of this lessens my enjoyment.

[FKA_Servo]

I contend that it wasn't that clear that the guy was going down.

 

I can live with the paraphrasing, honestly. I don't mind it, especially if they continue to improve the paraphrases as they have done in DAI. But, I think that showing the full lines would be a decent and easy concession to the people who do want such a thing (if it were an option, I'd certainly use it).

 

Disagree about interrupts, though. I'd like the action taken to be a little more clear. I'd also like to be able to pause during cutscenes or conversations to think about whether I want to undertake them at all (something that I don't remember if we're able to do in ME. If we can't, we should).

 

Here's another example - romancing Liara in LotSB. Towards the end there's a series of three paragon interrupts - hitting all three of them result in a kiss, essentially "continuing" the romance.

 

I loved that. I thought it was a great scene. But I think that stuff like that should be a little more clear ahead of time

[Nomen Mendax]

The value of good surprise surpasses the perceived lack of control.

My opinion on this is different from yours.

[CrutchCricket]

My opinion on this is different from yours.

Unacceptable. We must fight!

[In Exile]

I cannot possibly imagine why. Have you ever picked a dialogue option that ended up being nothing like what it looked like and had to reload? Now that's annoying.

I don't think adding the feature would be problematic. If it's that big of a deal, make it optional.

To people who don't want to read something and have it repeated to them. That is apparently a large group.

[CrutchCricket]

Actually one thing I think would make this smoother for all involved would be to allow escaping out of convos to restart them like in TOR. In ME, if you say something you don't like you have to play out the rest of the convo and hope you saved close enough to reload. But escaping the convo and being able to restart it immediately would cut down on the annoyance of having of having to redo a conversation.

 

It also helps when there's distractions around you and you start missing out what people say because you're paying attention to what your mom, your dog or crazy neighbor is doing. Just Esc and deal with whatever demands your attention and then restart it. But that's another matter.

[FKA_Servo]

I've also always thought that interrupts could, at the very least, benefit from a range of different descriptive icons, rather than just "paragon" and "renegade." So, throw up, say, a heart, and you'll at least know that you're engaging in a romance related interrupt. Toss up the fist icon, you'll know you're going to be doing something intimidating or violent. Teary eye to comfort someone or something along those lines. Etc and so forth. Seems like it would be a positive addition overall.

 

Do people want less icons like that, though? I don't even know anymore.

[N7Jamaican]

I've also always thought that interrupts could, at the very least, benefit from a range of different descriptive icons, rather than just "paragon" and "renegade." So, throw up, say, a heart, and you'll at least know that you're engaging in a romance related interrupt. Toss up the fist icon, you'll know you're going to be doing something intimidating or violent. Teary eye to comfort someone or something along those lines. Etc and so forth. Seems like it would be a positive addition overall.

 

Do people want less icons like that, though? I don't even know anymore.

 

Kinda like Dragon Age?

 

I am fine with paragon and renegade, I don't need tooltips in everything I play to make a decision.  But I understand others may want it.  See, I am the type of person where others are making a big stink for it, it should at least be an option for those who want it or don't want it.

[CrutchCricket]

I'd be ok with that, simply because it gets away from moral dichotomy systems, which were getting old before they even started.

[FKA_Servo]

Kinda like Dragon Age?

 

I am fine with paragon and renegade, I don't need tooltips in everything I play to make a decision.  But I understand others may want it.  See, I am the type of person where others are making a big stink for it, it should at least be an option for those who want it or don't want it.

 

Not really. I was using the Dragon Age icons simply as descriptors for convenience, but I'm talking about interrupts as we know them in ME.

 

I just think that the range of possible actions for an interrupt (even as evidenced by those undertaken in ME2 and ME3) is a little too varied to be characterized as just "paragon" or "renegade."

 

And honestly, having them designated in such a way would be enough for me, regarding my earlier complaint about not knowing what's going to happen. But I really think it would just be a good change overall.

[Robbiesan]

I'd be okay with that, after some of the DA:2 choices were not what what they appeared to be.  A simple summary of what each choice would say is okay, I don't think we need to see the whole line though.  I can see the "I just read the response, I don't want to have to read it and hear it too."

[Sylvius the Mad]

'course it's funny - if you don't take the game too seriously.

I came to the conclusion, playing ME1 that it doesn't actually make any difference what I do since I'll be dead at the start of ME2 and spend the rest of the time as a clone. Even if you go out of your way to be arsey to your team-mates, or any other NPC for that matter, they never seem to take it particularly badly - about the worst you'll get is "sorry commander".

I went around Noveria yesterday deliberately picking the most offensive (or renegade) dialogue options in every conversation and the worst I got was people apologising for not having slept much lately. So when the outcome of what your character says makes very little difference, it makes very little difference what your character says. Pick an option, see what happens... I don't really care enough to try and method act the game tbh.

Then I don’t see why I would even bother playing it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The paraphrase dialogue wheel will never change because it's one of Bioware's trademarks.

They patented it and Yanick Roy is one of the inventors.

That doesn't mean they can't improve it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Not seeing the line verbatim allows conversations to feel more natural. Really, even when you talk IRL you're not thinking "I will say this exact thing next, word for word". You have an idea of what to say and the words just come. Maybe some improvements could be made where the "ideas" of the dialogue wheel match up with the delivered line more. But I would not want verbatim lines to select.

1. That's not how I talk. I do plan whole sentences. I'll often rehearse them in advance.

2. Never do I say something I actively want to avoid saying. But Shepard and Hawke did that quite a bit. I know that there's something specific I want to avoid saying, and then they go ahead and say it.

At least with full text I'd know that I didn't have the option not to say that thing, and could find an appropriate mental state for my character with which to interpret the consequences. But finding that mental state might take a couple of minutes, not the fraction of a second available after I hear the line.

[CrutchCricket]

1. That's not how I talk. I do plan whole sentences. I'll often rehearse them in advance.

2. Never do I say something I actively want to avoid saying. But Shepard and Hawke did that quite a bit. I know that there's something specific I want to avoid saying, and then they go ahead and say it.

At least with full text I'd know that I didn't have the option not to say that thing, and could find an appropriate mental state for my character with which to interpret the consequences. But finding that mental state might take a couple of minutes, not the fraction of a second available after I hear the line.

1. I can pretty much guarantee you you don't, unless you've managed to find a way to live without anyone initiating conversation with you unexpectedly, or at all.

 

2. I find this almost as hard to believe. Misunderstandings alone would prove you wrong.

 

I think the issue is too much attachment to preconceived ideas about what the character is thinking/feeling in a given moment. If a line comes off angrier than you thought it would, go with it. Try to rationalize or accept the fact that even in real life we can react weirdly at times and then wonder why we did what we did. Surely you've had times where something pissed you off more than you thought it would and more than it would in other circumstances. Be more fluid. If a line is truly atrocious, you'll know to avoid it next time. Just hope there's enough dialog options in general to allow this. Later games have unfortunately cut down on some of these options.

[InterrogationBear]

That doesn't mean they can't improve it.

No, but they won't stop paraphrasing the dialogue.

[Sylvius the Mad]

No, but they won't stop paraphrasing the dialogue.

And every time they do, I want the consumers to be aware of the costs of that decision.

We've lost control over our characters.