156 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

The thing I think some people forget is Shepard is their own person within the story. Shepard isn't an avatar for the player, isn't an insert, isn't somebody's device to feel special or cool, ect. Her relationships, opinions, behavior is her own, and although you can influence that and make choices, you're still making choices within the realm of possibilities for Shepard, not you. Shep likes Garrus/Liara/Kaidan/Tali/Wrex, so the story reflects this, but gives the player the ability to decide what type of friends they are. Is Shep the strong and silent type who doesn't open up to Liara but looks out for her? Is Shep more comfortable opening up to Garrus when he tries to be supportive? These choices are yours, but ultimately regardless of your choice Shep is still her own person within the universe of Mass Effect and has her own story to tell, you're only there as a guide/thing of influence.

I get what you're saying, but you're making the common mistake of thinking that roleplayers are playing themselves in some way.

My characters are often nothing like me. I might disagree with their decisions. But they're still my characters.

People who disliked the autodialogue in ME3 always seem to be the types who wanted to play RP "their own" Shep, to have a Shep who despises aliens, who hates Liara and wants to kill her, who is power hungry or a liar, who would blow up the Normandy for fun, whatever. And these simply are not Shepard's personality, and are not viable.

Exactly right, and that's the problem.

But Shepard is also unable to be polite to TIM in ME2, or agree with him about Control in ME3. Shepard must blindly follow the orders she is given. She is wholly her own character, and we can hardly play her at all. Shepard is effectively an NPC.

Meanwhile the Inquisitor was more of a blank slate, an avatar, a device for the player.

And all the better for it.

But at the price of being bland, unoriginal, generally boring and having almost no backstory or personality to speak of.

Unless you add one, which, as the player, is kind of your job.

That's the roleplaying. That's all roleplaying is.

Personally I'd much rather have a main character with their own opinions, their own story and who is their own person like Shepard/Hawke over boring and undefined templates who get outshone by most of the other characters throughout most/all of the story.

My Inquisitors are never outshone. Inquisitors. Plural. I still haven't managed to play more than one Shepard (and I can't play Hawke at all; Hawke is uncontrollable).

If the player isn't supposed to invent backstory or motivation or inhabit the mind of the protagonist to make decisions on her behalf, what is the point of having the player there at all?

As the player, I want to play. I want to participate. Shepard and Hawke don't let me do that.

[N7Jamaican]

I am happy that the discussion turned out the way I envisioned.  I hope BioWare can recognize this and appease the RP'ers and the ones that do not really care about the choices.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I liked the dialogue wheel in all the BioWare games if you want to see how a bad dialogue wheel go play Fallout 4. 

[N7Jamaican]

I liked the dialogue wheel in all the BioWare games if you want to see how a bad dialogue wheel go play Fallout 4. 

 

People raved about Fallout's dialogue system in 4.  And to be honest, while I've had fun with FO4, my least favorite part of the game was entering dialogue. In order to be successful you need to spend points in Charisma ? No thank you. On the other hand, I couldn't wait to enter dialogue in ME1 and ME2, because it was intriguing!

[wright1978]

The thing I think some people forget is Shepard is their own person within the story. Shepard isn't an avatar for the player, isn't an insert, isn't somebody's device to feel special or cool, ect. Her relationships, opinions, behavior is her own, and although you can influence that and make choices, you're still making choices within the realm of possibilities for Shepard, not you. Shep likes Garrus/Liara/Kaidan/Tali/Wrex, so the story reflects this, but gives the player the ability to decide what type of friends they are. Is Shep the strong and silent type who doesn't open up to Liara but looks out for her? Is Shep more comfortable opening up to Garrus when he tries to be supportive? These choices are yours, but ultimately regardless of your choice Shep is still her own person within the universe of Mass Effect and has her own story to tell, you're only there as a guide/thing of influence.

 

People who disliked the autodialogue in ME3 always seem to be the types who wanted to play RP "their own" Shep, to have a Shep who despises aliens, who hates Liara and wants to kill her, who is power hungry or a liar, who would blow up the Normandy for fun, whatever. And these simply are not Shepard's personality, and are not viable.

 

Meanwhile the Inquisitor was more of a blank slate, an avatar, a device for the player. But at the price of being bland, unoriginal, generally boring and having almost no backstory or personality to speak of.

 

Personally I'd much rather have a main character with their own opinions, their own story and who is their own person like Shepard/Hawke over boring and undefined templates who get outshone by most of the other characters throughout most/all of the story.

 

Any voiced video game roleplaying game is going to have restrictions on the extent of choices. However previously they made a big song and dance about interactivity, player's story and providing choices they want. That was abandoned in ME3 in favour of a heavily defined character, coupled with heavily cut control over protagonist dialogue and even where dialogue was offered the range of choices was cut back. Whilst Shep may never have been a complete blank slate I wanted to roleplay the Shep who reflected the choices and characterisation i'd made during the course of the first 2 games rather than playing a doppelganger version that bore little resemblance to that character.

 

Personally don’t think Inquisitor’s problems are to do with the system itself but it’s implementation.

 

Personally I’d much rather have a system similar to ME1/2 Shep, where there’s lots more freedom for the player to make the character their own within a broader framework rather than a heavily defined main character who spouts opinion left right and centre as happened in ME3.

[AlanC9]

In practice, I'm not sure going voiced limits the extent of choices all that much. While it's pretty easy to cherry-pick a screen from an unvoiced game that shows a whole bunch of choices, those screens never represent the typical dialogue sequence.

[Fixers0]

The thing I think some people forget is Shepard is their own person within the story. Shepard isn't an avatar for the player, isn't an insert, isn't somebody's device to feel special or cool, ect. Her relationships, opinions, behavior is her own, and although you can influence that and make choices, you're still making choices within the realm of possibilities for Shepard, not you. Shep likes Garrus/Liara/Kaidan/Tali/Wrex, so the story reflects this, but gives the player the ability to decide what type of friends they are. Is Shep the strong and silent type who doesn't open up to Liara but looks out for her? Is Shep more comfortable opening up to Garrus when he tries to be supportive? These choices are yours, but ultimately regardless of your choice Shep is still her own person within the universe of Mass Effect and has her own story to tell, you're only there as a guide/thing of influence.

 

But then why was the systems so inconsistant? I ME1 Shepard could be an absolute jerk to Liara, strictly professional, friendly or even romantic, yet by ME3 there is always implied friendship, and there are many other cases were will autodialogue contradicts earlier statements without any form of explanation. Shepard could express anti-krogan sentiments in earlier games but then in ME3 just goes along with Wrex/Wreav for the most part.

 

 

The thing with ME3 is that it was that Shepard was so disproportionately railroaded into saying things without any imput from the player. That damaged gameplay experience and weakend Shepard as character.

[mopotter]

People raved about Fallout's dialogue system in 4.  And to be honest, while I've had fun with FO4, my least favorite part of the game was entering dialogue. In order to be successful you need to spend points in Charisma ? No thank you. On the other hand, I couldn't wait to enter dialogue in ME1 and ME2, because it was intriguing!

I really don't mind the dialogue in FA4.  But I do like putting points where I want to and having some characters who are smooth talkers and some who aren't.

 

For me,  ME 2 and especially ME3 had more auto dialog than I wanted.  Way more.  I don't mind some, I liked the comments Shepard makes running out of the ruins with Liara but that's about it, minor auto dialog and let me make all other comments.

 

I did enjoy the conversations between my team in ME3, though I wanted to play poker with them.

[themikefest]

But then why was the systems so inconsistant? I ME1 Shepard could be an absolute jerk to Liara, strictly professional, friendly or even romantic, yet by ME3 there is always implied friendship, and there are many other cases were will autodialogue contradicts earlier statements without any form of explanation. Shepard could express anti-krogan sentiments in earlier games but then in ME3 just goes along with Wrex/Wreav for the most part.

 

 

The thing with ME3 is that it was that Shepard was so disproportionately railroaded into saying things without any imput from the player. That damaged gameplay experience and weakend Shepard as character.

Can say the same for ME2.

 

I can tell the asari I want to throw her in the volcano in ME1, but yet, if I want to see her in ME2, Shepard gets a what-the-crap hug. Why?

[txgoldrush]

But then why was the systems so inconsistant? I ME1 Shepard could be an absolute jerk to Liara, strictly professional, friendly or even romantic, yet by ME3 there is always implied friendship, and there are many other cases were will autodialogue contradicts earlier statements without any form of explanation. Shepard could express anti-krogan sentiments in earlier games but then in ME3 just goes along with Wrex/Wreav for the most part.

 

 

The thing with ME3 is that it was that Shepard was so disproportionately railroaded into saying things without any imput from the player. That damaged gameplay experience and weakend Shepard as character.

No, the problem with it is that ME1's Shepard was poorly written and directed to be able to make illogical decisions. Bioware realized this and cut it.

 

The fanbase needs to face facts here, the ME1 and ME2 dialogue systems were flawed and the fact is that you cannot sacrifice narrative for role playing. What makes ME3's dialogue vastly superior is that for the most part, a Paragon Shepard can take a Renegade option and not be out of character and vise versa. In ME1 and ME2, if he does this, he is very much out of character. And really, ME1 and ME2 makes you go one way with its idiotic charm and intimidate system, ME3 does not. So for all the autodialogue that ME3 has, ME3 allows for more choice than ME1 and ME2, and better consequence as well.

 

And you look at The Witcher 3 and Lifei s Strange, for all their autodialogue, they did choice and consequence better than ME1 and ME2.

[BloodyMares]

No, the problem with it is that ME1's Shepard was poorly written and directed to be able to make illogical decisions. Bioware realized this and cut it.

 

The fanbase needs to face facts here, the ME1 and ME2 dialogue systems were flawed and the fact is that you cannot sacrifice narrative for role playing. What makes ME3's dialogue vastly superior is that for the most part, a Paragon Shepard can take a Renegade option and not be out of character and vise versa. In ME1 and ME2, if he does this, he is very much out of character. And really, ME1 and ME2 makes you go one way with its idiotic charm and intimidate system, ME3 does not. So for all the autodialogue that ME3 has, ME3 allows for more choice than ME1 and ME2, and better consequence as well.

 

And you look at The Witcher 3 and Lifei s Strange, for all their autodialogue, they did choice and consequence better than ME1 and ME2.

Nope. ME is supposed to be a full RPG with controlling your (!) character. It's not just about having choices and consequences but having the ability to chose how to interact with other characters. In ME1 if you have both Charm and Intimidate talents then you're not restricted by Morality system at all. ME1 allows the most variety of choices no matter what morality you have. ME3 on the other hand requires you to have a certain Reputation score. But it's not about morality system. In ME3 Shepard is rather a cinematic character. Not an RPG character. At least in ME1 you had the option to direct Shepard to say certain things or say nothing at all. And Shepard didn't say things without your choice. The amount of auto-dialogue was almost non-existent. In ME3 you may as well select a default Sheploo and opt out of RPG elements just to play a 3rd person shooter action game. And the difference would be minimal.

[themikefest]

At times I was playing Shepard's stunt double in ME3

[Twilight_Princess]

ME3 "choices"

 

Paragon: We're in this fight together Anderson

 

Renegade: We're in this fight together

 

 

No more of that please.

[Midnight Bliss]

I get what you're saying, but you're making the common mistake of thinking that roleplayers are playing themselves in some way.

My characters are often nothing like me. I might disagree with their decisions. But they're still my characters.
Exactly right, and that's the problem.

But Shepard is also unable to be polite to TIM in ME2, or agree with him about Control in ME3. Shepard must blindly follow the orders she is given. She is wholly her own character, and we can hardly play her at all. Shepard is effectively an NPC.
And all the better for it.
Unless you add one, which, as the player, is kind of your job.

That's the roleplaying. That's all roleplaying is.
My Inquisitors are never outshone. Inquisitors. Plural. I still haven't managed to play more than one Shepard (and I can't play Hawke at all; Hawke is uncontrollable).

If the player isn't supposed to invent backstory or motivation or inhabit the mind of the protagonist to make decisions on her behalf, what is the point of having the player there at all?

As the player, I want to play. I want to participate. Shepard and Hawke don't let me do that.

Oh, I feel you. Neither my GW or Inquis were "me" Either, so I completely understand where you're coming from/the appeal of that type of character for some people.

 

I think blank slates are best left for DA, though, and would be a disservice to ME unless it was executed very, very well in a way I doubt they're up for. Personally I thought the "best" Dialogue wheel for Mass Effect was ME2, - it seemed like they struck a nice balance between removing the pointless/samey responses from ME1, but still keeping the neutral option and providing a nicer range than ME3 offered.

 

Any voiced video game roleplaying game is going to have restrictions on the extent of choices. However previously they made a big song and dance about interactivity, player's story and providing choices they want. That was abandoned in ME3 in favour of a heavily defined character, coupled with heavily cut control over protagonist dialogue and even where dialogue was offered the range of choices was cut back. Whilst Shep may never have been a complete blank slate I wanted to roleplay the Shep who reflected the choices and characterisation i'd made during the course of the first 2 games rather than playing a doppelganger version that bore little resemblance to that character.

 

Personally don’t think Inquisitor’s problems are to do with the system itself but it’s implementation.

 

Personally I’d much rather have a system similar to ME1/2 Shep, where there’s lots more freedom for the player to make the character their own within a broader framework rather than a heavily defined main character who spouts opinion left right and centre as happened in ME3.

Yeah I agree about going back to the ME 1/2 system. Sometimes I think I might have been lucky that my characterization of Shep in ME 1/2 happened to sync up with ME3 pretty well, I wonder if it hadn't how differently I might have felt.

 

But then why was the systems so inconsistant? I ME1 Shepard could be an absolute jerk to Liara, strictly professional, friendly or even romantic, yet by ME3 there is always implied friendship, and there are many other cases were will autodialogue contradicts earlier statements without any form of explanation. Shepard could express anti-krogan sentiments in earlier games but then in ME3 just goes along with Wrex/Wreav for the most part.

 

 

The thing with ME3 is that it was that Shepard was so disproportionately railroaded into saying things without any imput from the player. That damaged gameplay experience and weakend Shepard as character.

I was defending the fantasy of a system like that, but I agree with you the execution needed work, especially on a consistency level with the previous two games/dialogue available in those games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Oh, I feel you. Neither my GW or Inquis were "me" Either, so I completely understand where you're coming from/the appeal of that type of character for some people.

I think blank slates are best left for DA, though, and would be a disservice to ME unless it was executed very, very well in a way I doubt they're up for. Personally I thought the "best" Dialogue wheel for Mass Effect was ME2, - it seemed like they struck a nice balance between removing the pointless/samey responses from ME1, but still keeping the neutral option and providing a nicer range than ME3 offered.

Whereas, I disliked ME2 for moving some of the interaction opportunities to interrupts rather than dialogue hubs, which not only provided even less information about what you were selecting, but turned that selection into a QTE.

My recent attempt to play ME3 only reinforced my position that I don't like where the ME games are going. Unless MEA is markedly different from ME2 and ME3, I expect it to be dreadful.

[KaiserShep]

I think blank slates are best left for DA, though, and would be a disservice to ME unless it was executed very, very well in a way I doubt they're up for. 

 

Personally, I'm just hoping that our protagonist in ME doesn't say a lot of dumb things (only made worse when the character automatically says it). However one may feel about the Inquisitor, one thing I enjoy is that Inky can be made to be vastly smarter than Shepard. 

 

In any case, as a system, I think ME2 is the worst of the 3, made even more so by the P/R mechanic, which I sincerely hope is dead. 

[txgoldrush]

Nope. ME is supposed to be a full RPG with controlling your (!) character. It's not just about having choices and consequences but having the ability to chose how to interact with other characters. In ME1 if you have both Charm and Intimidate talents then you're not restricted by Morality system at all. ME1 allows the most variety of choices no matter what morality you have. ME3 on the other hand requires you to have a certain Reputation score. But it's not about morality system. In ME3 Shepard is rather a cinematic character. Not an RPG character. At least in ME1 you had the option to direct Shepard to say certain things or say nothing at all. And Shepard didn't say things without your choice. The amount of auto-dialogue was almost non-existent. In ME3 you may as well select a default Sheploo and opt out of RPG elements just to play a 3rd person shooter action game. And the difference would be minimal.

No, the ME1 system was outdated. Second, charm and intimidate IS based of your morality scores in ME1, you can't level them past a certain point without building the morality bar.

 

And Shepard sucks as an RPG character....if you want to play a good RPG character, play a Black Isle game. Shepard in ME1 and ME2 was caught between a blank slate and a defined character and the writing suffers.

[txgoldrush]

Oh, I feel you. Neither my GW or Inquis were "me" Either, so I completely understand where you're coming from/the appeal of that type of character for some people.

 

I think blank slates are best left for DA, though, and would be a disservice to ME unless it was executed very, very well in a way I doubt they're up for. Personally I thought the "best" Dialogue wheel for Mass Effect was ME2, - it seemed like they struck a nice balance between removing the pointless/samey responses from ME1, but still keeping the neutral option and providing a nicer range than ME3 offered.

 

Yeah I agree about going back to the ME 1/2 system. Sometimes I think I might have been lucky that my characterization of Shep in ME 1/2 happened to sync up with ME3 pretty well, I wonder if it hadn't how differently I might have felt.

 

I was defending the fantasy of a system like that, but I agree with you the execution needed work, especially on a consistency level with the previous two games/dialogue available in those games.

For a dialogue wheel....range is bad. This means that your character is not consistent. Not only this, the voice acting will wildly vary in tone, making the performance suffer. Thats why ME1 and ME2's dialogue system sucks. Shepard becomes wildly out of character if the player chooses different options and doesn;t stay consistent in the upper right or lower right.

 

DA2 suffered from tone problems because the range was ridiculous. 

 

What makes ME3's wheel superior is that any Shepard can say any line (for the most part). This actually allows you more freedom of choice without fear of Shepard acting wildly out of character.

[txgoldrush]

ME3 "choices"

 

Paragon: We're in this fight together Anderson

 

Renegade: We're in this fight together

 

 

No more of that please.

Wrong.

 

ME3 Paragons were idealistic but realistic of loss and sacrifice while Renegades were pragmatists but with a moral compass compared to the enemy.

 

In ME1, renegades were illogical racists who should not have been an XO and a CO on a joint species ship and in ME2, he is a sadist who enjoys killing and hurting people.

 

ME3 morality is much better written than ME1 and ME2. ME1 and ME2 shows that Bioware still hadn't grasped grey morality, the same suck that doomed Jade Empire.

[wright1978]

For a dialogue wheel....range is bad. This means that your character is not consistent. Not only this, the voice acting will wildly vary in tone, making the performance suffer. Thats why ME1 and ME2's dialogue system sucks. Shepard becomes wildly out of character if the player chooses different options and doesn;t stay consistent in the upper right or lower right.

 

DA2 suffered from tone problems because the range was ridiculous. 

 

What makes ME3's wheel superior is that any Shepard can say any line (for the most part). This actually allows you more freedom of choice without fear of Shepard acting wildly out of character.

 

Disagree range is good and its why neutral options are also important too, a character shouldn't be one note regardless of the situation.

ME1/2 dialogue system is by and large good, because Shep can react differently to different situations, though i'll admit ME2 reputation system encouraged lazy spamming. ME3 is a bad joke of characterisation, the choice aspect is butchered coupled with fact Shep acts wildly out of character without player's input inside this lobotimised approach. They might as well have stripped out the choice aspect completely if that was the route they wanted to follow. The joke thing is actually they implemented a reputation system that would have worked well within a free choice system and then butchered the dialogue.

[KaiserShep]

For a dialogue wheel....range is bad. This means that your character is not consistent. Not only this, the voice acting will wildly vary in tone, making the performance suffer. Thats why ME1 and ME2's dialogue system sucks. Shepard becomes wildly out of character if the player chooses different options and doesn;t stay consistent in the upper right or lower right.

 

DA2 suffered from tone problems because the range was ridiculous. 

 

What makes ME3's wheel superior is that any Shepard can say any line (for the most part). This actually allows you more freedom of choice without fear of Shepard acting wildly out of character.

 

 

Shouldn't something like this be kinda up to the player? After all, how consistent or inconsistent a character's personality feels is not so much a matter of fact than it's just someone's opinion. With Hawke, jumping between tones for dialogue sequences won't necessarily make Hawke feel inconsistent. Like, if I'm rolling a sarcHawke (which I almost always am), there are still times when I feel it's more appropriate to use a diplomatic line, or an angry one. A good example is when talking to the Viscount over the body of his son. If you want to dedicate the entire game to nothing but the purple line, then great, but if you don't want your character to seem an overly insensitive jerk, then you'd probably be better picking something else. It doesn't always break from character to deviate from the dominant tone, if you know when it's best to do it.

[txgoldrush]

Disagree range is good and its why neutral options are also important too, a character shouldn't be one note regardless of the situation.

ME1/2 dialogue system is by and large good, because Shep can react differently to different situations, though i'll admit ME2 reputation system encouraged lazy spamming. ME3 is a bad joke of characterisation, the choice aspect is butchered coupled with fact Shep acts wildly out of character without player's input inside this lobotimised approach. They might as well have stripped out the choice aspect completely if that was the route they wanted to follow. The joke thing is actually they implemented a reputation system that would have worked well within a free choice system and then butchered the dialogue.

Is ME3 Shepard wildly acting out of character or is it that you just don't like the character?

 

Outside of decking a reporter because Bioware still thought it was funny, Shepard doesn't act out of character in ME3. He or she is NEVER going to be ruthless for the sake of it (like he or she is in ME2) and he or she is never going to be so stupidly idealistic that he or she can't take loss and sacrifice. He or She will always stay within acceptable range. Notice how if Shepard shoots Mordin and Falere, he or she is pained by it, you see, this is so a Paragon could choose these options and stay in character.

 

The problem with ME1 and ME2 is that Bioware simply put, doesn't grasp the concept of grey morality. You see grey morality has moral justification. Shepard time and time again is allowed to commit actions with no moral justification such as punching a cleaning guy in the ducts and saying that he or she enjoys it. and when actions could be justifiable, Shepard's attitude takes away this justification. Killing the Rachni queen is an example.

 

Look at The Witcher 3, look at Life is Strange, both games allow the protagonist to react to different situations, but stay in character. And frankly, ME3 allows the same thing.

[txgoldrush]

Shouldn't something like this be kinda up to the player? After all, how consistent or inconsistent a character's personality feels is not so much a matter of fact than it's just someone's opinion. With Hawke, jumping between tones for dialogue sequences won't necessarily make Hawke feel inconsistent. Like, if I'm rolling a sarcHawke (which I almost always am), there are still times when I feel it's more appropriate to use a diplomatic line, or an angry one. A good example is when talking to the Viscount over the body of his son. If you want to dedicate the entire game to nothing but the purple line, then great, but if you don't want your character to seem an overly insensitive jerk, then you'd probably be better picking something else. It doesn't always break from character to deviate from the dominant tone, if you know when it's best to do it.

But it does it poorly. Its like both actors sound different based on tone instead of doing it naturally.

 

This is the weakness of the dialogue wheel. Fallout 4 shows this plain as day. You allow wildly different tones and actions, you weaken the characterization and the VA performance unless you role play one way.

 

What should be up to the player is only the decisions the characterization allows. CD Projeckt understands this. This is why the player isn't allowed to murder people as Geralt. And what if the player was allowed to bully Kate in Life is Strange for the sake of choice? Then Max's character would be wrecked. This is why Jansen being able to shoot up a police station in Deus Ex HR is so problematic. it does not fit the character of Adam Jansen. same with John Marston being allowed to go on a GTA style rampage in red Dead Redemption.

[KaiserShep]

I don't agree that it does it poorly, and I don't know if FO4 really makes for the best comparison, since the voice acting in that game is pretty wooden compared to any BioWare game made in the past several years. 

 

But I think the point I'm making is that I'd rather have more range of options and simply decide for myself whether or not it works for what I feel comes closest to the type of character I'd like to roll. As much as I like Geralt and Max, I don't want BioWare to recreate them.

[txgoldrush]

I don't agree that it does it poorly, and I don't know if FO4 really makes for the best comparison, since the voice acting in that game is pretty wooden compared to any BioWare game made in the past several years. 

 

But I think the point I'm making is that I'd rather have more range of options and simply decide for myself whether or not it works for the particular character I think the PC should be. As much as I like Geralt and Max, I don't want BioWare to recreate them.

Then don't use a dialogue wheel or use voice acting.

 

You go one way or the other, the middle doesn't work.

 

Bioware should go more in the defined protagonist direction....there are other companies and games that will handle characters that allow more options better such as Obsidian or inExile