119 réponses à ce sujet

[RoboticWater]

Urgency is completely irrelevant in what is essentially a RtWP game. I can pause combat, I can take all the time I need in a conversation, interrupts are the outlier here.

Optional, not irrelevant.

[UpUpAway]

And thereby missing out on options that otherwise would have been included as dialogue options.

Dialogue works better, because it presents a great number of options at a time.

I barely finished ME2 and ME3 once each (I didn't even really finish ME3 - I got the ending wrong because the interface was confusing and I didn't bother to go back to fix it). I certainly wasn't going to endure them multiple times.

 

Probably not... you would just be missing out on an option that would not have been replaced with dialogue anyways.  I would find playing with your insistance on being absolutely 100% certain of my PC's next move to VERY laborous and uninteresting.

 

There were very few places where the interrupt caused a fairly significant shift in the course of the story.  The "shooting Mordin" interrupt being one of them... but honestly, a half-blind ape could predict that using the interrupt meant shooting Mordin and not using it meant not shooting him at that point.  The interrupt was on the screen for an adequate amount of time for even an old, old fart like me to be able to both predict what would happen to to react to it how I wanted to.  Heck, they even put the cinematic into slow motion.  Perhaps you need to get your peripheral vision checked?

 

Now, let's explore some of that predictability regarding dialogue.  The first convo with Liara offered a dialogue choice - to tell her to relax or to compliment her on her work.  Regardless of the player's romance status with Liara, if the player selected the relax line, then Aethyta later on would spout out the line about Shepard being Liara's boyfriend.  If Shep decided to instead compliment her on her work and had not previously romanced her, then Aethyta would merely indicate that Shepard was her "commander."  It was only IF Aethyta had made the "boyfriend" assumption that interrupting her would ultimately cause the "Nobody messes with my girl" line.  The whole situation IS set up by the earlier dialogue with Liara... which kind of shoots your expectation that dialogue leads to infallible predictability, don't it?  The interrupt actually gave the player the option of getting out of the situation by not rising to Aethyta's "hint" and not interrupting her (letting it slide)... which resulting in Shep skipping the "Nobody messes with my girl." line.  In any case, Shepard's reaction had no impact on whether or not he/she was able to romance Liara or not.

 

The story writers are probably going to want to always insert plot twists... because not inserting them makes the story boring.  Since that's the case, I prefer the immediacy of interrupts over the setting up of such surprise situations using ambiguous dialogue choices.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The QTEs can be optional, but they should still be there (and preferably on by default). Manipulating the player's emotions through mechanics is the right and duty of any videogame storyteller. There's nothing for BioWare "to get over," because what they're doing is resulting in better games. Better simulations? Not at all, but that was never the objective.

The cinematic bit isn't the problem. Sure, it complicates things, but the core of the matter is that there simply isn't a way to make a story that incorporates so many absurd powers. Sometimes the villain needs to get away or the protagonist just needs to get shot to progress the narrative. Constructing those scenes such that they account for every potential power the player could use would be difficult with or without fancy effects and camera angles.

That's a very small "we."

The counter-argument being that without cinematics Mass Effect wouldn't be nearly as appealing to so many people, and that free power use would immpede BioWare's ability to tell a story at all.


I know your response will obviously be the canned "but BIoWare shouldn't be telling us a story at all; they should let us tell our own!" but it doesn't matter. BioWare will be telling us their story, and will definitely be using cinematics to do it. While they have room to improve, their core design goals are perfectly sound.

The approach you describe is incompatible with roleplaying.

As long as they keep calling these things RPGs, I will keep complaining about that.

As for manipulating my emotions, that will never work, as I engage with these games on a purely intellectual level.

[RoboticWater]

The approach you describe is incompatible with roleplaying.

As long as they keep calling these things RPGs, I will keep complaining about that.

As for manipulating my emotions, that will never work, as I engage with these games on a purely intellectual level.

Then accuse BioWare of false marketing not poor game design.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Probably not... you would just be missing out on an option that would not have been replaced with dialogue anyways. I would find playing with your insistance on being absolutely 100% certain of my PC's next move to VERY laborous and uninteresting.

There were very few places where the interrupt caused a fairly significant shift in the course of the story. The "shooting Mordin" interrupt being one of them... but honestly, a half-blind ape could predict that using the interrupt meant shooting Mordin and not using it meant not shooting him at that point. The interrupt was on the screen for an adequate amount of time for even an old, old fart like me to be able to both predict what would happen to to react to it how I wanted to. Heck, they even put the cinematic into slow motion. Perhaps you need to get your peripheral vision checked?

Now, let's explore some of that predictability regarding dialogue. The first convo with Liara offered a dialogue choice - to tell her to relax or to compliment her on her work. Regardless of the player's romance status with Liara, if the player selected the relax line, then Aethyta later on would spout out the line about Shepard being Liara's boyfriend. If Shep decided to instead compliment her on her work and had not previously romanced her, then Aethyta would merely indicate that Shepard was her "commander." It was only IF Aethyta had made the "boyfriend" assumption that interrupting her would ultimately cause the "Nobody messes with my girl" line. The whole situation IS set up by the earlier dialogue with Liara... which kind of shoots your expectation that dialogue leads to infallible predictability, don't it? The interrupt actually gave the player the option of getting out of the situation by not rising to Aethyta's "hint" and not interrupting her (letting it slide)... which resulting in Shep skipping the "Nobody messes with my girl." line. In any case, Shepard's reaction had no impact on whether or not he/she was able to romance Liara or not.

The story writers are probably going to want to always insert plot twists... because not inserting them makes the story boring. Since that's the case, I prefer the immediacy of interrupts over the setting up of such surprise situations using ambiguous dialogue choices.

The dialogue choices shouldn't be ambiguous, either. I want 100% certainty for both of them (something that is probably impossible as long as they're using paraphrases rather than full text).

The lines Shepard speaks in the whole ME series are effectively auto-dialogue. We have direct control over exactly none of it. The interrupts are no better, but then also add the time-based element.

The interrupts required that we notice the cue, then figure out what it meant, then decide whether we want Shepard to do that, and then manage to press the button in time. If you're playing even a vaguely challenging character, decision-making isn't going to go that fast. Moreover, this whole process requires that you break character, because the framing of the cinematics are there for you, not for Shepard. Also, my natural rhythm during dialogue is to read the subtitles and then skip ahead, because I'm not interested in the voice acting. As such, having to sit through cinematic dialogue juat slows things down and bores me. I'm not as engaged with the process of spotting ephemeral UI elements when I'm bored.

I'm not there to watch. I'm there to play. Making me watch isn't fun.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Then accuse BioWare of false marketing not poor game design.

It is poor RPG design, intentional or not.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Optional, not irrelevant.

But they're not optional. If we could get the game to auto-pause when an interrupt was available, then they'd be optional.

[UpUpAway]

The dialogue choices shouldn't be ambiguous, either. I want 100% certainty for both of them (something that is probably impossible as long as they're using paraphrases rather than full text).

The lines Shepard speaks in the whole ME series are effectively auto-dialogue. We have direct control over exactly none of it. The interrupts are no better, but then also add the time-based element.

The interrupts required that we notice the cue, then figure out what it meant, then decide whether we want Shepard to do that, and then manage to press the button in time. If you're playing even a vaguely challenging character, decision-making isn't going to go that fast. Moreover, this whole process requires that you break character, because the framing of the cinematics are there for you, not for Shepard. Also, my natural rhythm during dialogue is to read the subtitles and then skip ahead, because I'm not interested in the voice acting. As such, having to sit through cinematic dialogue juat slows things down and bores me. I'm not as engaged with the process of spotting ephemeral UI elements when I'm bored.

I'm not there to watch. I'm there to play. Making me watch isn't fun.

 

I get it... and I give up... and I still like them.

[RoboticWater]

It is poor RPG design, intentional or not.

So? BioWare doesn't need to follow "proper RPG design."

 

But they're not optional. If we could get the game to auto-pause when an interrupt was available, then they'd be optional.

Sure, add in a toggleable option that allows players to allow/disallow pausing during interrupts, but my point was that just because urgency during regular gameplay can be ignored, does not mean that urgency is irrelevant. 

[goofyomnivore]

I hope interrupts go away at least in the style that ME2/3 presented them. I don't mind a dialogue timer on choices when it fits the context of having to make a decision quickly as long as the choices are somewhat clear such as, [hit him], [threaten him], [reason with him], or do nothing if you don't select anything. Clicking a mouse and wondering if you're going to shove someone out a window or just verbally threaten them is a bad system.

[RoboticWater]

I hope interrupts go away at least in the style that ME2/3 presented them. I don't mind a dialogue timer on choices when it fits the context of having to make a decision quickly as long as the choices are somewhat clear such as, [hit him], [threaten him], [reason with him], or do nothing if you don't select anything. Clicking a mouse and wondering if you're going to shove someone out a window or just verbally threaten them is a bad system.

While I agree with you completely, I have to wonder if we've ever been given an interrupt so poorly telegraphed that the player wouldn't know whether the result could range from accosting to murder. Not only am I fairly certain that every interrupt has been mainly (if not, purely) a physical action (which rules out verbal harassment), but I generally find that the given context clues are sufficient to determine our characters ultimate actions.

 

Regardless, simply adding info text under interrupt cues would vastly improve the system.

[Sylvius the Mad]

So? BioWare doesn't need to follow "proper RPG design."

They do if they want to make roleplaying games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

While I agree with you completely, I have to wonder if we've ever been given an interrupt so poorly telegraphed that the player wouldn't know whether the result could range from accosting to murder. Not only am I fairly certain that every interrupt has been mainly (if not, purely) a physical action (which rules out verbal harassment), but I generally find that the given context clues are sufficient to determine our characters ultimate actions.

Any uncertainty at all makes the decision take too long.

Regardless, simply adding info text under interrupt cues would vastly improve the system.

Text makes everything better.

[RoboticWater]

They do if they want to make roleplaying games.

What if they don't? Like in the case of Mass Effect.
 

Any uncertainty at all makes the decision take too long.

Hence the extra tension. You don't have to like it, but I think the process of determining whether or not I should take a particular action in a short period of time makes dialog much more fun.

[Sylvius the Mad]

What if they don't? Like in the case of Mass Effect.

I'll believe that when they say it.

You'll notice I don't complain that Call of Duty or FIFA aren't decent RPGs.

Hence the extra tension. You don't have to like it, but I think the process of determining whether or not I should take a particular action in a short period of time makes dialog much more fun.

I'm saying I can't even determine what the action is before the time expires, let alone decide whether I want my character to do it.

If I were deciding if I wanted to do it, that would be easier, because my thought patterns come naturally to me. But if I'm playing a character who is relevantly dissimilar from me (for instance, if he has a different standard of evidence), that takes longer. Thinking like someone else is slow.

And that means that my character might act (or not act) based not on his preferences, or even based on anything within his universe, but based on how fast I can think and whether I can press the right button in time.

How can we explain that within the setting? Why does Shepard act or not act based on reasons that actually exist within his universe? If he's acting or not acting because I clicked the wrong button, the setting it irrevocably broken.

[RoboticWater]

I'll believe that when they say it.

Exactly, take it up with the marketing department. In fact, explain the exact definition RPG to the entire industry and join the ranks of gamers complaining about the misuse of the term "Roguelike."
 

You'll notice I don't complain that Call of Duty or FIFA aren't decent RPGs.

What about The Division? Borderlands? Dark Souls? The entire ARPG genre? Not to mention that the terms RPG and RPG elements have been tossed around so much that they're nearly at the point of meaninglessness. Essentially, you're holding Mass Effect to a standard it never truly committed itself to because that standard, if it ever truly existed in the form you suggest, has become incredibly muddy as of late.
 

I'm saying I can't even determine what the action is before the time expires, let alone decide whether I want my character to do it.

If I were deciding if I wanted to do it, that would be easier, because my thought patterns come naturally to me. But if I'm playing a character who is relevantly dissimilar from me (for instance, if he has a different standard of evidence), that takes longer. Thinking like someone else is slow.

I knew what you meant. Just means that those moments would be a bit more tense.
 

And that means that my character might act (or not act) based not on his preferences, or even based on anything within his universe, but based on how fast I can think and whether I can press the right button in time.

How can we explain that within the setting? Why does Shepard act or not act based on reasons that actually exist within his universe? If he's acting or not acting because I clicked the wrong button, the setting it irrevocably broken.

Irrevocably broken. Very dramatic.

 

I said that BioWare should add a toggle to accommodate those who can't handle being timed. If you don't want to get emotionally invested in games, then fine, but that doesn't mean BioWare should neglect those of us that do.

[Master Warder Z_]

._.

[Eckswhyzed]

I hope interrupts go away at least in the style that ME2/3 presented them. I don't mind a dialogue timer on choices when it fits the context of having to make a decision quickly as long as the choices are somewhat clear such as, [hit him], [threaten him], [reason with him], or do nothing if you don't select anything. Clicking a mouse and wondering if you're going to shove someone out a window or just verbally threaten them is a bad system.

 

Certain interrupts presented better clues than others. Close-up camera shots of Shepard's fist, or the brandishing of a weapon, or pan towards the conspicuous red barrels of explodium - it's quite easy to telegraph violent action to the player. It's actually more difficult to show non-violent options, in my opinion. How do you show that the paragon interrupt is going to be Shepard hugging Tali?

[goofyomnivore]

Certain interrupts presented better clues than others. Close-up camera shots of Shepard's fist, or the brandishing of a weapon, or pan towards the conspicuous red barrels of explodium - it's quite easy to telegraph violent action to the player. It's actually more difficult to show non-violent options, in my opinion. How do you show that the paragon interrupt is going to be Shepard hugging Tali?

Well that's why I don't like them. Renegade options in general are easier to telegraph, but you still can't be 100% certain and it's even harder with paragon options like you pointed out. Text seems to be a better all around system.

[KaiserShep]

Certain interrupts presented better clues than others. Close-up camera shots of Shepard's fist, or the brandishing of a weapon, or pan towards the conspicuous red barrels of explodium - it's quite easy to telegraph violent action to the player. It's actually more difficult to show non-violent options, in my opinion. How do you show that the paragon interrupt is going to be Shepard hugging Tali?

 

I'm curious about whether or not the devs played around with various ways the interrupts can be presented, like instead of the vague flashing symbol, it would actually give a quick text of the action in brackets. This can get tricky for certain sequences though, like the dialogue between Shepard and Liara on the rooftop of Azure on Illium in LotSB. Shepard has multiple interrupts in dialogue to cut off Liara as she's speaking, and each one leads to whole lines of dialogue rather than just an action. I admit to being a bit torn on that, because on the one hand, it can make these exchanges more fun to listen to, but on the other, presents the potential to have the PC say something really dumb and you have absolutely no way to know even the gist of what will be said beyond that it might associate with the paragon or renegade alignment. 

[Sartoz]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Always hated those P/R interrupts.... a silly mechanism as I drink coffee and couldn't react fast enough...ergo NO FUN!!!

 

Pray that BIO got an epiphany and got rid of that mechanic.

[DaemionMoadrin]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Always hated those P/R interrupts.... a silly mechanism as I drink coffee and couldn't react fast enough...ergo NO FUN!!!

 

Pray that BIO got an epiphany and got rid of that mechanic.

 

Remember three or four consecutive Paragon interrupts that were on screen for maybe 2 seconds each during Lair of the Shadow Broker, when you wanted to resume your relationship with Liara? If you missed one, you didn't get her back. Fun!

[Sylvius the Mad]

Exactly, take it up with the marketing department. In fact, explain the exact definition RPG to the entire industry and join the ranks of gamers complaining about the misuse of the term "Roguelike."

Why would anyone misuse Roguelike? It's one of the best defined terms in gaming.

You'd think these people had never played Rogue.

What about The Division? Borderlands? Dark Souls?

Mandatory action combat has its own problems.

Mass Effect didn't have that, though. That's partly why the interrupts are so irritating; they're the only mandatory action content in the entire trilogy.

I also really wnjoued driving the Mako. But other people didn't. I'm not telling them they're doing it wrong by not enjoying some element of the game.

The entire ARPG genre?

I want someone to present a coherent definition of ARPG that encompasses all of the games that were ever widely viewed as ARPGs. The original Dungeon Siege, for example.

I'd also like to point out that BioWare claimed that DAO was an ARPG. Almost no one believed them, though.

But Dungeon Siege was an ARPG. And it's a decent roleplaying game. I quite like it. It's all a linear dungeon crawl, but you can play it how you like and there are no twitch-based systems at all.

Given that, I have no idea what an ARPG is.

Not to mention that the terms RPG and RPG elements have been tossed around so much that they're nearly at the point of meaninglessness.

There is only one RPG element, and that's roleplaying. But unlike a lot of other game systems, roleplaying isn't something that's provided by the game. Roleplaying is done entirely by the player, so all the game needs to do is leave space for it. Roleplaying isn't something a game provides; it's something a game allows.

And lots of games do. Football Manager leaves plenty of space for roleplaying.

I don't have a proper definition of RPG, because I can't list all the sufficient conditions. But allowing roleplaying is absolutely a necessary condition, and interrupts of the sort we've seen in ME2 and ME3 actively prevent it.

I would consent to having them in MEA as long as there was an auto-pause option, and detailed information about what each one entails.

Essentially, you're holding Mass Effect to a standard it never truly committed itself to...

Yes.

I knew what you meant. Just means that those moments would be a bit more tense.

There's no tension at all, because there's nothing I can do. I quickly become resigned to the fact that I have no basis from which to choose any of them, so it doesn't matter if I do. What you think brings tension I think brings irrelevance.

Because the interrupts come too quickly and provide too little information, they may as well not exist. The result is the same.

Irrevocably broken. Very dramatic.

Literally true.

I said that BioWare should add a toggle to accommodate those who can't handle being timed. If you don't want to get emotionally invested in games, then fine, but that doesn't mean BioWare should neglect those of us that do.

I can accept that.

[tesla21]

Eh, the interrupts were extremely easy to read for the most part, absolute worst scenario it wasn't at all like you guessed, which is unlikely to happen, just reload and replay 5mins at most. Seems like a worth trade off to me compared to no interrupts at all. I do wish the window was a bit longer, some interrupts (like in Shadow broker's lair) were way too quick.  

[Cyonan]

When anybody in the industry says "RPG elements" they typically mean things like stats, level ups, etc. They are things which have historically only really been found in RPG games until recently.

 

These days, a RPG video game is pretty much anything that gives you various dialogue options on a regular basis, probably at some point pretended that they were going to matter, and allows for a non action based gameplay.

 

An ARPG basically means "We don't really fit into any other category, so we're calling ourselves this". If you're not going to call Diablo an ARPG, there really isn't another genre that it would actually fit into. Dungeon crawler maybe, but that's just a type of ARPG.

 

This is, in my experience, what the gaming industry uses as the working definition for each term other than the occasional time where a developer wants to be different for whatever reason.