306 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

IIRC, this particular bit had 4 options, placed in the "corners".

I'd been asking Solas about his experiences with the fade, and did not want to express an opinion about it. "I'm not arguing" looked to me like the paraphrase that would represent not expressing an opinion, but it wasn't.

Fair, but that's not a paraphrase issue. That line could easily be the silent VO line - and all we would have to go on in terms of interpreting it is the reaction by Solas. If you ignore the delivery of the PC, does Solas also convey the dismissal?

Because this I think is the real issue some people have with the paraphrase. The writers write the dialogue with a particular meaning in mind. To the writer the paraphrase and line always line up, because they know what it means. But written dialogue is ambiguous - especially sort, curt lines.

"I'm not arguing" could be a dismissal - but it could be conciliatory. It's all in the delivery. This never goes away because dialogue is always written to have a particular meaning.

[Majestic Jazz]

Mass Effect's soul

[Onuris22]

Bioware's soul

 

 

Fixed that for you.

 

I'm kidding, but I am hoping that this game can help, along with a great showing from Dragon Age: Inquisition (even with a few problems from it,) help lead back into a really strong storytelling drive for Bioware. I once believed Bioware could do no wrong for the longest time, it's easy for me to ignore gameplay issues if the story is amazing and every one of their early games were stellar on up into the DA2 era, but they stumbled a bit then and with SWTOR/etc. (Shakes fist at EA ;..

 

Andromeda looks fantastic, big hopes it's as good as any of the past ME games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

DAO would start a furor. The number of cut features were extensive - like the much heralded nemesis system. That was featured as much as the keeps in the marketing, but because Bioware wasn't in this hyper aggressive internet world, they could just admit they cut the feature wholesale as they reworked the writing, and that artefacts survived in certain origins. That kind of blunt talk really doesn't work in today's internet.

Stupid people is why we can't have nice things.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fair, but that's not a paraphrase issue. That line could easily be the silent VO line - and all we would have to go on in terms of interpreting it is the reaction by Solas. If you ignore the delivery of the PC, does Solas also convey the dismissal?

Doesn't matter. We can't control Solas's reaction.

Because this I think is the real issue some people have with the paraphrase. The writers write the dialogue with a particular meaning in mind. To the writer the paraphrase and line always line up, because they know what it means. But written dialogue is ambiguous - especially sort, curt lines.

I proposed a solution to this problem when ME first created it: Have the paraphrases and full lines written by different people, in isolation, so that the one is based solely on the other.

Ideally, the conversation would be written first with only the paraphrases, and then the full lines would be written later by a different writer. And whatever meaning the first writer intended, the second writer never gets to know what it was.

"I'm not arguing" could be a dismissal - but it could be conciliatory. It's all in the delivery. This never goes away because dialogue is always written to have a particular meaning.

It goes away if that particular meaning isn't discernable.

[Pasquale1234]

Fair, but that's not a paraphrase issue.

Yeah, it is. It doesn't provide the slightest hint of what the character actually said.
 

"I'm not arguing" could be a dismissal - but it could be conciliatory.

Which is the reason that it was not a good choice for a paraphrase.

[AlanC9]

He directly insulted my intelligence and suggested here perhaps I might fare better....
My response was mild come now

Actually, I wasn't talking about your intelligence at all; I was talking about your competence with a particular couple of skills, which isn't the same thing. And I wasn't bothering to insult your video skills in that post either; I had already insulted the video upthread, before I realized that you were the one who created it, so I didn't figure I needed to do that again. I figured you already knew that I thought it was... I believe I said "dopey."

While I'm certainly capable of doing that veiled insult thing, I can't take credit this time.

[AlanC9]

"I'm not arguing" looked to me like the paraphrase that would represent not expressing an opinion, but it wasn't.

Are we sure we had a neutral option there?

[Capone666]

Mass Effect's soul

Don't Stop. Believing.

[Pasquale1234]

Are we sure we had a neutral option there?

I don't know.

Regardless, it was a poor choice for a paraphrase. Even if you don't care what the character actually says, its tone can have multiple meanings.

[In Exile]

Yeah, it is. It doesn't provide the slightest hint of what the character actually said.


Which is the reason that it was not a good choice for a paraphrase.

But why would it be a good choice for a written line at all? If it's ambiguous as written, then it's a bad line. The problem doesn't go away without VO - it just makes it completely unpredictable what effect picking the line will have in-game.

I can understand the argument that one wants freedom to imagine the actual voice. I appreciate than in your view the lack of VO allows you to pretend like the dialogue isn't written as a sensible conversation but rather as a disconnected interaction where the NPC reacts to some imagined meaning in their head. The problem with this line of reasoning is that spoken language isn't as ambiguous as written language with respect to things like affect. There's an informational assymetry.

Think of it this way - the fact the line isn't voiced allows you to imagine delivery. It doesn't allow you to actually imagine it's said using different words. To put it a different way, there are lots of different ways I can say the same line. But that set isn't identical to all of the ways the line I say a certain way can be interpreted, once I say it a certain way.

The problem of being completely surprised about the way a line is delivered doesn't go away once you account for VO, or remove it.

Some of us are more attuned to this issue - that's why the paraphrase is less of an issue. It's not that the paraphrase isn't bad - it's that the written line isn't better. What you experience as a unique disconnect is to me the same kind of disconnect I had with a silent PC, except now I have the benefit of a consistent tone and voice to at least understand the interaction.

[In Exile]

I don't know.

Regardless, it was a poor choice for a paraphrase. Even if you don't care what the character actually says, its tone can have multiple meanings.

But even if you DO care what your character actually says, the line you're picking is really ambiguous as to its meaning. It's a line whose meaning derives substantially from its delivery. Though I would argue as plainly written its arguably a dismissal.

[In Exile]

Doesn't matter. We can't control Solas's reaction.
I proposed a solution to this problem when ME first created it: Have the paraphrases and full lines written by different people, in isolation, so that the one is based solely on the other.

Ideally, the conversation would be written first with only the paraphrases, and then the full lines would be written later by a different writer. And whatever meaning the first writer intended, the second writer never gets to know what it was.
It goes away if that particular meaning isn't discernable.

 

Re: Solas, see above. There's a difference between not controlling his reaction (how he interprets some combination of affect, tone and wording) and the poorly drafted literal line (who could mean many things, and whose scope of possible meaning is different than the equivalently stated line, however said). 

 

I don't see why your system, however, solves the issue. If the full line is written later by a different writer, we have the same problem - only in this case we are just bound by whatever the interpretation of the second writer is of the first line. And these lines, again, aren't written in the abstract - they're written as part of the conversation. What you're suggesting would produce nonsense. 

[Cz-99]

Bioware got soul, but they're not a soldier.

We're all soldiers now.

[Pasquale1234]

But why would it be a good choice for a written line at all? If it's ambiguous as written, then it's a bad line. The problem doesn't go away without VO - it just makes it completely unpredictable what effect picking the line will have in-game.

I don't believe I've ever suggested that it would be a good line - with or without VO. I've stated only that it's a bad paraphrase, and like many paraphrases in the game, it misrepresents what the character actually says.

"I don't buy it" would be adequate for a dismissal, and its meaning would be clear.

A couple of other phrases that could replace "I'm not arguing":
"You're singing to the choir" if you want to indicate that you won't argue because you concur.
"I'll think about what you said" if you don't want to agree or disagree.

"I'm not arguing" is a terribly bad paraphrase.

[KirkyX]

We're all soldiers now.

I'm a Vanguard!

[Morty Smith]

Mass Effect's soul

 

Spoiler

[SofaJockey]

Don't Stop. Believing.

 

Hold on to that feelin'...   

[Ski Mask Wei]

To be fair to ME:A that question should be asked after playing the game not after some 2 minute teaser.  Play the game first, think on it some, and then write the thesis or whatever.  Until then live ya life.

 

Although I will say them not having more to show at this stage is worrisome.  I definitely won't be surprised if the game is delayed again. 

[AlanC9]

Regardless, it was a poor choice for a paraphrase. Even if you don't care what the character actually says, its tone can have multiple meanings.

Well, that's theoretically what the tone icons are there to handle. Can't recall if that paraphrase had an icon, though, and I haven't been able to turn up a video of anyone selecting it.

Looking at that convo, I'm pretty sure I realized on first sight that "I''m not arguing this" was the line for Chantry/Circle fanatics who were going to flat-out refuse to even consider what Solas was saying.

Incidentally, you've been consistently mis-stating the paraphrase. "I'm not arguing" isn't the same thing as "I'm not arguing this."

[Felps Cross]

See this is a considered response.

I'm just upset seeing what Mac has said in other interviews about the importance of character to include none of it in the actual material. 

 

 

 

I'm with you on that. 

 

Also, dont expect threads like yours to be taken seriously in these forums, people here makes fun of everything (for some reason I can't comprehend). Join the discussion at NeoGAF for better feedback.

 

Btw, love your channel, since indoctrination theory interview

[Pasquale1234]

Well, that's theoretically what the tone icons are there to handle. Can't recall if that paraphrase had an icon, though, and I haven't been able to turn up a video of anyone selecting it.

Nope. No icons.

And frankly, the icons aren't always clear, either. Depending on the context and the paraphrase, a red fist could mean that the character would express anger toward the party with whom they are speaking (suck it up, whiner), or anger toward some other party who wronged them (I'm on your side and we must right this wrong).
 

Looking at that convo, I'm pretty sure I realized on first sight that "I''m not arguing this" was the line for Chantry/Circle fanatics who were going to flat-out refuse to even consider what Solas was saying.

Bully for you. I don't remember what the Inquisitor said at that point, but I don't think it was that. And if the actual line was refusal to consider Solas's POV, the paraphrase should have said so.
 

Incidentally, you've been consistently mis-stating the paraphrase. "I'm not arguing" isn't the same thing as "I'm not arguing this."

In this context, I don't see the difference.

Is there something you're trying to accomplish here, other than disagreement about the ambiguity of some of the paraphrases?

[Spectr61]

Mass Effect's soul

Mass Effect's soul died with the departure of Chris L'Etoile.

Then the hacks that took over writing for ME3 fully stomped on its corpse with its hackneyed writing.

[Addictress]

If there are serious people here who thought DAI was even remotely a good game, we have major problems on our hands.

[Capone666]

I'm with you on that. 

 

Also, dont expect threads like yours to be taken seriously in these forums, people here makes fun of everything (for some reason I can't comprehend). Join the discussion at NeoGAF for better feedback.

 

Btw, love your channel, since indoctrination theory interview

 

Why thank you kind sir! Really appreciate it.