9 réponses à ce sujet

[Nemesis7884]

did i miss anything about release changes??

[David Gaider]

shertokch wrote...
it has its up and down sides, but in the end, i guess there is less dialogue and therefore you wont get to know your companions as good as in DAO, but DAO was a 70 hours game and awakening only 15 hours, so i think its really a good solution. the context sensitive dialogues make a lot of sense.

Unlike ME2 the context dialogue is full conversation and not simply ambient comments from a party members. We do give up the "list of questions" that you can ask a party member -- but, after discussing it within the team for a while we decided that had limited value. You got to talk to someone, but without context it was all exposition. So we're trying this out. There's still lots of dialogue and banter, but with any luck it'll be more effectively used.

btw. the blackmarsh part of the main quest i just finished was fantastic, in no way worse than the mage tower or the red keep of origins.

Yay! I wrote Blackmarsh -- nice to hear.

Modifié par David Gaider, 14 mars 2010 - 02:59 .

[David Gaider]

Brockololly wrote...
I guess my question is: is it still possible to have a complete relationship with a party member if you don't bring them along on a given quest? Or by not bringing a certain party member on a quest and thereby missing a dialogue spot, are you going to potentially miss out on some vital part of the character, like the opportunity to do a personal quest?
Or are personal quests, like Leliana and Marjolaine, Morrigan dealing with Flemeth or Alistair dealing with Goldanna, not in Awakening?
Too many damn questions, I wish amazon would just ship the thing!

No, there's still dialogue you can have with them in camp -- when they have something to say you'll see the plot flag over their head. Those dialogues are keyed to events the same way as they were in Origins (meaning something has happened to prompt them, such as reaching a certain level in approval, a specific event, etc.) What's been removed is the laundry list of questions that you could normally ask a character.

So not spending time with a character by taking them into the party and actually adventuring them does limit the amount of dialogue you'll get with them, yes -- you'll have less opportunities to increase their approval in dialogue. I don't really think chatting up a character in camp and asking them a bunch of questions is the best way to do that, anyhow. But, no, you won't miss out on their personal quest -- that's a prompted dialogue, just as it was in Origins.

Whether or not it works will be up to you to judge, of course, but from my perspective it's much more effective on the whole for character development.

[David Gaider]

ankuu wrote...
maybe we can turn off those things (from the options menu, plot helpers). i kinda dislike the ideea too, it would have been better for them to just pop up next to you and say what they want...not raise a sign "hey, warden! yes you! i wanna tell you something!"

That's exactly the situation that we wanted to avoid, since depending on how often you return to Vigil's Keep you could potentially have numerous prompted dialogues waiting. The KotOR-style "Carth looks like he wants to talk to you..." or characters waving their hands and shouting at you really seemed like they would be annoying in their own ways. Ultimately the goal is to prevent the player from feeling the need to repeatedly circulate amongst his followers and clicking on them only to discover that they have nothing new to say... that results in its own little break from immersion.

If someone really thinks that this will make characters seem more mechanical, that's up to them, but honestly it does nothing to the conversations themselves -- and from my perspective it actually makes the interactions more natural. I'd suggest trying it out.

Insofar as the plot flag goes, I suspect that the option to turn off all plot flags that exists in the main options menu would apply here as well. Don't quote me on that, however. I'm not certain if the system with the followers is different or not.

[David Gaider]

Vengeful Nature wrote...
Do we have a definate answer about what the default Origins story is for an Orlesian warden, Nemesis? Or anyone else who's played Awakenings? Still, i'm used to being ignored.

Not sure what you mean. The Orlesian Warden is an Origin Story -- meaning that whenever the player's Origin is being checked in dialogue, the Orlesian Warden is mutually exclusive with the Origins from the main game.

[David Gaider]

Vengeful Nature wrote...
Yup. This. What I mean by Origins is Origins the game, not the origins. For example, if you don't import a save, who is king?

Ah yes, of course. Origins the game, not the feature.

Alistair is king by default.

[David Gaider]

cachx wrote...
Default != Canon

This is correct. People are misusing the term. In any situation where you are importing previous save games, there must be a default for those who don't import. Canon means it is the same for everyone, and any other variants are not part of the official storyline. The Orlesian Warden uses a default, not a canonical, story.

[David Gaider]

Morroian wrote...
Yep, I agree with the above and personally think Bioware don't fully understand the ramifications of limiting conversations insofar as it effects our (the players) sympathetic identification with the characters.

I would object to the idea that "sympathetic identification" requires being able to talk to a character anytime, anywhere, about anything. I understand that some people liked the way the dialogue worked in DAO, but just because you liked the characters does not mean that the way it worked didn't have its down side or that altering one aspect of it (the list of questions when you clicked on a character) suddenly means only the extreme opposite is possible and all characters are rendered personality-less automatons.

Could you click on party members in BG2 and ask them questions? No? Were they without personality or the possibility of "sympathetic identification"?

My observation is that the most effective means of connecting with party members is through banter and dialogues that actually have import -- they relate to something that is actually going on, either in the plot or in their lives. Being able to ask them all sorts of background questions, while pleasant enough, never really added very much -- and while I get that some people automatically imagine that this means they won't get to talk to their favorite characters at all, it just isn't so. Just because something has been changed does not always result in a net negative.

Again, I'd suggest actually trying it out. You can always return here afterwards and complain bitterly about it, along with the lack of [insert favorite character here], the travesty of [insert plot element here] or the injustice of [insert failure to carry forward plot element here].

[David Gaider]

bluebullets wrote...
I understand where you are coming from, and I get your pespective, but we were somewhat limited in DA:O in terms of conversations, amd now you are limiting us even more. It may turn out well, I have never seen it, but I can sympasize for all the people that have doubts with the change, because I also have doubts.

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more dialogue with each party member than any other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when it came to building a character.

On another note, I wanted to ask you if you are done with Duncan for the series, I have read both your books and they are fantastic. .I think that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that Duncan MIGHT not be dead (although I highly doubt that he is alive)

Duncan is dead. If he appears again, it would have to be in a story that takes place prior to Origins, if anything.

Thank you for taking the time to personally respond in these forums.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
I think had he called it for what the decision to do so stemed from (lack of time. budget) rather than use a weak excuse it might have been better recieved.

Incorrect. I would have made that change regardless of the budget involved, and while its exact implementation may receive some tweaking depending on how its received I still do think it's the right direction.

Naturally the fans always want "moar!", and that's hardly unexpected. I'm addressing the idea that you should expect to be able to click on a character and ask them whatever you like, whenever you like, and that we should write loads and loads of expensive dialogue when those words can be used more efficiently elsewhere -- sure, the overall volume of dialogue can increase with a bigger budget, but I still think the idea of going around a camp and clicking repeatedly on followers just to see if they have any new questions to ask has fundamental issues... regardless of whether you think it "ain't broke" or not.

Disagree? As you wish. Want to cradle DA:O to your chest and refuse to play anything again, ever, because it just couldn't possibly be the same? That's okay, too. If you're trying to tell me, however, that the only route to go with dialogue is just to provide endless amounts of it and that everything else is "streamlining" -- well, sorry, in that case you're just going to have to be disappointed. So be it.

At the end of the day there's less overall character development that can be done in the space of an expansion, that's normal, but I don't really think that situation can be improved just by allowing someone to ask more questions in camp. Even so, I'll see what people have to say who have actually played the game, and parse their answers appropriately. That's my job.