1106 réponses à ce sujet

[bluebullets]

David Gaider wrote...

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].

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.

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)

I think that he could provide a whole lot of light on this situation and deepen the plot due to his past experiences with the architect and Meric.

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

Modifié par bluebullets, 15 mars 2010 - 03:38 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

David Gaider wrote...
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.

I am not sure I agree with that. Not once did I think that any talk with our companions was pointless. It may have not added to the plot as a whole, but it certainly added something to the character. It was key in making our companions feel like our friends. Afterall, I am sure we don't always talk about something relevent with our friends, but the very fact that we are talking is relevent in a friendship.

Now I am not judging the new system, as I have not tried it out yet, nor do I really comprehend it (angry posts are hard to understand). I personally welcome the idea of being able to talk with our companions in certain places. But I am not so sure about the lack of DA:O like convo in the camp. 

My point is that I wouldn't say the Origin system was pointless or didn't add much, because I thought it did. And if the Awakening system did not achieve positive results, then it would be preferable to stick with the old formula. But that's not determined yet.  
  

[MassEffect762]

David Gaider wrote...

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].

Maybe. Personally it sounds like spin to me.

[JamieCOTC]

David Gaider wrote...

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].

Will do. 

[elearon1]

>>Too all the others who rambling off on side tangents and having debates and discussions, could you open a can of STFU?

It is making this thread way too long when it is basically a Q&A for the new expansion.

Thanks.<<



Threads deviate, that's what they do. This isn't an official thread of any sort, so there is really is no room for coming and telling people how they should post ... not as though that will stop some people.



>>Again, I'd suggest actually trying it out.<<



Which is what I intend to do, but that doesn't mean I can't be concerned about what I've heard. If the new conversation method works better, kudos to the team, but any time I see something I liked change I get worried. Really, I'm doubting the changes will be able to address the actual problems I might have had with the DA dialog - which was, of course, that I would have liked more. Still, I do often find myself disappointed when I finish a quest and no one has anything to say about it, so hopefully this change will address that in a positive way.

[dunachar]

I was so excited for Awakening.......it has MASSIVE potential.....but i guess EA's money grubbing got in the way, and wanted an expansion as fast as possible, so bioware did their best in the amount of time they were alotted......and this is what we got. Its sad, truly sad.....awakening could have been legendary..........but its just been one huge dissapointment after another.....from no DLC, to hours of gameplay, to changing dialogue, the dissapointing hits just haven't stopped.

[elearon1]

>>the dissapointing hits just haven't stopped.<<



Seriously, wait until you've played the game before you bury it. Yes, I am disappointed I won't get to adventure with Leliana in Awakening, but that doesn't mean it is going to be awful ... give it a chance, you might just be surprised. (or you might not, but at least you'll be making an informed decision)

[Brockololly]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
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.

I am not sure I agree with that. Not once did I think that any talk with our companions was pointless. It may have not added to the plot as a whole, but it certainly added something to the character. It was key in making our companions feel like our friends. Afterall, I am sure we don't always talk about something relevent with our friends, but the very fact that we are talking is relevent in a friendship.

Now I am not judging the new system, as I have not tried it out yet, nor do I really comprehend it (angry posts are hard to understand). I personally welcome the idea of being able to talk with our companions in certain places. But I am not so sure about the lack of DA:O like convo in the camp. 

My point is that I wouldn't say the Origin system was pointless or didn't add much, because I thought it did. And if the Awakening system did not achieve positive results, then it would be preferable to stick with the old formula. But that's not determined yet.  
  

This is what I'm thinking too- I enjoyed the background questions if only to get a better feel for who the characters were in more relaxed dialogues where they weren't necessarily demanding something of the PC or focused on the events at hand. It may seem like a throw away aspect of the game that doesn't add much, but IMO its those sorts of little things that separate a Bioware game from your generic RPG.

Being able to ask them some less pragmatic, quest related questions in camp made the companions feel more fleshed out and alive if you will, when compared to say the companions of Mass Effect 2 who it seems only talk to you when they want something from you. Now on the other hand, not being able to delve as deeply into a character's background through the camp dialogue might make more sense if we already knew the companions- somebody like Oghren who we already sort of know his history, the new style dialogue makes more sense.

Thats what I don't want to see in Dragon Age; the companions and the dialogue was one of the absolute strengths of DAO- if it ain't broke don't fix it.

I guess maybe the new system might work within the confines of an expansion, which is going to be a bit more limited than a full game, but I would hope that in whatever next full DA game there is, maybe Bioware can keep the expository dialogue in camp but also have the little dialogue points in the world like ME has to add more contextual dialogues.

Modifié par Brockololly, 15 mars 2010 - 04:15 .

[TheMadCat]

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.

Maybe I'm reading this part wrong but going by the gist of what I see, that's a bit of a bushwa way of thinking there. Do you really believe that a characters past adds very little to the character and the story? Understandably it may have nothing to do with the plot of the story at hand, or in some cases it may have everything to do with it. But there is more to the cast and characters of a story and ultimatly what defines them than the situation at hand. Their pasts actions do a lot to define that character and how we perceive the actions they take, the choices they make, and the words they speak. The way you seemed to describe it there just makes it sound very artificial. By this type of thinking there shouldn't be any sidequests in the game either because really, what do they add to the plot of the story? 

Mind you I'm not bashing this new system you're implementing, I don't bash things I've no experience with. I'm just trying to gauge your rather odd comment there.

[Mass Fraud]

Brockololly wrote...
DAO- if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Thats what i've been wondering.

Modifié par Mass Fraud, 15 mars 2010 - 04:23 .

[cmessaz]

My thing is this, I agree that in Origins, there wasn't enough plot-specific dialogue. And sometimes the conversations seemed at the wrong time. (My favorite is Alistair saying he has nothing to remember Duncan by, while weilding his sword from RTO) I like what I'm hearing about the conversations being at particular points. However, I really enjoyed just being able to talk to them at camp. I personally think that it was a mistake to do away with that. Many people are nervous, first the romance has been taken out, and now with the conversations. I am looking forward to this game on Teus., but I'm also worried that it might ruin Dragon Age for me.  I'm concerned that it just won't feel like the same game.

Modifié par cmessaz, 15 mars 2010 - 04:34 .

[cmessaz]

My concerns: Lack of romances, (I know I'll catch a ton of crap for this but like it or not it was an important part of Origins), this conversation thing, official content not carrying over (yet I've heard that un-official does, go figure), lack of any of the characters we got to know in Origins (well-theres Oghren), and there are concerns on how the story will carry over from Origins, I'm worried about that because the endgame in Origins seems to be very bugged.

Modifié par cmessaz, 15 mars 2010 - 04:44 .

[cmessaz]

I would just like to throw out there that David Gaider is a genius. All hail the Gaider. Don't take any of this personally. We just like to complain, but I will cross my fingers and pick up Awakening first thing Teusday morning. We must support DA people no matter what doubts you may have! We want more, don't we?

Modifié par cmessaz, 15 mars 2010 - 04:53 .

[Morroian]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

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].

Fairy nuff, you're the write not me I shall do and report back

I do agree with what knightofphoenix wrote further on though. I don't think those conversations were pointless.

[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.

[cmessaz]

Good point. I will stop complaining until I play it. DA is one of my all-time favorite games and I will trust you guys to make a good product. I don't think I've read any real big complaints from people who have actually played Awakening, that says something. But I do appreciate you posting in these forums and addressing people's concerns. I think it is very cool that you do that. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to read some of these posts.

Modifié par cmessaz, 15 mars 2010 - 05:30 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

While I won't judge before playing it 24 hours from now or so, why do I get the sinking feeling this is another case of "streamlining the experience" much like the fiasco that is ME2?

[Bryy_Miller]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

While I won't judge before playing it 24 hours from now or so, why do I get the sinking feeling this is another case of "streamlining the experience" much like the fiasco that is ME2?

ME1 was way more streamlined than ME2. Only four main missions? 

[WilliamShatner]

Rather than complain about DA:O:A I will praise DA:O and say that the conversations my character was able to have with Leliana and Morrigan and the stories they told me were by far my favourite thing about DA:O.

[Brockololly]

David Gaider wrote...

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 the Maker that you have finally said so! No more " OMG! Duncan is really the Talking Darkspawn!" threads, sheesh.

And of course your presence in these threads is much obliged- I think its just hard for many of us to constructively comment on any of the game mechanics, like the dialogue, since we haven't actually played Awakening yet.  And as such we just run around and scream at the top of our lungs that Bioware has irrevocably ruined DA for all time, when we haven't played the game yet.

I think its natural for people to just assume the worst when we hear that you guys tweaked or altered some aspect of what many think worked just fine in DAO.

Modifié par Brockololly, 15 mars 2010 - 05:48 .

[Brockololly]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

While I won't judge before playing it 24 hours from now or so, why do I get the sinking feeling this is another case of "streamlining the experience" much like the fiasco that is ME2?

ME1 was way more streamlined than ME2. Only four main missions? 

Well, if you're like me, I'd  consider the loyalty missions just as integral to the game as the "main" quests. But I think you realize that the "streamlining" in ME2 is commonly attributed to the gameplay and RPG mechanics...

[Sandy2009]

Just to add my two cents...



The conversation with party member in the camp were an important part of connecting with them as live members. Who can forget the drunk dwarf falling on the ground instead of answering your questions The cold tone of sten, the facial expressions of morrigan. I did not pay much attention to party banter the first time because my mind was busy in quest when they were chatting on road. In camp I was more relaxed and hence wanted to understand their background lives (why there were doing what they were doing?). Camp environment was an important part of DAO experience.

[everittdaniel]

Would some considerate soul with an early copy of the game please update some parts of the various wikis? I'd love to know more about the Guardian, the Legionnaire scout, etc.

Edit : or, if someone has various large parts of info bookmarked in this thread, can ya link me please? I'll continue to keep on trawling through myself.

I just really want to see if my massive defense warrior will be more enjoyable to play, or a parry-rogue.

Modifié par everittdaniel, 15 mars 2010 - 05:56 .

[Bryy_Miller]

MassEffect762 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

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].

Maybe. Personally it sounds like spin to me.

.... seriously? He just gave you an in-depth answer and your response is to say that he is lying?