635 réponses à ce sujet

[MrGOH]

David Gaider wrote...

MrGOH wrote...
But I understand the appeal, to some, of the camp conversation style of DA:O. I do like to ask questions of the companions, especially if my character would want their input into a decision beyond a brief interjection. I think perhaps implementing some sort of conference or palaver segment during certain points of major questlines in which the PC can ask relevant, but perhaps myriad, questions of the companions regarding (again) relevant world building topics and factors that may affect the party's plan. For example, I'd have liked to ask Alistair about the Templars and mages at the beginning of the Mages' Tower segment in DA:O rather than randomly in camp. Then Alistair's stories and reactions could be tied to some sort of in-game event than a random moonlit conversation. Of course, there could always be a companion-initiated romantic conversation by moonlight, should that be required...

That's an interesting idea, though if you were going to ask Alistair about the Templars at the beginning of the Mage Tower segment it would still require you to click on him to see if he had anything relevant to say -- and if he did, would you not be checking every party member at every major location just in case?

Mind you, if Alistair made some comment that amounted to "Huh, I know a lot about Templars" when you entered the area... that might provide a good cue that eliminated the need for for dialogue-trolling, as it were. Though really it's the difference between clicking on an ambient object to start a conversation and clicking on the party member themselves. But it seems that's a real sticking point for some people. I'm not convinced it's a big issue, but it's something to consider.

Another possibility might be spacing out dialogues in-between major plot points. You don't get to ask said character twenty questions right off the bat, no, but maybe after you complete a plot you could click on them in the camp and ask them about the plot point specifically -- and it leads into something related, perhaps at your option. I'd prefer that to exposition on their background (which is to say I'd prefer to reveal character and background while you are talking to them about something else rather than allowing the player to simply say "Tell me all about your background." Despite the fact that some people seem keen on that, I really do think we're the worse for letting them do it.), and if it was restricted to the camp or somewhere neutral (read: with a set stage so the cinematic designers don't tear their hair out) it might not be so bad so long as the expectation was very clear and there were no exceptions. Again, something to consider.

Romances, of course, are another ball of wax completely. But, yes, I knew that.

I imagine that, in the example, Alistair would either float something upon entry or that there'd be a dialogue option in the main quest giver's dialogue amounting to something like "Let me see if my companions have anything to add and I'll get back to you." I think the float method would be ideal, and the easiest to implement. That way major there'd be a single location for these chats with companions to take place in (the main quest giver's location, since the associated dialogue wouldn;t be happening any where else) and they'd be immediately relevant. I also think that perhaps some sort of camp interrupt would be appropriate if the companion has some sort of urgent opinion (Alistair: "You went to the Redcliffe without me? I told you I was raised by the Arl..."), or is generally reacting to something that happened on the last mission.

I'm a fan of the Awakening style dialogues, too; I just think that, for a full sequel, for example, some mixture of observational dialogues and plot or event based dialogues would be nice. And I'm all for spacing relevant dialogues out as you suggest; I don't think massive text dumps from every companion upon recruitment is as fun or interesting as watching them grow and react to the story. Of course, this may make more work for you writers, but that's why I've spent upwards of $100 on your games in the past few months!

[errant_knight]

To quote Mr. Gaider:
"I'd prefer that to exposition on their background (which is to say I'd prefer to reveal character and background while you are talking to them about something else rather than allowing the player to simply say "Tell me all about your background." Despite the fact that some people seem keen on that, I really do think we're the worse for letting them do it.), and if it was restricted to the camp or somewhere neutral (read: with a set stage so the cinematic designers don't tear their hair out) it might not be so bad so long as the expectation was very clear and there were no exceptions. Again, something to consider."

I can agree with that entirely. While I want to be able to instigate conversations, and have NPCs instigate them with me, I'm not looking for blanket exposition. I'd rather have longer, more complex conversations, that reveal information in a roundabout way, as real conversations usually do. I have no problem with them refusing to talk to my PC if the right elements aren't in place, which could include trust (approval), cunning and persuasion. It would also be interesting if the asked the PC questions, even ones that might not be easy to answer.

Basically, I need to feel like I have access to these people when I want/need to find out more about them, or just want to improve group morale with a little conversation. It feels odd to tell one of them that we're friends when we've hardly talked, and never about anything remotely personal.

Modifié par errant_knight, 18 mars 2010 - 07:01 .

[elearon1]

>>Despite the fact that some people seem keen on that, I really do think we're the worse for letting them do it.<<



Because they liked it so much they want more of it? That really does seem to be part of what you're saying here. Which is understandable, after all you have to budget how much you can spend on voice acting and that means getting the best mileage for your money.



But, consider that when people get together with their friends they don't only want to talk about what is happening at work, in politics, etc. Often they want to fill a lot of their time with casual conversation that nonetheless reveals some insight into the other person. We had a lot of good, insightful discussions in DA:O which I think people miss when they are then not available. The Role-Playing part of CRPGs has become a lot more important over the last decade or so, I believe, and people are realizing that games can offer a lot more than simple combat oriented missions.



You mention that "In Balder's Gate you couldn't initiate dialog like that" and it is true ... but the crpg experience has evolved since then and as Bioware we expect you guys to be at the forefront - putting more RP in CRPGs.



To avoid the "laundry list" thing from becoming cluttered perhaps one could offer X number of conversation topics between each major mission and after that mission they vanish. These would cover the subject of the mission you were just one, the one you're about to start, and another about them as people. (so three or four potential conversation lines between each mission ... probably end up with about what you had in DA, but spread out more so one couldn't power through them all at once and limited in number so one didn't have to navigate through a huge list every time they wanted to talk.) If you really wanted you could put an icon poppup over npc heads when they switched out conversation lines, so people would know exactly when they had "refreshed their material", as it were. Then you also keep some stuff for npc initiated conversation in the course of an adventure - and in that case I liked the "clickie" to initiate conversation option.



When you read some of these complaints you have to remind yourself that, as fans, we love you guys and we have high opinions of the Bioware writers ... but with that comes high expectations. If you didn't do such a good job we wouldn't expect so much of you ... and when we ask for more it is because we liked what you'd done before so well. These things are compliments, even when they're not always delivered very well.

[Acacia_Kitty]

I would like to chime in with my opinion, having just finished playing through Awakening. I do not care for the new system. To me, it made the game feel shallow. At the end of Origins, I cared about the NPCs and when I finished Awakening tonight, I find myself not caring very much about my new companions. That is not to say I did not like them. I did! But the lack of dialogue and not being able to chat them up made me feel pretty disconnected from them.



I don't know what the answer is, but I think a compromise between the old system and the new would be the best option. A lot of people in this thread have made really great suggestions.

[Pious_Augustus]

So now you have to go find objects to talk to your companions, no this is not the right direction at all

[EccentricSage]

BooPi wrote...

I think Mr. Gaider is being too nice.

He asked for feedback, not whining. There's a difference. Whining equals "Waah I hate it, it's worse, waah." Feedback equals taking a close, measured look at why you like the new system less, and articulating it in a way that helps the developers address the those reasons. Or, looking closely at why you liked the old system more, and articulating that in a way that looks at how those qualities could be preserved. Or, if it's the case, why you like the new system better and the ways to improve its weaknesses or capitalize on its strengths.

If, after you show a good-faith effort to do that, your feedback really isn't constructive and you end up advocating a roll-back, then you've justified yourself. But remember you're one person out of many, and at least be humble about it.

Sheesh, it feels like an undergrad writing workshop in here sometimes.

(For the record, I'm not responding to the person who posted immediately before me, or really any one specific person, just a few somewhat unproductive comments in here. And yes, I do realize that this is the internet.)

I've been following the thread pretty closely and from what I've seen most here are being constructive, but honest.  If someone doesn't like something, they have a right to say it.  Even most of the people who say they prefer the old system are trying to be constructive and explain the 'why' and 'how' of it all.  Manny have given positive feedback and presented their own ideas, especialy towards the end of this thread.  It's kind of exciting, IMO.

Me, I think triggers out in the world are a great idea, but that 'campfire' dialogue shouldn't be replaced... that is played a vital role and has some strengths that a trigger system doesn't have.  Both systems have strengths and weaknesses.  I think incorporating both systems and exploiting their strengths to make up for each other's weaknesses would be practical.  More work for the devs, but making a good game kind of makes that a given.

[Dragon Age1103]

The more detailed responses I read & the more I play awakening makes me realize how much I really enjoy this new chat system but still feel they need to include minor conversations when walking around a town or doing a short easy quest. Some times it feels like I click on something then a random party member makes a statement & that is it so it still needs some work for everything to feel smooth & natural but this change is good & bad so far. I think with a few tweaks & added dialogue this could really be a change for the better, can't wait to see what we get in February!!!!! Love the time frame Bioware launches it's games since I am always so bored in the cold winters up here not being able to ride!!!!

Can't wait to play after work today!!!

[EccentricSage]

David Gaider wrote...

MrGOH wrote...
But I understand the appeal, to some, of the camp conversation style of DA:O. I do like to ask questions of the companions, especially if my character would want their input into a decision beyond a brief interjection. I think perhaps implementing some sort of conference or palaver segment during certain points of major questlines in which the PC can ask relevant, but perhaps myriad, questions of the companions regarding (again) relevant world building topics and factors that may affect the party's plan. For example, I'd have liked to ask Alistair about the Templars and mages at the beginning of the Mages' Tower segment in DA:O rather than randomly in camp. Then Alistair's stories and reactions could be tied to some sort of in-game event than a random moonlit conversation. Of course, there could always be a companion-initiated romantic conversation by moonlight, should that be required...

That's an interesting idea, though if you were going to ask Alistair about the Templars at the beginning of the Mage Tower segment it would still require you to click on him to see if he had anything relevant to say -- and if he did, would you not be checking every party member at every major location just in case?

Mind you, if Alistair made some comment that amounted to "Huh, I know a lot about Templars" when you entered the area... that might provide a good cue that eliminated the need for for dialogue-trolling, as it were. Though really it's the difference between clicking on an ambient object to start a conversation and clicking on the party member themselves. But it seems that's a real sticking point for some people. I'm not convinced it's a big issue, but it's something to consider.

Another possibility might be spacing out dialogues in-between major plot points. You don't get to ask said character twenty questions right off the bat, no, but maybe after you complete a plot you could click on them in the camp and ask them about the plot point specifically -- and it leads into something related, perhaps at your option. I'd prefer that to exposition on their background (which is to say I'd prefer to reveal character and background while you are talking to them about something else rather than allowing the player to simply say "Tell me all about your background." Despite the fact that some people seem keen on that, I really do think we're the worse for letting them do it.), and if it was restricted to the camp or somewhere neutral (read: with a set stage so the cinematic designers don't tear their hair out) it might not be so bad so long as the expectation was very clear and there were no exceptions. Again, something to consider.

Romances, of course, are another ball of wax completely. But, yes, I knew that.

I love where this is going!  Over all, this sounds like the sort of interactions I'd like to have in an RPG.

I think it makes sense to click on a 'trigger object' if the PC and NPCs are going to discuss the trigger object... That is intuitive.  Kind of like when in Origins we find the mysterious camp in the forest and click on the objects, causing a cut scene... that just makes sense.  Or like in the Dalish origin when you click on the statue in the ruin and it triggered dialogue.

But I think if we are triggering dialogue about the character's personal background or opinions about the current quest, it makes more sense to click the NPC than an object.  I think the problem with having to click objects for such dialogue would be that as players, our mind instantly tries to analyze why you would have to fixate on an object in order to start a conversation.  I agree it would be minor most of the time, but it could really be off putting if you are talking about a situation you are in and not an object.  It is unintuitive.

The idea of tying new camp dialogue to plot advancements is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see.  Though I think you should also still have some dialogues that are triggered by approval levels and relationships, as I don't think it would feel as intimate if I could only get dialogue strictly relevant to the quests.  People are not defined by present circumstance... so why would dialogue be so dependant on present circumstance?  Sometimes people have random conversations IRL to escape their current circumstance.  It's refreshing.  It feels real.  And it's like a pleasant little break from the quests. 

For example, the first time I got Zevran's poem dialogue was when we were in the ruins at Haven, in a room we cleared.  I'd been clearing the place for awhile at that point and was getting stressed.  It was such a pleasant surprise when I gave Zev a couple gift items to clear my inventory, and clicked him out of curiosity, and found there was this whole new dialogue.  It wasn't relevant to the task at hand, but it was brief enough not to seem out of place, and the fact he was trying to cheer my character up certainly did make me feel happier about slogging through the rest of the ruin.  I would hate to not have these moments anymore in future games.  It actually felt really personal even though it's the same dialogue tree everyone gets.  That's part of why Origins feels so special, I think.


*edit*  I forgot the main thing I wanted to say.  e_e

I agree that the lead ins to personal NPC dialogues should be more natural and purposeful than in Origins.  I felt awful asking Zevran to tell me about his adventures, because that way of breaching the topic of his past as a Crow just sounds kind of callous and blood thirsty, and not in character for most of my PCs.  But I couldn't NOT use that line, or else I wouldn't get his stories.  This is really the only real flaw I felt the Zevran dialogues specifically had.  Once I got past that most of the dialogue was really nuanced and believable.  People who never give this character a chance are really missing out!

In the other hand, asking Leliana to tell me bard tales was actually really a believable and cool way to start to get to know her.  I really liked her in her early dialogues.  I think that's an example of a way to initiate early character dialogue that feels very natural.

'I have a few questions' for Alistair only made sense during the Joining quest... after that, it seemed very out of place.  So I totally see what you mean about initiating personal dialogues in Origins being a bit problematic.  I appreciate your perfectionism more than you probably imagine.  This thread is actually really getting me excited for future installments in the franchise.

Modifié par EccentricSage, 18 mars 2010 - 10:13 .

[Lethias]

Maybe the best thing would be the conbination of the old and new system, or something. This click on object and get to know the companions opinion or things about them is cool, but it wasn't ennought without the old stuff where you could talk and get to know your party mates really well. So alone this stuff as it is in the expansion don't let people to know each character as much as they could do it in the original game. I was really attached to some character at the end of DAO but i missed this feeling in awakening. And don't get me wrong the characters was well written, with good voice, fitting personalities really good work, but missed the campfire and my party members there. Also i felt like i was much more controlling the conversations in the original game and im missing it in awakening.

[Massadonious1]

Rixxencaxx wrote...
Nothing to say....except....we'll see your awakening sales numbers....

How is sales going to determine anything? Not everyone that doesn't buy Awakenings is going to be dissatisfied by the new conversation sytem (that they haven't tried). Perhaps they didn't feel $40 is worth it, they didn't like the look of the new characters, or didn't like that their romance wouldn't carry over or that they would even have one. How would you calculate such a thing anyway? Track down everyone who owns a 360, PS3, or PC in the world and ask them why they didn't buy it?

[noctoi]

I HATE the new system hate it hate it hate it... Its way too rigid and disjointed. I hate getting stale one liners when i try to talk to my party members, Id rather just have the old style back. At least the old system made it feel like you were a member of the team instead of just an onlooker. Very very disapointed in the whole expansion alas *sigh*

[Geneviev]

I agree, this new system doesn't sit well as a replacement. As an addition to the conversation/chat system, it is amazing. But I feel very much the "passive" voice in my party - they can banter at will, but I have to wait to cycle out party members while I find their magic spots in the world? Backtracking with each individual is a crutch to immersion.



It's a Bioware game. These games are known for amazing characters, and character interaction. This expansion's system felt very rigid and unnatural, and I much preferred the old system. Having said that, I would Greatly Prefer a new system incorporating both elements. As far as 'wall of text, tell me everything!' goes, most games have that throttled quite well. Mass Effect 2, for an in-company example. It's a great reward system to come back from a mission and discover some new reveal from a companion.

[zahra]

David Gaider wrote...

MrGOH wrote...
But I understand the appeal, to some, of the camp conversation style of DA:O. I do like to ask questions of the companions, especially if my character would want their input into a decision beyond a brief interjection. I think perhaps implementing some sort of conference or palaver segment during certain points of major questlines in which the PC can ask relevant, but perhaps myriad, questions of the companions regarding (again) relevant world building topics and factors that may affect the party's plan. For example, I'd have liked to ask Alistair about the Templars and mages at the beginning of the Mages' Tower segment in DA:O rather than randomly in camp. Then Alistair's stories and reactions could be tied to some sort of in-game event than a random moonlit conversation. Of course, there could always be a companion-initiated romantic conversation by moonlight, should that be required...

That's an interesting idea, though if you were going to ask Alistair about the Templars at the beginning of the Mage Tower segment it would still require you to click on him to see if he had anything relevant to say -- and if he did, would you not be checking every party member at every major location just in case?

Mind you, if Alistair made some comment that amounted to "Huh, I know a lot about Templars" when you entered the area... that might provide a good cue that eliminated the need for for dialogue-trolling, as it were. Though really it's the difference between clicking on an ambient object to start a conversation and clicking on the party member themselves. But it seems that's a real sticking point for some people. I'm not convinced it's a big issue, but it's something to consider.

Another possibility might be spacing out dialogues in-between major plot points. You don't get to ask said character twenty questions right off the bat, no, but maybe after you complete a plot you could click on them in the camp and ask them about the plot point specifically -- and it leads into something related, perhaps at your option. I'd prefer that to exposition on their background (which is to say I'd prefer to reveal character and background while you are talking to them about something else rather than allowing the player to simply say "Tell me all about your background." Despite the fact that some people seem keen on that, I really do think we're the worse for letting them do it.), and if it was restricted to the camp or somewhere neutral (read: with a set stage so the cinematic designers don't tear their hair out) it might not be so bad so long as the expectation was very clear and there were no exceptions. Again, something to consider.

Romances, of course, are another ball of wax completely. But, yes, I knew that.

THIS

is exactly the response I was waiting for. I was reading through this thread getting increasingly worried, but this post has taken all my fears away. What I got from this post is that the dev team isnt just going to go one linear route (i.e. Awakening-centric), but the general idea is to take away the monotony of the dialogue options (despite being completely in love with most of the gang, esp Zevran+Morrigan, after my 9th playthrough I was just skipping quickly through most of the lines to get ++approval) by not allowing the character to simply rush through 60 percent of the characters dialogue options ten percent into the game.

I think they want to increase immersion rather than detract from it. Its pointless to tell them that their characters are the main reason we are addicted to DA, I think they know that. Even in RL we dont get someones life story after a couple of chats. I wouldnt suggest jumping through his throat just for mentioning possible tweaks to the system.


Thank you Mr Gaider.

[Liso66]

Since finishing Awakenings. I have a full opinion on the new conversation system,

My theory before, that this could be a feature with the existing system still stands.

At the end. I could have cared less what happened to most of my companions. I never felt I really got to know them, nor them my pc.

Cold and impersonal. It felt VERY one sided. I got to the point, I did not even care to find triggers for any companions to say anything. It was not worth my time to bother. The dialog was always short, vague, and pointless more often than not.

Finding out what your companions like? My pack was still full of gifts because it took forever to even find anything out about them. If you have (A) companion with you, instead of ( companion. You were finding out nothing.

A joy in these types of games, is getting to know your companions. Connecting with them. Look at all the fans of Morrigan, Leliana, Alistair etc etc etc.. there is a solid reason for this. The system allowed you those warm fuzzy moments, and get to know them. This new system? Is empty and truly pointless.

In short, if all my companions ran off to join the circus and got killed by a herd of elephants. I could have cared less....

Regards
Liso

Modifié par Liso66, 18 mars 2010 - 02:38 .

[Mlai00]

Aww man~! While reading this 10 page thread I was writing up a huge flame post for Mr. DG, and now with the way this thread is going, I have to scrap all of it! Why couldn't you just be snobby and blind like George Lucas so I could post my assassination threats?!

Anyways, yeah, like ppl said... we don't need "moar" of 1 or the other. We just need both in the appropriate "mix", so in the end Bioware won't have to pay Mr. Famous Actor any more money for the VO's, while still having better-paced and intuitive character immersion.

[Raiynsong]

Mr Gaider's last comment has allayed some of my ... well, "fears" is too strong a word, but let's use it for now.



I do see some consensus developing here.

1) we want to initiate dialog to get to know the characters and their backstories, and have our relationships with them develop organically

2) we want to know the characters that we don't/aren't able to take along on quests

3) we like some of the new system in that dialog occurs while questing and relates to the place we're at in the game.



and most important:



4) Most of us play this game FOR THE WRITING AND VOICE ACTING. There are LOTS of RPG's and MMO's on the market with great graphics, interesting story arcs, and fun to play combat systems. What sets DA:O apart is the great writing and voice acting. If there are ANY priority spending decisions to be made in future games, PLEASE PLEASE do not skimp on the writers and actors.\\

[Hulk Hsieh]

As long as I don't miss half of the dialogs because I don't bring the right persons to right places, I'm fine with either system.

[David Gaider]

Hmm. I will say that "I like the old conversation system, having long talks with the character let me get an insight into their personality and made me feel really close to them, etc etc." is very understandable. Who doesn't like having long talks with characters you like? It is, however, a lot of writing that is inefficient and, yes, expensive. No, you as fans don't have to worry about how expensive it is. I, however, do, and I do have to think about the sort of behavior a conversation system encourages in players -- even if some players (especially the really hardcore ones) enjoyed the end results despite its flaws (and every system has some).

There's food for thought, here. I'll take it into account when I decide how to proceed in the future, so thank you for those who offered their insight. I do, of course, have to add a grain of salt that this is feedback from the bunch that are *most* likely to be biased in favor of the Origins system by virtue of their presence here... but that's not a bad thing at all. Just realize it's one part of what we need to take into account.

So thank you.

Modifié par David Gaider, 18 mars 2010 - 03:27 .

[MoSa09]

I have given the new and old systems some thoughts what i like/dislike and why as well as what can be done better, and how can it be done better, in my opinion. Be aware, long wall of text incoming.

1. I prefer clicking on characters than objects to intiate a conversation. You can argue it's just on click either way, and i can't argue against that. It just feels strange from a more realistic point of view, if i want to talk to about one's family, to stare at a picture until that one realizes i want to talk about his family. If i want to talk to someone, i start talking to him or her. To me, it feels more natural

2. Especially in the beginning, when you meet new characters and recruit them to your party, it makes the most sense to ask them some personal questions and i think that not be scraped. I mean, i did never meet this guy before, i do not know him, and still he now fight's by my site and is responsible to guard my back. Therefore, i should be able to ask some basic personal question to get a general idea of this one. To shed blood together and save each others life but not being able to talk about some basic personal things would feel really arkward.

3. I like the idea that companions talk about some things they see during a quest and sometimes intiate a conversation. But i don't think clicking on objects to do this is the best way. Apart from that it feels strange to start a rather personal talk by using an object, you always run around pressing "tab" so that you do not miss a dialogue. As someone before already said, it would probably feel more natural if that party member would just make a remark and then you can click on him and ask him what he or she thinks. For example when you first enter Denerim with Morrigan, she makes a remark about the city and it's life. So one way to do it could be that as long as you remain in the area for the first time, you can click on her and ask her what she meant with the comment and what she thinks, maybe intiate a conversation about her previous life in the wilds, that she always wanted to visit the big cities and stuff. To me, that would feel somewhat more natural than clicking objects, and it would spare you running around pressing "tab" to avoid missing a dialogue trigger.

4. I still like to talk in camp, it adds a great extent to the atmosphere and the characters coming alive. I see the point of trying to avoid having peole runnig around talking to everyone to check if they have something new to say. One possible way to avoid is using plot signs above their heads, but i don't like that really, it always reduces them to mere quest giver objects in my very own personal view. I rather like an idea already mentioned here, that they behave differently. For example, Sten is always wandering around in camp., Maybe if they have something important to say, they could behave like him, appearing somewhat restless, and when you're getting close, calling you out like "do you have a moment" or "can we talk". That's a way to check if they have something new to say without needing to talk to them.

5. I am one of those geeks who sometimes stayed one hour in camp just to talk to companions or sneak a kiss from my love, even if they had nothing new to say, it just felt so close to them and enjoyed the feeling of companionship that i would love to have this back. Maybe some kind of middle ground between both would be to be able to click and ask them something like "how do you feel" or "Is everything okay", and they shortly respond based on approval and maybe if they are romanced or not. That way, no need to add huge random conversations, those who don't like that kind of convo don't have to use it while those who like get some talk with their friends. Also, if you implement romances, it's easy to just add a second dialogue tree fo the romance partner that leads to the romance dialogue options. And just on a personal note, i miss that i can't talk to a companion all the time. After we all just suvived fighting a whole bunch of enemies, it is somewhat relaxing and comforting to click on a companion and share some few words. But that's personal feeling and not a well reasoned argument i know, but i wanted to add this nevertheless.

6. I understand the issue that you get to know that companions best that you take along all the time, and to some degree, that is already the case in Origins. You never get to know the depth of a character unless you take him along. But as others pointed out, the ones you take along are also influenced by your own class and the need to have an effective party. So while i agree you may not get to know everything about the ones that stay in camp, you should be able to learn something about them that is more than just "oh hey, we seldomly speak, but here is my personal quest". One way to avoid this might be that you just have your whole party around more often than just always the same three people. I can think of two different ways to do this

6.A. Random encounters on the road. I always wondered, when for example, i travelled from Denerim to the Frostback mountains, i just had the same three people with me, but when i arrived at Frostback and instead of proceeding simply return to camp, everyone was there. Maybe at such randon encounters, as you obviously travel with everyone, all should be present (some kind of battle style like in Denerim where you only control your Warden), that would give the ones that are usually left behind a chance to shine and start a dialogue on their  own to get to know them better. Or, if you enter a city where there is no real fight, the party members you do not use could explore that city on their own and than later in camp simply tell you about that dialogue trigger you missed because they weren't part of your party and initiate the conversation that way.

6.B. A second way to do this is to get every companion a job to do. I always pretented my remaining party in camps would nevertheless do important things than simply gaze into the fire and wait for my return. For example, one skilled in herbalism could produce some potions or look for ingredients while you're away and when you return, you see that you have some new health potions while others hunt for food, watch/ guard the camp or check in the local town/tavern for some supplies and gossip. That activity might also be used as a trigger for conversation "while hunting, i found this..." and then they tell you something personal or might lead to some new quests like "while at that inn, i heard an interesting rumor we might want to check out". And moreover, it would give the remaining ones something to do instead of simply wait.

Wow, i apologize for that long posts, i could easily write more but i stop here. I tried to give some thoughts what i think and what and how something can be done. Just my very own personal two cents of course.

On a more personal note, the old dialogue system had a  natural feeling of smooth and fluid conversation to me. The new system always feels somewhat contrived and forced

Modifié par MoSa09, 18 mars 2010 - 04:37 .

[Liso66]

Hulk Hsieh wrote...

As long as I don't miss half of the dialogs because I don't bring the right persons to right places, I'm fine with either system.

You will , Sad but true

[errant_knight]

Raiynsong wrote...

Mr Gaider's last comment has allayed some of my ... well, "fears" is too strong a word, but let's use it for now.

I do see some consensus developing here.
1) we want to initiate dialog to get to know the characters and their backstories, and have our relationships with them develop organically
2) we want to know the characters that we don't/aren't able to take along on quests
3) we like some of the new system in that dialog occurs while questing and relates to the place we're at in the game.

and most important:

4) Most of us play this game FOR THE WRITING AND VOICE ACTING. There are LOTS of RPG's and MMO's on the market with great graphics, interesting story arcs, and fun to play combat systems. What sets DA:O apart is the great writing and voice acting. If there are ANY priority spending decisions to be made in future games, PLEASE PLEASE do not skimp on the writers and actors.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Heh, this made me realize that when I think of Dragon Age:Origins, the first thing that comes to mind isn't combat or story specifics, although they add to my enjoyment, or course, it's the characters, and my interactions with them--the fun of talking to Morrigan right after she's been really nasty and asking her why she's such a ****. Of feeling like you'll hold off on the next mission for a while, and try and figure out Sten, instead. Of talking to your PC's significant other before a battle--even though you've heard what they have to say--because you know it's going to be a tough one and hearing their voice would be good.

If you take out these elements, you still have a great game, you just don't have a game that's groundbreaking in how much you care about the characters. I no longer feel like I'm in a movie, where I can interact at will, but watching the movie again, waiting for something to happen.  Or perhaps it more fair to say that I feel like my participation has been limited.

David Gaider wrote...

Hmm. I will say that "I like the old conversation system, having long talks with the character let me get an insight into their personality and made me feel really close to them, etc etc." is very understandable. Who doesn't like having long talks with characters you like? It is, however, a lot of writing that is inefficient and, yes, expensive. No, you as fans don't have to worry about how expensive it is. I, however, do, and I do have to think about the sort of behavior a conversation system encourages in players -- even if some players (especially the really hardcore ones) enjoyed the end results despite its flaws (and every system has some).

There's food for thought, here. I'll take it into account when I decide how to proceed in the future, so thank you for those who offered their insight. I do, of course, have to add a grain of salt that this is feedback from the bunch that are *most* likely to be biased in favor of the Origins system by virtue of their presence here... but that's not a bad thing at all. Just realize it's one part of what we need to take into account.

So thank you.

No, thank you! It's nice to feel like we're being heard. I'll just leave it by saying that MoSa09 summed everything up vey well in his/her post between yours and mine. And that, because this is a post in favor of the new system, there's no need to assume natural bias toward the Origin's system. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Modifié par errant_knight, 18 mars 2010 - 04:17 .

[Liso66]

David Gaider wrote...

Hmm. I will say that "I like the old conversation system, having long talks with the character let me get an insight into their personality and made me feel really close to them, etc etc." is very understandable. Who doesn't like having long talks with characters you like? It is, however, a lot of writing that is inefficient and, yes, expensive. No, you as fans don't have to worry about how expensive it is. I, however, do, and I do have to think about the sort of behavior a conversation system encourages in players -- even if some players (especially the really hardcore ones) enjoyed the end results despite its flaws (and every system has some).

There's food for thought, here. I'll take it into account when I decide how to proceed in the future, so thank you for those who offered their insight. I do, of course, have to add a grain of salt that this is feedback from the bunch that are *most* likely to be biased in favor of the Origins system by virtue of their presence here... but that's not a bad thing at all. Just realize it's one part of what we need to take into account.

So thank you.

David

With all due respect. Considering how much a game cost now days,. and not to mention the highest priced expansion for 15ish hours of game play I've ever paid for. We as the player completely understand the cost of creating these games. We feel it when our bank accounts or CC's have been charged.

Having said that. If you cheapen the experience, how can you justify the higher cost of the games? the escalation of game prices have jumped epically this past year. An average $10.00 increase for an expansion and less hours to play?

"famous DA:O game quote" At Any Rate.....   We do comprehend the expense, the time spent, overhead cost etc. But downgrading our game all the while charging us more...  ?

Modifié par Liso66, 18 mars 2010 - 03:58 .

[allix22]

I agree with every single thing MoSa09 said !

[MoSa09]

allix22 wrote...

I agree with every single thing MoSa09 said !

I'm amazed someone actually took the time to read this, i thought i wrote this for myself.

Kudos, really