635 réponses à ce sujet

[Zanderat]

Default137 wrote...

abadomen wrote...

Why couldn't you ignore people in the camp? I rarely talked to the characters I disliked...only talked to those I liked.

It was a choice..added to the roleplaying aspect...I haven't played Awakening yet...but that sounds like something I may dislike.

From what I'm hearing sounds more like Mass Effect 2...

Well, the way its set up now is like this.

Basically, before you had to go to them in the camp, and go through the correct dialogue options to learn about "x", then you had to tell them how you feel about "x" and then after that, they get a boost, the problem is, after awhile you just gather so much "x" you have to talk to, and often its stuff that has NO connection to the game whatsoever, and is only mildly touching on things.

In Awakening, when you walk around with lets say Anders, he'll notice things, and suddenly say something about them, and you can turn to him and ask him how he feels about these things, its basically the same principle, but it actually makes the world feel more, well, real, hearing about it from another person while at a place like that, and seeing how they view such things, you still get the conversations, they are just split up a bit more, and allow a deeper understanding really.

A minor first example, I left my keep with Anders, and he noticed the statue to Andraste in my courtyard, and said a little bit about how he feels about Andraste, and the Chantry, and I was able to talk to him about it, and learn much more about the Chantry then I ever did from Morrigan and Wynne, however at the same time it was really fun, it didn't feel like he was reading it out of a book, I could feel how he felt about the Chantry, and it was just so much more interesting to see things from that angle.

Yes.  But can't you initiate the dialogue, as well?

[Zanderat]

LenaMarie wrote...

I think some people should put it in perspective. Sure you can chat with your friends when your at the mall or something, but comfortable surroundings like someones house or hangout is more realistic way to get to know someone on a deeper level. You wouldn't 'believe' someone telling you all about their life in the middle of a crowded mall or in Reference to the game a Crowded Marketplace.

It'd be much more believable to have those deep chats with someone in a more quiet and relaxed setting. Thats mostly why I believe perhaps theres a place for both styles. Casual Conversations out in the world, but deeper more meaningful conversations back at your Base. That seems more immersive and realistic to me.

Yes.

[Zanderat]

David Gaider wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
Yeah I get that, I'm not expecting the volume of character development or dialogue that we had in DAO but from everything I've read from Mr. Gaider, it seems like they wanted to tweak the dialogue system in this fashion expansion or not- feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Gaider

That is indeed so.

For those that are suggesting a "best of both worlds" that would include both the directed dialogues outside of camp as well as being able to click on followers and ask a bunch of questions -- you're missing the point. That would, once again, encourage the player to keep returning to the follower to check to see if they have any new dialogue options available.

Feel free to offer suggestions if you have them, but keep in mind what I'm trying to avoid. Just because someone may have liked the system despite its flaws doesn't mean it didn't have them, or that it couldn't be improved on -- and that goes for the new system as well as the old.

Sigh.  More dumbing down, I see......

[GardenSnake]

David Gaider wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
Yeah I get that, I'm not expecting the volume of character development or dialogue that we had in DAO but from everything I've read from Mr. Gaider, it seems like they wanted to tweak the dialogue system in this fashion expansion or not- feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Gaider

That is indeed so.

For those that are suggesting a "best of both worlds" that would include both the directed dialogues outside of camp as well as being able to click on followers and ask a bunch of questions -- you're missing the point. That would, once again, encourage the player to keep returning to the follower to check to see if they have any new dialogue options available.

Feel free to offer suggestions if you have them, but keep in mind what I'm trying to avoid. Just because someone may have liked the system despite its flaws doesn't mean it didn't have them, or that it couldn't be improved on -- and that goes for the new system as well as the old.

First things first, Mr. Gaider, I love you.  Everything you touch turns to gaming gold and I'm pretty much only a gamer because of Bioware and Bungie. Plus you and the boys in Edmonton make me proud to be Canadian. But enough with the sucking up. In my opinion, the new system was a big step backwards. I found that I didn't have the opportunity to gain the approval of my party members too often and I didn't end up caring about them too much. The convo system in ME2 was similar and like in Awakening, I didn't care for the party as much as I did in Origins. The whole camp arguement is pointless to me because that's what puts the RP in RPG. Learning about the characters' pasts is one of the little things in game that makes it more immersive. And looking for triggers in the environment is more tedious than asking a party member questions will ever be. But maybe that's just me. The new system makes me feel as if you guys are trying to make the game more accesible to a wider audience but at the same time are taking away what makes RPGs so immersive and interesting. I'm begging you to keep the same system from DA:O for DA2 however some elements from Awakening could be included. For example, the system would be pretty much the same but if you happened to walk by a landmark or an object of interest, that party member would automatically launch a convo with you. Pretend that you happened to stumble upon some of the flowers Leliana liked (Andraste's Grace was it?). If she was with you at the time a convo would automatically start where a possible option would be to pick the flowers for her like a gift. This way you'd gain approval for giving her something and you'd also learn about her past a bit.
By the way, I think it's really cool how you actually care about what it is we have to say and take the time to comment on these threads to see what the community is thinking. You're the best regardless of what happens dude, I mean that.

Modifié par GardenSnake, 01 avril 2010 - 03:46 .

[Artisian]

Can you delete this please? double post by mistake.

Modifié par Artisian, 01 avril 2010 - 05:12 .

[Artisian]

David Gaider wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
Yeah I get that, I'm not expecting the volume of character development or dialogue that we had in DAO but from everything I've read from Mr. Gaider, it seems like they wanted to tweak the dialogue system in this fashion expansion or not- feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Gaider

That is indeed so.

For those that are suggesting a "best of both worlds" that would include both the directed dialogues outside of camp as well as being able to click on followers and ask a bunch of questions -- you're missing the point. That would, once again, encourage the player to keep returning to the follower to check to see if they have any new dialogue options available.

Feel free to offer suggestions if you have them, but keep in mind what I'm trying to avoid. Just because someone may have liked the system despite its flaws doesn't mean it didn't have them, or that it couldn't be improved on -- and that goes for the new system as well as the old.

Look.. you have to stop trying to appeal to everyone, ESPECIALLY the
casuals. Why? Because the casuals will play the game once and move on,
us hardcore gamers will continue to reply it. The system you had before
was great, maybe it needed a bit of tweaking but this is just too much.

Its nowhere near 35-40 minutes if you skip all the dialog, even for every character. It's more like 5 minutes.  Its a little bit of an inconvenience, but thats it... an inconvenience, its not so gamebreaking that you have to freaking change the system. 

Keep the origins system, but just tweak it.

Heres an idea. When a companion has new dialog options for whatever reason (approval passes a certain point
for example) have them say outloud (like the group banter) "I have something to discuss next time were in camp.." when they have new things to talk about, Just to let you know they have new dialog. Such as when banter pops over their head. That way, you don't have to keep returning to check and whatnot.

Modifié par Artisian, 01 avril 2010 - 05:12 .

[Nillaith]

I also support the combination of both systems that's been proposed by many. The 'points of interest' system implemented in Awakening would be a great, additional opportunity to get to know those characters you're taking with you the most better, but used as the main conversation system I find it lacking. If I'm curious and want to know more about them, I can't just go and ask as I did -and loved doing- back in DA:O, and it breaks the immersion.

That's probably the main reason -aside from the shorter duration compared to Origins, but that's implicit-  why in DA:A I found it way more difficult to get attached to most NPCs. The only ones I really liked were Justice and Nathaniel (in the latter case, maybe due to the fact that on that game I was a Cousland, and the past between the two families grants him some additional depth...I'll have to start another Awakenings game using a character with a different origin story to check).

RP-wise, I think that it totally makes sense to be able to start conversations with any of the characters at the camp at will and then befriend them, dislike them, romance them...whatever. Okay, it also does seem logical that you develop a more meaningful relationship with characters you adventure with the most, but that shouldn't mean you don't care about the rest. In fact, thinking about it, most of the time span the story takes place in would be spent travelling from place to place -although we have no control over that-, and the whole party are travelling together there whereas, in comparison, the actual adventuring time when you're only taking a few of them with you would be much shorter (the Deep Roads probably being an exception). So that is no excuse, in my opinion.

In short, the ideal option for me would be to keep the camp/vigil conversations, and then add some hotspots around the world, probably assigning the hotspot-triggered conversations a higher weight than the camp ones. Oh, and probably limiting the influence of gifts a bit (or at least make NPCs able to detect when you're trying to smother them with gifts and then disapprove in return ).

As for checking if they have something new to say, perhaps some remark or visual cue might do. To tell the truth, I didn't find it particularly annoying, save for the character I had romanced: it felt a bit empty that after I'd hit an approval of 100@Love he didn't basically have anything else to tell me, but that's a completely different issue.

Oh, and now that people are posting some interesting suggestions, the ability to interrupt banter between two characters mentioned by tmp7704 also sounds great

Edit: misspelling 

Modifié par Nillaith, 01 avril 2010 - 05:36 .

[Hulk Hsieh]

The new system only works when there are less region and companions.



Imagine that after finishing Circle with Wynne, Sten, and Lilianna, I'll have to bring Alistar, Orghen, Shale, Morrigan, and Zav to the empty Ciricle again to find their dialogs. And apply that also to the other 10+ areas in DA:O.



Imagine the disaster.

[Lost-brain]

Hulk Hsieh wrote...

The new system only works when there are less region and companions.

Imagine that after finishing Circle with Wynne, Sten, and Lilianna, I'll have to bring Alistar, Orghen, Shale, Morrigan, and Zav to the empty Ciricle again to find their dialogs. And apply that also to the other 10+ areas in DA:O.

Imagine the disaster.

Exactly what I thought...

[Celyanae]

I am on the 'I'd like to see a mix of both worlds' front

I really enjoy the camp conversations in DA:O. After a while of killing/questing it is a nice and valued break of pace even after playing through the game 6 or 8 times.

The new system takes those breaks away and with it the getting to know your companions backstories.
Going back to the keep, most of the time all I get to hear from the companions is along the line: "come on, no relaxing, let's move on!" which makes me feel rushed.

On the other hand I did like entering an area and a companion commenting on it or another asking about elves in the Wending Wood.
The new system would also eliminate the 'trying to click on loot but getting a personal conversation instead'.

Some side quests could trigger companion remarks. Like some quests, where you get (dis)approval from certain companions, but it is never explained why exactly.


About the camp conversations and no new dialogue issue.
I would hate to see a "!" above a companion when they have something new to say. Why not simply(?) change the animation of those companions who have new conversations?
I never understood why everyone in camp was standing around anyway.

For example:
If a companion has nothing new to say they could sit and read, have a pint of beer, polish/sharpening their weapons etc...
If a new conversation is available have them pace a a few steps back and forth or shoot arrows/lightning bolts/swing their weapons at a practice target...
Which could also serve as a conversation opener "You seem nervous" - "Is there something on your mind" etc...

As said before a hybrid of both systems seems to give the most immersion.

On a side note: the main reason I am a Bioware games fan and recommend them whenever I get the chance is the interaction with the NPCs, which, in my opinion, increases the quality of the games immensely.

*edit* took out spoiler 

Modifié par Celyanae, 01 avril 2010 - 10:30 .

[meririm]

I was very disappointed with awakening's dialogue system, as it quickly became a chore to "get to know" the characters. I finished the expansion 3 times and haven't managed to really like the characters so far, except Sigrun and Nathaniel who were in my first team. And the main reason why I like Sigrun is her banter with Oghren. I only managed to get her personal quest once during my playthroughs (and don't ask me why I got it the first time). I could only finish Oghren's once, as I couldn't trigger the relevant dialogue while replaying.



It was horribly frustrating. I kept telling myself "well, maybe it's because their approval is too low, I'll just raise it... Ah, oops. No more gifts. Let's wander around just in case there is some statue somewhere that will make them talk to me."



The origins system had issues (accidental clicks on characters were a bit annoying), and was probably extremely costly in terms of voice acting/writing time/etc, but the amount and brilliance of the dialogue is what made me buy the game in the first place (I borrowed it for my first playthrough, then jumped on the deluxe edition), and RTO, and the books, and awakening. I hadn't bought a game in years, but DAO was so impressive I just *had* to. I felt the team deserved all the money I could give so they could make more games as good.



I loved the discussions. I actually reloaded a previous save very often just to take different branches of the same discussion.



I'd love a mixed system like many suggested previously, as it would get rid of the accidental clics while trying to loot etc.

Tweaking the camp dialogue system would be nice too, by clearing the "empty" chat options (if I hear "such as they are" one more time when there is nothing new to learn, I will kill Alistair) and notifying of new options as suggested too.

[HoonDing]

I would love if every party member would shout "Less talk, more fight!!" à la Minsc whenever clicking on them. Warcraft's classic "Stop poking meeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!" would be even better.

[BLunted]

I much preferred the old system as it gave you a feel for the members of your party, fleshed out the backstory a bit. Kinda felt like I was playing a role in a game.



In awakenings, i didn't care about any of my party members. They were so one dimensional. I just doled out the gifts in order to get approval bonuses to their attributes, but could care less about what any of them were talking about.



Seeing a Bioware staffer on the first page saying that they think this a good direction to go in gives me pause.



I am not even sure if the new system can be referred to a "conversation" as there really was not much conversation. One of your party members would indicate they wanted something and then it was was up to you to get it to them...doesn't sound like much of a conversation to me.

[AmstradHero]

Firstly, my apologies for making such a huge post, but I have been considering this very problem for the mod I'm working on at the moment.

The Current Problem:
Although I must admit I'm not a huge fan of the system from Awakenings, I did work out the rationalisation behind it, as was so eloquently put by David Gaider.  I commend him and everyone else involved for trying to work out a solution.

The issue is having to return to your camp (or in ME2, the Normandy) and "do the rounds" of going and attempting to talk to everyone to see if they have any new dialogue options available to you.  It becomes a formula:
1) Do quest
2) Go to camp
3) Give out presents to make party members happy
4) Talk to party members and explored unlocked dialogue if available.

Yes, I like the camp system, in that I love being able to have long, relaxed and meaningful conversations with my party members.  However, that doesn't mean I don't see a flaw with the mechanics of it.

Preference and Comparison:
I would prefer some basic level of interaction in camp, as just getting one liners from them makes them feel a little too shallow.  I do believe that certain things should happen in camp, and perhaps at that point the dialogues should either be:
a) Initiating by the relevant character upon returning to camp (as was done in Awakening)
While on the road, have the character say something along the lines of "we should talk about this when we have a moment" (as has already been suggested in this thread) - indicating the player should talk to them in camp.

Romances, for example, should not occur entirely on the road, although I am fan of having it such that you can't just leave someone at camp all the time and still have them as your love interest. It just smacks of: "Oh, I love you, but stay here and look after the others while I save the world.  I don't think you're good enough to come with me..."  Of course, I might be biased because I always take my love interest with me on the road because "dammit, they're coming with me!"

The problem is one of catering to design goals which are seemingly at odds - developing a relationship in a realistic manner, and allowing players to please everyone.  I hate not being able to make everyone happy, but I also realise that in some cases, that was never going to happen.  e.g. KotOR - my Light Side Jedi was never going to be able to make HK-47 like him extensively, or my BG2 paladin was never going to get along with  Korgan.  In the former case, there was no repecussion, and in the latter case, I didn't care, because I was never going to take him with me anyway.

If the new system is continued, seeing as we can only take 3 other characters with us, we either have to make a choice to rotate those characters regularly if we want to develop friendships with all of our team, which potentially comes at the expense of developing truly meaningful relationships with any of them.


Hypothetically using the Awakening system within Origins:
My human noble is adventuring with Alistair, Morrigan and Leliana, and I pick up Sten.  Sten strikes me as a little too crazy and dour when compared to Alistair's glib comments, Morrigan's biting wit, or Leliana's... okay, I'm already thinking she going to be my love interest for the game.  So I'm going to leave him at camp. I'm a warrior, so logically I could only trade him for Alistair, and I'm not going to give up my only Gray Warden buddy.

Later on, I pick up Wynne.  I've developed a bit of a friendly relationship with Morrigan, and she perhaps even likes me a little by this point, and I admit she's grown on me.  It's fun to see Alistair squirm occasionally; he's my best mate, but that doesn't mean I can't have a laugh at his expense.  But Wynne is noble and I need her help anyway, so she's coming with my instead of Morrigan.  So long, girl... I guess I won't be seeing you again.

My new problem:
From this point on, I can't find a reason to adopt any of the new party members.  I can't drop Leliana because she's my love interest (not to mention my rogue), I can't drop Wynne because I need her to heal the party, which  leaves only Alistair to rotate And I can't really do that either because I need the help of the only other Warden in Ferelden, so for my roleplaying, he has to come with me on any big mission.

This means Zevran, Oghren, Sten, and Shale are all going to sit at camp for almost the entire game and I'm never going to get to know them at all.

I don't dislike any of them as characters (well, maybe Oghren, but that's only because he forgot that he liked me when he re-appeared in Awakenings.  "Come on, you do remember me. We were good buddies!") but I'm not going to get to know them because I can't take them out and click on a flying boat (to utilise probably the worst example in Awakenings) to have a discussion with them.


What is the answer?
Combined system
As David already pointed out, this doesn't avoid the "camp runaround", which is exactly what he's trying to avoid. However, there are possible mitigations to reduce this effect, as pointed out above. But it doesn't solve the  problem if you never take them out with you.

Forced companions for particular quests
A lot of people hate having particular companions forced upon them, even though it was done in DA:O and ME2. It would allow you to get a better insight into the characters - the problem is would the character really open up to you if they've just been in camp the whole time?

Preferred companions for particular quests
Instead of forcing particular party members, perhaps indicate certain party members might be more suited to certain tasks.  Say, Mass Effect, where Liara seems an obvious choice when you're going to meet her mother. Other party members will even suggest you take her along.  The result of doing so? Effectively nothing, which was definitely a lost opportunity.  If certain quests (although I'd suggest they not be part of the main plot) might cause you to gain a greater insight into particular party members without being directly related to them, this would still give you choice - and if you don't care about that character, you don't bother.  To clarify, I'm not taling ME2 loyalty quests, or in DA:O Alistair & Goldanna, Leliana and Majorlaine.  Instead, perhaps when dealing with Antivans, a part member might suggest to bring Zevran along, which would give additional options and you would get to know him better.

"Whole party events"
Have a number of events that occur at certain times within the plot that involve everyone, regardless of whether
they're in your "active" party or not.  Camp/Keep events that will cause conversations with certain characters that you otherwise don't talk to much.  This could be hard to do extensively without it feeling forced, but at least something to inspire the player to give unused characters a chance could be useful. 

No punishment
In some cases the player is "punished" by an NPC leaving if their disposition is not high enough. In some cases, this may even force the player to kill the NPC.  Now, if the player has specifically annoyed the NPC and made them upset, then this is understandable.  But having this punishment inflicted simply because the player has not made the NPC like them "enough"seems unduly harsh, especially if you can't gain much disposition because you're not
taking them with you.  That said, I wholeheartedly support "rewards" for those who get the disposition of NPCs to a high level.

Presents
Presents are potentially a good way to please party members, but again we've a realism vs mechanics issue.  You can't simply make someone happy by giving them nice gifts. You should have to know the character enough to know they want that gift - e.g. Andraste's Grace for Leliana.  Why would you give one to her if she hadn't already told you about them?

An increased party size
I hate myself for saying this, but even one more slot would give at least a spot to rotate.  However, I suppose it could be argued that there's already one slot for rotation anyway: 4 members = 1 of each class + 1 spare.

Facilitated party rotation
Reduce the number of lengthy quest chains with unchangeable parties.  Most of the major quest chains in Origins are very long, and in some, there's no option to be able to change your party make-up once you start. Even when you can, it typically requires significant backtracking in order to do so.  I'm not going to choose to go out with my "B-Team" if I could end up "stuck with them" for a huge period of the game and be forced to struggle through every battle.

Timed/generic events
Why do all interactions have to be "player" initiated?  A conversation can occur when the player finds an appropriate object/location/individual and initiates the dialogue with the companion.  Why can't the NPC start a dialogue based on a generic event?  e.g. After a battle: "You know these darkspawn/maleficar/dragons/etc/etc, Warden. They've got me thinking..." or "Are you alright, Warden/Commander/my love/whatever ?"  Or after a certain period of time: "You seem worried..." or "I've been meaning to ask you something..." etc, etc.


Conclusions:
There is no "one size fits all" solution to this problem, and to be honest I don't think there should be.  It needs to be a balance of multiple options to create appropriate game mechanics and atmosphere in order to get an "optimal" interaction method. The game is trying to mimic real relationships, which can't be broken down into specific rules.

That said, I hope I've offered some useful suggestions to improve the new conversation system.  Even if I was slightly disappointed with its implementation in Awakenings, I definitely appreciate the intent behind it.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 01 avril 2010 - 11:38 .

[AutumnGhost]

Yes, I prefer this much more than binge conversing with the companions in the original. It feels more natural than feeling like you suddenly have to play catchup with someone you haven't spoken to after you've gone through a few plot events. It's not perfect, but it is a step in the right direction.

[v.lokai]

Darkannex wrote...

I wish Oggie's banter had grown up from last game-and had not gotten even more base. If I hear one more fart joke-seriously...

I completely agree here with Ohgren. In the fist game he had some depth and was sort of tolerable during his crude moments. He seems to have been turned into a total cartoon fratboy in DA:A and to be honest I cannot stand him in this game. And he was one of my favorites from the first. I leave him at keep at the first opportunity now. Combine that with his approval being a pain to raise due to not carrying over and diminishing gift values set at game start and he is pretty annoying character. I fail to see how he could have devolved into such an uninspiring character for Awakenings.

Having Ohgren in party is like watching those cheap parody movies non stop. Shallow and unfullfilling. Funny I think my view of Ohgren is permanently unfavorable so much that when I replay Origins I will dislike him there. Then again maybe this is where the writers wanted to go to invoke emotions in the player. If so job well done I hate this character.

[David Gaider]

AmstradHero wrote...
That said, I hope I've offered some useful suggestions to improve the new conversation system.  Even if I was slightly disappointed with its implementation in Awakenings, I definitely appreciate the intent behind it.

Very interesting thoughts. Some of the solutions you suggest have technical barriers that would prevent them, while others might be problematic due to more practical limitations (word budget, for instance -- yes, there is a budget for that) but on the whole very well spoken.

One point I'll add:

Don't forget that "making the rounds at camp" is not the only issue. Another is what I call the "low impact" dialogue-- the expository dialogue required when you have a list of questions to ask an NPC about themselves, which takes a lot of writing and offers very little in return (though it would be unfair to say it offers nothing, it is nonetheless very expensive to attain what is offered). The fact that such a list must be filled out with even more questions once depleted, combined with a lack of some kind of consistent indicator when such new content is available, compounds the "rounds at camp" issue.

Is what we tried in Awakening an effective answer to this? In some ways yes and in some ways no. It doesn't offer the clearest picture primarily because the amount of content to impart in an expansion of this size is not all that great, compared to the expectations of some, but I would say my impression taken from those who didn't like how it was presented was a feeling that they lacked agency. Why they feel that way and why they say they feel that way don't always seem to jibe, in my view, but I guess that comes with the territory.

Even so, there are some ways this could be ameliorated (or I think so, anyhow) and some of the things you suggest certainly have merit. Thanks for offering your thoughts.

Modifié par David Gaider, 02 avril 2010 - 03:20 .

[AmstradHero]

Thanks David. I realise some of the suggestions aren't particularly easy to implement, either technically or from a budget perspective. Having done a voiced mod, I certainly understand the concept of a word budget! "Low-impact" dialogue certainly is a problem: exposition is wordy by necessity, and it's always easier to "show" rather than "tell". Having an immediate object or situation to refer to definitely gives better impact per word.  For what it's worth, I thought the companions in Awakenings demonstrated that beautifully, as they were interesting characters despite having a lot less dialogue than those in Origins. (As explained eloquently before with the Anders example)

I agree that the method in Awakening is a step in the right direction, by having conversations directly related to events and surroundings rather than a "tell me your life story around the campfire" situation.  It is easy for people to say they don't like something and there's always resistance to change, but it's not always easy to pick out the reasons why they dislike it. When I figure out how to get players to articulate that (or even work out how to do it reliably myself!) I'll let you know.

[Commander of the Grey]

Thanks for the post, Mr. Gaider. I'll admit that I didn't really understand what you meant before but I think I'm getting the gist of it now. ....I think. Lol. I can understand wanting to take out the bits of dialogue that don't offer much. An example off the top of my head would be Alistair joking about being raised by dogs. Even though I laugh everytime I hear it and it let me see into his personality to a degree, it wasn't neccessarily plot driving. Some people might argue that Leliana talking about the birds in that woman's hair help them discover her more as a character or brought them closer to her. While a cute story, I always skip that. There's not near as much dialogue with Sten but he got to the point and I still learned a great deal about him. He's my second fav character. I'm with you and most people here; middle ground would be fine. Will I miss all the needless teasing and jokes? Well sure but I'll bet you'll throw humor in in other ways. If it gets cut down to such a degree, that is.



I'm awed that people from the team actually come here and ask questions and listen to the fans. I think that's fabulous and as a new fan, I say thank you. It's not something you have to do, but you do it all the same.

[Mlai00]

But then you're still working under the impression that the 'word budget' should be kept low, because it's "not so important as to warrant a higher percentage of the budget." You are thinking "this is an adventure-RPG, more budget must be doled out to the gaming aspects, less on the dialogue... that's what we must do for DAO2. DAO1 didn't use the word budget effectively, and used too much of the money pie."

Correct me if I'm wrong on that impression.

I have to re-iterate that DAO doesn't do anything more effectively than other big games. Except the character interactions and dialogue trees in general. Are the graphics and models better than other big games? Are there 1000's of weapons/armor/crafting for players to sandbox with? Is there some remarkable advance in the engine, the physics, etc?

Think about if what makes DAO special warrants keeping that slice of money pie the same size. Sure, use it more effectively. But don't think you can cut it down to 70% the size allocated to DAO1 or something.

I recommend Bioware/EA use game registration info to see how large a
percentage of DAO gamers are female.  I know that's a broad
generalization, but it shouldn't be hard to tally?
Hey, if females
are like under 10% or something, sure go ahead make DAO2 have Awakening
amount of dialogue.

@ Alistairschica:

That is exactly what would make DAO2 fail for a large subset of the DAO1 fanbase.

Modifié par Mlai00, 02 avril 2010 - 04:28 .

[David Gaider]

Mlai00 wrote...
But then you're still working under the impression that the 'word budget' should be kept low, because it's "not so important as to warrant a higher percentage of the budget." You are thinking "this is an adventure-RPG, more budget must be doled out to the gaming aspects, less on the dialogue... that's what we must do for DAO2. DAO1 didn't use the word budget effectively, and used too much of the money pie."

Correct me if I'm wrong on that impression.

I don't set my own budget. So what I think the word budget should be set at is irrelevant, and there's no need to put words in my mouth -- I work with what I'm given, as best I can, and that's always been the case. Just because a budget would be higher in a non-expansion game, however, does not mean that it should not and can not be used more efficiently.

I recommend Bioware/EA use game registration info to see how large a
percentage of DAO gamers are female.  I know that's a broad
generalization, but it shouldn't be hard to tally?
Hey, if females
are like under 10% or something, sure go ahead make DAO2 have Awakening
amount of dialogue.

Is your assumption that female gamers prefer a larger percentage of dialogue to male gamers? If so, I find that rather erroneous.

Regardless, I'm also not sure how you picture a budget being allocated. It is not "okay 30% goes to gameplay now instead of 20%" or anything like that. If the budget overall for a project is smaller, the budget that goes towards our word count is smaller. The proportion of the headcount on a team between projects is always roughly the same (although the size of the team overall will vary, especially when it comes to a small project like an expansion). If your opinion is that the budget for a project should be larger overall, that's fair enough -- we base it on potential sales, ourselves -- but I assure you that whatever else you're picturing happening is not how it works.

Modifié par David Gaider, 02 avril 2010 - 04:44 .

[David Gaider]

AmstradHero wrote...
I agree that the method in Awakening is a step in the right direction, by having conversations directly related to events and surroundings rather than a "tell me your life story around the campfire" situation.  It is easy for people to say they don't like something and there's always resistance to change, but it's not always easy to pick out the reasons why they dislike it.

Indeed. This is not to say they won't try, and not to suggest that every person is wrong when they do so, but it's not very clear -- we're talking about an emotional response, by and large, so that's not something that anyone can easily gauge even if they claim to. Expectations play a part in it, and that's completely fair, whether that comes from what they were expecting to be able to do or how long they expected the game to be or whatever. In terms of separating what people might mean when they talk about it, I need to make dinstinctions that not everyone even cares to.

That said, at the end of the day whatever direction we end up taking (with regards to dialogue or anything else) is not going to make everyone happy. I know everyone thinks we should (and install a toggle when all else fails) but at the end of the day all we can do is try to figure out how best to implement our vision with the resources we have available. Sitting here with a pad and paper to take down instructions is not the point, but getting intelligent feedback even when it's not all glowing praise certainly is (for me, anyhow).

At any rate, thanks again for the discussion. I'm off.

Modifié par David Gaider, 02 avril 2010 - 04:58 .

[AmstradHero]

Mlai00: I fail to see what gender has to do with anything. I don't see how you could argue "females like dialogue more" even as a gross generalization.

As for word budget, I think you're not seeing the whole picture.  For each line of dialogue you need to consider at least: VO costs, dialogue tree creation (writing and proofreading), continuity, testing, animation, disk space.  Each extra line of dialogue will eat up a not insignificant amount of money in the time taken to do each of those things.

Compare the length of Origins to the length of Awakening and the amount of dialogue for each party member.  If you reduced the amount of dialogue for Origins NPC so that it was on par with Awakening but kept the style the same, you would learn significantly less about each NPC.  However, if you took the Awakening's dialogue style and expanded the amount of dialogue to match that present in Origins, you'd get to know your NPCs extremely well.

I won't presume to speak for David Gaider, but he doesn't appear to be talking about cutting the word budget, only finding ways to use that word budget more efficiently.  I'd equate it to things like getting rid of Leliana's exposition for "Why did you come to Ferelden?" questions in which she responds by giving her life story and family tree.  With the right sort of reworking, it would be possible to cut down that dialogue chain significantly while still imparting the same relevant information about her character.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 02 avril 2010 - 05:26 .

[David Gaider]

AmstradHero wrote...
I won't presume to speak for David Gaider, but he doesn't appear to be talking about cutting the word budget, only finding ways to use that word budget more efficiently.  I'd equate it to things like getting rid of Leliana's exposition for "Why did you come to Ferelden?" questions in which she responds by giving her life story and family tree.  With the right sort of reworking, it would be possible to cut down that dialogue chain significantly while still imparting the same relevant information about her character.

That is exactly what I mean. I think some people interpret that as me suggesting that all the personality parts that we included in such dialogue (like Alistair's "I was raised by dogs" comment) would be removed... whereas the intention is actually to preserve that part while removing the need for the accompanying expository baggage. It does mean losing the ability to interrogate your followers, yes, but I think somewhere between that and feeling like you don't have to go quite so out of your way to "force" such interactions may be what is needed.

(Now I really am going, I promise. )

Modifié par David Gaider, 02 avril 2010 - 05:56 .

[Brockololly]

I think the issue is that whenever people hear about a "word budget" or something people get all in a tizzy and think "OMG! Dragun AgE iz not gunna hav any Dialoguz!" I sure as hell don't make video games for a living so I won't presume that I know the nitty gritty of how the such budgets work on a game as big as Origins.Going off their past efforts (barring some of Awakening), I trust the devs to make a damn good game for DA2... or whatever it is they're making.

I think the writers and Gaider are trying to make the most of what they've got to work with and thats a good thing. Obviously the simple answer as gamers is just MOAR! but thats just not how life works.

That said, IMO I don't feel like the issues with Awakening's dialogue system were simply a matter of the game being too short to be able to flesh out the new characters. Sure thats part of it, but even if it was length of Origins I would have had big problems with the dialogue system. To me, it boils down to the lack of agency the player has along with having to go on dialogue scavenger hunts. I liked in Origins being able to go around and ask questions to the companions to start a conversation, not clicking on an inanimate object. I don't mind if the companions start conversations on their own but in Awakening it just felt to me that whenever you clicked on an object to "start" a conversation, the characters weren't conversing with the Warden but more like giving a monologue to themselves about said tree or statue and the Warden would be lucky to interject a couple times. Too often they didn't feel like conversations between 2 people but rather one person just talking at the PC.

And I don't mind having conversations center around objects as a means to have more dynamic conversations, but I think back to Origins and some of the main plot gifts. What I liked about those was that you got the seemingly expository backstory of say Morrigan's mirror and you learned about her childhood, all well and good. But then out adventuring you see the mirror at the store and go "Hey! I remember Morrigan's story about this mirror!" Then you can give Morrigan the mirror and get her reaction. I know its different than the trees and statues from Awakening, but you still had the exposition but had a meaningful payoff in this case, rather than Sigrun waxing poetic about random tree #35 or Velanna giving us a botany lesson on city tree #89.

Modifié par Brockololly, 02 avril 2010 - 05:55 .