@ Regarding gender and dialogue quantity:
Sure, laugh it off. "Oh, what a dated misconception, ha ha har. This is 2010, we all know girls and boys all like the same things in games and books and movies har har!" I feel no need to argue this point any further; my livelihood doesn't depend on tapping fresh consumer demographics. Think what you will.
@ "Agency":
What exactly does this word mean, in this context?
New Conversation System is a HUGE step in the right direction.
Débuté par
Default137
, mars 17 2010 01:39
Retour en haut
#552
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 06:29
AmstradHero
-
- Members
- 1 239 messages
@Mlai00
I'll reiterate: what evidence do you have that suggests females like more dialogue? I don't know many female gamers, but those I do know aren't particularly attracted to RPGs because of the large amount of dialogue. While the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", I've not seen any research touting "female gamers would play RPGs if only they had lots of dialogue and less hack and slash". No one is "laughing off" anything, just raising the point that you seem to be making an assumption without any proof.
I'll reiterate: what evidence do you have that suggests females like more dialogue? I don't know many female gamers, but those I do know aren't particularly attracted to RPGs because of the large amount of dialogue. While the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", I've not seen any research touting "female gamers would play RPGs if only they had lots of dialogue and less hack and slash". No one is "laughing off" anything, just raising the point that you seem to be making an assumption without any proof.
#553
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 07:06
TheComfyCat
-
- Members
- 860 messages
Mlai00 wrote...
@ "Agency":
What exactly does this word mean, in this context?
The word is being used in the philosophical sense, as in the ability to make choices that effect your environment. So the dialogue system in Awakening making people feel a lack of agency means, generally, that they feel less in control of it than they did in Origins (it felt more limited and controlled compared to their Origins experience).
Modifié par senorfuzzylips, 02 avril 2010 - 07:14 .
#554
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 09:07
Cat Lance
-
- Members
- 1 119 messages
This thread and dialogue has made me much more interested in playing through Awakenings. Even if it's just to give this new dialogue system a run! 
argued isn't so much that "in general" girls are more interested in
dialogue than males, but that, once you are talking about people who
enjoy these sorts of games, they enjoy lots of dialogue, no matter to
their gender.
I think the reason the point wasMlai00 wrote...
@ Regarding gender and dialogue quantity:
Sure,
laugh it off. "Oh, what a dated misconception, ha ha har. This is
2010, we all know girls and boys all like the same things in games and
books and movies har har!" I feel no need to argue this point any
further; my livelihood doesn't depend on tapping fresh consumer
demographics. Think what you will.
argued isn't so much that "in general" girls are more interested in
dialogue than males, but that, once you are talking about people who
enjoy these sorts of games, they enjoy lots of dialogue, no matter to
their gender.
Modifié par Cat Lance, 02 avril 2010 - 09:10 .
#555
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 09:57
Sable Phoenix
-
- Members
- 1 564 messages
David Gaider wrote...
My personal thought on that is, instead of having questions that you can ask a follower, having conversations you can initiate with them in camp in the same fashion that you do out in the world. So maybe there's a keg in camp and you see that clicking on it means "have a drink with Oghren" or similar... maybe even new items appear, such as something taken from a quest and you can ask someone about it without needing to have them in your active party per se.LenaMarie wrote...
I think a mix of the new and old system would be better. Yes, its good to be able to talk with them out in the world to get their views on things. But Its also nice from a immersion stand point to get to know them even better when your back in camp.
Somthing to consider in the way of adding more "personal" conversations, perhaps, though that may be a step down a slippery slope. Hard to say.
This thread is massive so I haven't read all of it but I just want to add that while I like being abe to initiate conversations out in the world that have relevance to things you come across, I miss the conversations in camp. The characters have always been BioWare's main strength, and doubly so for Dragon Age: Origins, where the deepest and most lasting appeal of the game comes entirely from the characters as opposed to the story. In Awakening, the characters feel a bit disconnected compared to your companions from Origins, since you can't sit down in the Keep and have a chat with them, nor can you initiate a conversation with them on your own while out and walking around. I miss that.
In Awakening it feels like every time YOU want to talk to someone, they just brush you off... they'll only talk with you when THEY want. Getting to know your traveling companions has gone from being an almost totally proactive activity (which may have the danger of making the characters seem a bit too much like a Tickle-Me Elmo doll) to being an almost totally reactive thing (which has notably greater disadvantages related to the player feeling as if they lack influence with their friends, or the sense of an immersion-threatening rule structure surrounding any personal interactions). A pleasant mix of the two systems would make the characters feel the most alive, I think.
I disagree that you should only be able to get to know characters from the time you spend traveling with them. Getting to know someone well rarely happens while doing other activities... it happens when you can sit down and have an in depth discussion. You'll get someone's opinions and beliefs from their interaction with the world around them but you don't typically stop and ask them WHY they feel that way until later when you can converse without other distractions.
So yes, Awakening's conversation system is good in and of itself... but the elimination of the Origins way of doing things makes it a net loss to the gameplay. If they had simply been added together, it would have been a net gain.
Modifié par Sable Phoenix, 02 avril 2010 - 05:33 .
#556
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 11:50
JakePT
-
- Members
- 477 messages
I haven't gone through this whole thread, since it's incredible large, but I think I got the gist of it and wanted to add my two cents, apologies if any of my suggestions have been mentioned.
I'll just say first up that I don't feel like I can comment on Awakening's vs Origins' dialog systems, since I think Awakening had too little dialog compared to Origins to really compare them properly, plus the lack of Romance (and Friendship? The only character I got to +100 was Justice who stayed Warm, not sure if this is the same for other characters though) etc.
What I want, don't want, like and dislike in a conversation system for DA2 or whatever's next:
Initiating combat while out in a dungeon or out of camp (or similar places) is unnecessary and unrealistic.
It doesn't make sense that, all of a sudden, you stop in the middle of a dungeon to talk about a party member's childhood.
This makes sense back in camp, or at some other place the party is resting, not while you're out on a quest.
Perhaps having inns or temporary camping spots you can stay at where the party will disperse and you can go and chat to them, instead of a singular camp you always return to, is a potential solution.
Don't let me start a conversation if the character has nothing new to say
Since in Dragon Age (and Mass Effect 2, but not 1*) it's very difficult to tell when a character has something new to say, I ended up wasting a lot of time going up, initiating conversations only to see that there where no new dialog options and I had to wait for them to say "Yes?", me to say "Nothing" and them to say "Ok". Sure it's probably not even a full second if I skip, but it's not so much about the wasted time, as it is about the way it interrupts the flow of the game.
It also negatively affects the role playing, because even though it doesn't affect the way other characters feel about you, you feel like your character looks kind of stupid constantly going up saying "Hello. Nothing. Goodbye" to the other characters.
One simple solution, especially since the DA camp was always nighttime, would be to have the character sleeping. That way it makes more sense from a role playing perspective to go up to a character who isn't asleep and asking them what's keeping them up. This way you have a story and gameplay indicator for when a character has something new to say.
*I have to express how incredibly annoying it was in ME1 that after a certain point any character you weren't in a romance with particularly Garrus, Miranda, Grunt (in my experience) would suddenly either have nothing to talk about, become incredibly busy, or start repeating themselves. In Mass Effect 1 the characters always had something new to say after a main mission, and this would last until the end of the game. Unless you left all your side missions until just before Ilos you'd never feel like the game had 'run out' of dialog for the characters.
Characters need to respond to their surroundings and events
This one wasn't a much of problem in DA, but I think it's important not to forget this. The game needs to know how characters feel about certain issues, and respond to events in the game on their own.
Characters should reference the players choices, express their opinions about them, talk about places you've just been to, or have to go to, talk about important events that have occurred, reference things happening with other characters and not be completely oblivious the the importance of events impacting other characters. This way when a character speaks, it doesn't feel like a canned piece of exposition, but like something the character would actually say in any given situation.
I also think it's important party characters form relationships with each other. If two characters form a bond, something that causes one character to disapprove should cause a character who likes that character to also disapprove.
Also, wouldn't it be interesting if the player's choices could cause a romantic relationship between two other characters to occur, or if they already had a romantic relationship the player character, or even how the character interacts with a fourth character, could influence their relationship. I think it would be a huge deal for video games as a dramatic medium if a game could have have such dynamic relationships between not just two, but three, four, six or, hell, ten, characters.
Unfortunately this would be incredibly difficult because the more the characters respond to the player's actions the more dialog has to be written, and the more reactive the characters get, even more dialog will need to be written that a larger and larger percentage of players will never see. Heavy Rain took a big step in this direction, unfortunately it also meant the game, despite being developed for just as long, or longer than, Mass Effect 2, is considerably shorter.
Party member participation in dialog with other characters needs to be more natural
When a character speaks in a conversation with a villain, NPC, or whatever, other characters need to respond to this better. Particularly in Awakening party member dialog really felt like it exposed the underlying dialog system.
It was just cycling through their dialog, maybe giving the player a couple of things to say, before returning to the conversation subject who would be completely oblivious to anything anyone said.
Once again, the problem with this one is the more reactive characters get, the more work needs to be done for less and less people.
Less exposition
I should learn about characters by how they respond to events, or about how others respond to them, not because I asked them to tell me their life story back at camp.
Obviously you'd need the character to tell you some things about themselves, but these, whether by player or character initiation, should only come at the right time.
Characters should only tell you about their childhood after having forged a relationship through both of your actions during events. You don't build up trust with a character by giving them a snowglobe, you do it through how you treat their opinions on a problem you face, how you face that problem, demonstrating leadership etc. Only after doing that should the characters open up.
Don't waste dialog on expostion
You have a great character, a great voice actor and you've only got a certain about of dialog you can write and record with them. Don't waste a 15 minute conversation on them explaining the politics of their home country or whatever.
When I talk to a character I want to learn about them, and if I want to learn about their culture, it's only because I want to know what made them the way they are.
Obviously many players will be interested in those politics and that culture, and let them ask about it, just don't waste too much time on it. For the really detailed stuff give me another source of info, such as an NPC somewhere of the same race, or a codex entry.
In Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 one of my least favourite characters is Tali, and the reason is because all of her dialog in ME1 is just exposition on the quarians (who have nothing to do with that game's story!) while only most of her dialog in ME2 (outside the loyalty mission, which is fantastically written) is exposition. Yes, you made a fascinating world and fleshed out all the cultures, and I want to know that stuff, just don't waste a party member's dialog on giving that information. A good example is Garrus. He's a turian, but very little of his dialog is about his race or his culture, it's about him, his motivations, his personality. If I want to learn about the turians I can read the codex and piece together the rest by talking to a whole bunch of other characters who's motivations and personality I'm less interested in.
I'm sure there's more I have to say, I just can't think of it now, this'll do for the moment.
I'll just say first up that I don't feel like I can comment on Awakening's vs Origins' dialog systems, since I think Awakening had too little dialog compared to Origins to really compare them properly, plus the lack of Romance (and Friendship? The only character I got to +100 was Justice who stayed Warm, not sure if this is the same for other characters though) etc.
What I want, don't want, like and dislike in a conversation system for DA2 or whatever's next:
Initiating combat while out in a dungeon or out of camp (or similar places) is unnecessary and unrealistic.
It doesn't make sense that, all of a sudden, you stop in the middle of a dungeon to talk about a party member's childhood.
This makes sense back in camp, or at some other place the party is resting, not while you're out on a quest.
Perhaps having inns or temporary camping spots you can stay at where the party will disperse and you can go and chat to them, instead of a singular camp you always return to, is a potential solution.
Don't let me start a conversation if the character has nothing new to say
Since in Dragon Age (and Mass Effect 2, but not 1*) it's very difficult to tell when a character has something new to say, I ended up wasting a lot of time going up, initiating conversations only to see that there where no new dialog options and I had to wait for them to say "Yes?", me to say "Nothing" and them to say "Ok". Sure it's probably not even a full second if I skip, but it's not so much about the wasted time, as it is about the way it interrupts the flow of the game.
It also negatively affects the role playing, because even though it doesn't affect the way other characters feel about you, you feel like your character looks kind of stupid constantly going up saying "Hello. Nothing. Goodbye" to the other characters.
One simple solution, especially since the DA camp was always nighttime, would be to have the character sleeping. That way it makes more sense from a role playing perspective to go up to a character who isn't asleep and asking them what's keeping them up. This way you have a story and gameplay indicator for when a character has something new to say.
*I have to express how incredibly annoying it was in ME1 that after a certain point any character you weren't in a romance with particularly Garrus, Miranda, Grunt (in my experience) would suddenly either have nothing to talk about, become incredibly busy, or start repeating themselves. In Mass Effect 1 the characters always had something new to say after a main mission, and this would last until the end of the game. Unless you left all your side missions until just before Ilos you'd never feel like the game had 'run out' of dialog for the characters.
Characters need to respond to their surroundings and events
This one wasn't a much of problem in DA, but I think it's important not to forget this. The game needs to know how characters feel about certain issues, and respond to events in the game on their own.
Characters should reference the players choices, express their opinions about them, talk about places you've just been to, or have to go to, talk about important events that have occurred, reference things happening with other characters and not be completely oblivious the the importance of events impacting other characters. This way when a character speaks, it doesn't feel like a canned piece of exposition, but like something the character would actually say in any given situation.
I also think it's important party characters form relationships with each other. If two characters form a bond, something that causes one character to disapprove should cause a character who likes that character to also disapprove.
Also, wouldn't it be interesting if the player's choices could cause a romantic relationship between two other characters to occur, or if they already had a romantic relationship the player character, or even how the character interacts with a fourth character, could influence their relationship. I think it would be a huge deal for video games as a dramatic medium if a game could have have such dynamic relationships between not just two, but three, four, six or, hell, ten, characters.
Unfortunately this would be incredibly difficult because the more the characters respond to the player's actions the more dialog has to be written, and the more reactive the characters get, even more dialog will need to be written that a larger and larger percentage of players will never see. Heavy Rain took a big step in this direction, unfortunately it also meant the game, despite being developed for just as long, or longer than, Mass Effect 2, is considerably shorter.
Party member participation in dialog with other characters needs to be more natural
When a character speaks in a conversation with a villain, NPC, or whatever, other characters need to respond to this better. Particularly in Awakening party member dialog really felt like it exposed the underlying dialog system.
It was just cycling through their dialog, maybe giving the player a couple of things to say, before returning to the conversation subject who would be completely oblivious to anything anyone said.
Once again, the problem with this one is the more reactive characters get, the more work needs to be done for less and less people.
Less exposition
I should learn about characters by how they respond to events, or about how others respond to them, not because I asked them to tell me their life story back at camp.
Obviously you'd need the character to tell you some things about themselves, but these, whether by player or character initiation, should only come at the right time.
Characters should only tell you about their childhood after having forged a relationship through both of your actions during events. You don't build up trust with a character by giving them a snowglobe, you do it through how you treat their opinions on a problem you face, how you face that problem, demonstrating leadership etc. Only after doing that should the characters open up.
Don't waste dialog on expostion
You have a great character, a great voice actor and you've only got a certain about of dialog you can write and record with them. Don't waste a 15 minute conversation on them explaining the politics of their home country or whatever.
When I talk to a character I want to learn about them, and if I want to learn about their culture, it's only because I want to know what made them the way they are.
Obviously many players will be interested in those politics and that culture, and let them ask about it, just don't waste too much time on it. For the really detailed stuff give me another source of info, such as an NPC somewhere of the same race, or a codex entry.
In Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 one of my least favourite characters is Tali, and the reason is because all of her dialog in ME1 is just exposition on the quarians (who have nothing to do with that game's story!) while only most of her dialog in ME2 (outside the loyalty mission, which is fantastically written) is exposition. Yes, you made a fascinating world and fleshed out all the cultures, and I want to know that stuff, just don't waste a party member's dialog on giving that information. A good example is Garrus. He's a turian, but very little of his dialog is about his race or his culture, it's about him, his motivations, his personality. If I want to learn about the turians I can read the codex and piece together the rest by talking to a whole bunch of other characters who's motivations and personality I'm less interested in.
I'm sure there's more I have to say, I just can't think of it now, this'll do for the moment.
Modifié par JakePT, 02 avril 2010 - 12:12 .
#557
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 12:24
Mlai00
-
- Members
- 656 messages
@ Amstradhero:
Dismiss the male vs female comment I made, if you wish. I've no intention of trying to defend it. I don't hold stocks in EA or whatever.
Your mod is awesome, btw. It's a staple part of my DAO1 campaign experience now.
@ Senorfuzzylips:
I like how you offset your avatar to give her that "tall British headmaster" appearance.
@ Catlance:
Nope. I mean guys care less about dialogue than girls, even in RPGs. Ofc it's all anecdotal; I don't do studies on this.
There are, ofc, hilarious true scientific studies out there.
Dismiss the male vs female comment I made, if you wish. I've no intention of trying to defend it. I don't hold stocks in EA or whatever.
Your mod is awesome, btw. It's a staple part of my DAO1 campaign experience now.
@ Senorfuzzylips:
I like how you offset your avatar to give her that "tall British headmaster" appearance.
@ Catlance:
Nope. I mean guys care less about dialogue than girls, even in RPGs. Ofc it's all anecdotal; I don't do studies on this.
There are, ofc, hilarious true scientific studies out there.
#558
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 12:29
worksa8
-
- Members
- 571 messages
I did LIKE the new chat system, but it did feel like their was less to talk with them about, and also the characters didn't seem to have the depth they had in Origins. Also the removal of romances kinda handicapped the player-npc interaction.
#559
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 01:08
Brockololly
-
- Members
- 9 029 messages
As far as exposition goes- I agree with JakePT on how in ME1 Tali was a walking codex entry on the quarians and that should be avoided. Yet I didn't feel that was as much of a problem in DAO. Yeah you still had exposition and backstory, but they always seemed like natural questions to ask your companions to learn more about them (asking Alistair what it was like to be a Templar, asking Morrigan about growing up in the Wilds). All of the dialogue and questions choices could surely be better spaced out throughout the game so you can't rip through them right off the bat, sure. But I think at least when you first pick up a follower or first recruit them, you should definitely be able to ask them some more expository questions right off the bat.
I mean if I recruit someone, like say Justice or Velanna ad get back to camp with them, I want to know more about what they thought on the last quest but maybe have that conversation link in to another question or aspect of their personal backstory which may give insight into some of the more broad codex entry type information.
I mean if I recruit someone, like say Justice or Velanna ad get back to camp with them, I want to know more about what they thought on the last quest but maybe have that conversation link in to another question or aspect of their personal backstory which may give insight into some of the more broad codex entry type information.
#560
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 02:38
Cat Lance
-
- Members
- 1 119 messages
While not a scientific study, I'm basing this off of my experiences here on the boards over the past...when did NWN come out...? Well, whatever, my time here, and talking with other RPG fans and BioWare fans specifically that I've found around, even the ones that aren't the "hardcore" coming to the bioboards everyday and such are very very interested in the dialogue/interactions. And most of the fans I've had the opportunity to meet outside the boards (and hell, they outnumber us wimmins here too) ARE male.Mlai00 wrote...
@ Catlance:
Nope. I mean guys care less about dialogue than girls, even in RPGs. Ofc it's all anecdotal; I don't do studies on this.
There are, ofc, hilarious true scientific studies out there.
So, as stated, not at all scientific, but I consider all this time and meetings of others to be a good basis.
#561
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 02:44
Nerdage
-
- Members
- 2 467 messages
Even the best system will never be perfect, that's just the way programming is, since 'real' things tend to be infinitely diverse and a program can't be anything but finite. So you'd never be able to ask an npc whatever you want and expect an answer that takes into account everything that is/has been, all their possible reactions obviously have to be pre-recorded and all have to be stored somewhere so unless they start selling games by the terabyte at £150 each it won't feel completely natural.
As for wasting voice actors time on dialogue about the world rather than about the character, I didn't really notice alot of that, the characters who talk about their cultures don't go on about it for longer than needed and the way they speak about it does give insight into their personality. I suspect that there would be even less of it in the next game either way, if it's set in Ferelden then there's no need for any more information on other countries and if it isn't you'll probably be introduced to the new culture through through the story, like how you learn about Ferelden in DAO.
As for wasting voice actors time on dialogue about the world rather than about the character, I didn't really notice alot of that, the characters who talk about their cultures don't go on about it for longer than needed and the way they speak about it does give insight into their personality. I suspect that there would be even less of it in the next game either way, if it's set in Ferelden then there's no need for any more information on other countries and if it isn't you'll probably be introduced to the new culture through through the story, like how you learn about Ferelden in DAO.
Modifié par nerdage, 02 avril 2010 - 02:48 .
#562
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 03:57
Commander of the Grey
-
- Members
- 857 messages
@ Mr. Gaider
I apologize. That's not exactly what I meant. I thought you meant leaving out bits that weren't entirely relevant to the story in order to cut down on the amount of dialogue. Alistair's jokes and the insight into his personality are my favorite scenes in the game. If you mean cutting down on the amount of dialogue options and the extra lines that go with them, I can so jump on that band wagon. I pretty much choose the same things on each play through because I don't have the guts to be mean to any of them. I'm a ****** that way though. I can only imagine the amount of time/word count that would be saved by having maybe two options instead of four or five that lead to four or five more options and so on and so forth.
As for pacing things out, I agree with that notion also. Someone mentioned that they had Alistair romanced at the beginning of the game so I tried it. Ha, I had him at almost adore before entering Lothering and I thought, "Aww that's kinda sweet but also very wrong." So I see where having all of those options right away can have it's downside and take away from the...realness of it. My vote (though it may not matter) is for the sign that they have something to say. That's the only thing that irked me in DAO and I became rather OCD about checking and hoped that I didn't miss anything by not returning to camp after certain missions.
Sorry for me not understanding. I was worried that I didn't. If I still don't, then I throw my hands up and will be content to just read. I'm buying DA 2 regardless but I thought I'd try to voice my crappy two cents, anyway. Lol, thanks for being so paitent with everyone, me included.
I apologize. That's not exactly what I meant. I thought you meant leaving out bits that weren't entirely relevant to the story in order to cut down on the amount of dialogue. Alistair's jokes and the insight into his personality are my favorite scenes in the game. If you mean cutting down on the amount of dialogue options and the extra lines that go with them, I can so jump on that band wagon. I pretty much choose the same things on each play through because I don't have the guts to be mean to any of them. I'm a ****** that way though. I can only imagine the amount of time/word count that would be saved by having maybe two options instead of four or five that lead to four or five more options and so on and so forth.
As for pacing things out, I agree with that notion also. Someone mentioned that they had Alistair romanced at the beginning of the game so I tried it. Ha, I had him at almost adore before entering Lothering and I thought, "Aww that's kinda sweet but also very wrong." So I see where having all of those options right away can have it's downside and take away from the...realness of it. My vote (though it may not matter) is for the sign that they have something to say. That's the only thing that irked me in DAO and I became rather OCD about checking and hoped that I didn't miss anything by not returning to camp after certain missions.
Sorry for me not understanding. I was worried that I didn't. If I still don't, then I throw my hands up and will be content to just read. I'm buying DA 2 regardless but I thought I'd try to voice my crappy two cents, anyway. Lol, thanks for being so paitent with everyone, me included.
#563
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 04:51
MColes
-
- Members
- 343 messages
Having dialogue built into the adventure, rather than having to always go back to party camp feels more organic, and feels more like reading a book or a movie, or a real adventure. How often do people go back to camp as they're going through a dungeon to chat, only to go back down and keep exploring. Important events and dialogue happens as the tale unfolds, and that's what it feels like David Gaider is trying to do here. When I read a book, following the heroes along, the story unfolds around them, with them. The person back at camp shouldn't really be acting as if they were there at the moment, when someone else did it. They might have something to say about it afterwards, judging you unfairly, which might be a cool idea in of itself. Think about the replayability of it aswell, every time I play through the game, my party will change, and along with it the adventure will, because they respond differently because they're different characters.
Actually, I do really hope he reads this. Bringing your members with you, you get on the spot dialogue - very intense and in the moment - but I'm sure the member you didn't bring would have something to say, as a memeber of your team, but not there. That opens up whole other dialogue choices, once it's already happened, and I'm sure they would have their opinions the next time they saw you, or heard of what happened. Just an idea for the future and a way to bridge the gap.
Actually, I do really hope he reads this. Bringing your members with you, you get on the spot dialogue - very intense and in the moment - but I'm sure the member you didn't bring would have something to say, as a memeber of your team, but not there. That opens up whole other dialogue choices, once it's already happened, and I'm sure they would have their opinions the next time they saw you, or heard of what happened. Just an idea for the future and a way to bridge the gap.
#564
Guest_Kalee_*
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 05:33
Guest_Kalee_*
Guest_Kalee_*
-
- Guests
While I did enjoy spending time at the camp with my companions, I agree that cutting out the introductory lines can be an improvement (I don't see how finding out repeatedly that Alistair has nothing new to say about the templars and/or Grey Wardens can improve the game). However I don't agree with taking away completely the possibility of initiating conversations at the camp whenever I choose. Keep the significant conversations for certain check-points in between mission, but at least give us the possibility to say hello to them or ask them how they are doing - you can even add mood swings here (honestly, the one-liners we get now when we click on them make them seem like pieces of furniture). I know this is just my personal point of view but as opposed to Origins, my Warden feels utterly alone leading a bunch of people who as soon as they arrive home just don't care about him anymore. Sure they have intriguing stories to tell while on the road but they don't feel like friends. I'm surprised he can remain sane considering the situation. He's just been through one traumatic experience after another (I know he's supposed to be a hero but an archdemon remains an archdemon) and now he has to start all over with no familiar face around (Oghren doesn't really count as he's most of the time drunk). In Origins he had his friends and his love interest to provide a bit of normality while between battles, here he has a crumbling Keep, treacherous vassals and peasant revolts.
I also think it's fair that you get to know better the companions with which you travel, but we do need an insight into the others' personalities as well. Let the road-initiated conversations provide the most relevant info for their personalities, but I'd like to have access at least to their personal quests. If it seems illogical that they give us the personal quest without having high approval, then at least let them become friends with other members of the group, and then one of these could come to the Warden and tell him "you know, I noticed that one of us is feeling troubled, maybe you can help him...", even if this means you have to take with you both the companion in question and his friend when you solve the quest. This might make the interactions between the companions more dynamic.
There's another thing that I'd like to mention even though I'm almost sure it won't happen - instead of giving us less companions like it was mentioned somewhere in the thread, why not giving us a larger party instead? I'm aware that it's no easy task to balance the game around, let's say, a party of 6 instead of 4 but it would be so much fun. Plus, the argument that we have enough slots for 3 classes is no longer valid with all the subclasses we can now unlock, and from an RP perspective 4 slots are simply not enough. The first one is for the PC, the second is for the one character which storywise you simply cannot leave behind (this does not only happen in the case of Alistair, remember Imoen from BG?), the third for whatever class is still missing, leaving only one spot to juggle with for RP purposes.
I'm going to stop now before the wall of text becomes too big. Thank you Bioware for all the great games and for bringing me to the RPG gaming world - BG was the first game I played and I've been hooked ever since.
I also think it's fair that you get to know better the companions with which you travel, but we do need an insight into the others' personalities as well. Let the road-initiated conversations provide the most relevant info for their personalities, but I'd like to have access at least to their personal quests. If it seems illogical that they give us the personal quest without having high approval, then at least let them become friends with other members of the group, and then one of these could come to the Warden and tell him "you know, I noticed that one of us is feeling troubled, maybe you can help him...", even if this means you have to take with you both the companion in question and his friend when you solve the quest. This might make the interactions between the companions more dynamic.
There's another thing that I'd like to mention even though I'm almost sure it won't happen - instead of giving us less companions like it was mentioned somewhere in the thread, why not giving us a larger party instead? I'm aware that it's no easy task to balance the game around, let's say, a party of 6 instead of 4 but it would be so much fun. Plus, the argument that we have enough slots for 3 classes is no longer valid with all the subclasses we can now unlock, and from an RP perspective 4 slots are simply not enough. The first one is for the PC, the second is for the one character which storywise you simply cannot leave behind (this does not only happen in the case of Alistair, remember Imoen from BG?), the third for whatever class is still missing, leaving only one spot to juggle with for RP purposes.
I'm going to stop now before the wall of text becomes too big. Thank you Bioware for all the great games and for bringing me to the RPG gaming world - BG was the first game I played and I've been hooked ever since.
#565
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 05:52
Hundbert
-
- Members
- 82 messages
I love this new conversation system. Definitely the right way to go. Sure it you could add stuff like clicking on a beer bottle or whatever to initiate some dialogue but what else is there to say but:
Great expansion - great way of conversating. Thumbs up!
Great expansion - great way of conversating. Thumbs up!
#566
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 06:02
Suilebhain
-
- Members
- 154 messages
David Gaider wrote...
Glad you liked it!Default137 wrote...
Just wanted to say this to Bioware, in the hopes they keep with it, and keep making it better,
I've always hated going back to my camp after missions, because it means I would have to get some popcorn, and set myself up for 30-45 minutes of talking to people to make them like me, even if I could care less about them. And in many cases it just felt like a really odd system, that was more of a chore then an actual fun thing to do.
This new conversation system is great, it allows me to ignore the childhood of everyone, and actually learn about them as a character, and it never feels like a chore, in fact I often get a childlike glee seeing a new person that wans't standing there before, or finding an object near them that has the clickable mark over it, because it means I'm going to learn something about the world, and how at least one of my characters view it.
Keep up the good work Bioware, this is a great game!
I think it could use some refinement, and I imagine some people are going to mistake the volume of dialogue itself (in an expansion) for the system, but overall I think it's a better way to go.
This is unfortunate. Part of the thing I liked the most was the conversations, both talking to people in camp and the sponteaneous banter behind me as we travelled. Also, the romance, which of course requires dialogue, which means reading for those who just want to get on to the next battle, has fallen by the wayside as well.
I think removing these elements move the game from being as true a roleplay experience as it can be to more of a linear adventure with real-time shooter combat - not something I care to spend my hard-earned money upon. The fact that the lead writer confirms this dumbed-down direction as the "better way to go" is a bad sign.
I see this franchise starting great and moving rapidly toward mediocrity. Return to Ostagar was the first step, now Awakenings. Fortunately I have a bunch of games I can play instead. If I want a shooter, I'll dig out Altered Beast.
Modifié par Suilebhain, 02 avril 2010 - 06:11 .
#567
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 07:13
David Gaider
-
- BioWare Employees
-
- 4 514 messages
Err... was someone talking about removing romance or party banter or even removing entirely the ability to talk to a follower in camp? Not me.Suilebhain wrote...
This is unfortunate. Part of the thing I liked the most was the conversations, both talking to people in camp and the sponteaneous banter behind me as we travelled. Also, the romance, which of course requires dialogue, which means reading for those who just want to get on to the next battle, has fallen by the wayside as well.
I think removing these elements move the game from being as true a roleplay experience as it can be to more of a linear adventure with real-time shooter combat - not something I care to spend my hard-earned money upon. The fact that the lead writer confirms this dumbed-down direction as the "better way to go" is a bad sign.
I see this franchise starting great and moving rapidly toward mediocrity. Return to Ostagar was the first step, now Awakenings. Fortunately I have a bunch of games I can play instead. If I want a shooter, I'll dig out Altered Beast.
Modifié par David Gaider, 02 avril 2010 - 07:13 .
#568
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 07:27
shedevil3001
-
- Members
- 2 988 messages
i keep seeing comments come up about romances being removed but i never read anything confirmed on it i guess some people are miss reading it though i hope romances are back in the next release they were done very tastefully and were quite fun to play through especially alistair he's really well written his dialogue is awesome
#569
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 07:29
CybAnt1
-
- Members
- 3 659 messages
Initiating *dialogue* while out in a dungeon or out of camp (or similar places) is unnecessary and unrealistic.
(You meant dialogue. Fixed it for you.)
Agreed. You should be either in camp, keep, or some "rest" type place if you want to initiate conversation or ask them to teach you to be a templar (or whatever). It's silly to think you can talk to them while surrounded by things ready to gnaw off your leg. (I also thought it was silly that in BG2 they'd choose the time when something WAS gnawing on my leg to discuss their feelings, but that was that.)
That said, that doesn't mean you shouldn't be the conversation initiator (sans clicking on an environmental object), ever. But there could be times & places for it.
Don't let me start a conversation if the character has nothing new to say
I think there are ways to do that. If they're willing to go to the effort, perhaps the character's expression could signal whether they have something new to talk about with you, or not. But if not, there's always the "flag" over their head.
BTW, it would also be fairly simple to code to have it so that if you click them and they have nothing new to say, they shrug and shrug you off ("not a good time to talk") -- not unlike they do now.
Characters need to respond to their surroundings and events
Yes, they do. However, you need to be careful to make dialogue wholly dependent on making sure you bring companion X to area Y or to watch you click on object Z. You can miss dialogue if you have only 6 available companions (and can only take 4 to any area). You'll definitely miss more if you have 9.
Less exposition
Yes and no. Frankly, it makes sense that people would go up to Sten and ask, "Sten. Tell me about your culture."
Question is, should it result in a long "20 questions" back-and-forth session about the Qunari, or maybe just a "here let me tell you about them" and a new codex entry in your codex (I'd be fine with the latter.)
#570
Posté 02 avril 2010 - 07:40
shedevil3001
-
- Members
- 2 988 messages
yeah maybe but some conversations do help alot of my choices i made were based on who i had with me and some of their comments made me choose who to side with as i cared about my companions and wanted to help make choices that were important to them like with redcliff helping was important to alistair so i did help etc without saying to much "so not to spoil it for anyone"
#571
Posté 03 avril 2010 - 12:31
Ellestor
-
- Members
- 392 messages
Whilst I imagine that the male-to-female ratio is higher in the 'less talk, more crush' camp, I'm not sure that has to do with differences between the desires of male roleplayers and female roleplayers so much as it does who's more likely to fall into this behavior.Mlai00 wrote...
@ Catlance:
Nope. I mean guys care less about dialogue than girls, even in RPGs. Ofc it's all anecdotal; I don't do studies on this.
There are, ofc, hilarious true scientific studies out there.
In other words, I'd agree that individuals who want less dialogue are more likely to be male, yet not that males want less dialogue than females.
It's an 'all crows are birds yet not all birds are crows' situation, as I see it.
#572
Posté 03 avril 2010 - 01:10
Indoctrination
-
- Members
- 819 messages
I'm not a fan of the direction Awakening took as far as dialogue goes. I like being able to just chat with all my party members about everything at pretty much anytime.
If I don't feel like talking to them for a long time... then I don't. The beauty of the Origins system was that you never really had to engage with characters if you didn't want to. It was optional and not necessary at all. (It's perfectly possible to complete the game without that extra +4 in one stat on your characters from inspiration.)
If I don't feel like talking to them for a long time... then I don't. The beauty of the Origins system was that you never really had to engage with characters if you didn't want to. It was optional and not necessary at all. (It's perfectly possible to complete the game without that extra +4 in one stat on your characters from inspiration.)
#573
Posté 03 avril 2010 - 01:54
Sable Phoenix
-
- Members
- 1 564 messages
DJ0000 wrote...
dragon_83 wrote...
This is actually a very good idea. I would love to see this in the next game.
You might want to consider building upon arguably good feature of DA which is the companion banter, by allowing the player to join/react to these conversations with some sort of interrupt system. A small example what i mean:
(Nathaniel and Velanna have their banter.)
Nathaniel: "... And your ears look clownish."
* interrupt popup appears. If the player chooses to activate it, they get conversation options:
1. "That wasn't a nice thing to say."
2. "Damn straight they do."
3. if player is elf themselves: "Excuuuuse me? What was that last bit?"
* if the interrupt was actually triggered -- depending on picked option Nathaniel and Velanna approve/disapprove accordingly.
I agree, that's a great idea. +10 approval
Oh, a thousand times yes. As I was playing an Elf mage myself at the time I really wanted to turn around and give Nathaniel a tongue-lashing for that little comment. Please put something like this in! Interaction based off the NPC banter dialogues would be great.
#574
Posté 03 avril 2010 - 02:11
Mlai00
-
- Members
- 656 messages
So basically everyone is telling me that Bioware RPGers like lots of dialogue, regardless of gender.
..........
W00T I win!
Anyways, here's how I play:
(1) When on quests, I rarely talk to my DAO companions, unless I think they might be able to add something to a situation, such as before a big decision I have to make.
Suggestion:
--Keep things as in DAA when on quests. And a flag indicating that they have an opinion would be nice, when they don't interject on their own (for example, Morrigan upon entering the circle tower). Not a big yellow "!". Just a short vocal such as "Hmm..."
(2) When in camp, I usually ration out my convos, asking only 1 or 2 questions per companion before I move on. I don't binge.
Suggestions:
--Space out dialogue trees. Have them open up with approval (as in DAO), but also with number of quests completed, or specific quests completed.
--Cut down on non-cutscene gifts. Or make them only capable of erasing negative approval. Or make them appear only at intervals of game completion. Just like you should space out dialogue trees, you should space out approval increase opportunities.
(3) It's annoying to find a companion has no new lines while in camp.
Suggestion:
--Best I've heard so far... Have a companion be ASLEEP when he/she has no new lines. Click on him/her and all you hear is snoring or funny sleeptalk.
..........
W00T I win!
Anyways, here's how I play:
(1) When on quests, I rarely talk to my DAO companions, unless I think they might be able to add something to a situation, such as before a big decision I have to make.
Suggestion:
--Keep things as in DAA when on quests. And a flag indicating that they have an opinion would be nice, when they don't interject on their own (for example, Morrigan upon entering the circle tower). Not a big yellow "!". Just a short vocal such as "Hmm..."
(2) When in camp, I usually ration out my convos, asking only 1 or 2 questions per companion before I move on. I don't binge.
Suggestions:
--Space out dialogue trees. Have them open up with approval (as in DAO), but also with number of quests completed, or specific quests completed.
--Cut down on non-cutscene gifts. Or make them only capable of erasing negative approval. Or make them appear only at intervals of game completion. Just like you should space out dialogue trees, you should space out approval increase opportunities.
(3) It's annoying to find a companion has no new lines while in camp.
Suggestion:
--Best I've heard so far... Have a companion be ASLEEP when he/she has no new lines. Click on him/her and all you hear is snoring or funny sleeptalk.
#575
Posté 03 avril 2010 - 02:33
JakePT
-
- Members
- 477 messages
CybAnt1 wrote...
Initiating *dialogue* while out in a dungeon or out of camp (or similar places) is unnecessary and unrealistic.
(You meant dialogue. Fixed it for you.)
Agreed.Agreed. You should be either in camp, keep, or some "rest" type place if you want to initiate conversation or ask them to teach you to be a templar (or whatever). It's silly to think you can talk to them while surrounded by things ready to gnaw off your leg. (I also thought it was silly that in BG2 they'd choose the time when something WAS gnawing on my leg to discuss their feelings, but that was that.)
That said, that doesn't mean you shouldn't be the conversation initiator (sans clicking on an environmental object), ever. But there could be times & places for it.
This is how Awakening worked, and it was perfectly fine, even if Oghren saying "Need something pummelled!?" in the throne room was odd. My main issue is the time wasted going into the close up view and requiring the player to say "Goodbye".Don't let me start a conversation if the character has nothing new to say
I think there are ways to do that. If they're willing to go to the effort, perhaps the character's expression could signal whether they have something new to talk about with you, or not. But if not, there's always the "flag" over their head.
BTW, it would also be fairly simple to code to have it so that if you click them and they have nothing new to say, they shrug and shrug you off ("not a good time to talk") -- not unlike they do now.
Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It makes perfect sense for a foreign character like Sten to tell you about their culture, but making it the entire point of their dialog or having it run for too long is a big no no. Dragon Age didn't really have that much of a problem in this area though (even Mass Effect was fine outside of Liara and Tali), so not much work is needed.Less exposition
Yes and no. Frankly, it makes sense that people would go up to Sten and ask, "Sten. Tell me about your culture."
Question is, should it result in a long "20 questions" back-and-forth session about the Qunari, or maybe just a "here let me tell you about them" and a new codex entry in your codex (I'd be fine with the latter.)
One workaround is to have any exposition be context sensitive, instead of giving me a long list of questions in dialog at camp. Instead of having "What's your religion like?" be a question back at camp, have a situation where the character mentions it on a quest and when you get back to camp have a new question pop up along the lines of "Back there you mentioned x, what is that?". It's basically the same dialog, but it's integrated in a much more seamless way and wouldn't feel like exposition.
