635 réponses à ce sujet

[Boombox]

All I can say is I really loved the conversation system in DA:O and I think it was a major part of the game.
I totally agree with the person who said that the interesting party memebers aren't always the most effective (at the time) in battles. I'd like to get to know them evenly even if they aren't in my favorite battle team. I think it seems silly have to take them everywhere if we want to get the most out of them..
I loved the party camp and being able to click on a character any time i wanted and have them respond even if there was nothing new to talk about.. I felt like I had control over it, something that lacks with the new system. I wish the conversation system was re-worked not re-designed.
I can completely understand what David is saying but I don't think the old conversation system really needed such changes.. It won over so many people afterall. Were there complaints over it? I don't understand.
Maybe a poll would be interesting to see what people prefer?

Modifié par Boombox, 17 mars 2010 - 07:17 .

[David Gaider]

Rixxencaxx wrote...
Mr gaider...we are all whining people...we are all wrong. excuse us we cant understand the new fantastic changes brought by awakening...

Which is clearly what I meant.

If someone is willing to offer respectful feedback, positive or negative, I'm willing to hear it. Let me know if you come up with any.

As to the others on the thread: thank you for the suggestions. It may not always be clear why I do what I do, but we didn't arrive at DAO's method of dialogue without iterating on what we did before that. My goal is to preserve the good and adjust the bad, and in this case not to confuse the volume of dialogue in an expansion with the system itself. I'm under no impression that any given attempt is going to be perfect, and I will leave it at that. Thanks again.

[Rixxencaxx]

David Gaider wrote...

Rixxencaxx wrote...
Mr gaider...we are all whining people...we are all wrong. excuse us we cant understand the new fantastic changes brought by awakening...

Which is clearly what I meant.

If someone is willing to offer respectful feedback, positive or negative, I'm willing to hear it. Let me know if you come up with any.

As to the others on the thread: thank you for the suggestions. It may not always be clear why I do what I do, but we didn't arrive at DAO's method of dialogue without iterating on what we did before that. My goal is to preserve the good and adjust the bad, and in this case not to confuse the volume of dialogue in an expansion with the system itself. I'm under no impression that any given attempt is going to be perfect, and I will leave it at that. Thanks again.

well when you talk about respect probably  haven't examined your posts.
However i'm not interested in this discussion anymore, you are not in search of suggestion but of appreciation.
Sales will talk.
Goodbye to all.

[sami jo]

I love the idea of being able to have my companions react to things in the world around us and respond to them.  While from an RP perspective, there is zero reason for me to leave most of my companions at camp while I troll through the Deep Roads, I realize that there are limits to the game engine.  I always found the response from Riordan about why the party had to be so small absolutely ludicrous.  A few more of my companions with me will draw too much attention, but that battalion of fifty dwarves I just called in won't?!?!  Given that there are practical limits on the size of the party, it makes sense that there will be things the PC won't learn about a companion unless that companion is exploring with him/her. 

The problem is that this is already true in DA:O.  I would have never pegged Zevran as the most politically savy of my companions until I did a playthrough with him.  Anyone who sees that character as nothing but a murder happy sex wh**e should try to kill off the Dalish with him, or side with the Templars, or side with Harrowmont, or side with the slavers.  Sten was nearly as insightful, and he made comments that could be explored back at camp.  The fade and the gauntlet with virtually all of the NPC's were incredibly telling.  The characters reactions to what the PC does and banter with one another while exploring is the best way to "get to know" the characters.  I wish I could have talked to them about their reactions back at camp instead of listening to Lelianna's fifty minstrel tales or Wynne's romanticized notion of the Wardens based on her very sheltered existence in the Tower and almost no experience with the outside world. 

In other words, while this particular fan would love "more", I'm not asking for more--I'm asking for slightly different--something more akin to Sten's dialogues.  What feels very unnatural is the notion that I cannot just talk to the people I am saving the world with.  There was a limited amount that I could get to know a character if I did not take him or her with me.  It made perfect sense.  How does one spend the better share of a year camping and risking one's live with another and not know anything at all about him or her!?!  If I didn't spend much time with a character, I didn't get to know him/her very deeply.  That made sense.  But to not be able to ask anything at all?  No, that doesn't make much sense.  Nor does it make any sense to have deep conversations with a companion while we are out in the world, potentially in danger, with others standing right there.  At least at camp there could be the illusion of a little privacy.  As Morrigan loved to tell you if you asked her something personal while out in the world, "We are hardly alone."

A blend of the two systems would be ideal for me, and that is pretty much what I am hearing from those who are "complaining".  That isn't asking for "more" it is asking for slightly different.  And while I am normally a huge fan of Gaider, to be told in effect that the opinions of the hard core fans, the ones who care enough to buy the game, buy the expansion and play it the day it came out, buy the DLC and spend time composing responses on the boards, just don't matter is pretty off-putting.  If the devs don't care about what works for the people that will buy darn near anything they put out, it doesn't bode well for the franchise. 

I'm hearing a lot of excuses from BW when they mess up or someone disagree with a choice.  Take it or leave it.  Get over the fact that we just forced a patch that broke your game.  Communication is awful?  How dare you complain!  Consoles can't get a response to save their souls and get bounced from EA to BW like a ping pong ball?  Silence.  Don't like it?  Don't buy it.  That is what we've been getting. 

The thing is, people will stop buying, and it will be the core audience that stops buying.  And that would be sad because even with the problems, BW still tells the best stories in the business.  I'm sure this will raise the ire of some dev or another, which is really sad because really, people are just saying that they miss part of a game mechanic that they designed and asking for some part of that to return.

[Sandtigress]

I love the new conversation system - it does feel more natural, especially since you're Warden Commander and no longer just the friend/nominal leader of a group of ragtags who sit around the campfire at night. Then, it made sense that that might be where you talk to people, around the fire at night, maybe while you share a watch, getting to know them as a friend.



Now, you ARE the person in charge, and to some extent you have to maintain a professional relationship, at least with new recruits. So it makes sense to have a momentary connection over something like a statue, where you're curious about your new recruit and their history, but maintain a little more distance (though not everyone will play it that way, of course). And every once in awhile, they'll "seek" you out at the Vigil, to tell you something of a more personal nature as they come to trust you. Of course there's always tweaking involved, but I think it works well.



While I'm still getting used to the mechanics, finding places where people talk is a little awkward. But I'm sure that after a few playthroughs I'll be finding more objects to select, more discussions to unlock, etc etc. This is MUCH better than accidentally getting a rose or an earring in the middle of a battle. Tweak away with the dialogue system, Bioware, because I think you guys are doing a great job with it!

[errant_knight]

 I haven't finished the game yet, so maybe it will grow on me, but so far, the new dialogue system is the only thing about the game that I'm not enjoying. I find it alienating. On the otherhand, that works for the roleplaying in this expansion.

I want to be able to go up and talk to these people when I feel the need to talk. I want them to interrupt what I'm doing and talk to me, as they did occasionally on return to camp. That feels real and natural. I don't find this method at all natural, in fact it really hurts immersion for me.

As I mentioned earlier, the feeling of alienation caused by not being able to talk freely to my party members kind of works here. The one person that I know and care about has left the region, so my PC is missing him. She doesn't know these people--except Oghren, but it's different now that she's his commander, and he was never that communicative anyway. She's distanced from all of them, and responsible for them, as well. Anyway, it works, but it feels a lot more like a business trip than an adventure that we're all in together. My PC's in this  alone, but with followers. 

I really dislike that I can't choose to have the conversations when I want. Once I'd played through a time or two, the director in me enjoyed setting up locations for important conversation. For example, the 'I really enjoy spending time with you' conversation works much better if something amusing has just happened, rather than after limping back to camp after a brutal battle. And I like the option of deciding when and where a conversation should take place for myself.

Modifié par errant_knight, 17 mars 2010 - 07:36 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Bibdy wrote...
I think of it this way, 2 systems to get to know your characters:

System 1) 60% camp dialogue, 0% interaction with the game world, 20% dialogue and confrontation on your decisions, 20% party banter

System 2) 20% camp dialogue, 40% interaction with the game world, 10% confrontation on your decisions, 30% party banter

I'd prefer system 2, that's more even and spread out, rather than system 1 that's just ALL talk talk talk.

The content of the dialogue at camp was not completely detached from the game world. Through Leliana, we learned about Orlais. Through Sten, we learned about the Qunari. Through Alistair, we learn about the templars. Through Zevran, we learned about the Crows.
People speak as if the dialogue at camp was compeltely pointless. It isn't. It added insight to the character first and foremost, and then to the gaming world. So while I was not interacting with the world in a physcial sense, I got a much better understanding of the lore, which is interaction with the game world in an RPG.
In addition, it's not like the Awakening system adds much to world interaction. Clicking on the same statue several times to see what people think of Andraste could have been accomplished just as easily in the camp. Granted, some objects benefit alot from the addition. But in general, I have not seen anything special as of yet (with the exception of Nathaniel meeting his sis perhaps).

Furthermore, party members did react to objects and events. Specifically Sten. Of course it isn't as good and elaborate as Awakening.

I do not agree with the assumption that the dialogues in Origins were pointless. They are not. They might be irrelevent to the main plot. Of course I don't need to know anything about Antiva for me to beat the blight. But if that's the case, why have dialogue at all? Make it like Fable.
But while they are pointless to the main plot, they are not pointless to character development. And character development does not mean that the characters have to talk about the main plot all the time (which isn't the case in Awakening btw). Character development and depth is often based on trivial things, that nonetheless spark interest. When i talk with my friends, we often talk about trivial things. That doesn't make the conversation pointless.

Also, in my opinion it's more realistic to get to know characters and discover more about them through a fairly long period of time, instead of knowing everything about them in a few hours. The evolution Morrigan goes through, for instance, that spans hours is very revealing of her character and personality. And that evolution needs time and cultivation. So I do not see how the issue of time is a factor.
In addition, approval plays a part in this. To start with a cold and uncaring Sten that ultimately respects and admires you was very deep. To start with an ambivalent Morrigan that ends up in love with the character is very deep. Those interactions not only shed light on our companion's personality, but also on how they think of us.

In Awakening, I honestly dont' know what the companions think of me (except for the approval system). 
 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 17 mars 2010 - 07:47 .

[Brockololly]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In Awakening, I honestly dont' know what the companions think of me (except for the approval system). 
 

Agreed- You can chalk that up to the new system or the limited nature of the expansion pack, but I feel like there is a big time lack of PC to Companion direct interaction in Awakening. We've got the great banter between NPCs but Iit seems like alot of the other environmental cues feel like the companion is talking at the PC and just going along a preset path in the conversation regardless of how the PC tries to guide the conversation.

So while alot of the companions seem interesting and have neat personalities and backstories, I'm left with the approval system to figure out how they feel towards the Warden and the Warden's actions.

[Sandtigress]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In Awakening, I honestly dont' know what the companions think of me (except for the approval system). 
 

I'm not going to say anything in your post is wrong - I agree with it for the most part.  I would, however, say that your role in Awakening can be seen as much different than your role in Origins (of course, how you RP things will always play into it), and that, for me at least, the dialogue system reflects this.

I quote your little tidbit above because I think this illustrates the point.  In Origins, you were a loose band of people brought together by the Blight but held together mostly by their friendships/promises/bond to you.  If they hated you, they had no problem leaving your butt to face the Archdemon without them.

Now, you're the Warden Commander.  These people work with you because you recruited them and they are your men.  It doesn't matter what they think of you, really.  Plenty of soldiers follow commanders they hate, right?  Maybe you'll take the time to be a friendly commander, maybe you'll keep your distance.  With my Orlesian, I'm having a little bit of trouble justifying why I should be giving my men trinkets.

You are, of course, welcome to RP things however you might like.  Just sharing my perspective on why the new system isn't all that bad, and why I'm actually rather enjoying it.

[CarlSpackler]

David Gaider wrote...

Rixxencaxx wrote...
Mr gaider...we are all whining people...we are all wrong. excuse us we cant understand the new fantastic changes brought by awakening...

Which is clearly what I meant.

If someone is willing to offer respectful feedback, positive or negative, I'm willing to hear it. Let me know if you come up with any.

As to the others on the thread: thank you for the suggestions. It may not always be clear why I do what I do, but we didn't arrive at DAO's method of dialogue without iterating on what we did before that. My goal is to preserve the good and adjust the bad, and in this case not to confuse the volume of dialogue in an expansion with the system itself. I'm under no impression that any given attempt is going to be perfect, and I will leave it at that. Thanks again.

Personally I throw my hat into the ring of keep iterating.  Now while I certainly loved the dialogue in Origins, and have enjoyed traditional 'laundry list' questions, I am enjoying the change myself.  Even if this new system isn't perfect (and it isn't, and you're not claiming it is) experiments are good.  Particularly good when they lead to true innovation.  There is a certain novelty to the new system that I am definitely enjoying, and the context-centric dialogues I am really impressed with.  I think this may be on the right track and I really liked your suggestion above about in the camp area having objects that might initiate new context sensitive dialogue.

[Wonderllama4]

I really like the camp chats. if you don't like talking to people I think you are playing the wrong game

since I always ran around with Alistair, Morrigan, and Leliana, camp was really the only way I could really get to know the other party members

besides, most character dialogue is also available on the road.

Modifié par Wonderllama4, 17 mars 2010 - 07:53 .

[errant_knight]

Sandtigress wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In Awakening, I honestly dont' know what the companions think of me (except for the approval system). 
 

I'm not going to say anything in your post is wrong - I agree with it for the most part.  I would, however, say that your role in Awakening can be seen as much different than your role in Origins (of course, how you RP things will always play into it), and that, for me at least, the dialogue system reflects this.

I quote your little tidbit above because I think this illustrates the point.  In Origins, you were a loose band of people brought together by the Blight but held together mostly by their friendships/promises/bond to you.  If they hated you, they had no problem leaving your butt to face the Archdemon without them.

Now, you're the Warden Commander.  These people work with you because you recruited them and they are your men.  It doesn't matter what they think of you, really.  Plenty of soldiers follow commanders they hate, right?  Maybe you'll take the time to be a friendly commander, maybe you'll keep your distance.  With my Orlesian, I'm having a little bit of trouble justifying why I should be giving my men trinkets.

You are, of course, welcome to RP things however you might like.  Just sharing my perspective on why the new system isn't all that bad, and why I'm actually rather enjoying it.

It does fit with this story, I agree, but I would really hate to see this system used again, as I hope that the next situation my PC is in doesn't lead to her feeling so alone in a group.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sandtigress wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In Awakening, I honestly dont' know what the companions think of me (except for the approval system). 
 

I'm not going to say anything in your post is wrong - I agree with it for the most part.  I would, however, say that your role in Awakening can be seen as much different than your role in Origins (of course, how you RP things will always play into it), and that, for me at least, the dialogue system reflects this.

I quote your little tidbit above because I think this illustrates the point.  In Origins, you were a loose band of people brought together by the Blight but held together mostly by their friendships/promises/bond to you.  If they hated you, they had no problem leaving your butt to face the Archdemon without them.

Now, you're the Warden Commander.  These people work with you because you recruited them and they are your men.  It doesn't matter what they think of you, really.  Plenty of soldiers follow commanders they hate, right?  Maybe you'll take the time to be a friendly commander, maybe you'll keep your distance.  With my Orlesian, I'm having a little bit of trouble justifying why I should be giving my men trinkets.

You are, of course, welcome to RP things however you might like.  Just sharing my perspective on why the new system isn't all that bad, and why I'm actually rather enjoying it.

Even in origins, your companions would still follow orders even if they dislike you (with exceptions at key moments of course).
And in Origins, you do become the commander of all armed forces against the blight. But yes, it's a different role.

That doesn't mean that commander / follower relation is unimportant. Otherwise, why even have gifts? Because I don't see a commander giving gifts to his baby soldiers.

Here, we are not given the option to be a mean commander or a commander that actually cares. I am just forced into being a mostly ambivalent commander. Or rather, the fact that I am a mean or great commander is not reflected in our companions like it should be. They seem mostly ambivalent.
Remember that Grey Wardens are brothers and sisters and not just an armed force....

I am not saying you are wrong. And to make it clear. I didn't hate the system. I thought it was good, but as an addition and not a replacement.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 17 mars 2010 - 07:54 .

[Sandtigress]

e_k and phoenix,



Rather than quoting, cause that's just gonna take up a huge chunk of space... ;-)



I agree with both of you. I think in the time span of Awakening, this system works. For a sequel, where we spend more time with our companions, I'd like to see a hybrid of the Origins and Awakening conversation systems - the potential for more intimate conversation like we had around the campfire, but also the world-activated conversation that we have now. And I really have to say I like not getting roses in the middle of the Proving - but I DID like getting the roses and earrings. ;-)



And you're right, Phoenix, Wardens are brothers and sisters as well. This being a first foray into leading the Wardens for most of our characters (maybe not the Orlesian?), I suppose I can just see it as a forgivable awkward moment of trying to find your place as leader and brother/sister.



I just see this as a step in the general right direction, and I'm looking forward to seeing where it will eventually go.

[Darkannex]

"Now, you're the Warden Commander. These people work with you because you recruited them and they are your men. It doesn't matter what they think of you, really. Plenty of soldiers follow commanders they hate, right? Maybe you'll take the time to be a friendly commander, maybe you'll keep your distance. With my Orlesian, I'm having a little bit of trouble justifying why I should be giving my men trinkets."



Except you still have to stay in their good graces to have them not leave you. So in a way, you DO have to consider how they feel about you. If you could...ya know, go all Duncan on them if they rebel (rather than have them just leave...), or throw them back in a dungeon for mutiny maybe not so much...

[Addai]

Play_B4_Work wrote...

Dragon Age Origins: The Business Trip. So true!

QFT!  I feel like I should say, since I've been whinging in this thread and rather strenuously, that I have enjoyed Awakenings so far, for what it is.  I came prepared to see a lot of "hate" threads and didn't want to be a natterer.  However, that was because I thought what we saw in DA:A was due to budget constraints and the nature of an expansion, and one day we could go back to the good old days. 

I suppose my sense that DA:O was unique is more true than I realized.

Modifié par Addai67, 17 mars 2010 - 08:10 .

[errant_knight]

Play_B4_Work wrote...

Anyway, it works, but it feels a lot more like a business trip than an adventure that we're all in together. My PC's in this alone, but with followers.

Dragon Age Origins: The Business Trip. So true!

I just want to talk when I want to talk to whoever (whomever??) I want to talk to... whether they be covered in blood next to me or waiting back at the Keep. Even if all our conversations pertain to the business at hand, that's fine. I just want the option of dialoging when I feel like it. However, as previously stated by others, I also enjoy the clicking on items and the resulting conversations that nets as well.

But I get Bioware is experimenting with different methods and I can respect that. Maybe DAO 2 will have the perfect mix [for me].

Absolutely!  If no one tries anything new, we don't learn a damn thing!

I can also see location specified conversations as being a good idea, but I think they have to happen spontaneously. The action of knowingly triggering speech somehow pulls me out of the scene. I don't know why it's different if you just go up to say hi, or feel like a little chat, but it is.

PS. I'm disconcerted by the notion that DA:Origins was an early attempt that needs to be improved on. I thought it was pretty close to the perfect game, and all it needed was more of the same--continuation of the story

Modifié par errant_knight, 17 mars 2010 - 08:17 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

errant_knight wrote...

But I get Bioware is experimenting with different methods and I can respect that. Maybe DAO 2 will have the perfect mix [for me].

Absolutely!  If no one tries anything new, we don't learn a damn thing!

The key is learning from experiments and not just experimenting for the sake of it.

But it's Bioware and I have faith in them in an almost messianic way.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 17 mars 2010 - 08:18 .

[silksieve]

For me, one nice thing about the DA:O camp system was that the PC could be the instigator of a conversation from the PC's point of view. This happened most, and most effectively, with Wynne, but with other characters as well. ie. "I had another dream about the archdemon." "It's always going to be like this for me as a Grey Warden, isn't it?" It brings a nice role-play touch to the interaction. I think players appreciate it when characters react to the PC's personal life or story, so to speak. Difficult to pull off, especially in dialogue conversations, I realize, because everyone will RP differently, but it's not impossible. (I think this was why some of the banter in DAO was so amazing for me, especially once a romance was initiated, because NPCs started talking about this *life* that was happening, and not just quests or plot points.)



I think it's more difficult to pull this kind of conversation off when there's something you have to go through to get to that kind of dialogue conversation (like an object or point of interest) because the PC doesn't necessarily need that "spark," unlike an NPC, perhaps.

[Ensgnblack]

I am getting used to the new convo system and see pros and cons. One thing I do not like however is the amount of approval that interactions seem to gain you. I talk to someone for 10 seconds and get +17? That is rather absurd. I do not care that there are no romances, but with the lack of change beyond attributes for how much a character lieks you just makes approval seem rather shallow in awakenings.

[Addai]

This thread reminds me of Shale's line "It does like a good chat now and again, doesn't it?"

YES, my taciturn friend. Yes it does!

Modifié par Addai67, 17 mars 2010 - 09:54 .

[Dragon Age1103]

Grimgor79 wrote...

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.

 This I like, seems to be the best of both worlds. You get cool conversations when you are out and about and still have the camp, keep, condo etc. to have your deeper conversations. Hopefully some hybrid like this will be used in the future.

  I agree that was well worded. I'm glad(so far 3 hours in) that they didn't destroy the relationships like in ME2. It's nice having a deep convo back at the keep & still hearing random convos while traveling or on a quest but I would like to be able to select my party members for smaller less invasive convoes while exploring or questing. I hope they don't slowly cut out the random chatter between party members while running around like they did in ME2. It ruined so much of the game for me b/c I always felt alone since I only got 1 or 2 random spots per planet to click on to activate a short statement. ME2 was very lacking in relationships outside the ship...as I said I felt like i did every mission alone for the most part. I hope they do not do the same with dragon age.

[Aynslie]

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.

Yea I have to agree with you.  I think this would satisfy everyone's conversational needs in the games.  Hopefully this is what Bioware will get at for any future games.

[EccentricSage]

Bibdy wrote...

I think y'all are making the wrong argument. If all you want is more, moar, MOAR dialogue, then that's just not going to happen. If your only request is more, it will never be satisfied and developers attempting to do such, is a lost cause.

You can have deep character involvement, interaction and attachment WITHOUT laboriously long dialogue. In my opinion, most of the attachment to characters in DA:O didn't come from these pointless chats in the party camp. They came from dragging them around and hearing their opinions before/after you make your decisions - getting into possible conflict with them, or finding some understanding (such as using Persuade on them).

Sitting in the camp wading through line after line of dialogue doesn't feel realistic at all. Who are you to walk around asking all these personal questions? The only one who seems to respond in a realistic manner is Sten!

I already feel like I know Anders better, in 4 hours of DA:A gameplay, than I did Morrigan after spending 'hours' listening to her talk.

While I would like more options in dialogue, I agree we can't expect every character to be a novel to read.  lol  That's not the issue I have at all.   

I definetly think dialogue with enemies could be cut down a bit.  When I took Lel to confront Marjolain, I just wanted the both of them to shut the hell up and fight.  WHY do we always have to stand around saying 'durhur, but I just wanna taaaalk' and wait for the enemy to make the first strike?  Same with Jarvia.  That's one point where I think dialogue isn't being made optional and is really verry tedious.  (bargaining with cultists was fun and practical, though.  Actually served a practical purpose)

I fealt like the dialogues I had with my companions were mostly satisfying.  The only improvement being needed in camp dialogue is a mechanism in the game that will help pace us a bit.  It is a bit too easy to go through most of a character's pre-landsmeet dialogues as soon as you meet them if you have their story related gifts.  But this shouldn't be that hard to correct.  It's not broken.  Just imperfect.