Dragon Age

[Lantyssa]

Being a City Elf did make it very easy.  Humans were scum and deserved to be treated as such.

My elf had a bit of a chip on her shoulder.

[AutomaticZen]

Small ass screenshots.

[tmp]

Hmm not seeing much of difference in the style there, although the ground seems to be less exagerrated vertically which is a plus. The WoW style "mountains out of molehills" vexes me somewhat whenever i see it.

Looks they learnt how to make better skyboxes and lighting, too.

[Sjofn]

Well, ultimately he becomes a Paragon if he doesn't sacrifice himself.

Also if you do.

[tmp]

Some second hand info from the Game Informer article, don't know how accurate if at all but there you have it... a mild spoiler in there, i guess.

Alright, just finished reading the DA2 article in my GI mag. WARNING! I am going to be posting some of the things that really stand out. (To me anyway) So if you don't want to know, skip my post.

1) We will be able to import our DA:O games into DA2. "You may be controlling a different character in Dragon Age II, but the choices your Grey Warden made in Origins are still imported from your save and reflected in the world."


3) Pissing off party members won't always be a bad thing. "They won't necessarily leave. They may still join you, but they're going to try to show you up, and that may influence battle in a different way."

4) We're getting the ME2 conversation wheel, but this time instead of having some dialogue be a particular color the center of the wheel will show a symbol to show what kind of reply it is: "Dragon Age II uses a conversation system similar to Mass Effect's, where players select paraphrased versions of the dialogue from a wheel. An icon in the middle of the wheel even illustrates the line's basic intent (like aggressive or sarcastice), so you can focus more on the interaction rather than reading and analyzing your dialogue choices."

5) The way the story unfolds will be very different compared to the past Bioware games. "Dragon Age II has a framed narrative structure, which means that the exploits of Hawke occured in the past, but are being retold in the present." "Narrators with unique insights into the events in question tell the tale of his past adventures."

6) We may get to see some of the DA:O events at the start from a different perspective. "Dragon Age II begins as the events of Origins are still taking place, so you may see some familiar events from a different angle."

7) Because of the game spanning a decade, we get to see the consequences of our actions sooner, rather than in a little text at the end of the game.

8) The PC version's combat system remains mostly the same. "The PC version implements the same strategic approach afforded by a mouse-and-keyboard control scheme." "Rather than try to mimic the PC experience on consoles, Dragon Age II has a battle system more tailored to the strengths of the PS3 and 360." "the PC version will have the same ability to "examine the battlefield closely, make decisions from a top-down view, and direct your party like a general." They say they got to play the Xbox 360 version and they can "confirm that it is faster, more responsive, and more fluid than before. As soon as you press a button, something happens. As a warrior, Hawke threw down special strikes and used a new dash move to slash through darkspawn with ease. It isn't on the Dynasty Warriors side of the spectrum, but with obvious improvements to the targeting system and animations, playing Dragon Age II with a controller finally feels natural."

[Ingmar]

5) The way the story unfolds will be very different compared to the past Bioware games. "Dragon Age II has a framed narrative structure, which means that the exploits of Hawke occured in the past, but are being retold in the present." "Narrators with unique insights into the events in question tell the tale of his past adventures."

They're already experimenting with this with the Leliana DLC, I kind of like how that plays out so I'm cautiously optimistic that this will be cool.

[caladein]

As much as I love the ME2 dialogue system, there's already an upcoming BioWare game that should use it: ME3.  I really liked that DA was its own game (especially on PC) and now that the sequel is just Mass Effect: Dragon Age 2 I'm a bit bummed.

I'm still going to buy it when it comes out, just eh...

[Paelos]

I don't like the fact they are making obvious dialogue even more obvious.

It was bad enough that they put things on the top that were good and on the bottom that were bad. Then we get the IT'S RED IF YOU WANT TO BE A JACKASS!!! options...

Now you're telling me it's going to have even more symbols giving subtext to the text??? FFS, just read it.

[Fordel]

I love the ME dialogue wheel, so I welcome the change!

[Sjofn]

Now you're telling me it's going to have even more symbols giving subtext to the text??? FFS, just read it.

That's my own discomfort with the change. I don't want symbols being all ATTENTION: THIS IS THE ASSHAT ANSWER.

[Fordel]

Why is that bad, knowing what your character is going to say, or more importantly, HOW it's said?

[Sjofn]

Because I can usually tell, reading what I'm going to say, how I am going to say it? It's not hard to get context reading my lines. I just sort of resent the implication that I am too stupid to figure out if what I'm about to say is sort of prickish. I also think it will nudge me closer to "gaming" my conversations instead of me simply thinking "What would I say?" It's not like I always know what I'm about to say in real life is going to be taken poorly or not.  

I'm not saying "oh god this is horrible I'll never buy it," it's just a limitation of the system I see. If I have to take that to get some goddamn facial expressions when I'm talking to someone instead of serenely gazing upon all before me at all times, it's not a big price to pay.

[Fordel]

I don't understand how it is a limitation? All your conversation options would still be there.

[Sjofn]

Yes, but I don't want an ATTENTION: PICK THIS ONE TO BE NICE icon or whatever. Let ME decide if that one should make the NPC think I'm nice. And then let me be sad if/when it turns out it doesn't. It has a better feel for me, as that's how real conversations generally work. It's limiting because it takes away all the "Hm, I am trying to be nice here, which of these sounds nicest to me." Which takes me out of the moment, which takes away some degree of "What would my character say?" Because when I'm picking, I'm thinking "S/he would be a prick in this situation, which sounds prick-est?" Instead there will be a big arrow saying THIS ONE: PRICKEST. It just feels blah to me.

You can insist it's not that big a deal, and in fact I agree it probably isn't for most people, but that doesn't mean I have to throw confetti and lovingly accept it unconditionally.  


EDIT: And so help me, if they wind up keeping a Prick Score like they do in the Mass Effects, I will be really annoyed, because that will push me even harder towards gaming the conversations instead of just letting them fall where they feel they should naturally.

[tmp]

I suppose having the indicator for things like sarcastic tone and such may be useful, since that can be hard to convey through text, especially if the text is abridged. So that reduces possible situations where you pick something and the characters says things you didn't really expect. It does make me think of Elcors but, well.

edit: dev confirmation on the official forums, there's no Prick Score in the sequel.

We have not implemented a morality meter, no. Making morally complex decisions and dealing with the consequences of those decisions on those around you are pretty central to what we feel Dragon Age is all about.

[Job601]

Yes, but I don't want an ATTENTION: PICK THIS ONE TO BE NICE icon or whatever. Let ME decide if that one should make the NPC think I'm nice. And then let me be sad if/when it turns out it doesn't. It has a better feel for me, as that's how real conversations generally work. It's limiting because it takes away all the "Hm, I am trying to be nice here, which of these sounds nicest to me." Which takes me out of the moment, which takes away some degree of "What would my character say?" Because when I'm picking, I'm thinking "S/he would be a prick in this situation, which sounds prick-est?" Instead there will be a big arrow saying THIS ONE: PRICKEST. It just feels blah to me.

You can insist it's not that big a deal, and in fact I agree it probably isn't for most people, but that doesn't mean I have to throw confetti and lovingly accept it unconditionally.  

Well, I think I disagree with this in every way possible.  For me, the dialogue mini-game has always been the most frustrating part of bioware games, because the consequences are so removed from the action taken, and because the characters' reactions tend to be wildly unpredictable.  In Dragon Age, I was trying to romance Leliana, and at some point she just started repeating the same thing over and over no matter what I said.  Apparently something I did or said pissed her off, but damned if I know what it was or why she reacted this way.  One time you'll say something totally evil and your party will just laugh it off, and another time they'll attack you.  If these games were perfectly constructed and your party was consistent in its behavior, then you would be right and the colored dialogue options would be unnecessary.  As it is, they are a tool that makes it so I don't have to read the mind of the developer who wrote the scene to get the outcome I want, and a way to signpost which dialogue options really count and which ones don't.

[Engels]

For me, the dialogue mini-game has always been the most frustrating part of bioware games, because the consequences are so removed from the action taken, and because the characters' reactions tend to be wildly unpredictable.  In Dragon Age, I was trying to romance Leliana, and at some point she just started repeating the same thing over and over no matter what I said.  Apparently something I did or said pissed her off, but damned if I know what it was or why she reacted this way.  One time you'll say something totally evil and your party will just laugh it off, and another time they'll attack you.  If these games were perfectly constructed and your party was consistent in its behavior, then you would be right and the colored dialogue options would be unnecessary.  As it is, they are a tool that makes it so I don't have to read the mind of the developer who wrote the scene to get the outcome I want, and a way to signpost which dialogue options really count and which ones don't.

For me, the unpredictability was great, because it reflected how actual human beings communicate; imperfectly. There were some clunky elements because its a new way of doing things. There were some pretty innocuous dialog choices that could push you down one particular tree without you meaning to. That doesn't mean the entire model is wrong.

It took some cojones by Bioware to NOT offer a simple dialog tree that was already painted for you. How is that any different from just passively watching a movie? At least in Dragon Age you have to think for a second!

If you don't care about RPG interactions, then just don't play games like Dragon Age. If you do like them, but find yourself only enjoying, say, the weapons or the fights, or the combat mechanics, you'll normally find far more perfect specimens of those mechanics in other, non-RPG games, say Torchlight (no honey, Torchlight is not an RPG. I don't know what it is, but you ain't playing no roles).

[tmp]

One time you'll say something totally evil and your party will just laugh it off, and another time they'll attack you.  If these games were perfectly constructed and your party was consistent in its behavior, then you would be right and the colored dialogue options would be unnecessary.

Having coloured dialogue options doesn't remove any of that, though. In both cases you'll have red text, but the reactions will still depend on personalities of the companions present. The "party" is generally consistent on the individual character level, but it shouldn't be a surprise that a ruthless pragmatist may have different reaction to what you do than idealistic person. Or that elf may be more pissed about turning some other elves into +1 to stats compared to human being like, "whatever" about it.

[MuffinMan]

In Dragon Age, I was trying to romance Leliana, and at some point she just started repeating the same thing over and over no matter what I said.  Apparently something I did or said pissed her off, but damned if I know what it was or why she reacted this way.

That's the most realistic video game dialogue with a woman I have ever heard of. 

[tmp]

Was my thoughts when i read that, too...

(some of Leliana's dialogue is actually bugged which leads to unexpected behaviours which can disregard what she's been told by the player. But i how it makes her far more realistic character than most of the NPC drones)

[Goreschach]

The problem with the ME wheel system isn't that sometimes the npcs misconstrue your reply, but that sometimes the synopsis you select doesn't even have anything to do with what Shepard actually says when you select it. I'd actually prefer it if they didn't even give a synopsis at all, and just left the response spontaneous, with you selecting from general, ambiguous statements like this:

Asshole: blablabla
1. deny everything
2. (CHA) charmingly dissuade
3. (argued with Dickcheese) blame General Dickcheese
4. sarcastic dismissal
5. (INT) point out inconsistency
6. kick in the nuts

[caladein]

So, Alpha Protocol?

I didn't dislike it there, although I'm of two minds about the timer.

[tmp]

Also "Under a Killing Moon" and Tex Murphy series in general, if one is willing to dig deeper. Although i liked it better there, Alpha Protocol had issues whenever it'd step out of  the "Bond, Bauer, Bourne" choice triplet.

[Sjofn]

For me, the dialogue mini-game has always been the most frustrating part of bioware games, because the consequences are so removed from the action taken, and because the characters' reactions tend to be wildly unpredictable.  In Dragon Age, I was trying to romance Leliana, and at some point she just started repeating the same thing over and over no matter what I said.  Apparently something I did or said pissed her off, but damned if I know what it was or why she reacted this way.  One time you'll say something totally evil and your party will just laugh it off, and another time they'll attack you.  If these games were perfectly constructed and your party was consistent in its behavior, then you would be right and the colored dialogue options would be unnecessary.  As it is, they are a tool that makes it so I don't have to read the mind of the developer who wrote the scene to get the outcome I want, and a way to signpost which dialogue options really count and which ones don't.

For me, the unpredictability was great, because it reflected how actual human beings communicate; imperfectly. There were some clunky elements because its a new way of doing things. There were some pretty innocuous dialog choices that could push you down one particular tree without you meaning to. That doesn't mean the entire model is wrong.

It took some cojones by Bioware to NOT offer a simple dialog tree that was already painted for you. How is that any different from just passively watching a movie? At least in Dragon Age you have to think for a second!

If you don't care about RPG interactions, then just don't play games like Dragon Age. If you do like them, but find yourself only enjoying, say, the weapons or the fights, or the combat mechanics, you'll normally find far more perfect specimens of those mechanics in other, non-RPG games, say Torchlight (no honey, Torchlight is not an RPG. I don't know what it is, but you ain't playing no roles).

Pretty much this. It feels more realistic to not know exactly how anyone is going to take what I say.

And as someone else pointed out, Leliana's dialogue can be a little buggy (so can Alistair's), so she's not a great example of why the system is bad. She's a good example of "that bug really needed to be fixed." :P

[Malakili]

4) We're getting the ME2 conversation wheel, but this time instead of having some dialogue be a particular color the center of the wheel will show a symbol to show what kind of reply it is: "Dragon Age II uses a conversation system similar to Mass Effect's, where players select paraphrased versions of the dialogue from a wheel. An icon in the middle of the wheel even illustrates the line's basic intent (like aggressive or sarcastice), so you can focus more on the interaction rather than reading and analyzing your dialogue choices."

Well I knew it.  I don't know where it was that we had that discussion, but I distinctly remember saying that eventually they might as well just give your dialog options out as "fuck it heres a list of alignments."

[Paelos]

The problem is that every conversation in a Bioware game will be:

1 - WHITE KNIGHT
2 - MEH
3 - JACKASS
4 - FEMALE? STICK IT IN!

Do I really even need dialogue options if you are going to make the choices so fucking obvious that I can game them well in advance?

[tmp]

The problem is that every conversation in a Bioware game will be:

1 - WHITE KNIGHT
2 - MEH
3 - JACKASS
4 - FEMALE? STICK IT IN!

Do I really even need dialogue options if you are going to make the choices so fucking obvious that I can game them well in advance?

There's an obvious choice there? I'm just not sure what the problem is supposed to be...

[Paelos]

My point was just put that on the screen for every character interaction if you're going to go the simple wheel way. It decreases the thought for dialogue, roleplaying, or immersion.

[tmp]

I think that's bit of circular reasoning there -- "the wheel simplifies dialogue so go and make it all fixed and simple" when there isn't exactly anything specific about the dialogue wheel that requires stuff to be simplified to begin with, it's just different UI for regular top-down list. Now sure, ME does that, but it doesn't mean they can't use it for more normal dialogue in another game.

[Malakili]

I think that's bit of circular reasoning there -- "the wheel simplifies dialogue so go and make it all fixed and simple" when there isn't exactly anything specific about the dialogue wheel that requires stuff to be simplified to begin with, it's just different UI for regular top-down list. Now sure, ME does that, but it doesn't mean they can't use it for more normal dialogue in another game.

An icon in the middle of the wheel even illustrates the line's basic intent (like aggressive or sarcastice), so you can focus more on the interaction rather than reading and analyzing your dialogue choices."

They've explicitly said they are making it so you don't have to read your dialog choices 0_0

[tmp]

They've explicitly said they are making it so you don't have to read your dialog choices 0_0

But did they say these choices themselves are going to be simpler?

anyway, as if on cue they also said this:

(context was how the new wheel thing is going to ruin situations where the "dialogue" options is series of actions to be taken by a player, and descriptions of results are shown as text rather than acted out)

Yep that was my assumption. I guess its mixed result of all the cinematic experience talk from GI (what makes me thing no words, just pure sounds/animations) and simply because ME had nothing similar.

This is going to be our task over the next months, I see.

"I've made this wild assumption! Prove me wrong!"

In this case you are wrong, in both the assumption that we are no longer able to use narrative text (for whatever reason) and that our assuming the dialogue wheel interface and spoken player VO means we will be emulating the style of Mass Effect in every other way. Not so.

I guess we'll have to wait and see how it pans out.

[Reg]

From what I'm hearing it sounds like they're still willing to experiment with what has been a successful formula.  We like that, right?  Don't we all normally start to sneer when game companies stop taking risks?

[Khaldun]

I don't think they need to fiddle with the UI for dialogue or even the obviousness of it. I think they just need to work at making jackass, meh, and white knight replies more fully integrated with an emotionally complex world and with NPCs who are with the player for the long haul.

Meaning something like this: let's say you've been doing the Dudley Do-Right replies. Now you're talking with a female NPC in your group you want to romance, and she's the cynical outlaw type. So you start making with the cynical outlaw selections, and instead of her going "RAWRR you chose the right dialog, let's have a roll in the hay", she says, "Hey Dudley Do-Right, I see what you're doing there. Like I'd fuck you, you limpdicked do-gooder. It's even worse that you're pretending to be a cockbag just because you think I'm one--heck, I might even go for you if you were a sweet widdle puppy dog too stupid to know how the world really works." E.g., the characters get to know not just "what you chose on a key point in the plot" but "what kinds of things you typically tend to say"--and when you "break character", that tends in and of itself to spawn unusual dialogue trees.

Other examples: say you're a sarcastic cynic mostly but somehow that little orphan really got to you and you gave the Dudley Do-Right replies. Maybe one of your NPCs initiates dialogue with you after and says, "So what's with the Mr. Clean Marine thing? You realize that little urchin is probably shooting up magical heroin with the copper you tossed him, right? I thought you grew up in the streets yourself, don't you know any better?" Say you *always* say the good-guy thing with orphans but stay snarky otherwise. Maybe an NPC cuts in later in the game and says, "You know, I totally get it with you: adults have made their choices, and you're perfectly happy to knife them and take their money. Kids, though..."

The problem now is just that the dialogue system is still too much about working the game and not enough about building a character. If the dickbag replies made for an interesting story, or were themselves attractive responses, you'd be more inclined to choose them more often. Though I have to say that ME2, I did find the hardass responses more tempting in narrative terms than I'd ever found them before, especially dealing with Cerberus. ME2 is already pretty close to getting this right. DA's edging there as well. But it's right to say that the road forward is about being less rather than more obvious.

[Koyasha]

Yeah, that's a really good point that would be nice to see taken into account, NPC's that know what your usual attitude is, if you have a usual attitude.  If I remember right KOTOR2 tried to go a couple baby steps in this direction but it was a little bit clunky, and, well, since half the game was missing I imagine they didn't really get to flesh out a relatively new system very well at all either.  But it would be nice to see characters actually get to know you outside of the few conversations that directly involve them.

In the end it does kind of make it weird in Dragon Age (and all RPG's in general, really) when you can tailor your responses to the character you're interacting with, and they never notice any inconsistency with the way you behave around other party members, NPC's, etc.

[Paelos]

ME2 got the jackass choices right. It wasn't like KOTOR with kicking puppies or stomping on old ladies; they genuinely made you want to use the renegade stuff even when you were aiming for a righteous do-gooder. The dialogue breaks make all the difference in that regard.

My favorite moment was the part when I broke into the tower during the quest to get the assassin, and I sneak up on a henchmen who's on the horn with his other henchmen talking about how easy it's going to be to take me on. I tell him he's busted and demand that he gives up the intel on his boss. He essentially told me to go fuck myself, and right as he's doing that, the renegade dialogue break pops up. I'd been the do-gooder all game, but I just couldn't help myself. I tossed his smug ass off the building.

The best part was after that, from behind Jacob says, "I guess we don't need to read him his rights."