Dragon Age: Inquisition

[Monte Carlo]

Lots of bloody wheels in DA:I.

 

Every time Dave Gaider explains something, I feel something dying in my little happy place.

 

I think I'll play something else.

[kirottu]

I have never once replayed any crpg, not even my beloved BG 2 + expansion. I click through every conversation branch, lawnmower every map and scour the strategy guide to ensure I see it all in one play through.

 

First I just play the game through, if the game is good then I do the same as you. It's very rare for me to play any rpg through more than twice.

[Gfted1]

 

I click through every conversation branch, lawnmower every map and scour the strategy guide to ensure I see it all in one play through.

 

Now that's just... barbaric.

 

 

Heh, I cant wait to get my hands on the totally non-degenerative PoE strategy guide. I shall print it out and read it while on the crapper.

[Monte Carlo]

Actually Gfted1 we should start our own Order of Degenerates and try to break Sawyer's baby with our cheesy tak-tix.

 

Then we can mod in chainmail bikinis, mod out emo-NPCsszzzzzzz and we might have a half-decent game on our hands

[Monte Carlo]

^ Dammit another heresy x-post! It's catching.

[Humanoid]

Wheels make me think of Oblivion dialogue, which is frightening. I appreciate that some options won't be the essentially lucky dips in which you hope the actual response matches what you think it was, but delayed tooltips? Eh, Human Revolution did it better by just instantly displaying the first like of the response verbatim.

 

I'm mixed on the greying out of dialogue options. From a purely idealistic point of view, they shouldn't be there, but that only holds true as long as every conversation where you could reasonably apply conditional dialogue actually has conditional dialogue. The flaw with that thinking is that most often that kind of option is restricted to a few NPCs, often arbitrarily, and so you come back with a completely different character and find that nine out of ten NPCs present exactly the same unchanged dialogue. In that case I'd say I support showing the 'hidden' options. I do, however, feel that you should be able to select the options anyway even if it's a guaranteed failed check. Failure ought to always be an option. New Vegas let you do it, but to a very limited extent, mostly used for humour - it's a start but it could be so much more.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Every time Dave Gaider explains something, I feel something dying in my little happy place.

 

 

Are you sure that just isn't some girl you've handcuffed to your bed?

 

 

 

I click through every conversation branch, lawnmower every map and scour the strategy guide to ensure I see it all in one play through.

 

 

Now that's just... barbaric.

 

Heh, I cant wait to get my hands on the totally non-degenerative PoE strategy guide. I shall print it out and read it while on the crapper.

That is just disgusting.

 

You look at porn on the crapper, not strategy guides.

[Volourn]

"I have never once replayed any crpg, not even my beloved BG 2 + expansion. I click through every conversation branch, lawnmower every map and scour the strategy guide to ensure I see it all in one play through."

 

You don't like role-playing, I see.

[Bryy]

Good idea getting rid of the Dominant Tone.

 

It was a fantastic idea with piss poor execution.

[AGX-17]

I liked it in Fallout: New Vegas when a dialogue option would specify [speech 80] because that meant I could quit and come back later if I really wanted it. The conditional was always something my PC could do even if I decided not to.

 

I don't want to see something like [you picked an elf and we're going to show you a human-only dialogue option that you can't have].

It didn't always mean you could quit and come back later, unless you mean literally quitting the game/loading an older save. I don't see any reason why they'd do what you fear, except to goad you into trying to play the game with a different race or sex. Even then, it's typically a given that variations based on chargen choices would be the norm, rather than the exception.

 

 

I have never once replayed any crpg, not even my beloved BG 2 + expansion. I click through every conversation branch, lawnmower every map and scour the strategy guide to ensure I see it all in one play through.

You paid $30 extra for information you can get for free on the interbutts? And with more accuracy, at that.

 

Which is ignoring the fact that games have been made in which it is impossible to "see it all in one play through." You can't get porked by Benny in New Vegas if you're playing a male Courier, and you can't seduce Gannon into following you as a female.

Edited February 21, 2014 by AGX-17

[Keyrock]

I'm of the mind that not every player needs to see every last bit of content in a game, or even be aware that every bit of content exists.  Alternate paths don't need to be obvious.  If a given player only is aware of 50% of the content in the game, that's okay.  There's a great feeling of achievement when you find a different way to do something, a way to steer a conversation in a different direction, an alternate path, a different way to do something. 

 

I'm aware not everyone feels that way.  That's why game mechanics are never one size fits all.  Ideally, greyed out dialogue options, skill indicators, and such, would be an option in the config menu you could turn off.  I'm perfectly happy to have the mechanic in the game if I can turn it off.  The recent trendy game feature is focus mode or eagle vision or whatever, you know, when you push a button, the world goes all different color, and the game basically spells out for you where all the secrets, climbing paths, targets,etc. are.  Personally, I think it's a garbage mechanic, yet another hand holding tool making games more and more automated, but I have no problem with it being included in a game so long as I'm never forced to use it.  If I can turn it off or ignore it, then I have no problem with it being in the game.

[ManifestedISO]

Lots of bloody wheels in DA:I.

 

Every time Dave Gaider explains something, I feel something dying in my little happy place.

 

I think I'll play something else.

 

Shadows of Mordor, with its procedurally generated foes and definitive collaboration with WETA Workshop, New Zealand, will be my alternative. 

 

But then I'll also play Inquisition, because I am inexplicably compelled by laws of nature. 

[alanschu]

I'm of the mind that not every player needs to see every last bit of content in a game, or even be aware that every bit of content exists. Alternate paths don't need to be obvious. If a given player only is aware of 50% of the content in the game, that's okay. There's a great feeling of achievement when you find a different way to do something, a way to steer a conversation in a different direction, an alternate path, a different way to do something.

The question is less "does Keyrock like it" and more "can Keyrock understand why its presence might be seen as a positive for someone else." It seems that way, with your following paragraph.

 

As you say, though, it's reconciling people having different wants that can be mutually exclusive. For instance, the lack of a dialogue wheel was definitely one of the biggest pieces of feedback we got for DAO, but its mere existence is a negative for others. So we put in a brief explanation for bigger choice nodes, but some will say "that you have to do that shows the problem with the wheel" but that seems like it's coming from only a single perspective.

Edited February 21, 2014 by alanschu

[Oerwinde]

Wait... people complained about the lack of a dialogue wheel in DA:O? Its the 2nd worst thing about DA2 after the reused areas IMO.

[alanschu]

Wait... people complained about the lack of a dialogue wheel in DA:O? Its the 2nd worst thing about DA2 after the reused areas IMO.

Yep. Including some of my friends that I knew personally. Different people like different things.

[BruceVC]

 

I liked it in Fallout: New Vegas when a dialogue option would specify [speech 80] because that meant I could quit and come back later if I really wanted it. The conditional was always something my PC could do even if I decided not to.

 

I personally like when they don't give you the skill/stat amount needed, or even the skill/stat for that matter, it just looks like any other dialogue option, and if you don't meet the requirements or fail on your roll then you fail the influence attempt and have to deal with the consequences of your failed attempt.  The downsides to this method are:

 

1) It encourages metagaming and save-scumming.

2) It can be difficult to convey how difficult or preposterous an influence attempt might be without clobbering you over the head with a number.

 

My responses to those two valid concerns would be:

 

1) People are going to metagame and save-scum anyway if they're inclined to do so.

2) I enjoy trying to decipher/guess how much something would go against a certain character's wishes and nature and how far I could push them and get away with it from what I've learned about the character, their manner of speech, personality, etc.

 

 

Hi Keyrock

 

What do you mean by metagaming and save-scum in the context of DA:I?

[BruceVC]

I'm of the mind that not every player needs to see every last bit of content in a game, or even be aware that every bit of content exists.  Alternate paths don't need to be obvious.  If a given player only is aware of 50% of the content in the game, that's okay.  There's a great feeling of achievement when you find a different way to do something, a way to steer a conversation in a different direction, an alternate path, a different way to do something. 

 

I'm aware not everyone feels that way.  That's why game mechanics are never one size fits all.  Ideally, greyed out dialogue options, skill indicators, and such, would be an option in the config menu you could turn off.  I'm perfectly happy to have the mechanic in the game if I can turn it off.  The recent trendy game feature is focus mode or eagle vision or whatever, you know, when you push a button, the world goes all different color, and the game basically spells out for you where all the secrets, climbing paths, targets,etc. are.  Personally, I think it's a garbage mechanic, yet another hand holding tool making games more and more automated, but I have no problem with it being included in a game so long as I'm never forced to use it.  If I can turn it off or ignore it, then I have no problem with it being in the game.

 

I also think the ability to turn-off certain features is advantageous, like in Dishonoured and the way the quest markers worked

[tajerio]

 

Wait... people complained about the lack of a dialogue wheel in DA:O? Its the 2nd worst thing about DA2 after the reused areas IMO.

Yep. Including some of my friends that I knew personally. Different people like different things.

 

 

But if they don't like the same things I do doesn't that mean their opinion is automatically inferior?

 

-most grognards gamers.

Edited February 21, 2014 by tajerio

[Oerwinde]

 

Wait... people complained about the lack of a dialogue wheel in DA:O? Its the 2nd worst thing about DA2 after the reused areas IMO.

Yep. Including some of my friends that I knew personally. Different people like different things.

Its an example of the internet making it easy to avoid opposing viewpoints, as I have never heard of anyone thinking the dialogue wheel was a good thing until now.

[Maria Caliban]

It didn't always mean you could quit and come back later, unless you mean literally quitting the game/loading an older save.

I sometimes did just that.

 

Even then, it's typically a given that variations based on chargen choices would be the norm, rather than the exception.

Which, if you haven't guessed, is something I dislike.

[Nepenthe]

Good idea getting rid of the Dominant Tone.

 

It was a fantastic idea with piss poor execution.

Good idea getting rid of the Dominant Tone.

 

It was a fantastic idea with piss poor execution.

I liked it, but I'll save the rest for the heretic thread.

[Sarex]

Its an example of the internet making it easy to avoid opposing viewpoints, as I have never heard of anyone thinking the dialogue wheel was a good thing until now.

 

Oh it's a great thing, but for console players. Would be intersting to find out how many of the people who liked DA2 played it on a console.

[Nepenthe]

 

Its an example of the internet making it easy to avoid opposing viewpoints, as I have never heard of anyone thinking the dialogue wheel was a good thing until now.

 

 

Oh it's a great thing, but for console players. Would be intersting to find out how many of the people who liked DA2 played it on a console.

Played it on pc, have no issues with it.

[Sarex]

Played it on pc, have no issues with it.

 

Not the wheel per say, but the whole game. Also it's counter intuitive for PC players who use the keyboard to select which dialogue they want. It's not a big secret that the dialogue wheel was created to make it easier for console players to select the dialogue.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Sarex

[Nepenthe]

 

Played it on pc, have no issues with it.

 

 

Not the wheel per say, but the whole game. Also it's counter intuitive for PC players who use the keyboard to select which dialogue they want. It's not a big secret that the dialogue wheel was created to make it easier for console players to select the dialogue.

Same answer applies. I played dao first on a console and it was terribad, which could impact my perceptions. My latest dao run on pc was about as enjoyable as passing a kidney stone.