The dialogue interview at RPGCodex

[ryan@seganerds]

Sega have a lot of money, but that isn't really what matters in the long run. Its how much money publishers are willing to sink into the game. The richest games companies may not be the most likely to chuck it at developers.

Is that why they went third-party?

 

Alot has changed since then, they merged with a company that was rolling in money.. Now there the richest 3rd party games company based in Japan. They didnt have to rape any smaller companys to get it either.

[Volourn]

"Nonsense, Publishers play a massive role in how the game turns out.. "

 

They play a role; but I doubt massive is the word I'd use.

[metadigital]

Well that confirms it for me. Gaider writes troubled romance characters, apparently. I never adventured with Valen in HoTU, but I thoroughly enjoyed Nathyrra. The romanceable characters in BG2 all needed a professional counselor. I wonder what Dave's childhood was like.

It's the same reason soap opera doesn't have "normal" days and characters having uneventful lives: happy ever after is boring!

 

Maybe because [Truth]/[Lie] is really superficial and changes very little within the game, so many players are not very satisfied with that. It's not like most of the time the NPCs can tell if you're lying or not - which wouldn't make sense anyway if even if you told the truth, whether they would believe you or not was never open to any variables. They'd also want to check if you actually followed up on the lie and went back on that oath later, or if you 'changed your mind' and kept to it - otherwise it would be equally unbalanced.

How about a flag that keeps score of previous "[LIE]" options ... or a "[LIE - I INTEND TO DOUBLE-CROSS LATER, AT THE BEST TIME]" ...

[Dark_Raven]

To bad Deekin wasn't a romance option. He is such a cute little lizard.

Being dead it looks even better.

[Dark_Raven]

Hmm would anyone want a new game like Vampire the Masquerade from Obsidian/Sega? I think it would be pretty awesome.

 

I'm pretty sure it'd have to be Obsidian/Activision. And it'd be Vampire the Requiem, not Masquerade, these days.

 

But yes, give Brian Mitsoda free reigns on a WoD game and it could turn out amazing. Given how good his Bloodlines stuff was, I am now very excited to learn more about Project Georgia (where he is creative lead).

Requiem would be great. Having Mitsoda on board is one of the best things to happen.

[Tigranes]

How about a flag that keeps score of previous "[LIE]" options ... or a "[LIE - I INTEND TO DOUBLE-CROSS LATER, AT THE BEST TIME]" ...

 

In some limited situations in can work - i.e. "Please rescue my wife trapped inside the haunted mansion. You won't steal anything from my home, will you?" Then the game would check whether you told [truth or lie, then whether you stole anything or not (by flagging items). Interesting questions arise from - if you told the TRUTH then stole items, does that mean that you were actually lying to the game (not to the NPCs), and intended this? Or that your character changed his/her mind about the affair? Which one should the game assume and claculate player alignment (or whatever) for? Perhaps you told a LIE then decided to be 'honourable' and not take anything. But this could easily be abused - you could just 'lie' on every sort of disadvantageous promise, once again lying to the game, to try and get, i don't know, "redemptive points". (I decided not to rob this old woman, though when I promised I wouldn't, I was lying! And I 'decided' not to rob this old man even though I lied about that too! Man, I am so born again. Every two minutes.)

 

Essentially it's extremely difficult for the game to tell when the player is lying or changing their mind in-character or just doing it to exploit the mechanic and control the variables in an extremely transparent way. I fear it would have an even worse effect on the verisimilitude if not done properly, and I think Gaider is very correct in suggesting that [T]/[L], as one of the methods we've already seen before, isn't really the best answer.

[Sand]

To bad Deekin wasn't a romance option. He is such a cute little lizard.

Being dead it looks even better.

 

Don't you want to give a lil' love to the lizard. Come on now, love the lizard! LOVE THE LIZARD!

 

 

 

[metadigital]

How about a flag that keeps score of previous "[LIE]" options ... or a "[LIE - I INTEND TO DOUBLE-CROSS LATER, AT THE BEST TIME]" ...

 

In some limited situations in can work - i.e. "Please rescue my wife trapped inside the haunted mansion. You won't steal anything from my home, will you?" Then the game would check whether you told [truth or lie, then whether you stole anything or not (by flagging items). Interesting questions arise from - if you told the TRUTH then stole items, does that mean that you were actually lying to the game (not to the NPCs), and intended this? Or that your character changed his/her mind about the affair? Which one should the game assume and calculate player alignment (or whatever) for? Perhaps you told a LIE then decided to be 'honourable' and not take anything. But this could easily be abused - you could just 'lie' on every sort of disadvantageous promise, once again lying to the game, to try and get, i don't know, "redemptive points". (I decided not to rob this old woman, though when I promised I wouldn't, I was lying! And I 'decided' not to rob this old man even though I lied about that too! Man, I am so born again. Every two minutes.)

 

Essentially it's extremely difficult for the game to tell when the player is lying or changing their mind in-character or just doing it to exploit the mechanic and control the variables in an extremely transparent way. I fear it would have an even worse effect on the verisimilitude if not done properly, and I think Gaider is very correct in suggesting that [T]/[L], as one of the methods we've already seen before, isn't really the best answer.

I'd go with the "changed mind" dynamic, actually. Best intentions and highway-to-hell paving, and all that, after all.

 

Also, initially lying "I will rob your house" and then not doing so would be a threat not executed. Or an act of guilt/redemptive conscience/re-assessment (the junk wasn't worth stealing).

 

It is more complex, of course, and there would need to be a point. I see this as the biggest hurdle: the alignment of the PC is almost meaningless to the plot in nearly EVERY game (for various reasons, like ensuring every player travels through the same narrative arc, for example).