Dialogue Timer and other questions

[Anarchosyn]

Shemer, it's worth noting that Obsidian is trying something new regarding dialog and I'm not merely referencing the timer. Rather, the timer is just a manifestation of a larger design philosophy which involves keeping the intensity, immediacy and realism in the dialog flow.

 

In addition to the timer they've (at least claimed to have) removed dialog loops as well (i.e. those dialog "hubs" which exist in pretty much every other dialog enabled RPG where the player can reask a question and unrealistically cycle back through the conversation).

 

I'm definitely not a fan of timers in games myself. However, given the overall philosophy of the game I am willing to give Obsidian a chance and reserve judgement.

 

As a final thought, think about this scenario: Let us say you're under some kind of pressure to stop a terrorist attack which is due to launch any minute. You found somebody to interrogate that knows where the bomb is located but you need to get the information out of them through coercion. In a television program like 24 you have the inescapably linear and continuous flow of time to communicate the sense of urgency to the audience. In a video game, especially a RPG, that sense of urgency is lost since time doesn't inherently flow in a continuous manner. The timer is a means to approximate this intensity. Or, rather, it's a means to keep the dialog flow realistic (i.e. I believe the time in the timer is roughly an amount of dead air which approximates a realistic pause in the discussion, so - to the player - these conversations will flow like watching a movie). It also allows the developers to keep the player locked into a time reference they can anticipate (and design around). For example, they can realistically make the scenario outlined above since they can calculate ranges for how long it should take a player to go through the options. This way the bomb really can keep ticking and - who knows - maybe the intensity will be more palpable for the player as a result (i.e. give us a reason, besides role playing, to use more violent means to attain our ends).

 

A counter example to Obsidian's approach would be the severe lack of urgency felt in games like Oblivion. The plot, on paper, is one where your immediate action would make sense (Oblivion gates are opening across the land; one must save kvatch on the eve of its fall!). However, this urgency is purely theatrical. You can wait around for a month of in-game time and nothing will have changed.. the grand evil is just sitting there awaiting your arrival. Alpha Protocol is attempting to rectify this unfortunate cliche in modern RPGs.

 

ps: The only other game I've played that had a timer system like this was Indigo Prophecy (aka Fahrenheit in Europe). Suffice to say it wasn't a problem in the slightest. However, it did result in me not turning to that game unless I was relatively awake and sober.

 

pps: If it wasn't evident let me be explicit - that scenario (and my conjecture on how the developers could use it) was pure fiction from the backwaters of my imagination. However, speculation or no, it gives me pause on complaining about the timer's inclusion till I play through the game.

Edited September 16, 2009 by Anarchosyn

[Shemar]

Anarchosyn,

 

As I said in my earlier post I understand the reasoning. Sadly it is something that does not cater to my personal play style and tastes. Having said that if there is a playable demo I will give the game a fair shot.

 

Incidentally, I am not too thrilled about the lack of actual dialogue choices either, but that one is not a deal breaker.

 

Also incidentally, I am one of the 5 people that do not like 24 and find the whole 'rushed' feel of the show too gimmicky and unrealistic.

[Humodour]

2. Can the game be [...] saved anywhere?

 

No.

 

And yes, I agree. There's a lot of things about this game I don't like, gameplay-wise. But some of them have them have been changed or removed, such as infinite ammo, so I don't know where I'm at.

 

But in general it doesn't seem like the type of game I want. I'll buy it because it's Obsidian (so they probably don't give a **** about my opinions as long as I buy it), but I'm not psyched/hyped.

 

Edit: On the upside, it seems like it'll still be a full, vibrant RPG, and there's been a paucity of those for a long time, so I'm probably being a little harsh. I guess I've just lost a bit of faith in Obsid. At the end of the day, they are not BIS, and the only works to judge them on have been NWN2 and KOTOR2, both of which weren't bad games but lacked a certain spirit. I was beginning to think it was just me not enjoying computer games anymore, but I just started playing Mass Effect and am really enjoying it. So, yeah.

Edited September 16, 2009 by Krezack

[alanschu]

I do not want to destroy my single play through of the game by playing on easy for a few extra seconds reaction time during dialogues. Unfortunately the timer is a game breaker for me until it is revised (as in optionally disabled) or modded out. I would play this game for the story and having to worry about a timer instead of immersing in the story ruins it for me.

 

 

Errr, not to be too harsh, but I absolutely cannot understand how being "forced" to make a decision in an appreciable amount of time ruins "immersion." This just sounds like you're being completely closed minded to the idea, and neglecting it simply because it's different. AP is trying to, ironically, actually immerse you in the character of Michael Thorton, where in real life you don't have an infinite amount of time to respond to someone that is talking to you. Especially if they are pointing a gun at you.

 

How much thought, really, does it take to decide between a Professional, Aggressive, or Suave response? Especially given you can (and should) already be thinking about what type of response you want to make as the character is in fact talking to you. This is actually a lot easier to do than you might think, because you have an entire lifetime of experience doing just that.

 

If this is something that you think will block you, then I'd be more inclined to say that you're indecisive, rather than truly seeking "immersion."

[Anarchosyn]

At the end of the day, they are not BIS, and the only works to judge them on have been NWN2 and KOTOR2, both of which weren't bad games but lacked a certain spirit. I was beginning to think it was just me not enjoying computer games anymore, but I just started playing Mass Effect and am really enjoying it. So, yeah.

 

In my opinion, and across the majority of reviews one can find published on the net, both NWN2 and KotOR2 were better written and structured then the originals they were based on (bugs notwithstanding). This especially holds true for KotOR2 which has some of the most mature dialog (philosophically speaking) to ever grace the Star Wars canon. Since the general structure of those games were created by Bioware you shouldn't have expected them to reinvent the wheel.

 

Now, per your last sentence, I'm at a loss.. Mass Effect is a sub par RPG to say the least - reduced and compartmentalized in features to allow a free flowing console experience. Hell, if nothing else it has infinite ammo! Weren't you just complaining about that in regards to Alpha Protocol? Don't get me wrong, I like Mass Effect too.. However, it's a little weird for you to laud the depth of Black Isles and then turn around and say something like "ghee, glad I just picked up Fable."

 

alanschu - Well said.. well said, indeed.

[Shemar]

Errr, not to be too harsh, but I absolutely cannot understand how being "forced" to make a decision in an appreciable amount of time ruins "immersion." This just sounds like you're being completely closed minded to the idea, and neglecting it simply because it's different. AP is trying to, ironically, actually immerse you in the character of Michael Thorton, where in real life you don't have an infinite amount of time to respond to someone that is talking to you. Especially if they are pointing a gun at you.

 

How much thought, really, does it take to decide between a Professional, Aggressive, or Suave response? Especially given you can (and should) already be thinking about what type of response you want to make as the character is in fact talking to you. This is actually a lot easier to do than you might think, because you have an entire lifetime of experience doing just that.

 

If this is something that you think will block you, then I'd be more inclined to say that you're indecisive, rather than truly seeking "immersion."

 

This is how the timer breaks my immersion: During the dialog, instead of relaxing (as a player who sits on a chair playing a game to get away from the real life stress) and enjoying the fact I made it through one more action phase, and immersing in the storyline unfolding in front of me, my mind is occupied with the fact that any second now a timer will pop up epxecting me to make a decision within a few seconds. If I wanted 'realistic' I would go back to work, not play a computer game.

 

I am close minded? You bet I am. Because I know what I like and how I like to play and I don't need anybody trying to tell me how to. The dialogues are the part where I want to take a breather and relax, de-stress from the action that just happened and get ready for the next part. If there is a playable demo that proves to me that the timer does not break the game for me, I'll consider it. But on paper it does break the game for me.

 

It is not, after all the first time design decision by Obsidian ruined games for me. The Spirit Eater turned my casual slow and relaxed play style into a hurried romp through MotB. completely ruining any interest I had in the actual storyline. I am not critisizing Obsidian for their decisions, but I damn sure reserve the right to decide when those decisions do not cater to me. I am sure they are well aware that every time they make a decision about their games they lose a chunk of players and possibly gain a chunk. I am sure I am neither the first, nor the last person that plans to pass on AP as long as the timer is there.

[Humodour]

At the end of the day, they are not BIS, and the only works to judge them on have been NWN2 and KOTOR2, both of which weren't bad games but lacked a certain spirit. I was beginning to think it was just me not enjoying computer games anymore, but I just started playing Mass Effect and am really enjoying it. So, yeah.

 

In my opinion, and across the majority of reviews one can find published on the net, both NWN2 and KotOR2 were better written and structured then the originals they were based on (bugs notwithstanding). This especially holds true for KotOR2 which has some of the most mature dialog (philosophically speaking) to ever grace the Star Wars canon. Since the general structure of those games were created by Bioware you shouldn't have expected them to reinvent the wheel.

 

You can't say that. You can't say "bugs not withstanding" - because they do stand. Bugs severely impact on my game experience. So does cut and unfinished content. For that reason, KOTOR2 was an OK RPG rather than a brilliant one, same for NWN2 to a slightly smaller degree. And in general, both NWN2 and KOTOR2 tried too hard to be the 'dark and philosophical beauties' you claim. I say this as someone who can recognise an epic game for what it is, in terms of deep, thought provoking storyline (e.g. Planescape, Deus Ex).

 

I quite enjoyed KOTOR2 until 2/3rds through, and I do enjoy dark and philosophical storylines... to an extent. Obsidian hasn't got the balance right so far. Bioware errs on the side of shallow and comical (and always has) but at least that's fun and enjoyable. BIS has always been darker but still tended to get the balance right, while Obsidian just seems to be trying too hard to be dark and intellectual with their games. Maybe AP will be better since I've heard them mention a comical/superrealistic vibe.

 

Now, per your last sentence, I'm at a loss.. Mass Effect is a sub par RPG to say the least - reduced and compartmentalized in features to allow a free flowing console experience.

 

Thanks for your opinion. But funnily enough, Mass Effect is doing two things really well: atmosphere/immersion, and gameplay. And as somebody who dislikes the consolisation of PC gaming I'm not minding the way they did it for Mass Effect - maybe Obsidian can learn a thing or two from Bioware if they plan to succumb to consolisation.

 

Hell, if nothing else it has infinite ammo! Weren't you just complaining about that in regards to Alpha Protocol?

 

It has weapon heat, which is essentially recharging ammo. A bit different. It also fits slightly into the futuristic atmosphere. I don't think Obsidian could rationalise infinite ammo in a modern spy game, and I saw no plans to introduce something like weapon heat to make up for the strategic deficit of removing ammo.

 

But I'll admit infinite ammo was something I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt about.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like Mass Effect too.. However, it's a little weird for you to laud the depth of Black Isles and then turn around and say something like "ghee, glad I just picked up Fable."

 

Actually, Fable was ****. I never mentioned Fable.

[Oblarg]

Errr, not to be too harsh, but I absolutely cannot understand how being "forced" to make a decision in an appreciable amount of time ruins "immersion." This just sounds like you're being completely closed minded to the idea, and neglecting it simply because it's different. AP is trying to, ironically, actually immerse you in the character of Michael Thorton, where in real life you don't have an infinite amount of time to respond to someone that is talking to you. Especially if they are pointing a gun at you.

 

How much thought, really, does it take to decide between a Professional, Aggressive, or Suave response? Especially given you can (and should) already be thinking about what type of response you want to make as the character is in fact talking to you. This is actually a lot easier to do than you might think, because you have an entire lifetime of experience doing just that.

 

If this is something that you think will block you, then I'd be more inclined to say that you're indecisive, rather than truly seeking "immersion."

 

This is how the timer breaks my immersion: During the dialog, instead of relaxing (as a player who sits on a chair playing a game to get away from the real life stress) and enjoying the fact I made it through one more action phase, and immersing in the storyline unfolding in front of me, my mind is occupied with the fact that any second now a timer will pop up epxecting me to make a decision within a few seconds. If I wanted 'realistic' I would go back to work, not play a computer game.

 

I am close minded? You bet I am. Because I know what I like and how I like to play and I don't need anybody trying to tell me how to. The dialogues are the part where I want to take a breather and relax, de-stress from the action that just happened and get ready for the next part. If there is a playable demo that proves to me that the timer does not break the game for me, I'll consider it. But on paper it does break the game for me.

 

It is not, after all the first time design decision by Obsidian ruined games for me. The Spirit Eater turned my casual slow and relaxed play style into a hurried romp through MotB. completely ruining any interest I had in the actual storyline. I am not critisizing Obsidian for their decisions, but I damn sure reserve the right to decide when those decisions do not cater to me. I am sure they are well aware that every time they make a decision about their games they lose a chunk of players and possibly gain a chunk. I am sure I am neither the first, nor the last person that plans to pass on AP as long as the timer is there.

 

I couldn't disagree more. To me, nothing would be more immersion breaking than being able to sit for an infinitely long amount of time trying to decide whether I should execute this arms dealer or arrest him.

[Zoma]

Though I agree that giving an unlimited amount of time to reply would break immersion, I prefer that during less 'hectic' interactions with the NPC, we will be given additional time to make a decision to consider over the consequences.

 

Afterall, I admit I don't have a sharp wit. I think its fair to some slower players like me to give a breather room to ponder a while longer for a few more seconds after the NPC has finished talking. At the mean time, the time given for the player to make a decision with the NPC is executed immediately after the latter has finished talking which feels too much of a rush.

[Shemar]

I couldn't disagree more. To me, nothing would be more immersion breaking than being able to sit for an infinitely long amount of time trying to decide whether I should execute this arms dealer or arrest him.

Which is why there are different games for different people, different play styles and tastes. I never said that the way I feel about it is the way everybody else does. Thinking that one's tastes are universal or that my opinion about how I like things has any bearing on how other people like things (beyond some obscure statistical meaning) would be monumentally stupid.

 

@Zoma: I am a pretty quick thinker and I am sure if somebody was paying me to play the game I would have no problem whatsoever doing great at it. However nobody is paying me to play it so I see no reason why I should spend time and money to play a game that annoys me by design. Thankfully there are many more games I want to play than I have time to play them, so I never have to make compromises with my personal time.

[Zoraptor]

But funnily enough, Mass Effect is doing two things really well: atmosphere/immersion, and gameplay.

Strangely, those were the two things I thought were worst about ME. Though to be fair I thought the gameplay wasn't really bad per se- just tending towards formulaic and repetitive. OTOH I thought the atmosphere and immersion was borderline awful.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

It's a lot more immersive than their other RPGs.

[Raithe]

Hm, to my mind from what I've seen and heard of the dialogue stances... part of the decision as to whether to go professional, suave, or aggressive would be based around you playing the spy adapting to whoever he's talking to..

So all the intel dossiers you pick up about other characters, what you might be learning about them before hand, will give hints of how they'll react to different stances you might use.. Thereby changing what options open up.

 

Case in point, it's been repeatedly mentioned that Sie is all about the aggressive, forceful, militant approach in conversations and will react more positively to you then if you're just purely trying to charm her in a James Bond suave style. So from the get go of any conversation you'll probably have an understanding of how to get a "good" response from any characters you've spent time picking up details on. Of course, you as the spy might be thinking "well, I can complete the mission without help from this person so I don't need to have them 'liking' me so I'll react anyway i want." Or you might still try the "let's not burn any bridges just yet and act in a way that they respect".

 

I guess what I'm groping in the dark for.. is that even with a timer during the actual conversation.. you'll have had time in game before hand to think about what stances work in what way with the different people you encounter.. At least, if you're paying any attention to the intel dossiers and rumours you pick up

[Shemar]

I guess what I'm groping in the dark for.. is that even with a timer during the actual conversation.. you'll have had time in game before hand to think about what stances work in what way with the different people you encounter.. At least, if you're paying any attention to the intel dossiers and rumours you pick up

 

I see it the exact opposite way. The timer is what prevents me from making use of hints and fore-knowledge as it forces a hurried response instead of a considered one. Having to think ahead about what stance I should use when the timer starts running, instead of focusing on what is happening here and now is exactly what I see as an immersion breaker.

[Raithe]

I see it the exact opposite way. The timer is what prevents me from making use of hints and fore-knowledge as it forces a hurried response instead of a considered one. Having to think ahead about what stance I should use when the timer starts running, instead of focusing on what is happening here and now is exactly what I see as an immersion breaker.

 

Ah. From what I've gathered it's not as if you can actually peruse any dossiers / intel sources in the middle of a conversation...

So it's immersing you in the concept that a spy in the field will have had to have read such things before hand and can't just pause a conversation and do the "hang on, before I answer you I just need to access email to see how you'll best take this.."

 

It'll be based around the idea that you'll have had a source that implies "Oh yeah, Sie, she's a serious gunbunny. Doesn't like whimsy, but gets on well with more forceful types". So it'll stick in your mind that Sie would react to aggressive responses better then suave. 8 seconds might not sound like much time, but it can stretch out awhile when it's just that mental juggle of memory and a one/two button press.

 

To me the moment a character turns up, even before actual dialogue opens up, there's that mental run through of what you know about them, what you want from them, and seeing what might be needed to do the mission.. so you'll be thinking about stances before they open their mouth.. which is going to add to the timer that'll click on when they actually expect a response.

And that's the other side of it, the timer won't be starting up until they've finished speaking.. so before they're halfway through whatever dialogue they have I'd expect to be choosing a stance.. (I mean sure, it wouldn't be a final choice until they've finished and I've heard it all.. but it'll probably be close).

 

But hey, I recognise that not everyone will think or feel that way.. so it's just my two cents worth