Non-combat specific: Conversations

[Hmm-Hmm.]

For me, one of the most important aspects of a good rpg is a fleshed-out way to interact with other beings without resorting to violence. In many games, however, a conversation system can end up having various flaws, like:

 

-Showing various ways to say what amounts to the same thing.

-Choosing an option leading your character(s) to say something entirely different than what you thought he/she/they would.

-Having a choice but in the end finding that, well, you didn't influence the result at all (or only superficially).

-Only being able to talk to specifically designated groups/people. What if we could talk to the monsters, eh? Maybe they wouldn't turn out to be so monstrous after all.

-How in-game knowledge is treated, while not directly influencing conversations, can promote a certain atmosphere. How do you know said group of wandering people are bandits? And what their names are? Said knowledge should affect how you interact with them.

 

If done well, a conversation system is also a lot of work, so I would assume. It could include emotions your character(s) feel (how you say something), gestures, sign language.. even how you act towards someone while doing something else entirely. There are many ways a conversation system could be used to enrich the game.

 

And I really want to have a satisfactory system in Eternity. However, how deep it should (or can) go is probably dependent on the effort it requires. And such effort is only increased by adding more options for the players to customise their characters. As how NPCs of race X react to a PC of race A is likely to be different to how NPCs of race Y react to the same. Or the same with a different PC. Of course, there's not always a lot a person can change in people around him/her. Not everybody is as judgemental or prejudiced or objective. Hence, there's not always a need for a lot of conversation options. As long as what choices are given seem likely given the circumstances.

 

What I am wondering is what you, fellow being interested in Project Eternity, think about this. Personally, I am rather excited about Project Eternity and I have every confidence in the people behind it to make it as great as they can. It's just.. well.. that it's so rare that a conversation system is done well.

[eimatshya]

For me, one of the most important aspects of a good rpg is a fleshed-out way to interact with other beings without resorting to violence. In many games, however, a conversation system can end up having various flaws, like:

 

-Showing various ways to say what amounts to the same thing.

 

I don't necessarily agree that this is a flaw. I like it when you have multiple ways to say the same thing. When dialogue systems distill the options down to the minimal range of choices, I often find myself staring at a set of possible dialogue choices not sure which one to pick because the only option that conveys what I want to say is worded in such a way so as to make me uncomfortable with choosing it (e.g. because the wording is either extremely self-righteous or extremely callous). As such, I find having multiple ways to deliver a response to be very helpful when I'm trying to roleplay a character. To me, the wording of an utterance is as important as its surface message, as word choice conveys so many subtle (or not-so-subtle) connotations that it can fundamentally alter how the message is received.

 

For example, there's a part in KotOR II where you and the "scoundrel" have been waiting around in a room together for a while. Atton, the scoundrel character, has recently learned that your character is a Jedi. If you are playing a female, he will break the silence by hitting on you, saying something like, "So... how long you been a Jedi? Must be hard; no family, no... husband." The game then gives you several dialogue choices:

 

1. No harder than having to endure your false sympathy while you're staring at my chest.

2. Are you trying to annoy me, or are you just an idiot?

3. [some other option that ignores the fact that he's being skeevy].

 

Given that the first two options lead to the same result, i.e. calling Atton out on his advances, this conversation could have been reduced to two responses, 3 and an option that combines 1 and 2. I like that the game does not reduce the ways to criticize his behavior to a single option. It gives you both a sarcastic and a much harsher, direct way to do the same thing.

 

Anyway, I've generally enjoyed the dialogue options in Obsidian's games (and PS:T had the best variety of conversation options I've seen in a game), so I'm not worried about the conversation system in P:E.

Edited September 26, 2012 by eimatshya