What would you do to ensure dialogue doesn't......suck?

[JFSOCC]

Slightly of topic, but if I get different quests which still involve the same set pieces all the time, it won't feel very different to me. Reactivity means having some wildly different experiences based on your choices, not seeing the same level from a different perspective. That's cool part of the time, but not constantly.

[Ristora]

Slightly of topic, but if I get different quests which still involve the same set pieces all the time, it won't feel very different to me. Reactivity means having some wildly different experiences based on your choices, not seeing the same level from a different perspective. That's cool part of the time, but not constantly.

Suppose there was a metric that kept track of lying and reputation as a liar. Also suppose you had a quest that was to retrieve an ancient artifact. Suppose you have multiple ways of retrieving this artifact and you do retrieve it. And suppose that during your course of finding the artifact you lie (via dialogue options; something you have done a lot in the past) to a very powerful person in order to get it, . Again, suppose you bring this artifact to the person who desires it. Now suppose they say "yeah, whatever, don't waste my time" because they are convinced that what you have brought them is counterfeit. In fact, because you are *such a dirty liar* they won't even consider having it appraised. You are forced to bring it to the black market where liars are run of the mill.

 

There are nuances that would have to be worked out in this example, but I think it is pointed.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Ristora

[Greensleeve]

 

Slightly of topic, but if I get different quests which still involve the same set pieces all the time, it won't feel very different to me. Reactivity means having some wildly different experiences based on your choices, not seeing the same level from a different perspective. That's cool part of the time, but not constantly.

Suppose there was a metric that kept track of lying and reputation as a liar. Also suppose you had a quest that was to retrieve an ancient artifact. Suppose you have multiple ways of retrieving this artifact and you do retrieve it. And suppose that during your course of finding the artifact you lie (via dialogue options; something you have done a lot in the past) to a very powerful person in order to get it, . Again, suppose you bring this artifact to the person who desires it. Now suppose they say "yeah, whatever, don't waste my time" because they are convinced that what you have brought them is counterfeit. In fact, because you are *such a dirty liar* they won't even consider having it appraised. You are forced to bring it to the black market where liars are run of the mill.

 

There are nuances that would have to be worked out in this example, but I think it is pointed.

 

Yeah, you want to look at what Alpha Protocol did. If you respond as a very aggressive agent, opponents will pick up on that. They might shoot a hostage instead of attempting to negotiate the release of the hostage, because they know you don't care. There is more or less a reputation mechanic in place that tells other people in the game who you are and how you act. 

[Lephys]

Maybe it's more that the effects of your decisions (and the very presentation of those decisions) should be more split up between important (to whatever degree) individual NPCs than simply between big quest outcomes. I'm trying to think of how best to describe this, with only text. MAN if only we had telepathy...

 

Ehhh... *ponders*... Well, let me being by saying that it would be nice if your more immediate, short-term effects on NPCs with whom you interact were recorded. And maybe they do different things because of this. Man, I really can't think of a good, clear example...

 

Okay, alongside permanent switches, we'll call them (such as "Yay, because of what I said or did, you now believe my party are being set up instead of actually being evil murderous mercenaries -- 'murder-cenaries,' if you will" ), there could be lesser, "partial" or temporary switches. Kind of the pool-ball effect. Rather than shooting the queue ball (your party) straight into another ball to knock it into a pocket, you actually don't have any direct shots, and you knock a ball this way instead of that, to put it into a different position (for the purposes of this analogy, pretend you're just playing pool alone). Well, your dialogue choices would affect the weight of the ball you're trying to knock (affecting the distance it can go), and the direction in which you can knock it.

 

So, maybe you can hit the 1 ball into the 3 ball (but can't sink it this time), OR the 1 ball into the 5 ball, OR you can just relocate it into a different position, so that it can later be knocked into the 7 ball or the 8 ball, or perhaps hit the 3 or 5 ball from a different position and knock them into a different pocket.

 

Basically, the pool balls are NPCs, and the pockets are big, over-arching events/decisions/results in the world. In most games, you get a lot of "Do you hit this ball into THIS pocket, or THIS pocket?" choices, but that's about it. You can end up with 3 NPCs in one pocket, and 2 in another, or 1 in the first pocket, and 4 in the other, etc. But, the game doesn't really care all that much how you go about getting them to that pocket, in between pocket shots. Everything is typically taken care of in a single "shot" decision, or is a progression-based thing along a chosen path (the ball is heavy, so you have to shoot at it 5 times in the same direction, over the course of many hours of gameplay, but you eventually get it into the pocket). 

 

Which, again, that's all fine and dandy. I'd just like to see more "Oh, hey, remember that ball, earlier, that I couldn't get into a pocket, or even shoot TOWARD a pocket or any other ball? Well, I hit it in a certain direction, not knowing how far it would go and where it would stop, really, and NOW it turns out it's perfectly set up to hit this OTHER ball into a better position! Then, after I made THAT shot, it turns out that SECOND ball can hit one into a pocket! 8D!"

 

Sometimes, you'll know exactly where your shot will take the ball, and it's just a matter of making a tricky shot, and other times you either won't know the weight of the ball, or you won't really know exactly which direction it can go when you hit it, and you won't know exactly where it's going to end up.

 

The point being that I think affecting NPC A in a certain way, during a temporary meeting, should end up being a factor (or changing a factor) in the scenario in which NPC B comes into play. Maybe because of how you affected NPC A, he sent NPC B's squad on some mission, so when you run into NPC B in a tavern, they're all roughed up and fatigued, and in a completely different mood because of what they just underwent recently. However, if you had handled NPC A differently, maybe NPC B wouldn't have gone on that mission (or would have been told to approach the mission from a different angle, or given more resources, etc.), and you might still bump into them at the exact same tavern, sitting in the exact same place, except they're actually content and relaxed.

 

In other words, you've indirectly affected NPC B, regardless of whether or not they even know it was or whether they react to you differently because of who you are, when you first meet them. They react to you differently because of other factors that were different because of your previous actions and dialogue choices with other people. You have affected the world, if only locally or on a small scale, and different factors are now at play in the current situation you find yourself in, allowing for different choices and angles and ball weights for your next shot attempt. 8P

[mokona]

In order to ensure that dialogue doesn't suck, please keep swearing to a minimum. The Wasteland 2 demo gets annoying when every other word is cussing by the leader of the community you visit and your characters. Blasting the reader with profanities in your writing does not make you edgy, it makes you suck.

[Lephys]

In order to ensure that dialogue doesn't suck, please keep swearing to a minimum. The Wasteland 2 demo gets annoying when every other word is cussing by the leader of the community you visit and your characters. Blasting the reader with profanities in your writing does not make you edgy, it makes you suck.

 

Unless it's a signature trait of a particular character (or characters). But, yeah... otherwise, I'm kinda with ya on that.

[Ffordesoon]

In order to ensure that dialogue doesn't suck, please keep swearing to a minimum. The Wasteland 2 demo gets annoying when every other word is cussing by the leader of the community you visit and your characters. Blasting the reader with profanities in your writing does not make you edgy, it makes you suck.

Every other word? Really? There are many many words in that demo. The F-word is used about five times, and there are scattered other profanities, but I didn't find it excessive at all.

 

I do think I just figured out why some people found the swearing excessive, though. Her posture when you actually meet her doesn't match her demeanor, which makes her whole spiel feel ever-so-slightly off, and the cursing feel excessive. Will post about that on the Wasteland 2 board later.

 

Don't get me wrong; there can be excessive cursing. As with anything in writing, though, it's about context and the voice of the character. At least ninety-five percent of the swearing on Dexter is done by Dexter's sister Debra, and yet it feels appropriate, because the writers have established a consistent voice for that character. By that same token, if June Cleaver screeched the F-word at the top of her lungs and nobody acted as if it was a tremendously strange occurence, that would be excessive, because it would be totally out of character for her.

[FlintlockJazz]

How to ensure good writing in PE? Get a court order banning Bioware from coming within 50 miles of PE! Ba-dum tish!

 

Sorry, it must be that time of the month for me.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

How to ensure good writing in PE? Get a court order banning Bioware from coming within 50 miles of PE! Ba-dum tish!

 

Sorry, it must be that time of the month for me.

It must be. 100 miles should be the minimum.

[JFSOCC]

 

 

Slightly of topic, but if I get different quests which still involve the same set pieces all the time, it won't feel very different to me. Reactivity means having some wildly different experiences based on your choices, not seeing the same level from a different perspective. That's cool part of the time, but not constantly.

Suppose there was a metric that kept track of lying and reputation as a liar. Also suppose you had a quest that was to retrieve an ancient artifact. Suppose you have multiple ways of retrieving this artifact and you do retrieve it. And suppose that during your course of finding the artifact you lie (via dialogue options; something you have done a lot in the past) to a very powerful person in order to get it, . Again, suppose you bring this artifact to the person who desires it. Now suppose they say "yeah, whatever, don't waste my time" because they are convinced that what you have brought them is counterfeit. In fact, because you are *such a dirty liar* they won't even consider having it appraised. You are forced to bring it to the black market where liars are run of the mill.

 

There are nuances that would have to be worked out in this example, but I think it is pointed.

 

 

it's a very good argument it's just not in response to anything I said.

[Ristora]

it's a very good argument it's just not in response to anything I said.

Re-reading what I quoted and what you've said now, I see you may not have been talking about set items as in 'quest items' which is what I thought you were talking about, hence my attempt to show how there could be reactivity despite having the same 'set items' (quest items).

 

Were you referring to quest lines with the same linear plot points (set items)?

Edited April 9, 2013 by Ristora

[JFSOCC]

yes, I was referring to "set pieces" though I didn't realise it was one word.

Parts which you cannot avoid no matter how different your choices are. You'll always come across these. Sometimes it feels pointless to try something different as, while the story might be different, you'll still come across the same situations. Alpha Protocol is a fantastic example of this. Sure you could go for suave, professional or aggressive,

but you'd always have the bomb/hostage choice, you'd always find yourself in the palace to deal with an assassination attempt, and you'll always have a disco battle.

For a game which advertised with "Choice is your weapon" I was quite disappointed that my second play-through found my way to the same scenes as before.

 

And that's fine, to a degree. But you want at least SOME content which is exclusive, based on how you play.

 

that's my point. And yes, that's why I said "Off topic"

Edited April 10, 2013 by JFSOCC

[Inq]

One thing I want: All dialog options lead to at least one different visible reaction. I believe the OP stated something along these lines, I don't want multiple dialog options that lead to the exact same thing.