Sulphur on 22/7/2016 at 17:24
I don't get the criticism over some games being linear either. It's a design choice for your game's content framework, and hopefully one that shows off the key strengths of the content you develop. Open-world and open-ended design is good for lots of things, chief among them the sense of player freedom, but if the game is meant to have a strongly authored through-line, I can suspend my disbelief for that.
If a game is a rewarding experience in spite of or even because of how it's tailored, that usually compensates for any perceived loss of freedom. Most of my all-time favourite games are strictly linear but plenty brilliant regardless.
Nameless Voice on 22/7/2016 at 20:05
I don't think "linear" is quite the right word.
Linear makes me think of a game that always goes in a set sequence (e.g. the story always elapses in pretty much the same way, the levels each follow each other in the same order, etc.)
What I'm talking about is more when the moment-to-moment gameplay feels like you are moving along a track rather than really deciding anything.
I guess that's moment-to-moment linearity as opposed to arc linearity?
To continue with what I was saying before, when the moment-to-moment gameplay is too obviously linear and on rails, it can break my suspension of disbelief and take me out of the game.
Pyrian on 22/7/2016 at 20:51
I have that problem, too, although honestly I usually get over it pretty easily. Still, I appreciate it when a game setting is both good for gameplay and makes a passable attempt at a possibly real-ish location. On the other hand, sometimes I feel like I've cheated myself out of the challenge, which kind of gets back to the original post - if there are multiple paths, are some of them too easy? In Dishonored they sure as heck are. There's something to be said for crafting your own experience, and the effect is heavily mitigated if you have any sense of completionism, but still...
I want to bring up something else. Dialog.
Here are my rules for "Dialog" Options in Glade Raid:
1) No outright stupid options. Any given choice has at least a chance of being good. Dialog choices are not puzzles. Similarly, choices don't have a necessarily optimal answer, either.
2) No foreknowledge. If, for instance, you don't know whether to trust someone and your choice hinges on that, then there are always chances that it could go either way. Again, dialog choices are not moon-logic puzzles.
3) Extensive differences in kind, heavily foreshadowed. If you choose to attack a night, you'll (probably) have a night battle. If you pick the Berzerker's suggestions, you'll have more battles in general, and reach higher levels as a consequence; the Kern's, you'll discover more loot. And so on.
So in one sense I'm basically rejecting the notion of dialog as a separate "path" at all. Instead it influences what paths you'll be on.
But I'm not against a dialog path. Its just never been done well. Can it be? Human Revolution certainly took a crack at it, with a heavily systemized dialog challenge. Shadowrun:Hong Kong has some really cute dialog puzzles (and they're truly separate path, since you can obviate combat with them), although they're basically very easy; I think it's extremely difficult to write dialog puzzles that are neither too easy nor moon logic.
So how would you - any of you - craft a dialog persuasion system that is interesting and fun? With systems clear, open, and extensive enough to figure out and engineer solutions with a combination of persuasive "tools" to solve a given "puzzle"?
Nameless Voice on 22/7/2016 at 21:35
That's really the question, isn't it?
I've never seen dialogue done really well.
It's either "guess the correct option every time" - which is either easy or moon logic, as stated - or it's some really bizarre thing like always having to coerce someone after paying them a compliment, or other weird minigame systems that make no sense.
Unlocking dialogue options at least works halfway okay, e.g. with skill checks or character knowledge allowing you to choose different options. Other than that, it's usually just guesswork.
Yakoob on 23/7/2016 at 03:28
Interesting points. I actually (
http://koobazaur.com/gamedev/game-design/redefining-rpg-conversations-part-1/) brainstormed a few dialogue system that allow you to use attitude wheels with accesories, or one when you can collect different types of responses (like "charm" if you are dressed nicely or blackmail if you get someone to admit something suspicious). Overall I scrapped the ideas as too complex and gamey.
Inline Image:
http://koobazaur.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/dynamic_network_system.jpgOn the problem of dialogue trees, I (
http://koobazaur.com/gamedev/game-design/new-challenges-writing-meaningful-game-dialogue/) ran into similar problems with my old approach where it was hard to show how your choices influenced the outcomes and the linearity didn't really allow much experimentation. You can have a million branches, but a player will only ever see one depending on choices he picks.
I've been brainstorming some new ideas with a friend for procedural setting/character generation that can lend itself to more emergent and procedural dialogue. I think that's the best approch if you truly want a non-linear dialogue. Something to how Dwarf Fortress or Shadow of Mordor create "stories" organically via the world, rather than having them pre-written
