Mass Effect - 2-minute video of a full conversation.

[RK47]

Yes
No
I don't care
Maybe. Tell me more.

Are the basic choices that I expect from my RPG.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Don't see what the fuss is about. The level design seems like the same thing we saw in KOTOR and the dialogue had the same feel as in any other Bioware game. The only thing I liked was the lack of "Let's go back to my other questions" options.

 

[Volourn]

ME > KOTOR

 

[RK47]

In what way Volourn?

 

[PseudoIntellectual Snob]

You still seem to be assuming that there needs to be an explicit mechanic covering the different ways to say something. There doesn't - the existing dialogue scripting already encodes the "mechanics" by special-casing everything to the current situation. Presenting the player with the full text of his speech provides the player with information important to his understanding of the situation (i.e. the "mechanics").

Not only a "mechanic" in the sense of a system that explores more deeply the options and consequences of subtle social interactions but also the concept that, if i choose among two options and the interloper's answer is the same (not only in a "path" o "variable choosen" one, but in a "text shown" one) then both options should be one and the same. If i have the illusion of choice (illusion in the sense of two different text options that bear no "solid" change in gameplay) then the same response of the interloper should be written in two different ways, even if it is the same.

Exempli Gratia, if i can choose to say A or B, and whatever i choose the NPC is going to say C, then i should not have two different options. If i can choose A or B and in response the NPC gives me answers C or D, fleshing out the "fluff" even if the "gameplay" result does not change, then i am all dandy with that (if well written and not just some extra random crap). The "choice" had a "Consequence," being that more info or different info (i prefer different) about the situation or character or a entirely different point of view on something, even if not a "mechanical" one.

Of course, a "mechanics" or "gameplay" difference is not against my wishes, even if it is as simple as different rewards, quest difficulty or content, different prices, or some use for the extra fluff, even if it is just discovering more extra fluff or clues about puzzles/situations. It is not that hard to script that kind of differences, so i am inclined to think "Lazy Bastards" if not present.

I'd have listed them if I could think of any - I just haven't played that many RPGs. Arcanum surely though. Bloodlines? I'd say so. I'm no authority on hidden RPG gems.

Me neither, no problem.

Arcanum was a good game and all, but not my cup of tea in the dialog department - I thought it had way too little options, or at least too litte variety in the "kind" of options. Most "diplomatic" options where more of "Lying" options than "Argumentation" options, and even the "Diplomat" special quests were like multiple choice exams without chance to argument the point, just say what they want to hear or fail the quest.

Ages beyond most, even then.

We seem to be talking about slightly different things though.

Maybe it is the same thing with different wording? I am beginning to think so, at least partly.

Sure, but I'm criticising what they're doing with it - not the idea itself. If that's all they can make of it, I don't think it should be included. I don't think they deserve credit for an "RPG element" until they use such a system to further RPG gameplay.

One hundred percent with you on that one. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

Cinematic context to how a natural conversation would span out is a noble effort and may be an innovation, even. But it seems to sacrifice the dynamic nature of how one could observe character development, closes some paths that may offer more introspection into the character traits.

It depends on implementation. If, for an example, you have a choice of background as in Arcanum, then the "Emoting" could be based on such option. At least as a generalization, it doesn't need to be perfect to express who your character is and where he comes from.

Exempli Gratia, a "Miracle Operation" character should have diferent "emoting" (mannerism, localisms, wording, et caetera) than a "Bandit" or "Arsonist" one, and both different from a "Mad Scientist" one, but maybe the diferences between the "Miracle Operation" guy and another "High Society, Non Physical, Charismatic" background would be so small there is no immediate need to assign them fully different ones, only some specific scripted situations that differ.

So it would still be based on generalizations, pinpointed by in-game-choices maybe, but that will always be in cRPGs.

It emulates the immediate thought process that compel a person to formulate dialogs, but it is nonetheless scripted emoting that is aesthetically pleasing but does not better reflect the character that you are trying to role-play. It seems you are role-playing more of yourself.

O.o

How it is that watching a pre-scripted set of emotes is actually more like role-playing yourself (choosing what you, and not a character, would choose given the represented situation) than role-playing a character (choosing what the character, not you, would choose given the represented situation)? If the character acts by itself or if the character has a limited choice of ranges from wich to pick, then you can't roleplay yourself. It is not possible by design, only by chance - And then highly doubtful.

The problem here is that the game is roleplaying the character for you instead of puting him on your hands, not that the game is roleplaying you for the character. xD

Now, offtopic, that would be a quite interesting game. Very Taoist and experimental. I like the idea.

And just in case: yes, i read the last paragraph of your post - I am discussing the concept in itself.

I think Mass Effect will be better than KOTOR.

ME > KOTOR

It is not an epic feat to surpass the first KOTOR.

Not even the best of modern CRPG's offer dialog chooice, like Wizardry 8, the late Ultima's or even Daggerfall, while some bad or mediocre CRPGs do (Ravenloft: Stone Prophet).

Dialog Choices = One of the main ways to influence the story.

Influence over Story + Character Development = RPG.

Character Development without Influence over Story = Diablo Clone, Adventure Game, or Turn-Based Tactical Game (with "walk around the world and buy souvenirs" tourist minigame as an extra, or not).

Not that i have anything against adventure games, but we are talking cRPGs right now.

Dixi.

 

[Jasede]

I don't remember having much influence over the story in Lands of Lore or Eye of the Beholder or Dungeon Master.

Surely this means they each are a turn-based tactical game, not an RPG. The games we grew up with are no longer RPGs by authority of PIS.

 

[spacemoose]

I don't remember having much influence over the story in Lands of Lore or Eye of the Beholder or Dungeon Master.

Surely this means they each are a turn-based tactical game, not an RPG. The games we grew up with are no longer RPGs by authority of PIS.

they're not the rpgs I want to play for sure.

 

[Volourn]

"In what way Volourn?"

In every way that matters.

 

[PseudoIntellectual Snob]

I don't remember having much influence over the story in Lands of Lore or Eye of the Beholder or Dungeon Master.

Surely this means they each are a turn-based tactical game, not an RPG. The games we grew up with are no longer RPGs by authority of PIS.

Please... Lands of Lore an RPG? It wasn't just linear, it had no skillsystem to speak of, not a single choice, no character creation, no sidequests, almost no quests, lots of situations with just ONE solution that was not dependant on character (all?), the story sucked, and the gameworld had no background beyond "She. Evil Witch. Go kill."

And i do consider "Go pillage some random dungeon and kill the big shit in the last room" games to be a separate genre, wether they were made ten years ago or yesterday. If Diablo is not an RPG, then Eye of the Beholder, Dungeon Master, Ravenloft, Menzoberranzan, et caetera are not RPGs. They are whack-a-monster-and-solve-a-basic-puzzle games, or whatever they are called.

***

Oh, and i almost forgot: I gave three different genres, and just as an example. Do not try to turn my words into another thing, please. I know you understood perfectly well what i said, or at least hope so.

 

[kingcomrade]

PseudoIntellectual Snob

What do you think about SUVs?

 

[Jasede]

Words

Despite all that you said and explained, Lands of Lore still is an RPG and Diablo is an Action RPG. One day you will learn.