Interview A Decadent Interview at RPG Dot

[Vault Dweller]

Yeah, but somehow righting the wrongs of other games doesn't come acroass as a positive sales argument.

I'm not trying to make any sales arguments yet, and frankly, I don't think I should. My PR job is to inform people what kind of game AoD is. The game itself, when you download it and try it, will be my one and only sales argument.

Sounds very nice and anti-capitalist, but it's still bullshit.

Why anti-capitalistic? I do want to sell the game. Fuck, I need to sell the game otherwise I'll lose my team, but I want to do it differently. When everyone and their fucking dog are doing things a certain way, it often helps to do the opposite, no?

Also, the game will be sold as shareware, so no matter what I say and promise, the final impression & the purchase decision would be based on the gameplay, hence my earlier sentiment. "Selling" the game, under these circumstances, is pointless, informing people isn't.

If you go out to the public with an interview like this, you are talking to your potential customers, and everything you say is a sales argument, wether you like it or not.

Few posts back you said that you "don't have the slightest clue in Marketing", and now you are reading me a lecture on sales.

I'm not trying to convince people to buy my game at this point. I'm merely explaining the features and such. Talking to potential customers doesn't imply that a sale is taking place, just like every time you talk to a woman, you are not trying to sell her the idea of sleeping with you (I hope )

 

[Vault Dweller]

If you are comfortable with it, then, in my opinion, it is as it should be.

I'm very comfortable with it, but because English isn't my native language, my opinion is meaningless, unfortunately. I can only estimate the quality by the reaction I get from other people. Since the reaction is public, I'll let you be the judge.

... it also reads very naturally (in the not-forcing-this-personality-up-your-ass kind of way) while still retaining quite a bit of originality.

Thanks.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Few posts back you said that you "don't have the slightest clue in Marketing", and now you are reading me a lecture on sales.

Heh, the fact that I don't have a clue doesn't mean I don't have an opinion

The reason I even posted at all is "prelude to darkness" I only just got it by stumbling over it here on the forums and on the RPGdot - that game is from all I heard and from a first impression good enough to "speak for itself" too, but I get the impression that that was not enough. I had never heard of it, there isn't a single review on the net except in these very forums - which tells my uneducated self that whatever marketing they did clearly wasn't enough.

But anyway, since you are conviced you are doing it right I will save my breath.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The reason I even posted at all is "prelude to darkness" I only just got it by stumbling over it here on the forums and on the RPGdot - that game is from all I heard and from a first impression good enough to "speak for itself" too, but I get the impression that that was not enough. I had never heard of it, there isn't a single review on the net except in these very forums - which tells my uneducated self that whatever marketing they did clearly wasn't enough.

That's a different problem, and I doubt that AoD will suffer from the lack of publicity.

 

[Azarkon]

Up to par with what? Your own standards? Tolkien? War and Fucking Peace? While I agree with the criticism, I daresay that the game has better writing, despite the awkwardness, than many top commercial games do. Oblivion and Rise of Legends come to mind.

The standards set forth by games like yours. I'm talking about games like the BG's, the Fallouts, PS:T, and the like.

RoL's dialogue indeed sucked donkey balls, but then RoL was never meant to be a dialogue-dependent game (as for Oblivion, I'm not in a position to judge since I haven't played the game through). Your game, from what you've said, is dependent on dialogue, and should therefore juxtapose itself against other games of the sort. Saying that your game has better dialogue than a RTS or a shooter isn't going to mean much. Saying that it has dialogue on par with the BG's, on the other hand, is tremendously meaningful with respect to the audience you're targetting.

I've already said what I felt about the dialogue, so I won't belabor the point. But I really don't think I'm coming from an elitist point of view. To be frank, I've played NWN mods with better writing - but that shouldn't be an insult, because there are some very talented NWN mod makers around who clearly has English as their first language & concentration. Still, it does indicate the standard that you're up against.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I've already said what I felt about the dialogue, so I won't belabor the point. But I really don't think I'm coming from an elitist point of view. To be frank, I've played NWN mods with better writing - but that shouldn't be an insult, because there are some very talented NWN mod makers around who clearly has English as their first language & concentration. Still, it does indicate the standard that you're up against.

You are right.

 

[WouldBeCreator]

Why not just hire a writer but maintain control over the scenario and over the actual design of interactions? Judging from the dialogue itself, it seems like the craft of *writing* interests you a lot less than the craft of dialogue design. My impression is that all you'd have to do is offer a pittance and you'd have lots of writers jumping at the chance to work on a decent game.

 

[galsiah]

The standards set forth by games like yours. I'm talking about games like the BG's, the Fallouts, PS:T, and the like.

Fallout 2?
Probably the main reason I've stopped playing Fallout 2 soon after starting (though I guess I continue at some point) is the annoying writing, with constant self reference and real world references. Companions in a game shouldn't start talking about how "Developer X didn't make enough <insert art asset here>". Cheeky self reference is all very well, but only if it fits with the game world - or the game world is intended to be a joke.

I'll take VD's occasional awkwardness over Fallout 2's in-your-face self-referencial running commentry any day. Perhaps the companions I've met in Fallout 2 aren't typical, but I don't think any character should be so out of place.

Also, why mention PS:T? That's hardly useful in a standard-to-live-up-to sense, since it's practically unique. It's something for an accomplished writer to aspire to or attempt to best.

Your game, from what you've said, is dependent on dialogue, and should therefore juxtapose itself against other games of the sort.

There's a big difference between depending on dialogue and depending on writing. The most important part of dialogue is the depth and breadth of options presented for the player, and the depth and breadth of possible NPC reaction. The writing of the dialogue is just a means of presenting those possibilities - it's important presentation, but still presentation.

It's important that bad / awkward writing doesn't obscure the meaning, and doesn't put the player off. That's all a game with good dialogue needs from the writing. If the dialogue can be presented with style, then that's great, but it's not necessary - just a bonus.

If VD were championing his writing as a feature, you'd have a point, but he's not. I agree that it would make sense to spend a bit of time eliminating awkward phrasing etc., but not to re-write much to change the style.

 

[WouldBeCreator]

If VD were championing his writing as a feature, you'd have a point, but he's not. I agree that it would make sense to spend a bit of time eliminating awkward phrasing etc., but not to re-write much to change the style.

I guess what I don't get here is why there shouldn't be more of an effort to polish the writing up significantly. As I said in our prior lengthy debate, fancy writing is candy, just like fancy graphics or fancy music and sound, but it happens to be fairly cheap candy to produce, at least if all you want is prosey but technically accurate dialogue. The current dialogue is riddled with run-on sentences and usage issues. It's perfectly readable, so it presents no impediment to gameplay, but I can't think of a good reason not to fix it up more.

(I agree, by the way, with your issues with FO2 and with the silliness of setting PS:T as the standard. But in terms of the writing itself -- as opposed to the dialogue's structural design -- it's awfully weak compared to other games out there.)

 

[Azarkon]

I'm not expecting PS:T writing here, but Fallout (if you really hate Fallout 2 that much), BG, & BG 2 should be a good goal to aim for, right?

It's important that bad / awkward writing doesn't obscure the meaning, and doesn't put the player off. That's all a game with good dialogue needs from the writing. If the dialogue can be presented with style, then that's great, but it's not necessary - just a bonus.

I disagree. Game dialogue is like screenwriting. It's not just functional - and making it merely functional means that people are going to fast forward through your dialogue to get to the point, which I doubt *any* designer wants.

Good game dialogue, in my book, plays like a conversation where you can detect the other person's personality from the way he's speaking, and which also serves as good reading besides. In this sense, traditional writers don't really have a leg up except perhaps in their larger vocabulary, because no one's expecting you to describe the scenery or make imaginative metaphors in the middle of a sentence on what to do about invading orcs. But they are expecting writing with personality, which is where style comes in.

If you're going to be spending alot of time reading what characters have to say and interacting with them, then the medium through which such things are conveyed - writing - is of foremost importance. If reading is not a pleasure in a game where I spend a significant amount of time reading, then how do you expect me to enjoy the game? That's the question you've got to answer.

 

[galsiah]

I guess what I don't get here is why there shouldn't be more of an effort to polish the writing up significantly...

Sure - I'd have no objection to that. It's one reasonable direction to head. It would involve a lot of VD's time to get it done properly though. Perhaps he thinks there are more efficient uses of time.
Still, I'd see it as a useful addition to improve AoD, not a necessary fix to make AoD viable as a good game.

It's not just functional - and making it merely functional means that people are going to fast forward through your dialogue to get to the point...

No it doesn't: if the dialogue is a functional presentation of what you need to know, then the dialogue you are reading is the point - there is no "getting to" the point. If dialogues were linear, with little player input, then the player could be encouraged to skip through them to get to the point. I don't think they are.

If reading is not a pleasure in a game where I spend a significant amount of time reading, then how do you expect me to enjoy the game? That's the question you've got to answer.

Ok then, I will.
The question is not: "Is the reading entertaining in some way?"
But rather: "Are you being entertained in some way as you read?"

Perhaps AoD won't always be able to say yes to the first, but I think the focus is on being able to say yes to the second. While you are reading, you are being told important facts (or lies of course) which will influence your future actions. You might also be trying to piece together the truth of various past/current situations. In short, you are thinking.

Given the choice between writing where I'm thinking "What a delightful play on words", and writing where I'm thinking "Could that be true?... What implications does it have for...? Can I believe this guy?... In the light of ..., I'll certainly need to ... and to bear ... in mind", I'll go for the second any day.

Of course ideally you'd have both, but it's silly to think that the style of writing is anything like as important as the substance. By "substance" here I mean things which have an important impact on a player's future actions / gameplay experience. Much of the writing in PS:T lacks substance in the sense that it doesn't have a large impact on player action (I think most of it does impact the player's overall experience though - even "irrelevant" facts help to build up a picture of things).

I would guess that a much higher proportion of the dialogue in AoD has substance, in that it can have wide ranging implications for future player action. The entertainment of reading comes from thinking about how it's important, what it means, whether it's true..., or with your own responses, what you're aiming to achieve.

I agree that it's a bonus if the writing style is entertaining to read, but I don't think it's in any sense a requirement. You have a point about style being important to get a sense of personality, but it's not the only way. What NPCs say and do is still the most important factor (it's just that usually they don't do/say much that makes any difference).

 

[Azarkon]

I'm not in a position to refute your post, given that the game hasn't been released yet, though I think you're placing too much faith on how well actions can be represented through functional dialogue in a game that's not going to depend on graphics/animations. In my experience, it's simply darned hard to invoke emotions from players who do not respect your language in a game that depends on language to express almost everything. In this respect, presentation is everything. But I'll wait for the game to see for myself (since there'll be a shareware, which btw is a great decision).

 

[bryce777]

Well, a lot of mods have 'good' writing in the sense that it is grammatically intact and is nice prose, but that does not make the writing itself good.

A lot of it is lauded as well written when unfortunately it is sort of a showcase of writing and doesn't fit in with the game itself or portray anything like a like conversation someone might posibly have.

VD's problem is once you largely eliminate combat as a game staple then not only must the actual choices themselves be sharp and make sense but since it then becomes largely a dialog game, the writing and characters had better be interesting as well as pleasing in contruction or else the game is in trouble.

 

[WouldBeCreator]

galsiah -- I feel like you're taking exactly the position you got upset at me for advocating in the other thread.

 

[Claw]

I think you're placing too much faith on how well actions can be represented without words

How'd you get that idea? I can't seem to find any notion of that in his posts.

 

[Azarkon]

That's a typo. I'll correct it.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I guess what I don't get here is why there shouldn't be more of an effort to polish the writing up significantly.

Time. Coincidentally, that's also the answer to questions "why there shouldn't be more of an effort to polish graphics significantly?" and "why there shouldn't be more of an effort to polish the interface significantly?" Do I really need to explain that?

The current dialogue is riddled with run-on sentences and usage issues.

Riddled? You must really hate the dialogues.

It's perfectly readable, so it presents no impediment to gameplay, but I can't think of a good reason not to fix it up more.

See above. Yes, I know. Get a person. Well, it's not that simple. Here is my experience with the locations artists. I posted a "need an artist" message. Got 27 artists, and spent a few days looking at the sample art. Picked 8 artists that I really liked, and asked them to do a test piece. Of course, I had to answer questions, discuss the game and the art, explain and correct, evaluate the test art, discuss it with my team, etc. Took about a week. All that before we even started working on the game art, and the game art didn't take much of my time. The dialogues are a different matter. I can't just say "here, fix it". I would have to discuss every dialogue line, word-by-word. If it takes less than 6-8 weeks, after I spend a week or two interviewing and evaluating potential candidates, I'll be very surprised.

Granted, I'm very concerned about the complaints, and if more and more people join the bitchfest, I would have no choice but to delay the game. It doesn't make sense to work so hard, and then ruin it because my dialogues are so awful. However, based on the response, I'd say that 70% like the dialogues, 25% are ok with them, and 5% think that they are awful and weak. So far, the numbers are in my favor.

...it's awfully weak compared to other games out there.

Again, what games? Out where? FO, BG, PST. 5 games. If my game is #6, I can live with that.

In my experience, it's simply darned hard to invoke emotions from players who do not respect your language in a game that depends on language to express almost everything.

I'm not trying to invoke any emotions other than "Holy Fuck! I can really do a lot of different things here!". I'm perfectly aware of my shortcomings. The dialogues are there to give you options. If you are looking for linguistic virtuosity :wink:, get a book instead.

 

[Azarkon]

I'm not trying to invoke any emotions other than "Holy Fuck! I can really do a lot of different things here!". I'm perfectly aware of my shortcomings. The dialogues are there to give you options. If you are looking for linguistic virtuosity Wink, get a book instead.

That's about what I figured Hence my first post indicating that AoD will likely be differently received by the "need more text" camp and the "roleplaying choices for teh win" camp. Still, I don't think I'm looking for what can be found in a book here, but more what could be found in a good screenplay. That's more akin to what I think dialogue should do in games.

 

[Roqua]

You are from Niger or Mali aren't you? Or mayby DR. But if you were Dominican would English be your third language? It would more likely be your second or forth, but not third. Why don't you just tell us? It makes no sense. If you are native Canadian what other language would you learn before English? You are too normal to be from France, where you could of picked up another romance language. And if you were from somewhere other than Niger or Mali you probably would know a million tribal languages and not English. Besides Morocco, Tunisia, or Algeria. Then English could very well be your third language, but you would be less compassionate to Israel. Just tell us for Christ's sake.

 

[Vault Dweller]

What difference does it make?

 

[galsiah]

In my experience, it's simply darned hard to invoke emotions from players who do not respect your language in a game that depends on language to express almost everything.

I don't think players usually "respect" or disrespect language as they're playing a game. That's looking at it from a critique-the-writing perspective, not a player's perspective.
If the writing has a load of mistakes which get in the way of the sense, then I lose respect. Otherwise I take it at face value. I don't think players lose respect for writing on the basis that it lacks personality.

As to how hard it is to invoke emotions, there are many ways to do that. In X-com games I had strong emotional responses to situations even though the "characters" were totally flat. If a character is important (in any sense), his actions are important, and the player is given room and time to ascribe personality / emotion to him, he probably will.

However good / detailed the writing, you always have to fill in the gaps yourself. Most of the picture you build up of any character is based more on your assumptions and guesses than what you're explicitly told. The most important factor IMO is that the player has the motivation to care enough to fill in the gaps - however large they might be. Xcom gave me that motivation without the need for any writing, Morrowind (unmodded) usually did not.

galsiah -- I feel like you're taking exactly the position you got upset at me for advocating in the other thread. :wink:

Yeah - that crossed my mind when I was writing it, but I figured that arguing couldn't be wrong .
I still think the situation is a bit different from graphics though. I'd also still say that it's impossible to cleanly separate funtionality from "glitz". That doesn't mean I can't say that the functionality is the important aspect.

Anyway, perhaps when I said "You can't draw the line...", I meant you can't draw the line. Clearly I can draw the line, since I'm special :wink:.

 

[Vault Dweller]

In my experience, it's simply darned hard to invoke emotions from players who do not respect your language in a game that depends on language to express almost everything.

I don't think players usually "respect" or disrespect language as they're playing a game. That's looking at it from a critique-the-writing perspective, not a player's perspective.

Agree. I enjoyed Space Rangers a lot, even though the translation was crappy. Questions like "do I respect the writing?" never came up.

As to how hard it is to invoke emotions, there are many ways to do that. In X-com games I had strong emotional responses to situations even though the "characters" were totally flat

Yep. I remember losing a guy in XCOM who wasn't the best overall, but he had a bitching reaction. I had to abort a long underwater mission I wasn't ready for (it was my first run), and I literally had to leave him behind. I still remember that moment.

 

[bryce777]

You are from Niger or Mali aren't you? Or mayby DR. But if you were Dominican would English be your third language? It would more likely be your second or forth, but not third. Why don't you just tell us? It makes no sense. If you are native Canadian what other language would you learn before English? You are too normal to be from France, where you could of picked up another romance language. And if you were from somewhere other than Niger or Mali you probably would know a million tribal languages and not English. Besides Morocco, Tunisia, or Algeria. Then English could very well be your third language, but you would be less compassionate to Israel. Just tell us for Christ's sake.

Can you not respect the man's privacy? I do not tell people my place of origin and there is good reason for it in my case because I have had many issues with people harassing me over petty squabbles that should be dead for centuries. I can only assume VD has similar reasons he would rather be judged by the content of what he says instead of an identity assigned by idiots who have never met him. He is obviously a bright guy and hopefully will make a game we all enjoy; beyond that there is no reason to care about his past.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Amen.

 

[Azarkon]

Agree. I enjoyed Space Rangers a lot, even though the translation was crappy. Questions like "do I respect the writing?" never came up.

You could enjoy a game tremendously without respecting the writing, but were you moved by Spare Rangers? Diablo is a very fun game - does that make it one with memorable NPCs and stories?

The importance of writing depends on what kind of game you're trying to create. If all that you're trying to do with AoD is to make a "fun" game, it's not necessary to have good writing. In fact, you could forego all the writing, and still have a "fun" game.

Yep. I remember losing a guy in XCOM who wasn't the best overall, but he had a bitching reaction. I had to abort a long underwater mission I wasn't ready for (it was my first run), and I literally had to leave him behind. I still remember that moment.

It's his *reaction* that made the moment memorable, which is why the presentation of that reaction is important. I don't know much about Xcom, having never played the series, but I admit that there are other ways to create attachment between the player and the NPCs, such as cinematic techniques, direct control, and the like - but they're dwarfed by writing in a CRPG because most of your interactions with characters in a CRPG come through either dialogue or combat. That is why writing is so important, imo, in a CRPG.

But we've gone back and forth on this point long enough, I think. I don't think it can be argued that good writing helps a game and that bad writing detracts from it. It's only a matter of degree that's in question, and that usually depends on the person's own biases.