Shevek said:
Dave's use of the numbers "10-12" is simply a clever rhetorical device. He knows any reasonable person would agree that that number is too high.
No, actually Dave is saying 10 - 12 is bad because
the original poster in that thread where this response by Dave Gaider has been pulled from said "
I would like to see about 10-12 options, and not the same old ones every time for each minor or major NPC. I realize this can not be done for every NPC so just focus on some interesting ones.".
Given I'm working on
the greatest fan-made Fallout project EVAR I've got some comments on this from a design perspective. Dave is right when he implies "there's only so much you can do" because everything you do does have to be scripted, created or coded into the game in some way. The reality is, what are your real options anyway? People don't play PC games for some kind of dialogue re-creation. They play RPGs for quests and to explore a really cool world (if your opinion differs, please elaborate as to why - I'd be interested). That leaves us with the simple fact that the player is talking to an NPC to:
- Get a quest.
- Get some info about a quest he's already got.
- Find out some info (important or otherwise) about the game world.
If it's to get a quest, then again, there's only so much you can do. At some point the NPC has to tell or indicate to the player that they have a quest to give. The PC has to be able to show interest in the quest, find out more and accept it or be able to reject it if they're not interested. Players generally don't won't to talk to an NPC about the kids and what they did last weekend and what they thought about Star Wars Episode III. They just want the quest or some info about the game-world. Really, that's it.
That said, delivery is certainly important and building up to the quest is a lot better than having a player walk up to a character and simply ask "Quest PLZ?" but you don't want to go too far with it. Asking farmer Joe "What he's doing" and being told "I'm planting these here witchity-trees but my witchity-polanterer is on the blink so I'm doing it by hand" is a nice lead in to a quest ("Hey, I'll fix your quest item for you! XP++"). Being told about the kids, the holiday and how good the wife is in bed - or more appropriately, anything other than information that the player can use in some way in the game - isn't.
The problem of course is, that if you accept that these characters shouldn't say anything other than what may be of use to the player, then you can't really have a conversation with them (point of clarification: What would ultimately be a meaningless, pointless, irrelevant and "unfun" conversation). If it's a quest, then the player doesn't really have many options. Either he / she has to accept the quest, refuse the quest or maybe see if he can go away to think about it and come back later. What else really, is the player going to do?
We can elaborate and bring this into real world conversations. Most conversations in games have to be broken down into question / answer sessions. The player isn't really having any "conversations" at all. He's just a walking quizz show host and the NPCs are his unfortunate contestants. Think about any conversation you've had in real life. Now imagine it was a game. Hopefully you'll see how it wouldn't work.
The other issue is that even in these generic real-life conversations, your options aren't really all that unlimited. I mean really, if someone asks you "What did you think about the new Star Wars movie?", what are your responses?
- Fuck you areshole!
- I haven't seen it yet.
- It sucks because... here's my 5 minute speech on why it sucks.
- I blew a load in the cinema at its greatness... here's my 5 minute speech on why I blew my load.
- I didn't see Star Wars but I saw Mr and Mrs Smith... Here's my 5 minute speech about how hot Angelina Jolie is.
- Say, would you like to join me in a quest to the canteen for some lunch?
- Can I ask you another question?
Only 3 of those really make any sense (2, 3, 4). The rest are simply changing the subject to "anything else other than what you're talking about right now" while one is completely idiotic (No# 1). Even then, that's only 7 options and nowhere near 12. I could make 12 but then it'd become noticeable that they're simply variations on the same "change the subject" theme. The person has asked you a very specific question. Your only real options are "yes / no / avoid the issue".
You can't replicate a "normal" non-question conversation in a game simply because it is impossible. You'd end up talking about things that are either irrelevant to the game or situation the player finds themself in or in a long-winded conversation that achieves nothing ("Why did I spend 10 minutes talking to that guy when he didn't know anything about the quest or the big bad Foozle? What was that all about? What was the point?"). Dialogue responses suddenly become overly long and it's just not fun.
The key to good dialogue in a game is therefore quite remarkably simple (and as usual, simple things are often the hardest to achieve):
- Players aren't interested in information they can't use (Some good background information about the world or other characters is useful info as it helps build the game into something interesting).
- Keep the discussion to the topic on hand. Work out what information you need to give the player and figure out how you're going to do it. Pad it out a bit if it makes sense to do so but don't go overboard.
- Players don't want to be able to ask "quest-related" questions to NPCs that don't know anything about the quest.
- The players options need to make sense. He should be able to say "yes / no / maybe later" (you'll be surprised at how many times you don't get to say "no" and have it matter - especially with regard to main plots).
- Different options that end in the same result should have more than a mere superficial difference. IE: If there are two "yes" options, one should result in a better reward or be otherwise different in some way to the other option (for example the "yes" and "yes with angst" style options where appropriate - or even "yes, but it'll cost you"). One thing we do a bit in Fan Made Fallout is have two options which ultimately lead to the same result but one is a "nice way" and often has less conditions attached to it (lower speech skill check) where as the other way is the "more insulting way" and has more conditions, such as leading to another skill test, having a higher initial skill check or having some other affect on the NPC - good or bad. They're not provided with every NPC and are used sparingly.
- Use skill checks where appropriate. Options like the player bartering down the price or even asking for a price / reward when none has been suggested. Intimidating / bribing the NPC into giving out more information and so on. These are where your extra options come into play. Given they're based on skills, players find them more rewarding because it rewards "their" character for having the right stat bumped up for this situation. Again though, the situations have to make sense. Bartering where no money is involved is just daft or intimidating an NPC who can be easily bribed doesn't make sense. There's no need to provide multiple ways to do the same thing - use the skills and rewards sparingly and people suddenly feel like they've gained something, even more so than if you had provided generic "bribe / intimidate / persuade" options with every NPC.
Seriously, all you need is good writing and most of the complaints about lack of options disappear. Provided you cover the basics - throw in a few more options
where it makes sense to do so and make sure the scenarios that the player finds themselves in are plausible - you generally end up with some good dialogue.
