Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Stabbey] #589226
25/09/16 06:19 PM
25/09/16 06:19 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
LordCrash Offline

veteran
LordCrash  Offline

veteran

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
Originally Posted by Stabbey
I agree with this. I understand why some people like to have all that content available so they only have to play it once, but I don't agree. Picking an origin character should be a special choice, you shouldn't get almost all the experience seeing the origins you didn't pick. That just makes it less special.

Swen just said in the other topic that this will indeed be the case. Only one origin story in SP. Yay! smile

Quote
The rest of your idea sounds pretty good as well.
Thanks. smile

Last edited by LordCrash; 25/09/16 06:19 PM.

WOOS
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: LordCrash] #589242
25/09/16 06:41 PM
25/09/16 06:41 PM
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 110
S
Surrealialis Offline
member
Surrealialis  Offline
member
S

Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by LordCrash
Originally Posted by Surrealialis
They need to find a way to have important conversation tags like pet pal or the red prince still be available when another character is talking.

I must say, that I like your ideas a lot.

First, I agree that only the main character's origin story should work in SP. Every other orign story related content for other group members should be blocked in SP and become invisible. Competitive questing was only envisioned for coop-MP anyway.

For all the rest of the normal dialogues it would indeed make sense if Larian implemented some kind of "group dialogue" for SP which means that when you talk to an NPC every possible dialogue line that applies to one of the party members of your current (chained) group is visible and choosable no matter which character is currently active.

I think that it would be pretty easy to implement such a system for SP. The game only had to notice that only one player is playing right now (you could even manage that by a manual button in the menu like "play the game in SP mode") If that's the case the game doesn't differentiate between members of the current chained party anymore in dialogues and instead offers one dialogue option for the whole group. So if your current chained group for example consisted of Ifan, the Red Prince and Lohse a possible dialogue window with an NPC would look like that:

NPC text, text, text...

1) Generic reaction/answer one
2) Generic reaction/answer two
3) [Ifan]...
4) [Soldier]...
5) [Red Prince]...
6) [Scholar]...
7) [Lohse]...
8) [Mystic]...


If you unchained Lohse and your group only consisted of Ifan and the Red Prince options 7) and 8) wouldn't be visible anymore. For a one-man party only consiting of Ifan only option 1) to 4) would be visible and choosable if you start a conversation using Ifan.


That way it wouldn't matter anymore which character of your group initiated a dialogue because it always involves the whole chained group. This solution would offer a viable solution for all current issues with dialogues in SP imo:

- you don't have to start multiple dialogues with the same NPC anymore to have access to origin/race specific dialogue options

- dialogue feels dynamic and includes the whole party, giving you the feeling that it's more like a discussion with the whole group where everybody can get involved

- if only one party member has access to pet pal you don't necessarily need this character for starting dialogues with animals

- scripted dialogues that start automatically will never again happen with the "wrong" character who just happened to stand closest to the respective NPC

- situations that split up your party (death, prison, etc.) wouldn't be negatively influenced by this solution



The more I think about this solution the more I'm convinced that it's really a winner. Larian, please take notice, this is good stuff. smile

Quote
They need to implement a way for co-op characters to have discussions with NPC's because I haven't run into any of those situations yet with my co-op play through and it's really disconnecting. I miss arguing about whether or not to toss the clam into the ocean or eat it.

That will happen. The whole party interaction and relationship system just isn't implemented in the early access version yet. You can see that when you start a dialogue with another party member. In the final game companions will behave according to their character traits in decisive situations, controlled be the AI.


This is it! Exactly. And it's prettier. Well done with presenting the dialog options in a coherent and accurate manner.

My only clarification is that while the SP 'origin story' should be the only one you can really follow. Dialog options which are specific to companions should not be removed (though technically they are tied to their origin story). Your presented dialog options are exactly how I imagined it. I'm just trying to separate the 'origin story' from their backstory. So they can all add their bit in a chat, but you'll still need to try to play a game as one of them to truly experience their POV.

Last edited by Surrealialis; 25/09/16 06:47 PM.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589319
25/09/16 11:07 PM
25/09/16 11:07 PM
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
L
Littlebob86 Offline
journeyman
Littlebob86  Offline
journeyman
L

Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
Barter should be party was wide for sure! smile it's tedious moving things over for one character to sell

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Stabbey] #589340
26/09/16 01:03 AM
26/09/16 01:03 AM
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 11
S
SourceHunter Offline OP

stranger
SourceHunter  Offline OP

stranger
S

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by Stabbey
I'm against this, because I think it detracts from the entire point of picking a specific origin. You chose that origin to see the story from their perspective, yes? Getting to see all the different options which you didn't pick makes the point of picking an origin much shallower.


You get to see from your perspective but it shouldn't mean the whole world revolves around you. You get to see your story and a bit of background from the other characters. It wouldn't mean much in the narrative of the game (I'm assuming the relationships and origins will be a big part of the narrative) if you know little to nothing about your companions and their outlooks. I just feel in cases where situations can be avoided because a certain party member is in, they should interject, after all, they are standing right next to your main character and can hear everything. Hypothetical Example: Guard is getting aggravated at your party's presence but knows (let's say) Ifan. Ifan interjects and calms the situation. It'll be weird that Ifan didn't have the option to defuse the situation despite knowing he could. I'm not saying this should be in every situation because it would detract a lot from your main character's interaction with the world, but if there's a situation that can be avoided or changed because of a party member they should be able to interject. Or maybe if no one has any unique dialogue, an option should be presented to choose the one character that has one.

Although I'd still like a Wasteland esque dialogue system where everyone can talk in a conversation, I think LordCrash and Surrealialis' idea which was

1) Generic reaction/answer one
2) Generic reaction/answer two
3) [Ifan]...
4) [Soldier]...
5) [Red Prince]...
6) [Scholar]...
7) [Lohse]...
8) [Mystic]...

works pretty well as a compromise though.

Last edited by SourceHunter; 26/09/16 01:06 AM.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589423
26/09/16 09:38 AM
26/09/16 09:38 AM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
Ayvah Offline

enthusiast
Ayvah  Offline

enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
I don't like the idea of choosing when a companion should interject. For better or worse, they should interject without being prompted by me. I like to believe that they can think for themselves.

Also, I really hope they remove the tags from the coversation options by the end of Early Access. I don't need to be told that a particular option relates to a particular tag.

Last edited by Ayvah; 26/09/16 09:44 AM.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Ayvah] #589425
26/09/16 10:15 AM
26/09/16 10:15 AM
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 218
Naqel Offline
enthusiast
Naqel  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 218
Originally Posted by Ayvah
I don't like the idea of choosing when a companion should interject. For better or worse, they should interject without being prompted by me. I like to believe that they can think for themselves.

Also, I really hope they remove the tags from the conversation options by the end of Early Access. I don't need to be told that a particular option relates to a particular tag.


Column A should be optional, it was in the previous game, and it would be obnoxious if you want to actually use a specific character.

Column B would just make it an obnoxious wiki-hunt, and should once again, be a tick in the menu, and not a universal constant.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Ayvah] #589433
26/09/16 10:57 AM
26/09/16 10:57 AM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
LordCrash Offline

veteran
LordCrash  Offline

veteran

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
Originally Posted by Ayvah
I don't like the idea of choosing when a companion should interject. For better or worse, they should interject without being prompted by me. I like to believe that they can think for themselves.

But that's not the vision Larian has in mind I'm afraid. At least not for normal dialogues. In decision situtations however companions will be fully controlled by AI in SP and choose their own answers.

Quote
Also, I really hope they remove the tags from the coversation options by the end of Early Access. I don't need to be told that a particular option relates to a particular tag.

I disagree. If something like group based dialogue really happens these tags are vital to give you the feeling that the whole group is participating. The tags then pretty much tell you who's talking.


WOOS
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: LordCrash] #589440
26/09/16 11:46 AM
26/09/16 11:46 AM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
Ayvah Offline

enthusiast
Ayvah  Offline

enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
Originally Posted by LordCrash
Originally Posted by Ayvah
I don't like the idea of choosing when a companion should interject. For better or worse, they should interject without being prompted by me. I like to believe that they can think for themselves.

But that's not the vision Larian has in mind I'm afraid. At least not for normal dialogues. In decision situtations however companions will be fully controlled by AI in SP and choose their own answers.

I don't think that's been ruled out. Also, if you don't like the challenge of having a companion who asserts himself, then you can choose not to have them in your party, and play lone-wolf. But they will be much stronger characters if they're portrayed as having their own agenda and are actively asserting this.

Quote

Quote
Also, I really hope they remove the tags from the coversation options by the end of Early Access. I don't need to be told that a particular option relates to a particular tag.

I disagree. If something like group based dialogue really happens these tags are vital to give you the feeling that the whole group is participating. The tags then pretty much tell you who's talking.

I really don't like the idea of the group merging into a single identity. What I was suggesting is conversations that would ordinarily be led by the avatar, with companions who participate out of their own free will. You don't need to choose an option to allow them to speak. You're not always in charge of everyone. It's essntially like talking to two NPCs except one of the NPCs is your companion.

If I want to choose a Mystic option, it's because the content of the option fits the character I want to roleplay, not because I feel obligated to choose the Mystic option.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Ayvah] #589443
26/09/16 11:53 AM
26/09/16 11:53 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,111
The Frog & Hounds
vometia Offline

Duchess of Gorgombert
vometia  Offline

Duchess of Gorgombert

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,111
The Frog & Hounds
Originally Posted by Ayvah
If I want to choose a Mystic option, it's because the content of the option fits the character I want to roleplay, not because I feel obligated to choose the Mystic option.

But there is no obligation to use it. I actually rather like seeing the ones that may give my character an edge or yield an interesting response, but I just use the tags as a guide and will often choose a different response if I see one that takes my fancy.


J'aime le fromage.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: vometia] #589447
26/09/16 12:09 PM
26/09/16 12:09 PM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
Ayvah Offline

enthusiast
Ayvah  Offline

enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
No obligation, but it's a pretty big distraction for me.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589454
26/09/16 12:51 PM
26/09/16 12:51 PM
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 824
right behind you
Madscientist Offline

old hand
Madscientist  Offline

old hand

Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 824
right behind you
First of all: Is your main char something very special (like Baldurs Gate) or are all party members equal (like NWN2 Storm of Zehir)?

In BG, you are the bhaalspawn and the story is mostly about you. In that case it makes no sense to chose answers for other party members and you cannot play the game with Minsc as main char.

In D:OS2 you have (at the moment) 4 pre generated chars. You can select any of them or a custom char as main char and all the pre generated chars you did not select as main char can join your party. Since your main char can be any char, I consider all party members as equal so each one of them has the same right to talk in a dialogue. This means I agree to the suggestion of LordCrash.

I like to have the option to hide the tags in dialogue, but you should see who of your party members is speaking.

example: The red prince and sebille are in your party and an elf runs to you.
elf: "Please help me, I excaped the Lizard who wanted to torture me.
[Sebille] *Suggest that you kill the lizard and bring his head to the elf so he can eat it and gain his former masters strengh*
[Red Prince] *knock out the elf, return him to his master and tell him to punish the elf and get better locks for the slave cells*


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589464
26/09/16 01:38 PM
26/09/16 01:38 PM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,860
Stabbey Offline
veteran
Stabbey  Offline
veteran

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,860
It seems like the main character is something very special in SP. In MP, all the main characters are special in the same way.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Ayvah] #589488
26/09/16 03:37 PM
26/09/16 03:37 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
LordCrash Offline

veteran
LordCrash  Offline

veteran

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
Originally Posted by Ayvah
I really don't like the idea of the group merging into a single identity. What I was suggesting is conversations that would ordinarily be led by the avatar, with companions who participate out of their own free will. You don't need to choose an option to allow them to speak. You're not always in charge of everyone. It's essntially like talking to two NPCs except one of the NPCs is your companion.

As much as I'd like that as well that's imo out of question and unrealistic because it would require way too much effort for Larian to essentially script every possible dialogue in the game with multiple possibilities and interactions (depending on the character combination of your current group). It's a huge difference to have multiple dialogue paths for different characters or to have completely scripted dialogues for multiple characters and character combinations. That's pretty much a completely different system of doing dialogues.

Realistically we imo have the chance to either leave the dialogue system like it is for SP which means that every character in your group is narratively detached from the dialogue of other characters or to merge their detached dialogues into a group based discussion with the very same mechanics but with more believablity and a more fluid gameplay. That would still mean that we have to control every character of our group in dialogues with the exception of internal group conversations and situations in which group decisions are required (quest relevant choice situations). These will work with scripted AI controlled companions anyway.

So I'm not against your idea, I very much support it. I just don't think that Larian is willing to handle SP and MP narrative with fundamentally different dialogue systems, both due to their overall vision for the game and due to the extensive additional workload that would require.

Originally Posted by Ayvah
No obligation, but it's a pretty big distraction for me.

Best way again: more flexibility.

Which means that there should be an option for both and a menu button that let you switch between visible and invisible tags. wink

Originally Posted by Madscientist
I like to have the option to hide the tags in dialogue, but you should see who of your party members is speaking.

This.

Last edited by LordCrash; 26/09/16 03:48 PM.

WOOS
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589497
26/09/16 03:53 PM
26/09/16 03:53 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,111
The Frog & Hounds
vometia Offline

Duchess of Gorgombert
vometia  Offline

Duchess of Gorgombert

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,111
The Frog & Hounds
I'm not really seeing why it's a big deal to just not use a feature one doesn't care for instead of having to pretend it isn't there (or make sure it actually isn't there).

Which I hasten to add is just some random musing: yet again going back to Oblivion (its quality is kinda irrelevant, it was just an epiphany for me in terms of "why didn't I play RPGs much sooner?") I did actually have to disable things like fast travel to train myself to not use it excessively. But in a genre that is often criticised for too much hand-holding, isn't having to remove a feature so players aren't tempted to use it one of the most serious forms of hand-holding? It's a bit like "it's only a 10 minute walk to the shops, but I'll drive unless someone takes my car away".


J'aime le fromage.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: vometia] #589511
26/09/16 04:25 PM
26/09/16 04:25 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
LordCrash Offline

veteran
LordCrash  Offline

veteran

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
Originally Posted by vometia
But in a genre that is often criticised for too much hand-holding, isn't having to remove a feature so players aren't tempted to use it one of the most serious forms of hand-holding?

No.

Focus and hand-holding are two essentially different issues that actually work in the opposite direction.

Hand-holding means that you make it as easy as possible for the player to master the game. Examples are quest markers and several other indicates on the map. Usually you add little helping tools to your game in order to give players the chance to solve issues without too much effort.

Focus means that you design your game in a specific way that leads to a very specific experience for the player consuming it. Usually focus means that you limit a game's mechanics and tools and that you concentrate on the very experiece you want to deliver.




WOOS
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589516
26/09/16 04:47 PM
26/09/16 04:47 PM
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
L
Littlebob86 Offline
journeyman
Littlebob86  Offline
journeyman
L

Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
I rekon other characters should be visible if they have something to say.. I hate the idea of missing out on a cool bit of lore, or situation, because I didn't know one of the many characters needed to talk to that person. It should happen when, as a group, we interact with them.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Littlebob86] #589539
26/09/16 06:34 PM
26/09/16 06:34 PM
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8
H
HauRukh Offline
stranger
HauRukh  Offline
stranger
H

Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8
I strongly disagree with the idea that only the main character in single player should get the special conversation options.

If some people feel that the choice fo their main character should define all of their game, they are free to never choose another character's options, and that is it. However, as someone who does not have the time to play the same game 4 times, I feel I would unecessarily miss a lot of very interesting content.

I really like the Dragon Age approach, where conversations are lead by the main character, but you can allow one of your party members to answer in your stead (where it makes sense because they have some special interest).
This way, they are not mindless drones, but you ultimately still decide what will happen (or to leave that decision to an AI companion with a given agenda).

Example:

Blah blah kill slave master ?

- Yes
- No
- Yes, and kill his slave too, muhahaha
- Let Sebille answer this


Alternatively, instead of just having your companion answer, you could give your own answer, and your companion might complain/comment on your choice, if he/she had an opinion on this. You could then get the option to change your mind and follow your companions opinion/advice (gaining like points), or overrule them as the party leader (but gain hate points).

Same Example:

Blah blah kill slave master ?

- Yes
- No
- Yes, and kill his slave too, muhahaha

---> choose: No

Sebille: How can you let him live? *complain complain*

- Change your mind, Sebille is right
- You stand with your decision


Choosing the first decison now makes Sebille like you more (but maybe not as much as if you had answered yes immediately). Or maybe it just means she stays neutral.
Choosing the second answer will make her hate you.


At the very least, the companions opinion should be voiced at some point, so you can understand them better.


I also do not see this as a restriction for role playing. It is up to my main character to decide if he/she ahs a strong opinion on this matter and makes a specific decision, or if he/she understadns that a member of the party might hve an opinion on this, and goes with that person, either because my main does not care, or because he/she wants to keep the parties peace.

Last edited by HauRukh; 26/09/16 06:42 PM.
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: HauRukh] #589590
26/09/16 10:47 PM
26/09/16 10:47 PM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
Ayvah Offline

enthusiast
Ayvah  Offline

enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 379
I feel this is a decent compromise, but I disagree with LordCrash that it's difficult to have companions interject without the player explicitly asking for it.

It's simply a case where your AI companion makes the choice before you. As an example, a conversation where Sebille would normally have 4 conversation options, including one that she is very passionate about (and is potentially unique to Sebille). When she is your companion, and you reach this point in the conversation, Sebille interjects her favourite response before you are given the option to respond.

The only difference from HauRukh's suggestion is that instead of selecting "Let Sebille answer this", the option would be selected automatically in cases where Sebille is strong-minded enough that she doesn't feel the need to wait for your approval.

It would be even more awesome if in co-op, there were a system in place that allowed co-op partners to interject into each other's conversations under specific circumstances. Once again, providing the sense that both players are participating in the conversation.

Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: Ayvah] #589593
26/09/16 10:51 PM
26/09/16 10:51 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
LordCrash Offline

veteran
LordCrash  Offline

veteran

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,801
Germany
Originally Posted by Ayvah
It's simply a case where your AI companion makes the choice before you. As an example, a conversation where Sebille would normally have 4 conversation options, including one that she is very passionate about (and is potentially unique to Sebille). When she is your companion, and you reach this point in the conversation, Sebille interjects her favourite response before you are given the option to respond.

So this is one character in one dialogue, already requiring a script.

Now do the maths: the game will probably at least have 6-8 possible companions and hundreds of unique dialogues.

That means that Larian would have to create multiple scripts for hundreds of dialogues. I don't call that simple. I still call it a shitload of extra work.

I do think that Larian will do stuff like that for special dialogues that are important for the main quest or that offer special decisions for you to make within the group. But I'm sure this AI-controlled dialogue system won't happen for each and every dialogue and each and every possible character. If they do it, great. I'll be the first to applaud them. It's just that I don't think that it is a realistic vision to have at this point in development.

Last edited by LordCrash; 26/09/16 10:54 PM.

WOOS
Re: Suggestion: Switching Characters in Conversations [Re: SourceHunter] #589803
27/09/16 10:21 PM
27/09/16 10:21 PM
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
L
Littlebob86 Offline
journeyman
Littlebob86  Offline
journeyman
L

Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 68
One thing I thought about this is, if I'm going to take these special characters with me, I want to know when they have something to say, otherwise I'd much rather just make 3 other custom characters that I want. I already feel more disconnected because of only creating one character. And the chore of retalking to someone with another character to see if I missed anything is just, well, a chore frown

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2