9 replies to this topic

[Kaeloree]

Before I go away, I thought I'd ask this question of you all.


Iin the Bioware romances, everything is very linear - all the talks are in the same order, etc. There is 1 dialogue 'path', and you either go along it or the romance is ruined. The exception being CN Anomen, of course.

Do you think, in some of the PC Friendships/ah, relationships in the Interaction Expansion Project, we should add dialogue paths? So, for example, if you choose a certain dialogue path Jaheira will be more likely to reject the Harpers, and her encounters with them and your future dialogue with her will reflect this change. Or, you could encourage her in her following of the Balance, and she realises that the Harpers *do* meddle. Or, you could encourage her being with the Harpers, and reinforce her belief that the Harpers do what is best.

This is an extreme example, because Jaheira isn't likely to change all *that* quickly, but you get the idea.


The downside of having such paths is that, in some cases, it might even double the workload - you have to rewrite half of their dialogue once or twice to reflect their changed relationship to the PC, as well as their NPC banters, etc. This could bloat Phase II a *lot*, and delay the release significantly.

There are really 3 options here: we could do linear paths, which will, of course, have many paths in them - but there won't be any major character changes where you can influence their decisions and change their personality.

The second option is to have full-on paths: an example of this would be Imoen. You could help heal her; bring forth the darker side of her personality or break her. So, say if it is 15 dialogues over the course of SoA+ToB (or just SoA), 10 of those dialogues would be affected. So, in essence, you would be writing 35 dialogues, which would project the release date even more forward.

The third option is a more reasonable one; have paths, but within the structure of a linear relationship. So, you might still be able to encourage Imoen or Jaheira towards a certain path, and maybe 3-5 of their dialogues will reflect this towards the end or when the decision/whatever comes to a climax, but other than that there are no paths. This will also push forward the release date, but not so much as option 2.


Now, just a note: linear does NOT necessarily mean 'bad'. Most mod NPCs follow a linear relationship - Xan and Kivan are notable exceptions to this, and both well demonstrate what I'm saying is a 'path'; for Xan, you can continue as his lover from BG1, you can be his friend or you can begin a romance.


What do you all think? Would you like a much more varied and complex dialogue paths (delays release, by one estimation, an entire year) , somewhat varied dialogue paths but still stays within the bounds of a somewhat-linear relationship (delaying the release by 3 months at minimum, 5-6 months at most), or a linear relationship (quicker release).

Complex does *not* necessarily mean *good*, either. Just sayin'.

[berelinde]

This is a beautiful idea. I adore this idea. I do not want to see it die.

Please, please, please, oh please, do not set out from the onset with an overly-ambitious plan.

What you are describing sounds larger in scope than the BG1 NPC project, and the credit list for that mod has over a hundered names on it.

It is always easier to add than to prune.

Please consider Option 4: get the mod done in a linear fashion, then revise, embelish, and add options as time allows.

[Tassadar88]

As much as I have complete faith that you could do well on any of the four aforementined paths, it might be a very long run in the first two cases - and it often so happen that enthusiasm wears out eventually, leaving a lot of work unfinished, as well as a great deal of frustration both on the side of the developer, and with those who were charmed by the concept, but didn´t participate.

I believe that either path 3 or 4 should both work:either way, as you said, "linear" does not necessarily mean "bad" and if there is a good variety between the individual paths, the player might be satisfied as well. (what I mean is that if there are seven relationships developing in exactly the same manner, it does not matter overmuch how "linear" they are)

And when thinking about the actual writing, I am not sure whether starting to write a relationship as a linear one and at the end of the work, to change the approach and create several possible outcomes, if would not seem a bit forced and unnatural. If it were me doing it, I would definitely make a first concept and stick to it. With branching dialogues or without, but stick to it.

And finally, I think that as a general, PATHS ARE A GREAT IDEA. It is what always attracted me very much. The possibility of redeeming or corrupting my fellow NPC´s is what I always wanted (I believe that something similar exists in KOTOR, which I started playing not long ago)

So to my points:
1) Paths can be great and I would love to play them
2) Linear relationships can be very good as well, though
4) So, be realistic and decide about how much work you (and your team) want to do on the project
3) Decide the paths according to point 3

Sorry for the rambling ;-)

[cmorgan]

I can say that there are enough good and several great BG2 coders able to slam through alot of stuff, as there are exisiting examples of structures and ideas for scripted pseudo-linear and even alternate pathway interaction - the problem of course is the scope of dialogue.

I suggest three things won from hard experience retinkering and attempting to unify The BG1 NPC Project:

• raid Domi/Ashara's brain for ideas on keeping writers on target and on schedule, with the added bonus you could gather additional ideas for alternate path construction.
  
• have as many coders as you can gather, but grab one person to become "The Unifier" [kind of an Editor of Code] out of the gate, so your bugfixing becomes much easier (variable naming consistency, file structure, commenting, use of scripted calls, CHAIN construction and patterning, heck, even capitalization usage and community prefix, etc. It is amazing how much easier it will be to bugfix if there are common conventions, and single Find/Replace can cover maintainence!).
  
• Choose linear, then add on second and third pathways building on the stability of the first. That way you have a chance at the hardest part of all, getting alpha test feedback and rebuilding

my 2cp, anyways -

I am excited to see this kind of project start for BG2 (especially if it adds to ToB, so I can look forward to actually finishing the expansion instead of getting tired of the constant battles ).

Edited by cmorgan, 26 December 2006 - 06:39 AM.

[Kulyok]

The main disadvantage of a non-linear path is that replay value is not that good, since many dialogues will be repeating. If paths were added *in addition* to the main, linear path, I guess it will be cooler: the player will be able to get all content in one game, if he or she so desires, or choose to skip some paths he or she will not like.

In Xan, small paths(two-three banters long) are introduced via player-initiated dialogues. (Especially in version 3 ). If an NPC-related quest was completed, if the romance was "hastened" via a player-initiated option, if she got him drunk and they slept together, if a flirty option was chosen in the friendship path in ToB, etc.

This way, first, the linear path is completed, and the player has all the main content, and then, extra perks are added.

[Kaeloree]

We wouldn't be doing 'friendships/relationships' for every NPC, but rather these (other people may want to add some, but these are the ones I've decided on personally):

Aerie
Cernd
Imoen
Jaheira
Korgan
Minsc
Viconia

And also maybe Nalia, but I'm notoriously poor at writing her, so...

For each of these, I'm thinking 7-12 dialogues, depending on the complexity of the character. Imoen would have the most, I'd say, with Jaheira and Viconia as close seconds.

Would someone mind setting up a poll for this? I'd do it, but everyone else is packed into the car and are telling me to hurry up... ;P

!

[Kulyok]

One more thing I meant to say about paths:

I liked Anomen's two paths - I think it was done well, and it was quite clear which choice lead to which path. (Except that horrible dialogue in the end, in Saerk's house, where my heartfelt: "I intend to help you to kill this bastard!" made him leave forever).

Coran's paths in BG1 NPC were cool, too(though I am biased ), and the choice was again clear: mostly it was about going to Briel, or not.

So, as long as it is fully clear where the player makes a choice, I am all for it. But as for "you have to say ten nice things to an NPC to get him to path N, and I mean nice things how *I* mean it, he-he, so you'll have to guess!" - I am not sure this will work as well.


I'd really like to have friendships with Viconia and Jaheira for my female PC, but only if they do not hold any female-female innuendo. However, discussing boys quietly behind their backs - that's another thing entirely!

Edited by Kulyok, 26 December 2006 - 11:26 PM.

[Tassadar88]

Oh my, dont know how to set up a poll, but I would surely vote for Nalia ;-)
And as for the difficulty/obviousnes of the dialogue paths, I think that the BW ones are OK, have yet to try BG1NPC...
And here as well, I have had quite enough girlie innuendos, I think that the idea of them chatting about boys etc. sounds great

[berelinde]

Ha! You asked for it, you got it! Not one, but *two* polls. But it's probably good to keep both, because they give different info, which is good!

[berelinde]

Just because I like polls, I'm going to put up a 3rd: nature of the content.

The choices will be:

Better developed friendship with the PC.
Better developed friendship with another NPC.
Opportunity to influence the development of an NPC, i.e. alignment change
Better developed conflict with another NPC.
Better define the personality of the NPC.
Add opportunities to say things to the NPC that BioWare left unsaid.