"Solving" the 4-options dialogue system

[TeamBacon]

 

I don't see this as an issue at all for the way I write. I never liked having 10 dialogue options all at once, I found it rather cumbersome.

 

I try to have my dialogue branch in a more organic way and rarely need more than 3 choices at any one given time. Choices build on other choices the way conversations in the real world work and it isn't so morally black and white.

 

I am totally excited about working with the new dialogue system.

 

 

It's a matter of freedom and roleplaying possibilities. If the number of dialogue options is limited to 4, I doubt one can even roleplay what he/she wish to. F4 shows the worst example of such a flawed system, that the player are given not just limited choices, but also highly defected ones that most are insignificant and usually lead to the same outcome. This, I can't agree with you to a large extent.

 

 

If you can't create roleplay options with 4 choices, then you are not a very good writer.

 

Fallout 4 does not suffer because there are only 4 choices, but because they usually aren't choices to begin with. Adding a whole bunch more empty choices wouldn't be any better. Quality over quantity. That is why I think people should only use 3.

 

Roleplaying doesn't come from having a big long list of ways to respond to one thing, and that is a horribly inefficient way of writing. Roleplaying is built over time as things build.

[TeamBacon]

I understood completely where you were going with it, but I also think its possible to have the 5-10 branches going into more branches as well, it just becomes quite complicated is all. I don't disagree with you though, in general. I just see situations where I would rather have more than 4 initial choices leading into more, if that makes sense. But working with the 4 into more is more than doable and as you stated can flow very well with practice.

 

It is possible, sure, but it takes a really long time as a writer and isn't very good use of your resources. But if you want to voice act 10 lines and have 9 of them not be used, go right ahead.

 

Or if it a pick multiple kind of thing, it is just becomes a cumbersome menu crawler where the player is spending 30 minutes in a dialogue screen going through all 10 branching dialogue choices. This kind of stuff breaks the pacing of games. Pacing matters.

 

How do you like your dialogue? A small trickle being unlocked over time or a water-balloon to the face where an NPC explodes their entire life story to you in one conversation with 10 different dialogue choices with dozens of more branches?

[anbeegod]

 

If you can't create roleplay options with 4 choices, then you are not a very good writer.

 

Fallout 4 does not suffer because there are only 4 choices, but because they usually aren't choices to begin with. Adding a whole bunch more empty choices wouldn't be any better. Quality over quantity. That is why I think people should only use 3.

 

Roleplaying doesn't come from having a big long list of ways to respond to one thing, and that is a horribly inefficient way of writing. Roleplaying is built over time as things build.

 

 

 

I have a feel that this little joke I created can be of use here.

 

 

 

A boy had fallen into a pool poisoned by radiation, some people came and watch, while his mother stood in fear and yelled.

Lone Wanderer:

1. How did he get there?

2. Let me drain the water to rescue him.

3. Good luck with that.

4. [barter] I can save your son... for a decent price.

5. [Medicine] He can't survive for long even if he's rescued. I'm sorry.

6. [intelligence, red] Gosh! Will he turn into a Super Mutant after he get out of there?

Courier:

1. How did he get there?

2. Let me drain the water to rescue him.Get out of my way, I'm going down and rescue him.

3. Good riddance.

4. Good luck with that.

5. [black Widow] Please, everyone, save that poor kid for my sake!

6. [science] I will sabotage the pool's underground system and make everyone nearby die of radiation poisoning.

7. [barter] I can save your son... for a decent price.

8. [Medicine] He can't survive for long even if he's rescued. I'm sorry.

9. [intelligence, red] Gosh! Will he turn into a Super Mutant after he get out of there?

10. [Lady killer] Say, if I rescue your kid, what will a beauty like you do for her son's hero?

11. [speech] Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

Sole Survivor:

↑. How did he get there?

↓. Don't worry, I'll save him.

→. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

←. (Sarcastic) Oh look, the most useful mother ever who saves her son by yelling bullshit.

Sheogorath:

1. Kid

2. Reward

3. Rumor

Dovahkiin:

1. (Persuade) What can you give me for saving your boy?

2. I'll help you.

3. Good luck.

4. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

You can have more than 4 choices, with which all being unique and irreplaceable. If a game fails to provide multiple ways to respond to an event, the game is not very free and open-ended.

[anbeegod]

At any event, I don't think that a debate over the 4-options system's legitimacy is the subject here, as this thread is about tackling the system's problem, which would not just limit the possibilities of story mods, but also undermine the overall moddability of the entire game as there are only so much slots for dialogue options. Even if the story mods are designed to fit the 4-options system well, the system would undoubtedly devastate other mods that would use dialogue option slots, which is the fundamental problem of this ill-designed system.

Edited March 30, 2016 by anbeegod

[TeamBacon]

 

 

If you can't create roleplay options with 4 choices, then you are not a very good writer.

 

Fallout 4 does not suffer because there are only 4 choices, but because they usually aren't choices to begin with. Adding a whole bunch more empty choices wouldn't be any better. Quality over quantity. That is why I think people should only use 3.

 

Roleplaying doesn't come from having a big long list of ways to respond to one thing, and that is a horribly inefficient way of writing. Roleplaying is built over time as things build.

 

 

 

I have a feel that this little joke I created can be of use here.

 

 

 

A boy had fallen into a pool poisoned by radiation, some people came and watch, while his mother stood in fear and yelled.

Lone Wanderer:

1. How did he get there?

2. Let me drain the water to rescue him.

3. Good luck with that.

4. [barter] I can save your son... for a decent price.

5. [Medicine] He can't survive for long even if he's rescued. I'm sorry.

6. [intelligence, red] Gosh! Will he turn into a Super Mutant after he get out of there?

Courier:

1. How did he get there?

2. Let me drain the water to rescue him.Get out of my way, I'm going down and rescue him.

3. Good riddance.

4. Good luck with that.

5. [black Widow] Please, everyone, save that poor kid for my sake!

6. [science] I will sabotage the pool's underground system and make everyone nearby die of radiation poisoning.

7. [barter] I can save your son... for a decent price.

8. [Medicine] He can't survive for long even if he's rescued. I'm sorry.

9. [intelligence, red] Gosh! Will he turn into a Super Mutant after he get out of there?

10. [Lady killer] Say, if I rescue your kid, what will a beauty like you do for her son's hero?

11. [speech] Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

Sole Survivor:

↑. How did he get there?

↓. Don't worry, I'll save him.

→. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

←. (Sarcastic) Oh look, the most useful mother ever who saves her son by yelling bulls***.

Sheogorath:

1. Kid

2. Reward

3. Rumor

Dovahkiin:

1. (Persuade) What can you give me for saving your boy?

2. I'll help you.

3. Good luck.

4. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

You can have more than 4 choices, with which all being unique and irreplaceable. If a game fails to provide multiple ways to respond to an event, the game is not very free and open-ended.

 

 

That is not an example of good storytelling by any means.

 

Having 7 different skill checks is just cheapening the whole idea into a catch all where anyone can solve this problem. Plus, in a videogame it would make much more sense to let the player interact and not menu crawl. Have the player walk over to the pool's underground system and give them the option to sabotage it if you have enough Intelligence.

 

Gameplay as opposed to menu crawling. Remember, we have real time dialogue now, this stuff can be much more fun.

[anbeegod]

 

That is not an example of good storytelling by any means.

 

Having 7 different skill checks is just cheapening the whole idea into a catch all where anyone can solve this problem. Plus, in a videogame it would make much more sense to let the player interact and not menu crawl. Have the player walk over to the pool's underground system and give them the option to sabotage it if you have enough Intelligence.

 

Gameplay as opposed to menu crawling. Remember, we have real time dialogue now, this stuff can be much more fun.

 

 

 

This undoubtedly is not a good way to tell story, but it definitely is a better way to play a game. Minus those options that can be done without talking (which happens to be only no. 6, 8 in the Courier's branch), we still have a lot of ways to finish a conversation, and the number is definitely not less than 4.

 

Until real VR and more advanced AI are invented, menu will continue to be the most effective way to provide roleplaying possibilities and freedom for the players.

 

DAO and its sequels are good examples, though I believe it would get completely off-topic very soon if we continue discussing it.

[zanity]

I honestly don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. It is IMPOSSIBLE to believe the GECK won't give user control over the form of dialogue options. Beth went for 'always 4' as an UI choice, not cos you'd ever hard code this in the engine.

 

Concepts like 'number of choices' and 'branching' are issues for the script used alone- and hardly need people worrying about them before hand.

 

Conceptually, the dialogue system is a very traditional MENU data-structure. As for implementation, well in games like this it is always whether the on-screen choice is LITERAL, an alternate way of saying the same thing (so the spoken version comes as a 'surprise'), or a 'category' description of response (like 'sarcastic'). It really doesn't require over-thinking pre-GECK release.

[Boombro]

Simply use the gameplay aspect more and smooth it out.

 

Think ED in FNV, the USS and the sick guys and the bomb in FO3. There is no checks, but they work well, and imo more seamless into the world.

Think show and not tell?

Edited March 30, 2016 by Boombro

[anbeegod]

I honestly don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. It is IMPOSSIBLE to believe the GECK won't give user control over the form of dialogue options. Beth went for 'always 4' as an UI choice, not cos you'd ever hard code this in the engine.

 

Concepts like 'number of choices' and 'branching' are issues for the script used alone- and hardly need people worrying about them before hand.

 

Conceptually, the dialogue system is a very traditional MENU data-structure. As for implementation, well in games like this it is always whether the on-screen choice is LITERAL, an alternate way of saying the same thing (so the spoken version comes as a 'surprise'), or a 'category' description of response (like 'sarcastic'). It really doesn't require over-thinking pre-GECK release.

 

 

Before F4 was out, I also thought it was IMPOSSIBLE to have a Beth game with so little content. You never know.

 

War never changes, but Beth has changed.

[Boombro]

 

Before F4 was out, I also thought it was IMPOSSIBLE to have a Beth game with so little content. You never know.

What are you talking about?

Fo4 has more side quests and factions to join unlike FO3.