Will dialog responses actually matter? NPC dialog trees always felt very artificial to me. We are often presented with specific responces we can give but they never matter because you can still restart the loop and go through all the choices (and often need to to get all necessary information). I'd like to see it actually matter which option we choose. This would mean that some options block progress or send me down a different path. To avoid this from being too much of a problem (a simple misclick forever breaking a quest, for example), we could be allowed to restart the dialog loop after 6 hours or something.
For example
NPC: "Do you seek an audiance with the king?"
Reply Option #1: "Yes, I wish to offer my assistance".
Reply Option #2: "Yes, and I will give you 10 gold if you let me sneak my daggar in"
If I answer with Option #2, I shouldn't then be able to exit and answer with Option #1. It makes all dialog choices meaningless and it defacto encourages completism, where we go through all options to gather all information every time. If it's not going to matter, there might as well be a click saver option that just shows us all dialog at once.
Dialogue choices *should* matter, otherwise what is the point. As you say they rarely do.
Your option two could lead to more dialogue, so that a misclick on one thing would not be too damaging. For example you may be asked "A dagger?" or "Sneak?" with reply choices "Yes a dagger" or "Oh just kidding - I guess it wasn't that good a joke was it?" Yes a dagger sending you into combat or leading to an arresting development.
Dialogue choices, ideally, will also be influenced by previous conversations or by your attributes. High wisdom or intelligence attributes could add options. Low attributes could remove options. Do I expect to see this - no. But at least one single player game many years ago took that approach as a core part of its design.
Benonai: I believe the Project Faerthale dev stream cleared this up pretty well...
Yup, you are correct. This was shown to be the case and your game choices, skills, perception will all matter to the dialog presented. Two similar characters may well get different dialogs and options depending on what they have done, have not done or have come across in the past.
There was also some NPC dialogue in a Fortress Deviare stream, maybe the first one with Cohh, where a Rogue was given some choices of progression that included choices to focus on thieving, or assasination, or battle. Something like that. I believe when he went back to the NPC, he didn't get the choice again.
I fully support concequences of choosing stupid or dangerous options. I have a hard time accepting that having not found widget or spoken to X before speaking to Y will forever preclude that quest path ever being offered. Being locked out of unknown content, without every interacting with that content isn't fun and will force many players into diligently following a guide, rather than exploring the world.
Agree it should have consequenses but please- at least have them make sense or be intuitive. Example: The Spirit of Garzikor quest in EQ. First of all, let me prep by saying you are a caster char with a Troll SK friend. He wants giant faction and you want dragon faction but while you guys are exploring and leveling up you are doing shawls for everyone and he is doing ring. So, He has to split off to WW and I split off to Kael because getting dragon faction takes some time and he is straddling factions. We gather frequently in CC to go for herbalist packs or CS or SG to go for nameds and to touch base. Finally, I have warmly faction with random dragons in Skyshrine and almost a full set of nice thurgadin quest armor along the way. HE says, follow me, we go all the way to the top and I am nervous because I know he doesnt have faction so I am making sure he's invis otherwise he'd be toast but he says not to worry because he can FD and I say i'll run down and coth him if it gets dicey. So we get to the top and he points to this one named dragon and tells me to hail him. This dragon asks me some things, I reply and THEN he asks, "Have you done battle with dragons?". Now...I have spent a long time trying to prove myself as more than ally to dragons, one of the ways not to mess up faction was to NOT kill ANY dragons, not even drakes and it took alot of giants and giant heads and beards to show for it. I have not fought ANY dragons, so what do I say? naturally, I say...."no"
...Annnnd that was the wrong answer. and I can never get the quest again. From what I read up it was a very nice quest with alot of going places, some crafting and some spawn triggers in dangerous place and whispers. The reward would have been nice for the troll or me and we were thinking I could get one and then swap it and he could play with it for a bit and swap it back for the ring which would be good for me.
TO me, that was counter-intuitive but maybe I was just not as sharp on dragon lore and their ways.
Manouk said:This dragon asks me some things, I reply and THEN he asks, "Have you done battle with dragons?". Now...I have spent a long time trying to prove myself as more than ally to dragons, one of the ways not to mess up faction was to NOT kill ANY dragons, not even drakes and it took alot of giants and giant heads and beards to show for it. I have not fought ANY dragons, so what do I say? naturally, I say...."no"
...Annnnd that was the wrong answer. and I can never get the quest again.
That's bad dialog writing and should be reported as a bug since it's so easy to think it means the exact opposite of what it says. I don't want anything that harsh and permanent. Consequences are important, but permanent consequences for a single misunderstanding or misclick is bad design.
Manouk: This dragon asks me some things, I reply and THEN he asks...
I agree; if a quest's responses are this binary and final without indication of consequence, then it should be reported as a bug as the quest is very flawed. It is just plain wrong and lacks effort, forethought and proper design on the part of the author(s).
As long as lore is available in game and/or the quest path provides information to suggest that an answer to a question might stop that quest from continuing but the player has not digested that information, then tough, it is on the player. However, no quest should terminate purely on a guess.
Your decisions should matter. World lore should matter. Mob motivations should matter. Players should take notice of what is going on. If enough information is provided to make an informed choice, then long live consequence!
I dont agree that mis-clicks should make a difference. If you accidently pull a mob or fall from a cliff or drown because you didnt realise how deep you were, you dont get a reset. In the same way, if you accidently choose an option, you should live (or die) with it. Quests decisions must be based on knowable information. It should be expected that players will need to take notice of that information. If you choose unwisely, that is on you.
Manouk said:...Annnnd that was the wrong answer. and I can never get the quest again. From what I read up it was a very nice quest with alot of going places, some crafting and some spawn triggers in dangerous place and whispers. The reward would have been nice for the troll or me and we were thinking I could get one and then swap it and he could play with it for a bit and swap it back for the ring which would be good for me.
TO me, that was counter-intuitive but maybe I was just not as sharp on dragon lore and their ways.
According to alla it sounds like you have to be max ally for that quest and when you say no you take a faction hit.
"PART I - SKYSHRINE
Note that you must have MAX Ally faction to start this quest or very close to it.
Oglard says 'Greetings young Wood Elf. Very few of your kind has ever seen the halls you know walk through. You must have provided a great service to our kin for them to allow you passage into this inner sanctum. We welcome you to our ancient home.
You say, 'thank you'
Oglard says 'Might, wisdom, and manners? Quite a surprise to see all of these traits in one of the younger races. I am impressed. I see you are a noble creature, one who would treat another creature of nobility with respect.......... 'Oglards eyes suddenly begin to shine with a magical, golden, light. He looks down upon you as if in judgement and asks, 'Tell me Keyno , have you done battle with dragons?'
You say, 'yes I have done battle with the dragon'
[*note* Saying, "no I have not done battle with the dragons" will result in this. Olard's eye begin you gleam even brighter, then quickly fade, a frown left apon the wurm's face. Hmm... I see. Thank you for your information. Good luck in your travels.
You faction standing with the ClawsofVeeshan got worse.]
Oglard 's eyes slowly begin to lose the golden light that flared earlier. He then studies you carefully before saying 'There are many Dragons on this world that do not share our beliefs. If you have done battle with dragons and have lived, then you may be able to help us."
I don't have a way to test it and I could be completely wrong, but chances are they didn't lock you out forever, you just needed to top off your faction to try again. I guess the general idea lorewise is go find that bad dragon that raises CoV faction to prove you are strong enough to handle the upcoming quest, but in reality killing some giants would work too.
If that is how it worked, I agree with how they handled it in the context of this thread: meaningful choices and ways to rectify an incorrect answer that isn't just exiting the dialog and trying another answer. This will probably have unintended consequences of min/maxers opening up pantheonwiki and just doing the right answers instead of organically choosing, but to each their own.
DagnyStout said:...The hard balancing act as a player is Knowing if this particular option is flavour or permanent choice...
I like this. It's something Everquest did and those almost 'secret' aspects of the game/quest became legend, even if they were just flavour, almost like Easter Eggs within the game.
Certain NPCs if you handed in certain things would do something unexpected. Certain NPCs if you said certain things to would react.
I would love to see this in Pantheon.
In another thread I mentioned 'trash' items that turn out to be used in quests. In Everquest I believe every item had a use, but it could be quite obscure or indirect.
I would love to see dialog options that turn out to be more important or interesting than they first seem and, years from now, people are discovering things like if you talk to Guard #13 while holding a rabbit's foot in your hand he gives an extra dialog option that just says "Wish the guard good luck" then he says "I never have good luck" and if you then give him the rabbit's foot you start a rare quest.
Nexira said:Manouk said:...Annnnd that was the wrong answer. and I can never get the quest again. From what I read up it was a very nice quest with alot of going places, some crafting and some spawn triggers in dangerous place and whispers. The reward would have been nice for the troll or me and we were thinking I could get one and then swap it and he could play with it for a bit and swap it back for the ring which would be good for me.
TO me, that was counter-intuitive but maybe I was just not as sharp on dragon lore and their ways.
According to alla it sounds like you have to be max ally for that quest and when you say no you take a faction hit.
"PART I - SKYSHRINE
Note that you must have MAX Ally faction to start this quest or very close to it.
Oglard says 'Greetings young Wood Elf. Very few of your kind has ever seen the halls you know walk through. You must have provided a great service to our kin for them to allow you passage into this inner sanctum. We welcome you to our ancient home.
You say, 'thank you'
Oglard says 'Might, wisdom, and manners? Quite a surprise to see all of these traits in one of the younger races. I am impressed. I see you are a noble creature, one who would treat another creature of nobility with respect.......... 'Oglards eyes suddenly begin to shine with a magical, golden, light. He looks down upon you as if in judgement and asks, 'Tell me Keyno , have you done battle with dragons?'
You say, 'yes I have done battle with the dragon'
[*note* Saying, "no I have not done battle with the dragons" will result in this. Olard's eye begin you gleam even brighter, then quickly fade, a frown left apon the wurm's face. Hmm... I see. Thank you for your information. Good luck in your travels.
You faction standing with the ClawsofVeeshan got worse.]Oglard 's eyes slowly begin to lose the golden light that flared earlier. He then studies you carefully before saying 'There are many Dragons on this world that do not share our beliefs. If you have done battle with dragons and have lived, then you may be able to help us."
I don't have a way to test it and I could be completely wrong, but chances are they didn't lock you out forever, you just needed to top off your faction to try again. I guess the general idea lorewise is go find that bad dragon that raises CoV faction to prove you are strong enough to handle the upcoming quest, but in reality killing some giants would work too.If that is how it worked, I agree with how they handled it in the context of this thread: meaningful choices and ways to rectify an incorrect answer that isn't just exiting the dialog and trying another answer. This will probably have unintended consequences of min/maxers opening up pantheonwiki and just doing the right answers instead of organically choosing, but to each their own.
Nope, Max ally going in, after the hit got max ally and tried again. he wont speak to me. :/
Manouk said:Agree it should have consequenses but please- at least have them make sense or be intuitive.
I must agree that if any dialog with an NPC has branches, that the conversation makes sense and that a reasonable person can figure it out.
That said, within hours of any NPC dialog taking place, someone somewhere will put the entire thing up on a wiki page so any mystery as to what you need to say to get to the desired outcome will forever gone.
I have promoted this topic as part of my CM content; please continue the discussion and have fun! :)
"Community Opinion - Dialogue on Dialog - How important are dialogue options to you when engaging with NPCs in the world of Terminus? Check out this community-created post to see what others members think. https://seforums.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/13932/dialogue-on-dialog #MMORPG #MMO #CommunityMatters"
MY IDEA:
For the purposes of Pantheon, I think it'd be neat to see a conversation system where each character you interact with has a certain point score that is used like currency to "purchase" information from them. For example, let's say every NPC you talk to for the first time will have a "favor" (currency) score based on a number of factors like race/faction compared to the player, etc. If you complete tasks for that NPC you can gain more favor and then spend that to unlock deeper conversation options for hidden quests, loot for purchase, etc. Cashing in on those advanced options "spends" favor, so you have to choose carefully and may not be able to take advantage of everything that NPC has to offer. Obviously taking part in activities that would negatively impact that NPC’s opinion of you would lower your favor with them.
OTHER THOUGHTS:
I agree with what's generally being said about this here, that they need to be intuitive and meaningful. That said, once you've correctly applied those constraints I think it becomes difficult to implement them in a way that doesn't detract from the game, or at least the x-factor of what makes dialog "fun". For example, if you have meaningful dialog choices, you've now alienated a % of players who don't want to read and engage with the lore on that level. If you have intuitive dialog choices, you're taking all the mystery out of it, and the engagement becomes somewhat boring as it's just a clinical "click this option to get x outcome".
I'm sure there's a sweet spot in there somewhere. I think the Mass Effect series gets... well close-ish. Definitely not perfect. Tying in a reputation stat that gets affected by how you respond, even if your response doesn't ultimately change the outcome of the story, is kind of a neat gimmick. Especially when you then take that stat and use it to provide unique split second cinematic changes to parts of the story.
Nope, Max ally going in, after the hit got max ally and tried again. he wont speak to me. :/
That sounds like a bug, I wonder what a GM would have said. That's the perfect example of an answer that should be able to be changed to continue on the quest with proof of the victory of course(rep/dragon head/whatever).
GhostEye said:MY IDEA:
For the purposes of Pantheon, I think it'd be neat to see a conversation system where each character you interact with has a certain point score that is used like currency to "purchase" information from them. For example, let's say every NPC you talk to for the first time will have a "favor" (currency) score based on a number of factors like race/faction compared to the player, etc. If you complete tasks for that NPC you can gain more favor and then spend that to unlock deeper conversation options for hidden quests, loot for purchase, etc. Cashing in on those advanced options "spends" favor, so you have to choose carefully and may not be able to take advantage of everything that NPC has to offer. Obviously, taking part in activities that would negatively impact that NPC’s opinion of you would lower your favor with them.
OTHER THOUGHTS:
I agree with what's generally being said about this here, that they need to be intuitive and meaningful. That said, once you've correctly applied those constraints, I think it becomes difficult to implement them in a way that doesn't detract from the game, or at least the x-factor of what makes dialog "fun". For example, if you have meaningful dialog choices, you've now alienated a % of players who don't want to read and engage with the lore on that level. If you have intuitive dialog choices, you're taking all the mystery out of it, and the engagement becomes somewhat boring as it's just a clinical "click this option to get x outcome."
I'm sure there's a sweet spot in there somewhere. I think the Mass Effect series gets... well, close-ish. Definitely not perfect. Tying in a reputation stat that gets affected by how you respond, even if your response doesn't ultimately change the outcome of the story, is kind of a neat gimmick. Especially when you then take that stat and use it to provide unique split-second cinematic changes to parts of the story.
Very interesting read.... I like the thought process of this.
This process tied into the perception system and factions could become almost espionage-like. The possibility is all but endless; it would need good writing and a definite way to show you gain favor and how much you have and, of course, a way to show you are spending favor.
A lore-based solution to misclicks / bad dialog choices could be some kind of amnesia crafted consumable that will cause the NPC to forget your last conversation. This should be made with very rare ingredients and thus difficult to obtain to keep us from relying upon it, but still being useable and thus no one need to fear permanently losing access to a quest line because your cat stepped on the keyboard.
An interesting way to make intelligence and wisdom matter more would be to have high intelligence characters sometimes have additional info provided (representing a smarter character knowing more info. High wisdom characters should receive some guidance as to which dialog options to avoid. So at the end of the a dialog response option, you might get guidance like 'you think saying this may anger him".