Interview Lionheart Team Q&A #16 @ RPGVault

[Spazmo]

Tags: Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader

<a href="http://www.rpgvault.ign.com">RPGVault</a> have put up <a href="http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/428/428725p2.html?fromint=1">installment number 16</a> of their series of shotgun interviews with the <a href="http://lionheart.blackisle.com">Lionheart</a> team. This time, <b>Jonric</b> asks what was the Lionheart team's favorite single element from the game.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Ion Hardie
<br>
Co-Producer and Lead Designer, Reflexive Entertainment
<br>
Initially, I was a proponent of having shorter player responses so the player could make faster dialogue decisions. Luckily, I got the <b><u>proverbial</u></b> board broken over my head, and woke up to the fact that it meant for less interesting dialogue in general. The complex dialogue that we finally wrote for the player, combined with the increased complex scripting possibilities, made the game more robust and deep. In the end, there were more complex dialogue paths and solutions to problems than I thought there were going to be. One of my favorites concerns the Goblin Grumdjum and the River Dryad. I won't spoil it for you... however, just know that high-speech characters should try different possibilities here!</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Yeah, Ion Hardie knows who he has to thank for that.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Yes, but the dialogue has moron indicators so you know what to say, as per Cabal:

Right i know most people like detailed conversations to waste thier time
but i like more to the point conversations, is it possible to make a menu option you can tick like "simple conversations" and it cuts out all the crap you dont need to know? that would be much easier for some of us

Ah, sort of like the old Infocom text adventures with the 'Verbose' and 'Super Verbose' options? No, we don't have a toggle like that.

However, I made a point of making exits in all conversations, so if you want to high-tail it out of a dialogue, it's fairly easy to do. We use dialogue icons to help your eye drift to certain types of responses, the exit icon/response is always the last, speech related/attribute related responses are on the top, fight/aggressive responses are second to last etc. We also flag responses that will lead to quest discussions i.e. "Tell me about your strange dilmena" with quest icons.

Some quests can be found early on in conversations, so if you don't like reading, they're fairly easy to find. But, others are nested in the conversations and some depend on other conditions before appearing. We hope there's a good mix of this for all types of gamers, but hopefully the reading in Lionheart won't turn you off.

 

[Skorpios]

Yes, but the dialogue has moron indicators so you know what to say

*sigh* That is an intelligent thing to say. A feature that helps all sorts of players make intelligent ROLEPLAYING decisions during dialogue and you call them morons.

Screenshot

Check out this dialogue screen. You have 1 quest indicitor, 1 combat indicator and 1 exit indicator. Now read the dialogue options, how do the indicators turn that dialogue into something fit only for morons?

You also have 2 other options with effects you can't predict so dialogue retains some mystery and an element of risk. How is that inferior to any other game?

All the indicators do is give you clearer control of your character. If you are roleplaying a psychopathic 'kill first and ask questions later' kind of character then you know to look for the sword. The quest icon helps you instantly identify important information. Again, explain how this makes Lionheart's dialogue system a system for morons??

 

[Jed]

Again, explain how this makes Lionheart's dialogue system a system for morons??

Uh, because it holds your hand?

 

[Volourn]

Yeha, this seems kinda lame...

 

[chrisbeddoes]

Ha ha ha !!!!!

Lol

Hope this can be disabled.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Ha ha ha !!!!! this seems kinda lame... because it holds your hand?

What they said

What next, quest translation windows? Uhh, this dude wants you to kill another dude.

You have 1 quest indicitor, 1 combat indicator and 1 exit indicator. Now read the dialogue options, how do the indicators turn that dialogue into something fit only for morons?

The indicators, so nicely and fittingly named "moron indicators" *bows to DarkUnderlord*, are for morons because only a moron would not be able to understand a simple line of a dialogue without an icon. Let's look at your screenshot, "I seek the seer" is obviously a quest, I guess that "you must be destroyed" is a violent option, and "goodbye" is a tough one of course, but I think it means that the conversation is over.

You also have 2 other options with effects you can't predict so dialogue retains some mystery and an element of risk.

Holy fuck! Mystery and risk!!! OMG! Unpredictable effects! My heartbeat just doubled!
Don't you realize that by introducing the moron indicators(tm) all mystery and risk have been removed? "I seek the relic" and "I seek the seer" are equal questions but since only one has been marked with the moron indicator(tm), there is no reason to ask the other question now simply because you know what the answer is going to be: "I don't know, keep asking, my son, till you see a moron indicator(tm) , for only then shall you know the answer you seek".

All the indicators do is give you clearer control of your character.

Please! What the hell are you talking about? If you are roleplaying a psycho, then behave like one and don't wait for the signal to start a fight. Simple as that.

 

[Skorpios]

Now my memory might be faulty but wasn't there a perk or skill level in one (or both?) of the Fallouts that gave you an idea of the responses your dialogue choices would cause through colour-coding your dialogue choices? Did that instantly make FO a game for morons? Don't think so. It was a REWARD for dedicated diplomatic characters.

I'm still underwhelmed by the rabid elitism on this board. Just because a game has a feature that you might not need or appreciate doesn't automatically make it a feature for morons. I notice that this board for example has all sorts of buttons and indicators to help people post messages. This doesn't automatically make everyone who uses this board a moron though, right?

Vault Dweller, this isn't a question of "understanding a simple line of dialogue" but giving the player MORE information to base their decisions on. Don't the indicators give the developers (who are worth defending in my opinion, if only for the fact that they work hard to give us games to enjoy) the freedom to be more flexible with dialogue? They don't HAVE to hit us over the head with dialogue like "Die Hell Spawn Die!!!" all the time to inform the player that this is a choice that will probably upset the NPC.

Things like the 'exit line' are just a common courtesy - sometimes you start talking to someone and realise you just want to get out of that particular conversation as quickly as possible. Just like real life sometimes :wink:

After Saint_Proverbius worked SO hard to get the speech skill in, now Reflexive can't even add another layer of information to dialogues that may help some players play the game? In the Interplay forum Eric stated that there are also symbols indicating that particular dialogue choices use skills such as Barter. Don't you NEED to know when your character is going to attempt to use a skill? Or why bother building up the skill in the first place? Why leave it totally to guesswork when everyone has different levels of comprehension of the written word? Why penalise players who might not have Degrees in English Literature?

It seems a contradiction to me that you demand ever more complex and challenging dialogues and plots in CRPGs for a true 'hardcore' experience, but when Reflexive put in a small aid for 'softcore' players you start throwing insults like 'moron' about.

Can't you see that if Lionheart can encourage new 'softcore' players to discover the joy of a good CRPG then that can only help future games? With more people interested in buying CRPGs then more money will be invested in them and more games will go into development and the chances of good ones appearing on the shelves HAS to rise.

The only eventual result of elitism such as yours is a shrinking fanbase who are so 'hardcore' that developers move on to serve audiences that are not so critical and demanding - that actually welcome new players with different points of view. You have only yourselves to blame if Reflexive's next game is an updated version of PONG. Why try selling games to people who are never satisfied whatever you do? Why suffer criticism for design decisions that IN NO WAY infringe on 'hardcore' players but are aimed at assisting new or inexperienced players? Doesn't it make more sense to make games for people who actually appreciate them?

You are only arguing yourself out of any games at all with attitudes like these.

The bottom line on dialogue is that good writing makes good dialogues - not interfaces or icons as shown above. If the writing sucks you'll be clicking through just as fast icons or no icons. If the writing is good then you'll be reading every item, whether the icons are there or not.

If the icons bother you that much, just ignore them! You all obviously have above-average intelligence, so why can't you just read the dialogue and ROLEPLAY your decisions based on them?

but since only one has been marked with the moron indicator(tm), there is no reason to ask the other question now simply because you know what the answer is going to be

What if I want the answers to the other questions? Why does the icon stop me from asking them? The icon simply indicates that the first question relates to a quest you are on (or are about to start) but the other options could very well have information or entertainment for the careful ROLEplayer. It is only your prejudices that are limiting your playing options if the icons are all that you can focus on.

Don't any of you have the strength of will to make your own decisions and not slavishly follow the icons??? So how do the icons truly affect your gameplay decisions or enjoyment of the game?

Uh, because it holds your hand?

Doesn't a manual do the same thing? Are manuals for morons too? What about in-game help and rollover tips? Just how 'hardcore' do we have to be about this? Why is giving the player more information treating them like a moron? You still have complete freedom to play your game any way you see fit.

If you are roleplaying a psycho, then behave like one and don't wait for the signal to start a fight. Simple as that.

Umm, maybe I'm roleplaying the kind of psycho who enjoys a brief conversation with his victims before he kills them? Perhaps I am the kind of psycho that enjoys taunting his victims until they attack him in a blind rage. Simple as that.

 

[Azael]

Now my memory might be faulty but wasn't there a perk or skill level in one (or both?) of the Fallouts that gave you an idea of the responses your dialogue choices would cause through colour-coding your dialogue choices? Did that instantly make FO a game for morons? Don't think so. It was a REWARD for dedicated diplomatic characters.

No, it was a reward for players who picked the Empathy perk, a rather useless perk if you ask me.

 

[Spazmo]

Empathy was garbage. FIrst off, any halfway intelligent person knew what to say to acheive a certain goal, and secondly, it was poorly implemented. Empathy wanted me to join the Unity and give the Master the location of Vault 13.

Vault Dweller, this isn't a question of "understanding a simple line of dialogue" but giving the player MORE information to base their decisions on. Don't the indicators give the developers (who are worth defending in my opinion, if only for the fact that they work hard to give us games to enjoy) the freedom to be more flexible with dialogue? They don't HAVE to hit us over the head with dialogue like "Die Hell Spawn Die!!!" all the time to inform the player that this is a choice that will probably upset the NPC.

You don't seem to understand. Most anyone who's not a moron can understand on their own what response will bring about what reaction. The indicators are only there for people who can't figure it out for themselves: morons. Thus, they are moron indicators.

 

[Araanor]

Empathy was garbage. FIrst off, any halfway intelligent person knew what to say to acheive a certain goal, and secondly, it was poorly implemented. Empathy wanted me to join the Unity and give the Master the location of Vault 13.

Doesn't that do exactly what it advertises - point to the responses that the person you spoke to would like to hear?

 

[Azael]

Empathy was garbage. FIrst off, any halfway intelligent person knew what to say to acheive a certain goal, and secondly, it was poorly implemented. Empathy wanted me to join the Unity and give the Master the location of Vault 13.

Doesn't that do exactly what it advertises - point to the responses that the person you spoke to would like to hear?

Yes, Empathy was never supposed to point towards the "best" dialogue option, but rather the one which would make the character you were talking too "happy", or so I understood it.

I must say that I don't really like the idea of markers in dialogue, it seems a bit too much like the game is holding my hand.

 

[Jed]

I'm still underwhelmed by the rabid elitism on this board.

Underwhelmed? Really? Well just stick around, because again, "rabid elitism" is another thing that falls under the jurisdiction of What We Do here at the RPGCodex.

Just because a game has a feature that you might not need or appreciate doesn't automatically make it a feature for morons. I notice that this board for example has all sorts of buttons and indicators to help people post messages.

This is a false analogy: The buttons are merely tools for functionality, without the buttons, you wouldn't be able to interact with the board. You tell the buttons what to do; the "conversation indicators" from Lionheart tell you what to do.

This doesn't automatically make everyone who uses this board a moron though, right?

As per my previous comment, no--with the possible exception of you for making false analogies.

After Saint_Proverbius worked SO hard to get the speech skill in, now Reflexive can't even add another layer of information to dialogues that may help some players play the game?

Man, that still burns you up. Even after Eric made two post acknowledging Saint's input, you're still hanging on to this one. You lost. Let go. Move on.

It seems a contradiction to me that you demand ever more complex and challenging dialogues and plots in CRPGs for a true 'hardcore' experience, but when Reflexive put in a small aid for 'softcore' players you start throwing insults like 'moron' about.

I don't actually believe that people need the indicators. I have a lot more faith in the average person's reading comprehension than that. If removing any vestage of challenge is so good, does that make Britany Spears the best music? Jackass the best movie? Mashed potatoes the best food?

Can't you see that if Lionheart can encourage new 'softcore' players to discover the joy of a good CRPG then that can only help future games? With more people interested in buying CRPGs then more money will be invested in them and more games will go into development and the chances of good ones appearing on the shelves HAS to rise.

Insulting gamers' intelligence won't get quality games made; merely more dumbed down games. After all, isn't challenge the motivational force behind playing a game? I no more want to be told what to say to meet my goals in a game than, say, watch the combat play out by itself ala NWN or Dungeon Siege? The indicators are yet another move toward automating the genre which (especially if it sells!) can only hurt the genre. Roleplaying games are a genre for people who like to read and think; if so-called "soft core" gamers aren't interesting in doing the brain work, then they aren't interested in CRPGs anyway.

The only eventual result of elitism such as yours is a shrinking fanbase who are so 'hardcore' that developers move on to serve audiences that are not so critical and demanding - that actually welcome new players with different points of view.

Separating the wheat from the chaff. If devs don't want to make deep challenging games, they won't and those who do will.

You are only arguing yourself out of any games at all with attitudes like these.

I thought you were of the opinion that our arguments have no effect on games? After all, Saint's just a megalomaniac, right? Anyway, this is a ridiculous comment; we have Spiderweb, Troika, and Zerosum to keep us firebrand radicals that dare to demand deep and well-thought-out games satisfied for years to come.

The bottom line on dialogue is that good writing makes good dialogues

This is the only good point you made. No amount of novelty indicators that help kids speed through the game so they can skip teh st00pid dialog, & get on to teh h4x0r & sl4shing to become teh l337 ub3r fightor that kills teh 3n3mies OMG!!!!11 will change that fact.

Doesn't a manual do the same thing? Are manuals for morons too?

Another false analogy. Manuals tell you how to do something unknown; teh r0x0r indiank4torz tell you what to do. Do you understand the difference?

 

[Volourn]

I agree. Contrary to what soem think; the average person is smart enough to pick the choice that best suits their character. They don't need to be babysat. And, if soemone does, perhaps, they are simply playing the wrong game?

I definitely know that in pnp; no dm is going to tell what the player choices will possibly lead to. That should be left to common sense, and some mystery.

Simply, it's a disspaointing addition to what looks to be a worthwhile game.

 

[Sol Invictus]

As much as I would just love to participate in this one, I ... well, I suppose I will.

I think that the best thing fo Reflexive to do about this would be to implement a "disable moron markers" option so the rest of us folk can go about playing the game with a sense of adventure without those moron markers spoiling the choices that we are supposed to be making for ourselves.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Now my memory might be faulty but wasn't there a perk or skill level in one (or both?) of the Fallouts that gave you an idea of the responses your dialogue choices would cause through colour-coding your dialogue choices? Did that instantly make FO a game for morons? Don't think so. It was a REWARD for dedicated diplomatic characters.

Empathy gives you "the inside knowledge of the emotional reaction to you" which in some cases led to the suggestion to join the Unity as Spazmo noted. There is a huge difference between knowing "the right" thing to say while being careful not to cross the line and knowing what each line leads to.

Just because a game has a feature that you might not need or appreciate doesn't automatically make it a feature for morons.

No, of course, it does not unless the said feature is designed to aid intellectually-challenged people, morons for short

I notice that this board for example has all sorts of buttons and indicators to help people post messages. This doesn't automatically make everyone who uses this board a moron though, right?

You mean the buttons like post, edit or the emoticons? XJEDX has already covered the tools, and the emoticons help you add your emotions in a short convinient manner. For example, instead of writing "I'm really surprised why you brought this stupid analogy up that does not prove anything other then the fact that you can't really use analogies", I will post this :shock: and save me some time

Vault Dweller, this isn't a question of "understanding a simple line of dialogue" but giving the player MORE information to base their decisions on.

Incorrect! An option to have MORE information would probably be giving your character some heads up. For example, you notice that the NPC's dwelling is decorated with dead witches heads and you have a floating text informing you that asking any positively phrased magic-related questions might not be a good idea with this particular gentleman.

In the Interplay forum Eric stated that there are also symbols indicating that particular dialogue choices use skills such as Barter. Don't you NEED to know when your character is going to attempt to use a skill? Why penalise players who might not have Degrees in English Literature?

Uhh, I would expect my barter skill to kick in in any barter realted situation, but that's just me and I don't have a degree in English Literature Btw, some people here are Americans, we read American literature, not English, duh! :D

Can't you see that if Lionheart can encourage new 'softcore' players to discover the joy of a good CRPG then that can only help future games? With more people interested in buying CRPGs then more money will be invested in them and more games will go into development and the chances of good ones appearing on the shelves HAS to rise.

Aha, the famous "dumbing down a game leads to getting more people interested in the game which leads to more good games" argument. NO, it's been proven many times that dumbing down a game leads to one thing only, more dumbed down games with a diminishing amount of intelligent content. FOT led to later cancelled FOT2 and unfortunately still not cancelled FOBoS.

As before, I'm asking you to answer a single very simple question. Do you think that a person, who is mentally able to play Lionheart and progress through the game, would be able to figure out what each question leads to without any mental efforts and a degree in English Literature? Yes or No?

 

[Skorpios]

As before, I'm asking you to answer a single very simple question. Do you think that a person, who is mentally able to play Lionheart and progress through the game, would be able to figure out what each question leads to without any mental efforts and a degree in English Literature? Yes or No?

Haven't all of you already defeated your own arguments? If the 'proper' player is intelligent enough to deduce what a given dialogue option will do, haven't they already 'spoiled' themselves? What difference does the presence of an icon make? If you can work out what "Goodbye" means in a dialogue, why are you so upset about the added presence of an exit icon? How has it impacted your gameplay experience?

As much as I would just love to participate in this one, I ... well, I suppose I will.

I think that the best thing fo Reflexive to do about this would be to implement a "disable moron markers" option so the rest of us folk can go about playing the game with a sense of adventure without those moron markers spoiling the choices that we are supposed to be making for ourselves.

Look back at the original screenshot I posted - I don't see any lack of adventure in that dialogue. Yes, I can see that Nostradamus is an important topic, but wouldn't you be fairly well aware of that anyway? So why does the quest icon upset you so much? As for the unmarked options they do look interesting enough to follow on their own and how do you KNOW Vault Dweller that they lead to dead ends? Why waste two dialogue threads on dead ends when the quest thread is clearly marked - wouldn't it mean there IS content on those two extra threads, perhaps leading to whole new quests and information? That sounds interesting and adventurous to me. If I met someone called "Weird Woman" I'd be trying to find out as much as possible about her...but then that might just be a reflection on me and my lovelife. :twisted:

Who hasn't been caught in an 'infinity loop' in some dialogues? Going round and round in circles, reading the same dialogue over just trying to dig up the one important piece of info you need isn't THAT much fun surely. Nor does it reflect a 'natural' conversation either. What rational person (NPC) would stand around while you ask them the same questions over and over? You think playing boring games are bad? Imagine having to WORK in one!

Uhh, I would expect my barter skill to kick in in any barter realted situation,

But in Lionheart they have expanded what a 'barter related situation' is from the Fallout Games. No longer restricted solely to the barter screen, it is now checked against in dialogue when you perhaps try something like negotiate more reward money, or convince an NPC to give you a quest item instead of some other reward. If you try something and fail, at least you know that building up your barter skill is what is required next time, just the same as when you try and pick a lock you KNOW that you are using your lockpick skill. Why is it so horrendous to inform a player that they are using a particular skill in a particular instance. Doesn't that reinforce the importance of that skill - if it all happened invisibly in the background, why invest in that particular skill? What evidence do you have that the skill is actually doing anything? Just because YOU expect that skill to kick doesn't automatically mean that EVERYONE will.

Let's try a hypthetical situation Vault Dweller and others. Let's imagine that the icons CAN be turned off in the options screen. You buy Lionheart and are happily playing it with the icons turned off. The plot is great, the dialogues are exciting and you've invested quite a lot in your character and are REALLY enjoying the game. Then your little brother (cousin/sister/alien visitor/whatever) sneaks in one night and fiddles with the options and turns the icons on. You boot up the game next day and start playing.

Do you:

A) Fall to the ground screaming, "My eyes, my eyes!!!!" then slip into a coma.

B) Play for several minutes before you even notice them, flip into options and turn them off.

C) Ignore them completely.

D) Find yourself using them as a handy shortcut from dialogues you've already read through or aren't interested in.

I think we'd all agree that A is the least likely, even though from comments on this board you would think it the MOST likely. But of the rest how do ANY of them seriously impact on your enjoyment of the game? Aren't you over-reacting to a very minor interface issue? My 'only good point' according to you is that good writing makes dialogues - my complementary point is that icons like these don't automatically make BAD dialogues so what are you complaining about?

For example, instead of writing "I'm really surprised why you brought this stupid analogy up that does not prove anything other then the fact that you can't really use analogies", I will post this :shock: and save me some time

Good example. Now apply it to Lionheart please. Instead of writing "You are a witch, you must die" [You thrust your chin forward aggressively and rest your hand on your sword, glaring at the witch] in the dialogue screen (which DOES have limited space remember and what happens if you are skilled in unarmed and don't have a sword?). Reflexive use a 'sword' icon as shorthand to indicate that this dialogue choice is an aggressive one likely to upset or intimidate the NPC you are speaking to.

I feel you are all looking at dialogue too critically. The whole dialogue system FORCES you to make choices in any case, you can't escape that fact however much you complain. So how do the icons make that fact suddenly evil? Don't the icons HELP you roleplay? Do you want your character to act more aggressively? The choice is yours. Aren't quests IMPORTANT in CRPGs, so the interface alerts you to them.

Remember no one is FORCING you to choose any dialogue options. In the game universe the dialogue doesn't exist until YOU choose it, so the icons are irrelevant until YOU make the decision. How does that devalue the importance of CHOICE in the game?

Aha, the famous "dumbing down a game leads to getting more people interested in the game which leads to more good games" argument. NO, it's been proven many times that dumbing down a game leads to one thing only, more dumbed down games with a diminishing amount of intelligent content. FOT led to later cancelled FOT2 and unfortunately still not cancelled FOBoS.

Where did I say that Lionheart should be 'dumbed down'?? :shock:

As far as this topic goes all I'm arguing is that the icons in almost no way impact on YOUR enjoyment of the game and may very well be useful for some; less experienced players. You are the one throwing insults like 'moron' and 'dumbed down' around. I still expect Lionheart to have rich, interesting dialogues, icons or no icons. I'm just stating that all things being equal how does a Lionheart with icons and a Lionheart without ACTUALLYplay differently or give you more or less enjoyment?

Also, your cancellation argument doesn't make all that much sense. If the creation and/or cancellation of games DOES rely on only a single factor (such as the quality of previous games) which I doubt, then why isn't EVERYTHING in the Fallout Universe being cancelled? My argument might be simplistic but at least it makes sense.

Are YOU saying that more players interested in CRPGs is a BAD thing? Maybe 'dumbing down' games isn't the way to go (and I NEVER said it was) but don't you agree something has to be done to attract a larger audience? Perhaps a relaxation of the 'elitism' that seems prevalent at least in this sector of the fanbase might be a start. Don't call someone a moron if they don't 'get' CRPGs and all their intricacies straight away.

I work in a Library - but I wouldn't get too far if I called everyone who came in who didn't understand the Dewey Decimal System a moron! Ignorance does not equal stupidity. We should be trying to show gamers how much fun CRPGs can be rather than calling them 'morons' just because they don't fully understand them.

 

[DrattedTin]

Are YOU saying that more players interested in CRPGs is a BAD thing? Maybe 'dumbing down' games isn't the way to go (and I NEVER said it was) but don't you agree something has to be done to attract a larger audience? Perhaps a relaxation of the 'elitism' that seems prevalent at least in this sector of the fanbase might be a start. Don't call someone a moron if they don't 'get' CRPGs and all their intricacies straight away.

No, I don't agree. The audience is very large, as is.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If the 'proper' player is intelligent enough to deduce what a given dialogue option will do, haven't they already 'spoiled' themselves? What difference does the presence of an icon make?

In some cases like attack and exit it makes no difference, but, honestly, somehow it looks stupid. It's if every time before you attack somebody a window would come up warning you that people might get hurt as a result of your actions. It's just that silly.
In other more important cases it highlights the important questions which in my opinion ruins conversations completely. It takes away something very important: a chance discovery.

As for the unmarked options they do look interesting enough to follow on their own and how do you KNOW Vault Dweller that they lead to dead ends? Why waste two dialogue threads on dead ends when the quest thread is clearly marked - wouldn't it mean there IS content on those two extra threads, perhaps leading to whole new quests and information?

Perhaps, perhaps not. If the unmarked questions could lead to quests if you dig deep enough, it's not that bad. If like I believe they are dead ends providing some background and/or generic info, it's bad. It's interesting to learn more about the land, the customs, people, etc, but visibly separating quest-branches from reading material to please action fans is a bad decision.

Going round and round in circles, reading the same dialogue over just trying to dig up the one important piece of info you need isn't THAT much fun surely

Example, please. The only dialogue of such complexity that I can recall is the conversation with Ravel, but then again it was not supposed to be easy.

Uhh, I would expect my barter skill to kick in in any barter realted situation,

But in Lionheart they have expanded what a 'barter related situation' is from the Fallout Games. No longer restricted solely to the barter screen, it is now checked against in dialogue when you perhaps try something like negotiate more reward money, or convince an NPC to give you a quest item instead of some other reward.

I never said like in Fallout, I said in any barter related situation which is any situation involving a value that could be debated.

What evidence do you have that the skill is actually doing anything? Just because YOU expect that skill to kick doesn't automatically mean that EVERYONE will.

That's what replayability is for. I remember replaying Fallout for the second time and being genuinely surprised when things developed differently when I developed my character differently.

A) Fall to the ground screaming, "My eyes, my eyes!!!!" then slip into a coma.

lol, that was funny. So you do have a sense of humor after all, Skorpios, you were taking everything so seriously, so I thought you didn't have one
I chose B after screaming "why you little...!"

Where did I say that Lionheart should be 'dumbed down'?? :shock:

you didn't technically but since I think that the icons equal dumbing down (see above), and you are if not pro-icons then anti-anti-icons , so ....

I'm just stating that all things being equal how does a Lionheart with icons and a Lionheart without ACTUALLYplay differently or give you more or less enjoyment?

See above, chance discovery and all that

Also, your cancellation argument doesn't make all that much sense. If the creation and/or cancellation of games DOES rely on only a single factor (such as the quality of previous games) which I doubt

I did not say that cancellation matters, I used it for reference so people would not start asking FOT2, where, when, etc. I said that FOT did not lead to another Fallout game, it led to FOT2.

don't you agree something has to be done to attract a larger audience?

Absolutely, but dumbing down is not a good idea and you agreed with that. Is there an option that does not sacrifice quality in exchange for quantity? I dunno.

I work in a Library - but I wouldn't get too far if I called everyone who came in who didn't understand the Dewey Decimal System a moron!

Common, we know that you want to

We should be trying to show gamers how much fun CRPGs can be rather than calling them 'morons' just because they don't fully understand them.

Well, a noble goal, but do you think that supagu64 (see the beginning of this thread) might be helped? Btw, you did not answer my question.

 

[Skorpios]

Vault Dweller: I always have a sense of humour, it's how I've lasted so long against such determined opposition! I write these posts to entertain as well as inform - I've just been attempting to seriously argue this topic most of the time that's all. Plus, when I'm fielding shots from all comers, it doesn't leave much energy for jokes!

I don't have much of a problem with supagu64's post - at least he phrased his question clearly and without excessive abuse unlike some posters I could mention. He had enough interest in the game to post a question - so it shows that there are gamers out there who just might appreciate the icons - his money is just as good as yours as far as Interplay is concerned.

Posted here his comment might go something like:

"Hey! Long conversations are for eggheads with no-one REAL to talk to! Your game sucks!!! You Reflexive Guys are really stupid if you think anyone wants to waste their time talking to a computer!! Get rid of the dialogues or I'll never buy any of your games, EVER!!!!"

Do you think that a person, who is mentally able to play Lionheart and progress through the game, would be able to figure out what each question leads to without any mental efforts and a degree in English Literature? Yes or No?

OK, here's your answer: Yes. But as I explained before that just negates your argument. If anyone should be able to progress through the game then the icons (as spoilers) perform no actual function whatsoever. So what is the big deal about them? If you can navigate without them - then surely you won't play any differently WITH them, as they are just performing the same function as your own knowledge and experience of CRPGs. Supagu64's post tells us that there are players out there who aren't as enamoured of complex dialogue systems as you obviously are - does that mean he would get no enjoyment out of Lionheart? Maybe Lionheart isn't the game for him, but maybe, with the icons, it could be...

No, I don't agree. The (CRPG) audience is very large, as is.

Define 'very large'. Is it as large as the Diablo fanbase? Is it as large as the Quake fanbase? Is it as large as the Solitaire fanbase? Company executives make those sorts of decisions all the time and I'm guessing that we don't look that attractive compared to some of the other genres out there. You guys have discussed this elsewhere, but the 'suits' aren't fixated on any particular gaming style - they are just interested in sales figures. Sad, unfair, but true. Nothing makes CRPGs immune to those sort of pragmatic decisions. If the CRPG genre isn't growing then it doesn't look like an attractive investment opportunity, end of story.

If game designers - hounded by hardcore fans - ONLY make games that appeal to those same hardcore fans, then where is the potential for growth in the market, for the sales that make the suits open up their chequebooks to invest in the next CRPG? Where are the new players coming from if games ONLY accommodate experienced players? Who is going to want to join a community where you are called a 'moron' just because you don't know what a THAC0 is?

Are the icons in Lionheart such a huge price to pay to possibly broaden it's appeal? If the game is just as deep and just as enjoyable, do the icons make any appreciable difference? Balance that against the possibility that players like supagu64 might give Lionheart a try because of the icons and learn to appreciate longer dialogues. Calling him a moron (or features that he might like 'moron indicators') certainly isn't going to attract him to CRPGs.

Quote:
I work in a Library - but I wouldn't get too far if I called everyone who came in who didn't understand the Dewey Decimal System a moron!

Common, we know that you want to

Sure there are days that I feel like it, but I don't think I'd be employed for very long if I abused my customers, or that many people would come to the Library, which is a shame, because it is a fun place to be. That is kind of my point guys - someone coming in 'off the street' mildly curious about CRPGs who comes to this site could very easily get the impression that Lionheart is a game for morons if they read your posts. Is that truly a fair description of the game?

Now, on the subject of 'infinity loops' I wasn't referring to overly complex dialogue threads so much as working your way through a conversation, losing your place and having to backtrack again and again, just to get an answer about a particular quest from an NPC. It frustrated me sometimes while playing IWD2 recently (which is why I called it an 'infinity' loop) and I doubt I'm all that much of a moron, but in that situation I could handle having some navigation symbols to straighten me out.

In some cases like attack and exit it makes no difference, but, honestly, somehow it looks stupid. It's if every time before you attack somebody a window would come up warning you that people might get hurt as a result of your actions. It's just that silly.
In other more important cases it highlights the important questions which in my opinion ruins conversations completely. It takes away something very important: a chance discovery.

I feel you are looking at this the wrong way. You seem to look at the dialogue and icons as indications of what is going to happen, as if they are spoiling some kind of mystery. I look at dialogue options as me telling the computer what my character is going to do. I'm focussing on what happens NEXT.

How is the Weird Woman going to react to my inquiries about Nostradamus (who is obviously a big deal in the world of Lionheart) and will that information aid my quest? What will she do if I call her 'the witch of lies'? Does she know about the ancient relics? As a member of the Inquisition (let's say) should I challenge her right to even exist, and if I do will she attack me or attempt to bribe me with knowledge or gold? Or perhaps she is a danger to me, maybe I should just say goodbye and leave?

All of these options sound quite interesting and personally I want to explore them all - I really do doubt they are dead ends and how can you be so sure that they are, Vault Dweller? But in the end looking at that sole screenshot example (which is no example really of a working dialogue interface, but it's what we've got for now), do the three icons REALLY shatter the sense of mystery for you? I just can't see it myself, perhaps you can explain it to me. The mystery is what is going to happen NEXT, and even with the icons you can't totally predict that if Reflexive have done the job right creating rich, complex dialogues. And if they haven't then the icons don't matter!

Remember, this is a QUEST dialogue we are talking about - if you aren't on the 'Nostradamus' quest then the dialogue option probably wouldn't even show up, so which 'chance' discovery are you missing out on because of the icon?

Again, how do these icons 'dumb down' the game? Do they actually REPLACE dialogue? Not as far as I can see - all of the dialogue is still there. The 'chance discovery'? Well, if all the dialogue is still there, then doesn't it follow that all the 'chance discoveries' are still there, assuming Reflexive put them in in the first place? So please tell me how the mere presence of the icons makes Lionheart a game for morons?

I never said like in Fallout, I said in any barter related situation which is any situation involving a value that could be debated.

But if the interface never shows you the barter skill being used how do you KNOW that your character is using his barter skill to bribe a guard in Lionheart? Just 'expecting' it to be so seems a bit hopeful. What if the designers decide just to use the Speech skill (praise be to St P) for bribery instead? You could very well spend all your points in the wrong skill! You'd be a bit upset if you had to GUESS about which weapon skills applied to which weapons, right? So why shouldn't the game inform you which of the more 'passive' skills are being used during dialogue? Doesn't this feature add value to the skill - doesn't it feel more worthwhile SEEING your hard-earned skill points at work? And it doesn't hurt replayability either, once you've seen barter in action for example, you'll be looking forward to trying another passive skill like Speech (praise be to St P) the next time you play through, or by investing even more skill points in it perhaps.

Other skills reward you in-game usually instantly. A high combat skill will result in more damage and more criticals - an obvious return on your investment of skill points. But the passive skills are just that, a little more passive - why not raise their status a little and SHOW the player how valuable they can be throughout the game? Why should you have to wait until your second, third, even fourth attempt at the game to come to appreciate ANY of the skills?

Just answer THIS simple question Vault Dweller and others. Which is healthier - a community that welcomes new players and has room to accept a spectrum of games and gaming styles that can entertain newcomers and hardcore alike - or a community that rigidly rejects any games that aren't hardcore or that attempt to accommodate newer players* and which hurls abuse at anyone who even dares to show their ignorance by questioning the status quo?

* Please note: accommodating newer players does NOT automatically mean lowering the quality of games, perhaps it might just involve something like icons that can help them navigate complex dialogue systems, leaving the complexity intact for ALL players to explore and enjoy.

 

[MF]

I have to agree with skorpion here. While I don't like the spoiling effect of the moron markers, they do remove some of the vagueness that surrounds passive skills. You know what skill you're using. Usually a halfway intelligent person can figure this out, but there are gray areas, gray areas that do not constitute decent gameplay with choices, but criple the character system by not knowing what aspect of the character is being roleplayed.

Considering that, I like the idea.

On the other hand, quest questions shouldn't be marked, IMHO. Just skill use notification. Then again, you could predict the outcome of a dialogue line by the skill icon in some cases. It has its advantages and disadvantages but I like the general idea.

 

[Azael]

You know Skorpios, verbosity isn't always a good thing. There are times when less is more.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't have much of a problem with supagu64's post - at least he phrased his question clearly and without excessive abuse unlike some posters I could mention.

He was polite, that's true, but it's not the point. The point is that he thinks that conversations which are the essense of any good RPG (and let's leave D2 and other action RPGs out of it) are crap and a waste of time, and that's very sad. The fact that his request was accomodated (moron indicators) is sad too. The fact that you are defending both is even sadder.

OK, here's your answer: Yes. But as I explained before....

No explanations are necessary. That's the point. Since your answer is yes, it means that the icons are unnecessary and thus serve no positive purpose. Since we have something that clearly does nothing, but potentially may ruin or spoil dialogue options, it's indeed a bad idea. Can you follow my simple logic?

If the CRPG genre isn't growing then it doesn't look like an attractive investment opportunity, end of story.

RPGs would never sell like action games, and nothing will ever change that. However, there is a market for RPGs that can generate good revenues with the right approach. I hope that ToEE would prove me right.

Where are the new players coming from if games ONLY accommodate experienced players?

There you go again. Where did this "ONLY" come from? You answered my question positively, that means that everybody can figure out how to use the dialogue system. So why do you speak of "only experienced players"?

Are the icons in Lionheart such a huge price to pay to possibly broaden it's appeal?

I will repeat myself till you start paying attention. The icons dumb the game down but they do not broaden its appeal. You answered "Yes", remember?

Just answer THIS simple question Vault Dweller and others. Which is healthier - a community that welcomes new players and has room to accept a spectrum of games and gaming styles that can entertain newcomers and hardcore alike - or a community that rigidly rejects any games that aren't hardcore or that attempt to accommodate newer players* and which hurls abuse at anyone who even dares to show their ignorance by questioning the status quo?

That depends. We welcome new players who discover RPG genre and come here to learn more about it. We recommend them good games to shape their understanding and show what a RPG truly is. There are many threads here proving my words. And then, there are people like some idiots from Interplay boards who think that turn-based combat is boring, that FO3 should have every weapon in human history, and who saw nothing wrong with FOBoS, now these people are to stupid to be taught anything and I don't think anybody want them here.

 

[chrisbeddoes]

For me 75 % of any rpg are the dialogues .

So I guess Lionheart is a game I could buy.


And like I said before I hope that this feature is disabled.


But this feature could be very useful in certain situations .

a) If the player is very young .

b) If the player only knows little english .

A lot of foreingers know little english have no localised version and yet
have the money to buy the game.


That feature could increase sales of this title by by 10 % by making aqccesible to people that could not play it before.


BUT i hope it can disabled because I do not need that feature and I do not want it.But this is only because I have a lot of expirience with the english language.

15 years ago I would need this feature to even consider buying the game.

But to majority of people and certainly to all native english speaker this feature is a BIG MINUS .

So the smart decision is to make this feature optional.


This post was NOT corrected with word.exe to make my point than not all people that buy RPG are native english speakers

 

[Walks with the Snails]

Do you think that a person, who is mentally able to play Lionheart and progress through the game, would be able to figure out what each question leads to without any mental efforts and a degree in English Literature? Yes or No?

OK, here's your answer: Yes. But as I explained before that just negates your argument. If anyone should be able to progress through the game then the icons (as spoilers) perform no actual function whatsoever. So what is the big deal about them?

It's vaguely insulting. I don't know, it's like when you watch a movie and they assume you're an idiot, so they spend half the time spelling everything out and repeating themselves. Save it for Barney.

No, I don't agree. The (CRPG) audience is very large, as is.

Define 'very large'. Is it as large as the Diablo fanbase? Is it as large as the Quake fanbase? Is it as large as the Solitaire fanbase? Company executives make those sorts of decisions all the time and I'm guessing that we don't look that attractive compared to some of the other genres out there. You guys have discussed this elsewhere, but the 'suits' aren't fixated on any particular gaming style - they are just interested in sales figures. Sad, unfair, but true. Nothing makes CRPGs immune to those sort of pragmatic decisions. If the CRPG genre isn't growing then it doesn't look like an attractive investment opportunity, end of story.

If game designers - hounded by hardcore fans - ONLY make games that appeal to those same hardcore fans, then where is the potential for growth in the market, for the sales that make the suits open up their chequebooks to invest in the next CRPG? Where are the new players coming from if games ONLY accommodate experienced players? Who is going to want to join a community where you are called a 'moron' just because you don't know what a THAC0 is?

That's a rather narrow way to look at making money. Many companies have followed that logic and crashed and burned. Think of it instead that there are people out there with money and only so many games they're going to buy with it, and how are you going to get them interested enough to buy your game. Diablo sells a lot, but its clones don't. Diablo fans don't want your in-depth RPG with Diablo elements, they want Diablo 3.

Think of it in terms of selling food. Just for the sake of argument, lets say more people like chocolate than liver. And lets say you're a liver vendor, but that's not good enough. Well, plenty of people sell chocolate, so if you want to create yet another chocolate bar, you've got to give them a good reason to give up who they're already buying from and try you out. Unless you can demonstrate a clear advantage people have from buying from you, like it's much better and/or cheaper, they'll probably stick with what they know. Given that you don't have the expertise and experience of someone like Hershey's, it's rather unlikely you'll succeed. That's basically what happens to most copycats in the game industry.

So instead you try to jazz up your liver by adding chocolate sprinkles. Now, most sane people would realize that's just not really a good combination. People who don't like liver still aren't going to like liver, even if you add chocolate sprinkles. People who like liver but don't like chocolate aren't going to like your new concoction, either. And many people who like liver and chocolate are probably going to say combining the two just winds up spoiling both because they just taste rather nasty together. So in the end, you've really pleased no one but a few weirdos who like the unholy combination you've just created. And meanwhile, some guy who just worries about making good liver steals all your old customers.

Sure there are days that I feel like it, but I don't think I'd be employed for very long if I abused my customers, or that many people would come to the Library, which is a shame, because it is a fun place to be.

Well, we don't have have customers, so we have the luxury of saying what we feel. If I find some 40-year old guy in your library playing with coloring books, I reserve the right to poke fun at him to prod him towards something a little more intellectually engaging. Especially because you'd probably get in trouble for doing the same.

Now, on the subject of 'infinity loops' I wasn't referring to overly complex dialogue threads so much as working your way through a conversation, losing your place and having to backtrack again and again, just to get an answer about a particular quest from an NPC. It frustrated me sometimes while playing IWD2 recently (which is why I called it an 'infinity' loop) and I doubt I'm all that much of a moron, but in that situation I could handle having some navigation symbols to straighten me out.

I have the same problem, but this isn't the solution. The problem will still exist with fancy pictures, and you'd probably still end up looking all over the place "just in case". The best solution would just be to close off dialogue choices after they've already been selected. Brace yourself here, but some games already do this. It's not hard.

But if the interface never shows you the barter skill being used how do you KNOW that your character is using his barter skill to bribe a guard in Lionheart? Just 'expecting' it to be so seems a bit hopeful. What if the designers decide just to use the Speech skill (praise be to St P) for bribery instead? You could very well spend all your points in the wrong skill!

All they have to do is tell you in the skill description what the skill does. In fact, they should let you know things like this before you ever begin. So that you won't tag speech but not barter if you plan on bribing lots of people. I really hate it when games pull surprises on me and I have to start over, because they didn't explain the game mechanics to start with and just sprung it on me in the middle of the game.

You'd be a bit upset if you had to GUESS about which weapon skills applied to which weapons, right?

I'd also probably find it amusing at first and then annoying if "sword skill activated" flashed over my character every time he tried to stab somebody.

So why shouldn't the game inform you which of the more 'passive' skills are being used during dialogue? Doesn't this feature add value to the skill - doesn't it feel more worthwhile SEEING your hard-earned skill points at work? And it doesn't hurt replayability either, once you've seen barter in action for example, you'll be looking forward to trying another passive skill like Speech (praise be to St P) the next time you play through, or by investing even more skill points in it perhaps.

NWN (sorry, guys) does this by flashing stuff like [Insight] or [Persuade] and such before dialogue, and to be honest, I've grown not to like it. Partly it starts me thinking about game mechanics instead of role playing when I read it, so it screws with immersion. If they just added the dialogue options without telling you what's going on, it wouldn't keep reminding you that your character is basically just a set of numbers.

Just answer THIS simple question Vault Dweller and others. Which is healthier - a community that welcomes new players and has room to accept a spectrum of games and gaming styles that can entertain newcomers and hardcore alike - or a community that rigidly rejects any games that aren't hardcore or that attempt to accommodate newer players* and which hurls abuse at anyone who even dares to show their ignorance by questioning the status quo?

*yawn* Every few weeks, someone materializes out of the ether to show us sinners the error of our ways, then after a few posts fades out to wherever they came from. We just like talking about games, don't necessarily feel like wasting time on tact, and would rather just get to the point. Don't like it, play in another sandbox.