Branching Dialog

[Leo G.4501]

Just curious to see other people's opinion of such a feature and how you'd make it work or what you'd want from it.

 

IMO, making branching dialog would be very costly *IF* it's all completely voiced. But an interesting work-around could be partially voiced choices/canned dialog that accompanies the branching choice or simply no voiceover for the choice itself and let the other NPCs play out their dialog depending on the choice.

 

The latter was done very often in the early story but not a good example because those choices usually branched off into other outcomes. But the point is that, yes, it would require more voiceover work but only for the NPCs and not the x amount of voice actors that play the PC. This is the optimal choice and I could write out an example of this using an in-game example with added dialog options to demonstrate how many extra lines could be estimated for any given instance.

 

The canned dialog suggestion is more a flavor type option. Think of it being like having 3 options, a yes, a no and a maybe (with expanded written dialog that takes that tone) and the PC spoken line would basically be [basic racial flavored approval], [gruff racial flavored disagreement] and [general apprehension] that's given with the text dialog line that then leads to the NPCs reacting to those lines. The benefit is, you can reuse those same canned voiceovers for other choices (and have more types of general choice canned responses for other types of options).

 

Ultimately though, this is only to flavor the words from your PC's mouth, not to branch the story. Branching story is a whole other discussion.

Opinions? Criticisms? Bueller?

[Haleydawn.3764]

We already do get certain branching dialogues, but it can't be extreme so to sway the main story (obviously).

Then you have to factor in extra costs to put more VO in place for the dialogue, then you have to write more arcs to bring the story back to the same cadence. Which renders a lot of that variance of dialogue, redundant. If players RP their 'Commander', the Devs are better using a more blander slate for the commander in the story, to allow for our own interpretation of our character, regardless of how many dialogue options there are.

So, I honestly believe if it was do-able, time and cost wise, Anet would have done it. Is it absolutely neccessary for more dialogue branches to be added? No. I'd much rather Devs evolved their narrative to keep me hooked into the story of NPC characters, allowing me space to keep my own character interpretation how I want her/them to be.

Trying to reign back in the 'personality' function into selective dialogues could possibly work, but that's it I guess.

[joneirikb.7506]

The problem with branching dialogue is that it's rare to see it actually well done.

 

I mean, if all you want is basically the old character system (charm, pride, ferocity) as a way to give character themed "grunts of approval" sure, I could get behind that (I actually miss that).

 

But actual branching dialogue with any meaning at all ? I honestly think that is beyond what ANet can pull off (reliably enough to be worth it). They did try with the earlier parts of the Personal Story, and while it's mostly passable, it isn't stellar. And Iirc was another thing they basically ran out of time on, that they would have loved to have done more with.

 

So for story telling, I think they where smart to pick the direction they've done with a "set pat/dialogue". Even if I personally find it dull.

 

(Not really taking voice acting into consideration here, was just thinking in terms of writing and having it text based in-game)

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Haleydawn.3764" said:

> We already do get certain branching dialogues, but it can't be extreme so to sway the main story (obviously).

> Then you have to factor in extra costs to put more VO in place for the dialogue, then you have to write more arcs to bring the story back to the same cadence. Which renders a lot of that variance of dialogue, redundant.

 

I think you misunderstand the purpose of this thread.

 

You list several issues here, but the purpose is to fix those issues. Come up with a solution or work-around that circumvents those problems.

 

The issue that I'd initially tackle is the inability to have personality in the PC's dialog. Having the branched dialog suggested in my post, for example, wouldn't require more arcs or writing to bring anything back into cadence because the only variance is the tone of the player's dialog.

 

>If players RP their 'Commander', the Devs are better using a more blander slate for the story, to allow for our own interpretation of our character, regardless of how many dialogue options there are.

 

This is just false.

 

> So, I honestly believe if it was do-able, time and cost wise, Anet would have done it. Is it absolutely neccessary for more dialogue branches to be added? No. I'd much rather Devs evolved their narrative to keep me hooked into the story of NPC characters, allowing me space to keep my own character interpretation how I want her/them to be.

 

I never see a problem as "if it was do-able". Everything is do-able, you just have to put in the work and or make the sacrifices necessary. The point is, if time and cost are a sacrifice, then sacrifice something else to make it work.

[Haleydawn.3764]

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

> I think you misunderstand the purpose of this thread.

 

When you start a thread titled 'Branching Dialogue', people will comment about that as well as the content of your post. If you wanted opinions about 'flavour' of choices, and not branching dialogue, that would have been the thread title, no?

It's asking for opinions, and I gave you mine. Adding any sort of variance is redundant when you come to the same arc cadence, adding 'personality' to predefined options would be ok, but it was scrapped for a reason.

 

[Leo G.4501]

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> The problem with branching dialogue is that it's rare to see it actually well done.

>

> I mean, if all you want is basically the old character system (charm, pride, ferocity) as a way to give character themed "grunts of approval" sure, I could get behind that (I actually miss that).

 

I think that might allude to my main issue in that, the system itself wasn't bad, they just wanted to use it for certain things and didn't follow through. It was a dialog option, a means of getting buffs and goods from NPCs and probably a few other things. Just because that amalgomated system was canned doesn't mean a facet of that system couldn't work (i.e. just the dialog part).

 

>

> But actual branching dialogue with any meaning at all ? I honestly think that is beyond what ANet can pull off (reliably enough to be worth it). They did try with the earlier parts of the Personal Story, and while it's mostly passable, it isn't stellar. And Iirc was another thing they basically ran out of time on, that they would have loved to have done more with.

 

I just think it would take some slight author consideration and a few extra lines (from non-player characters) per choice. Of course, I'm not thinking of a grande branching tree dialog set-up, merely [make my commander sound stern], [make my commander sound empathetic], [make my commander sound aloof], etc.

 

Also, the main reason I wanted to discuss this is because I've heard it was nearly impossible to do and I vehemently disagree with that conclusion.

 

[Haleydawn.3764]

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

> Also, the main reason I wanted to discuss this is because I've heard it was nearly impossible to do and I vehemently disagree with that conclusion.

 

Did I miss the part where you work for Anet, and know exactly what they're trying to achieve with the narrative they are presenting?

 

[Leo G.4501]

> @"Haleydawn.3764" said:

> > @"Leo G.4501" said:

> > I think you misunderstand the purpose of this thread.

>

> When you start a thread titled 'Branching Dialogue', people will comment about that as well as the content of your post. If you wanted opinions about 'flavour' of choices, and not branching dialogue, that would have been the thread title, no?

> It's asking for opinions, and I gave you mine. Adding any sort of variance is redundant when you come to the same arc cadence, adding 'personality' to predefined options would be ok, but it was scrapped for a reason.

>

 

Well the title says "branching dialog" not "branching story" which is why I feel you misunderstood. The topic is focused on exactly that, the branching of the dialog, not the branching of the resulting story. Anything that requires making new story instances or story steps is likely out of the question. You're free to discuss that but I am obligated to steer the conversation on topic when there is a misunderstanding.

[joneirikb.7506]

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Personality

 

I would actually love to see them bring this back again. Make it visible on the Hero Panel (loved watching the "Diplomatic" on my guard).

 

Even if all they did was basically letting you reply (grunt/nod/agree) in the said manner. It would be on way to infuse some level of personality/character onto the toon, and feel that you could project some personality at least. I'd be fine with this just being text based, and not voiced.

 

Alternatively, just auto-picking the response determined by which of the 10 different personality sets we had active.

[Keriana.9635]

Both branching dialogue and flavor dialogue options are great! The more the better. :)

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

All the hullabaloo aside, I do question the usefulness of a branching dialogue system in the storyline. I'm going to compare it to another RPG I like to play: Shadowrun Returns.

 

In Shadowrun you have one of the biggest branching dialogue systems I've ever seen in a game. It is put to good use: say the right thing and you can unlock secret areas, avoid fights, and even get new allies. Say the wrong thing, and you can find yourself neck deep in a whole lot of trouble. It affects how characters grow, how the plot goes along, and changes the endings based on the choices you make. This all done for a lot more than to connect with the character. Also, since it is all text, fine-tuning dialogue is incredibly fast and cheap.

 

If it was only in the game to help me connect with my character, then it would just be a burden. We had the charm/dignity/ferocity system at launch, and to be honest I didn't much care for it. I haven't missed it. The only thing I wanted was to play the race + sex combination that I chose for each toon, and to get the dialogue to match that. I wouldn't care much for a dialogue option.

[Khisanth.2948]

I think choices are a waste of time unless they actually lead to something. Take the trial in the recent episode. There is some shallow bit of branches but none of the choices matter in anyway. Same with the speech given at the end of the PoF story.

 

In the original personal story the choices had some impact and they could have been used to help flesh out the world. I haven't done any analysis of whether or not they did but the opportunity was there.

[Pifil.5193]

I enjoyed the old personality options but branching dialog that doesn't affect what happens at all is largely pointless, IMO, so it probably doesn't make sense to invest in it.

 

That's probably why they dropped the old charm, dignity, ferocity system. It had very little if any impact on the actual story, after all, in the end you still do the exact same things in the exact same way regardless of whether you're charming or ferocious.

[Blocki.4931]

All I want is slightly different dialogue for each race, maybe even gender (though that is asking for a lot)

 

It doesn't have to be branching. Stuff like the choice of banner in the PoF story being relevant months later was really nice though. Slightly more of this perhaps, but it doesn't have to be every release.

 

As others have said: Branching options don't do anything in an MMO. You get to be the "slightly better" good guy or you are the slightly dickish good guy. The results won't change because that means so much more work & things you will have to continue to worry about as you go forward. Flesh out one, solid and definite experience rather than try to do everything.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Pifil.5193" said:

> That's probably why they dropped the old charm, dignity, ferocity system. It had very little if any impact on the actual story, after all, in the end you still do the exact same things in the exact same way regardless of whether you're charming or ferocious.

 

Also, the old system didn't have any voiced lines for those, every time there was a choice between charm, ferocity or dignity, it wasn't voiced. Even in the personal story, you'd see the 2 characters talking in a cutscene, then provide the choice outside of it. Now, every story dialogue is voiced so it's another reason why they scrapped that.

 

> @"Leo G.4501" said:

> Ultimately though, this is only to flavor the words from your PC's mouth, not to branch the story. Branching story is a whole other discussion.

 

I think branching the words is too much work with very little gain. In the trial we got some choices in dialogue, there are certainly unique bits of dialogue based on your character's race (remember parts only available to Sylvari in Heart of Thorns) so there is, for me, enough branching in terms of dialogue.

[lokh.2695]

I always see it as a plus in a MMO, not a given. Some nice luxury if the devs have time to do it but nothing I miss, in a story where millions of people are "the commander". It doesn'r even have to be dialogue. I really liked how creative the devs implemented our class into story instances(the one where we go after Caudecus in his mansion, shows this best). The banners of Amnoon are another great example of how your choices can be reflected in the game w/o dialogue.

Asa player, I enjoy if the game "remembers" the few choices I had during character creation or the early story. I like when NPCss of my order recognize my char by rank or when ambient dialogue between NPCs credits my characters race.

 

But again, its a plus. In a single player RPG I expect branching, in an MMO, not so much. I apreciate what I get, but don't mind if it's not much or anything.

[Durzlla.6295]

I don’t want them to add branching dialogue unless they’re planning on making the entire story centered around it, where Player 1 and Player 2 could have entirely different experiences based on what was said.

 

GW2 is not that sort of game though, and I personally think the way they have the commander portrayed at the moment is fine, and is significantly better than just making us some silent protagonist who just runs around nodding and grunting at people while our friends/lackeys do all the talking.

 

Branching dialogue systems are double edged swords, if done really well it really helps the game, but if it’s half assed it’s not only just painfully obvious that nothing you do actually matters (SWTOR for example), but it can also just be jarring and immersion breaking at how rail roaded the dialogue actually is. Not to mention the waste of time and resources.