This is an interesting topic. In practice there are "RPG" genres. Is this an "eastern" (linear plot, teenagers kill god with the power of friendship) or "western" (sandbox, cannibalism perk) RPG? Your approach to story crafting is  going to vary a lot depending on what your making.

(I am not sure if I just prevented or started the obligatory JRPG/WRPG debate  )

I've been experimenting with text-based for a while now.

Depending on what you want to do and your technical expertise I'd argue for building your own tool. When I stared out I had a very specific feature set that any potential tool had do provide.

• Run on or export to html
• Potentially look ok on a smart phone
• Model an actual world (Rooms, actors, time, etc.)
• Point and click (UX not centred on text commands)
• Translatable content (I18n)

I evaluated Twine, Inform 7, Ren'py and possibly a few more. None of them passed all the above criteria, so I opted to write my own engine. Two years later I think I have something that is pretty general and works fairly well.

I'm currently using it for this game:
http://superattack.se/games/nom/

Ofcourse what you build  depends on what you need. When I started out I really did not know what to make, so I ended up creating a very general engine before i found the game idea I was looking for. In a more focused project you can probably get a lot further a lot faster with just ractive.js and some creativity.

[Linearity and pacing]

When I posted the OP I was expecting players to get the basics (action points, credibility, sympathy and posture) and have problems with the more intricate details (argument chains and retorts). As far as I can tell it sounds like it's the other way around.

This is very important feedback.

As you can probably understand I won't explain how it really work in this thread, at least not now. I'm going to change thing and see if I can have it make more sense, then I will return and ask for feedback on a new release. Rinse and repeat until it makes sense for most players.

I do however want to comment on a few things:

Linearity and pacing
This release is more or less one long corridor. My intent is for the final game to have a more free exploration feel, with other stuff to do than arguing. But the dispute system is the "innovative" part. That's why I want to figure it out properly before building to much of the other (relative low risk) stuff.

The Impact font?
This one is really weird. The css is set use the to font-family 'fantsy' which is supposed to be a 'generic' font. 

Code:

body {
margin: 0;
font-family: fantasy;
}

I get that this is not going to look the same everywhere, but 'Impact'? The MEME-font? I'd probably  better just use an embeded font for the next release, and fall back to Verdana/Helvetica on older browsers.

Random fails
So "The argument misses and fails to make sense." is just what is sounds like. There argument has a random chance of missing.

I generally think randomness has an undeserved bad reputation in game development circles. Random has it's place, but in this case it should probably be saved for special "high risk/high reward" opportunities. I've changed this code now.

Rounding up
Thank you everyone.  So reading all of your comment has sparked several new ideas to try out in the next release. Please keep the feedback coming.
(<- this is tea, not coffee)

For puzzles I really missed having an in game note taking system. For something this immersive I do not want to look away from the screen to use pen and paper.

thanks
I was thinking about a note system but haven't found a good solution yet because I want to keep the game old school with no saving.
so I thought about taking notes with twitter or something similar, but I guess it also brakes the immersion...

Using twitter could work if you can integrate it properly. It'd make the game very viral, but it may also be a bit  spammy for the players followers.

Thanks. Glad to hear your liking it, and your feedback also illuminated several smaller unclarities.

It also sound like your experiencing some bug(s) that I'm not able to reproduce. What web browser (& OS) did you play on?

I didn't get the meaning/use of the number next to the stars-icon next to the character name...

The stars are action points. But your not the first tester to have trouble with this. How to represent time is something I'm still tinkering a lot with. Tester feedback is extra helpful here since it's very easy to make something that works in theory, but is completely incomprehensible to new players.

Exploring and character interaction seem like a good fit. The "fights" were a little impersonal (except for the introduction/outcome), still it felt good to convince somebody.

Currently opponents mostly have a subset the same arguments that the main character uses. I agree that using argument sets (and AI) to express different personalities through mechanics has potential that requires deeper exploration.

I started playing without reading about the game. My first though was: "Hey, it's a walking simulator without all the tedious walking. I'm just getting in to this kind of games". Then I realised I was walking.

Really digging the atmosphere (both music and visuals).

For puzzles I really missed having an in game note taking system. For something this immersive I do not want to look away from the screen to use pen and paper.

I've posted the latest release in the feedback section. The main reason is to test if the game mechanic is understandable.

https://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=53796.0

If I can get 3-5 people to play through it and post something useful, then I consider that a massive success.

[Now go!]

Please jump to here (preferably without reading the preceding posts):
https://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=53796.msg1293720#msg1293720


So, I have made (an early prototype for) a new game. I would like to tell you all about it, but I should probably abstain from that.

You see I'm not really trying to answer the question 'Is this fun?' just yet, but rather I want to know 'Is this even comprehensible?'. If I were to tell you what kind of game it is I will not get your untainted first impression.

Here is what I need your help with:

• Play the game (Try to at least get to the "Town square")
• Do not any other posts after this one
• Write down how you think the "conflict mechanic" works and post that

(All rules are made to be broken. If you do not want follow the above instructions then that is fine to. Just mention it in your feedback comment in some creative way)


Now go!

System requirements:
It is a html5 game, so since your reading this chances are high you can also play it.
(But IE users be warned)

Full game url (build of post):
http://superattack.se/games/nom-r6/

Full game url (always latest build):
http://superattack.se/games/nom/


(Also, I'm an undiagnosed dyslectic and the English language is not my native tongue. If you are the type starts to sparkle with glee at the though of correcting spelling and grammar, then this game may prove to be an inexhaustible source of merry joy for you. This kind of feedback is off course appreciated, but please use a PM and not the thread for this. Otherwise the sheer volume it will most likely bloat the thread. K' Thx. Yay.)

Greetings dev-lings,

I used to be a software developer but then I took a scrum master certificate in the knee. These days I only get to code on hobby projects (which are mostly games).

My other major hobby (after games) is, for lack of better words, processes and models. I like stuff like lean start up and design thinking. The game projects I start tend to be just as much as much about figuring out a good way to make games as to making the actual game.

When I'm I not inventing now project models I also have a small allotment. It mostly produces beetroots. You can just never go wrong with beetroots.

(I've actually been hanging around here for over a year, but somehow I missed this thread. Sorry about that  )

Oh look, this devlog has been going for exactly one year today.

To celebrate, here is the current world map as a graph (spoilers?):

[Average]

I've been working almost every day since new years on this. A lot of stuff has happened.

http://superattack.se/games/nom-r6/

New and noteworthy:

• New path with disputes (of increasing difficulty)
• New IU layout
• Paged narrative
• Symbols improve clarity of dispute state
• Dispute Mechanics: Blocking and Posture
• Several new dispute arguments
• Argument presentation illustrations make it more clear who is saying what
• Navigation is simplified by changing the action name when returning to the previous room.
• Tweak how time works (again) - This time adding randomness and changing how the speed stat is used
• All (relevant) unit tests converted from jasmine to mocha
• Intro

Questions am exploring with this release:

• Can the mechanics be taught through play?
• Can difficulty be increased? (Is there "difficulty"?)
• Does the mechanic work with the story and setting?
• How much work is it to create one (propper) dispute?

Most obviously missing (from the top of my head):

• Active goal for the main character
• Final battle/Ending
• Release quality illustrations
• Progression system

Trying to assemble a concrete backlog (with estimates) has proven to be a mostly pointless exercise. So for this release I'm testing a new way to calculate progress. And yes, it appears I'm still moving backwards.

Aesthetics	20%
Story	10%
Mechanics	60%
Technology	90%
Average	45%

We can't be islands, right.

If you take a look under the surface you will notice that most islands are already connected.

[Keeping it warm]

Keeping it warm

(The following post is partially a re-edit of this post)

During January I've been doing a small experiment on my self (because test on animals is immoral). I decided to do something, if ever so small, with this game every day. I've often found that getting back to a game project is very hard once it "cools of", therefore I've opted to "keep it warm".

I've found there things to be very important.
1) Every day is every day.
1) Potentially tangible result.
2) Risk of (a small) failure.

Every day is critical to keep going. Tangible result are important because they are the only thing that move you forward. Risk of failure is important because they show if you are on the right path, or not.

So just thinking (really hard) about the game is not good enough. At best it creates scope creep. The "just thinking" part will happen naturally at other times as long as the game is kept warm.

Testing really small tweaks in code is very valuable, even if (or rather mostly if) the tweak turns out to be the wrong tweak and is discarded. I've found that doing very small incremental changes some times open up new discoveries, like a treasure room in a rouglike. I also get better at spotting new small tweak the more I do them.

Art (graphics) is another good activity. Not only does it have a high risk of "failure" (roughly 10% of what I've draw has actually ended up in the next release). It's also a uses a completely different mental fortitude resource than the one that solving technical problems (ie. my day job) consumes. So it's a good thing to do after a hard days work at te office.

I'm still testing this on my self so I'm not sure where to draw the line yet. But I'm fairly confident that "just thinking" or writing things down in a personal notebook is not good enough. Research is one grey area. Writing in this devlog is another. I'm not convinced that these two activities keeps a game warm. They may even (indirectly) cause the game to cool of a bit faster, because they give the illusion of keeping it warm. More experiments need to be conducted in the next ittration.

One thing I've found quite recently by a practical experiment is that it's very important to keep a game project warm. It's a bit like smithery I guess.  You need to give your game at least 20 minutes of hard effort every day to keep it in at a workable temperature.

By hard effort I mean to very specific things. A hard effort always has..
1) ..a potentially tangible result.
2) ..an associated risk of failure.

So just thinking (really hard) about the game is not good enough. But test playing the game after making few small tweaks and then reverting the tweaks (because they where the wrong tweaks) is perfectly fine. It is a valuable effort as long as there is some potential for the result to end up in the game. You could (attempt to) improve art, refactor code, add small features, do spell checking etc.

I'm still testing this on my self so I'm not sure where to draw the line yet. But I'm fairly confident that "just thinking" or writing things down in a personal notebook is not good enough. The "just thinking" part will happen naturally t you keep your game warm. Research is one grey area. Writing in your dev log is another. I'm not convinced that these two activities keeps a game warm, I may even cool it of a bit faster than doing nothing.

Tangible result are important because they always move you (slowly) forward. Risk of failure is important because they show if you are on the right path.

It's not totally fair to say MUDs were just substitutes. First there is a population of players who can't play 3D games (vision deficient players). Second there is people who prefer play muds rather than graphical mmorpg for various reasons.

This is really at the heart of why I started this thread. What benefits from game design can we get from text-based?

Cost reduction is risk reduction. Most movies start out as text-only (a script, often based on a book).

That said, finding benefits with text-only as the final delivery format is harder. Printed books still sell though.

[Is GGJ an online jam?]

I'm thinking of attending the Global Game Jam 2016 (29-21 Jan), but for various reasons I'm not very keen on dragging along a computer.

Is GGJ an online jam?

No, you need to sign up at one of the many, many local sites around the world in over 75 countries and participate on-site together with all other registered participants. There you will form teams and create a game over the weekend.

Has anyone here attended GGJ without an own computer? Is it usually easy to just "pair up" with someone else?  Will I be hunted down by a rabid mob of raging puritans if I attempt to make a board- or cardgame at the Jam?

My favorite RPGs - Final Fantasy 9

I was enjoying that videogame, but every single random encounter had a 30 second wait before you could input anything, made it unplayable for me

Ah, the PAL version of FF9. Much load time. So nostalgia. Wow Europe.   

If you like FF9 you should really look into Bravely Default. It's the spiritual successor when it comes to atmosphere, but has a more sophisticated battle system (and short load times).

I'm currently working on a game that is mostly text. I've never really been into text-adventures, CYOAs, MUDs or even VNs. My main motivation was to find a way to make games on a shoe-string budget.

The biggest challenge (in my experience so far) for text-games is in repeating mechanics (ie. most game mechanics except adventure-games). Having the same lines of text appear over and over is not just dull, but actually makes it harder to remember what just happen. Making the text more varied on the other hand makes the mechanics harder to understand. The correlation between input and output gets lost when the output is filled with aesthetic noise. In any case clarity is lost. The player is both bored and confused at the same time.

Complementing or replacing text with illustrations and icons, paying attention to layout, typography and use of colour helps a lot to improve clarity. Good visual flair is not just eye candy, it is information density.

[Actor]

(Fun fact:  When I made the last post I got a warning that I had not made any posts in over 120 days. Getting a Wii U was a good idea, but not a productive idea.)


Today I'm going to explain the basic components of the world engine behind the UI. It will perhaps not be a very useful post in it self, but it will simplify thinking out loud in future posts dealing with more specific subjects.


The basic building blocks of the engine core are: Actors, Rooms, Exits, Targets, Actions and Story

The Actors are the subjects of the worlds. They are the only type of object in the model that can cause behaviour, not just react to it. Actors work on a timing schedule. Every "turn" all actors accumulate a predefined amount of initiative. They then take turn doing stuff depending on who currently has the highest amount of initiative. The player is prompted for input whenever a special 'protagonist' actor has the most initiative.

The game world is divided into a set of Rooms. Rooms are bound together by Exits. A single exit only goes one way, from one room to another (and not back again). Moving bidirectionally requires exits to be paired. This pair is smart enough that if one exit is locked, then the other side of the pair is also locked (by default).

Anything that can be acted on is a Target. Unlike the other core types, the Target is an interface. It does not have a concrete type, but Room, Actor and Exit all implement it. A room is available as a target for all actors in a room and all actors in the same room are available as targets for each other. Combining an Actor with a Target generates a list of possible Actions, the choices presented to the player. AI-driven actors could also use actions (in theory), but this is currently not used anywhere.

Story binds everything together. It instantiates and manages actors and rooms. Beyond that it's mostly acts as a façade that encapsulates complexity, hiding it from the (really messy) knockout-based UI code.


(Oh, snap. I just realised I've forgotten about the Translation andActivity types, but it can wait)

The Barriers to Entry for RPGs Are Way Too High is an interesting because it's from a gamers (non-game-developers) perspective. I'm not sure the author understands it bur the gist of the article is that what makes (W&J)RPG:s unplayable is also what make them great.

The barrier to entry is also the barrier to exit. Once your mustered up the willpower to get over that hill and boot up the game, then that hill is in a way also what is keeping you there. Getting into it takes some effort, therefore getting out of it also takes effort.