Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411278 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 01:17:06 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperDesignMeaningful conversations in games. Which are the best?
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Meaningful conversations in games. Which are the best?  (Read 3277 times)
matwek
Guest
« on: February 04, 2016, 08:00:29 AM »

I've been meaning to attempt to design a conversation based game for a while now, so I've recently started to collect together ideas and concepts that I think are cool/interesting. I wondered if any of you guys knew of any games that had interest conversation mechanics?

From a mainstream perspective, Ive been playing a fair amount of Fallout 4, and whilst I've been enjoying the game Ive been finding the conversations system a little boring. Saying different things to people often results in the same outcome, and when there is a branch in the conversation, it's so glaring "black and white" which option is which that it can be almost tedious at points.

I've started work on a system of my own that I'm hoping can be used to inject a bit more realism into the mix. Here are some of the concepts that I've come up with...
- the removal of the 'conversation web' concept. Players can change the subject themselves rather than relying on a series of question responses.
- the removal of 'themed' responses. There is no right or wrong, or good or evil response. Each response is unique in that it effects the person you're talking to in various ways.
- no factions. As in each character responds depending on how they have been treated by you, not by your alliance with that particular group of people.
- character personalities. Different characters react different to the same questions.
- key info, once collected from other characters, can be 'deployed' strategically during later conversations and have different effects depending on when in the conversation you bring it up. Think of it like an item that must be used at the right moment for best effect.
- having simple outcomes. Whilst the conversations may be more complex I understand that it's important to have a clear outcome to the conversation and how it effects the story

There are a few more ideas Ive been playing with, and it seem a little daunting but I think I've come up with a system that should cover some of those bullet points.
Once I'm back on my PC I'll share my idea (currently on phone) but I'm curious to know which games you guys think had interesting conversation mechanics?
Logged
ThemsAllTook
Administrator
Level 10
******



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2016, 08:22:55 AM »

I've always had a soft spot for games that let you type in freeform keywords for conversations (Ultima V, The Real Texas, etc). With a system like this, it's hard to know if you've exhausted all of your conversation options with someone, and I consider that a good thing - a little bit of mystery in a game never hurts. Some sort of in-game system for note taking so that the player doesn't have to use paper or remember every keyword would be helpful, but I'd really prefer it not to be to the level of the game automatically remembering every important word and presenting it as a multiple choice option. It feels better if I'm taking initiative to talk to a particular character about something without the game giving me too explicit of a hint about it.
Logged

matwek
Guest
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2016, 08:59:55 AM »

I like the idea of having certain bits of information that can be collected from conversations, almost like a resource.
Then during another conversation you could then reveal that information. It wouldn't be a dialog option, more like an action that you can perform at any point in the conversation.

For example you might be trying to solve a murder and you question person A. At the end of the conversation they might reveal a bit of info about person B, such as them being near the murder scene at the time of the murder.

Now, when you have a conversation with person B you have your usual conversation options but also have the added option of revealing this information at strategic points.
If you reveal the info straight away then they will react and come up with a reasonable excuses as to why they where there, but if you hold off you can wait till they talk themselves into a corner before revealing that you know they were lying.

The best way I can describe it is like an rpg battle. If you cast a poison spell too soon then the enemy will just use a spell to cure it on their next turn, but if you silence their use of magic or wait till their MP is depleted before casting poison, then there will be nothing they can do to stop the effects.
Logged
ecplav
Level 0
**



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2016, 11:19:26 AM »

I've always had a soft spot for games that let you type in freeform keywords for conversations

This part of your sentence reminded me of Facade. There was such a system, but it was maybe a bit poorly implemented.

I like the idea of having certain bits of information that can be collected from conversations, almost like a resource.
Then during another conversation you could then reveal that information. It wouldn't be a dialog option, more like an action that you can perform at any point in the conversation.

For example you might be trying to solve a murder and you question person A. At the end of the conversation they might reveal a bit of info about person B, such as them being near the murder scene at the time of the murder.

Now, when you have a conversation with person B you have your usual conversation options but also have the added option of revealing this information at strategic points.
If you reveal the info straight away then they will react and come up with a reasonable excuses as to why they where there, but if you hold off you can wait till they talk themselves into a corner before revealing that you know they were lying.

What do you think about L.A. Noire's interrogation system then?
Logged
baconman
Level 10
*****


Design Guru


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2016, 11:40:33 AM »

Play HuniePop.
Logged

Alevice
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2016, 03:13:10 PM »

I like the idea of having certain bits of information that can be collected from conversations, almost like a resource.
Then during another conversation you could then reveal that information. It wouldn't be a dialog option, more like an action that you can perform at any point in the conversation.

For example you might be trying to solve a murder and you question person A. At the end of the conversation they might reveal a bit of info about person B, such as them being near the murder scene at the time of the murder.

Now, when you have a conversation with person B you have your usual conversation options but also have the added option of revealing this information at strategic points.
If you reveal the info straight away then they will react and come up with a reasonable excuses as to why they where there, but if you hold off you can wait till they talk themselves into a corner before revealing that you know they were lying.

The best way I can describe it is like an rpg battle. If you cast a poison spell too soon then the enemy will just use a spell to cure it on their next turn, but if you silence their use of magic or wait till their MP is depleted before casting poison, then there will be nothing they can do to stop the effects.

this sort of reminds me of blackwell legacy, where your character will write down keywords that can be used as topics to engage with other characters, and you could also mix keywords to form more detailed concepts in the form of other keywords
Logged

Pfotegeist
Guest
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2016, 01:34:51 PM »

Conversation is pretty complicated. Language is developed to share information, but individuals are well documented to use language as a means of dissembling and gathering power.  To find meaning in one conversation is a bit too easy to be real. People who sound like broken records IRL aren't effective communicators.

So there's some flavoring options, by having NPCs cycle dialogue in the most linear manner they seem more alive.  I don't think I've ever seen or heard complaints about this. It has a display of story progression about it which is always satisfying. Now I'll put this into use, a real person is talking, and they want something. They'll rephrase what they say because they didn't think ahead before talking.

example: 1. I put the keys in the box. 2. Look in the glove box for me. 3. Could you get the keys for me?

Short conversations are easier, they get punctuated by periods of silence and allow active listening. So assuming the player doesn't get the message, they would talk to the NPC again and get a different message.

Longer conversations are more theatrical. All sorts of tricks could be used, like canned laughter gets overused by TV sitcoms, the laughter will elicit socially affected laughter, engaging someone who might not have been paying close attention.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2016, 07:28:00 PM »




If you have trouble with conversation, I would direct you to emily's short design breakdown of all the conversation mechanics in game, it's a must read, might give you ideas! Of course since it's covering the whole spectrum of interactive conversation you won't need all, but it will give a solid ground with practical concept and implementation for your own need. Even though she spoke from the perspective of the IF genre, the many trope use in if are also used elsewhere (menu choice is therefore covered). The concept being both abstract AND practical it's easy to translate them to PGC as she laid out guideline that can be translated into rules, especially as she spend great time outlining the pro and con and the limit of each model. IMHO she is the sharpest designer in the whole community of dev, period.

Emily's works:

- the basics
https://emshort.wordpress.com/how-to-play/writing-if/my-articles/conversation/
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/05/column_homer_in_silicon_the_co_1.php
http://www.tigsource.com/2009/05/14/emily-short-conversation-methodologies/ (masterclass in the comment)

- series on modeling conversation, cover all the state of the art, practical
https://emshort.wordpress.com/page/3/?s=modeling+conversation+flow
https://emshort.wordpress.com/page/2/?s=modeling+conversation+flow
https://emshort.wordpress.com/?s=modeling+conversation+flow

- the breakthrough design masterpiece on cnversation, to read!
https://emshort.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/versu-conversation-implementation/
https://emshort.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/versu-content-structure/


optional
https://emshort.wordpress.com/how-to-play/writing-if/my-articles/action-and-interaction/

- less filtered version of the conversation modelling series
https://emshort.wordpress.com/category/conversation-modeling/

- More overkill details about versu
https://versublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/versu.pdf
https://versublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/ptai_evans.pdf
https://versublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/praxis.pdf
https://versublog.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/graham_versu.pdf

- her analysis of how information, story and design merge in some game is insightful for building our own implementation in any games.
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/7.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/6.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/5.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/4.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/3.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/2.php
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/column_homer_in_silicon/

- random
https://emshort.wordpress.com/how-to-play/reading-if/
https://emshort.wordpress.com/how-to-play/reading-if/plot-and-narrative/
https://emshort.wordpress.com/how-to-play/writing-if/


There is also correlation between writing conversation and a game based on scattering information on a spatial basis (and the gating that generally goes with like in adventure games). Instead of mapping the discourse structure into a conversation interface, where the player navigate through a network (generally a tree) of information, the world space became the discourse map by scattering information onto place that act like topics. I do not know if this part is clear Huh?





That NPC stuff looks complicated!

However I found that for dialog pile Who, Me? ignore  if not needed but it's the chatterbot perspective, I think there is a few concept explain here that could make it easier for the conceptualization and organisation of the speech data. Not that it's ground breaking (unlike versu) but seeing actual implementation would make your own surely easier.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6305/beyond_fa%C3%A7ade_pattern_matching_.php?print=1 (especially the suzette part)
I know It's NLP and that it is overkill for your project, but I thought some concept might still help in how they hadnle topic and various discourse handling. More like for inspiration and thought (mostly for procedural generation parts).

Optional read
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132155/beyond_aiml_chatbots_102.php?print=1
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/PaulTero/20130318/188686/Creating_Better_NPCs.php?print=1
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/BruceWilcox/20110623/89684/Suzette_the_Most_Human_Computer.php


Also To add to the thought of the social aspects of my previous and explain the reasoning. The goal was to offer a basic gameplay loop to ease the player into the world as a progression mechanics, a short term goal loop with clear gating of the main currency (information and agency). Other game use trading or fighting, I thought a social ladder mechanics based on intel could be that and ease the player into the the broader hi level goals or exploration without getting lost at first, it's like a mechanical short term breadcrumb.

It's true they originate from a design which I'm working on and deal with more intimate interactions.

So while you don't have to be that intimate, you can substitute individual with group or more abstract concept, simplify the loop or adapt it to your purpose. But I want to raise the necessity for clear short term loop.



Beyond
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135698

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1015613/Beyond-Eliza-Constructing-Socially-Engaging
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 07:54:11 PM by Jimym GIMBERT » Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2016, 08:00:07 PM »

My personal advice is to cut your conversation framing sequence per "stake" ie clear implication for each conversation (clear consequence). Eventually transitioning from one stake to another with consequence. Having one stake per sequence allow for the clarity you are looking for.
Logged

Pfotegeist
Guest
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2016, 08:17:43 AM »



Very interesting Gim. I need to read these later, too much info too quick.

I'll share something I've been thinking about. Mnemonic, story based information sharing. I think it is more realistic than perfect data blocking structures.


Also I apologize ahead of time if this is too exciting.

Why use of mnemonics for memorization? We remember a long story and reflect the information more accurately.  Even with very bad memory and little energy I could remember most things with a story. It's also not surprising that kids likely believe and immerse in stories before they're old enough to reflect on the large storehouse of data and make many more connections between not-closely related data.  Why? Because we just happen to evolve like that, and it worked so well we took over the planet.

In writing and programming you might be more comfortable with perfect information, but the task is daunting for anyone. Games deliver a less than perfect process of interaction, which would be whatever the user wanted it to be, with an appropriate response. We're not there yet. ( I think this was brought up in the very first link in Gim's post )

Game design strongly encourages the use of knowledge flags, that's pretty old now, and still works but it's bare and stilted for conversation.  I think the information could be in flux. A story-based information model more closely resembles the way we remember and share knowledge.  So for example, rather than a checklist (flags) you'd have a resource pool of stories that you can use as a replacement for parsing data. This is similar to selecting an item and using it, and reflects reuse of information.

Ok so that's just the setup.

Following the idea of a more realistic spoken word system, there is potential info degradation (data omission), mutation (mythology, phone game). This is because memories aren't perfect, they have some reliance on data importance in order to derive meaning (Psychology studies this phenomenon of recoding and decoding  memory so despite being a pseudo-science it's a bit clearer cut than what I'm thinking). A working flaw in the story-based information model is the stories undergo unintentional, but sometimes intentional changes that alter crucial data to make it more amazing, and more memorable.

Another result of the story based system is we derive figures of power. Ok I stop here. I find fuzzy logic more entertaining it's just a matter of how it's delivered.  Pure data is visible in nature because of how most animals use language, so it's a very fuzzy topic.

Bunnies are fuzzy.

Conversations about stories improve use of stories. I think I heard it first on here that when you remember something you change how you'll remember it differently.  So I think a meaningful conversation could be any conversation that alters the data.

What I was originally trying to think of when I looked at this topic was a meaningful conversation that elicits emotional content, it's very similar, an emotional response also improves memory, but doesn't necessarily solidify data.
Logged
Pfotegeist
Guest
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2016, 04:26:03 AM »

What I wrote was definitely confusing. I'll ask a few questions instead.

Take: One.

Language concept.

Is Math a language? Can you have a meaningful conversation with pure Math? Is it fun? If you're still with me, how frequently do you find someone who relies on Math to describe things?

Take: Two.

A simple outcome is implausible without a programmed response. ( Literal Deus ex)

The ball is round but is it smooth? Given one could you assume the other if unspecified? It makes things much quicker to have such redundancy, but I still don't know if that's how you think.

Take: Three.

Key info. It is real. It's basically mail.

Could a video game be more fun if it was less realistic?

To reproduce key info in reality you need a perfect data transport like written words, a uniform algorithm for expressing the data, and someone who can interpret and respond perfectly, someone well trained for that task. The mutation concept requires key info is such, otherwise it can't have a simple outcome.

Take: Four. I'm out of questions.

Human = Man, I'm just being obsessive about neutral words, it's a trend the English language has taken to some extremes.

Instinct allows communication between animals. Humans even. Rather than a perfect info system human develo ways to deliver the largest quantity. Human invent writing to express finite info. Human invent stricter ways of interpreting language. Human invent math because no language is strict enough. Human invent mail at some point, ironically using birds at some point.
Logged
Torchkas
Level 10
*****


collects sawdust


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2016, 12:12:17 PM »

I don't think making every conversation meaningful is necessarily a good thing. You might end up burning out the player which will make them lose attention to all the important information he's supposed to receive.
It depends on your definition of meaningful.
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2016, 03:45:55 PM »

The real problem is what purpose conversation have in game and at large?

Conversations is first social act, some says it's about communication and communication is often reduced to facts sharing, but is that so?

Personally I have found 4 functions for conversations:
- Bonding: the content is not as much important that showing affections, supports or destroying it with anger or other negative emotions.
- Fact sharing: this one is obvious, it's about statements but also questions relevant to something.
- manipulation: get others to do what you want and gain something from them
- self expression: It's about sharing your aspiration.

They are not mutually exclusive.
Logged

Torchkas
Level 10
*****


collects sawdust


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2016, 03:56:32 PM »

I consider those still to be important to the plot.
Things that are unimportant are jokes, insignificant backstory, remarks characters make. These interactions can still flesh out characters, but they don't require full attention.
Logged

gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 16, 2016, 04:22:59 PM »

Oh I forgot a fifth one specific to fiction, "flavor" as torchkas is talking about
Logged

Jordgubben
Level 2
**



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: February 27, 2016, 11:32:28 AM »

Seaman always deserves a mention when talking about conversations in games.

Since it's not a very famous game, here's the gist of it: You have a fish in an aquarium and you talk to it for a few minutes every day using a microphone (that I assume is included with the game). It starts mostly like a tamagochi with fartjokes, but then gradually evolves in to a light daily therapy session, with mind screws. Seaman is not very mechanically deep, it does not have to be. Seaman just has a very large predefined list of responses to different voice commands, combined with a calendar and memories of previous conversations.




(The example above is an example of seaman game play in general, not necessarily an exchange of meaningful conversation)
Logged

Photon
Level 4
****


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 29, 2016, 11:58:21 AM »

This conversation made me think of Eliza.

http://dosgames.com/g_misc.php (down the page a little ways.)
Logged
Photon
Level 4
****


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 29, 2016, 07:57:00 PM »

On a more serious note though, one idea I've had to make conversation more dynamic would be to add conversation pieces through the use of inventory items. When you are talking to NPC's, you could have a generic talk option but also have the option to show them something from your inventory (like a map or artifact) to see if they have any information they could give you about it. It not only stands to nicely unify inventory and dialogue mechanics but gives the player a concrete avenue by which to channel their curiosity and explore. NPC's could also have something like a "I'm too busy to talk" response if the player pesters them with too many conversation pieces.
Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic