Also the lovetalks won't be inititated only by the NPC's, like in BG2.
David Gaider :
Quote: Posted 01/28/05 01:26:28 (GMT) by Nom.au
Perhaps my two biggest concerns are 'dead end' dialogue options and passive romancing. By passive romancing I mean that all the key dialogues are initiated by the NPC. As a PC, I'd like the option to, on my own initiative, to go out of the way to please my friend. This includes initiating conversation where I can compliment them, trinkets that I can buy them (and preferably have them give a positive response), and whatnot. Even the option to buy them a meal in a tavern (or proposition them for bed, depending on your preferences). These don't even need to change the NPC attitude counter, but just ways to make it more real and feel appreciated. Obviously, if such things can trigger an attitude counter, you need a mechanism to stop spamming ("uh, bruce, this is too much. I need space").
That's a good point to bring up.
I know that we started addressing this a bit more in HotU. We made it so that half the dialogues were initiated by the player at their leisure and the other half were initiated by the NPC. I think that worked fairly well, too, even if it was a bit harder to write.
Funny you should mention some of the other stuff, because these too are a logical advancement (like buying something for your love interest). A few things you mentioned sound very do-able, though, and I hadn't really thought of. Thanks, I just might include them.
Quote: Dead ends are also a concern. Regardless of whether a "wrong" answer will break the plotlet, the _perception_ that such an answer exists is frustrating. I want the ability to do something stupid and then make up for it, rather than have the chain simply end. To put it another way: to play the dialogue, rather than attempt to win it.
We haven't really had the "dead end" thing much since BG2. Recalling Carth in KotOR, there was perhaps one or two actual instances where selecting a response would end the romance track completely. At those points, though, I just thought that there's no getting past saying this... it's just too awful. Other things, however, would cause an argument or a bit of banter, but there were no 'traps' in the dialogue, per se.
I do kind of like the idea of leaving it up to the player to apologize, however. Perhaps have a few specific points where it is possible for the player to make the NPC angry and have the conversation end... and if the player wishes for the "romance track" to continue, then they would have to initiate an apology. Or not. Much better, probably, then having the NPC always doing the apologizing. Hmmm. Hmmmmmm. Actually, yes, I really like that.
Quote: several times in the Bioware campaigns, there are multiple dialogue options presented. If choose to ask about certain things first, you cannot later go back and ask about other things - even though you have not negatively impacted the character's attitude.
I'm not sure this is what you're asking about, but I'm wondering how you would feel about changing the "romance track" to a different progression style altogether?
Would it be an improvement if we allowed the player to ask certain questions, and the NPC's response would vary based on on their current attitude towards the player and how much they had already told them? And then new "starter" questions for the PC to ask could be opened up as their story continued?
That way you could have several "story paths" ongoing at the same time... but the player could discuss them and jump between them as he wished. A bit more like natural conversation, as opposed to the A-B-C-D method.
The only trouble, there, would be having the various paths interact with each other and not feel completely independant. If you make the NPC angry in one path, her attitude towards you in another line of dialogue shouldn't suddenly shift. As well, if you learn something that is relevant in another line, the NPC should know that you know that. It could get quite confusing and risk suspending disbelief completely. The thing about the A-B-C-D progression is that that style flows much more naturally... even if it is less interactive (to a degree, as you can still have paths).
