[kuddles]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Of course, not every game needs dialogue trees. It's just the "either you enjoy them because they affect the game or despite they don't" mindset that bugs me.

Exactly. I think a more interesting question is what kind of dialogue trees people like. I would say I have three favourites.

Fahrenheit: The "choose-your-own-adventure" kind, where your choices are RPG-like. As in a real life discussion, you don't ask everything, but have to make decisions on what you want to ask, and then you can't choose the others. Even though most of your choices are superficial, they still feel like they create conseqences.

Gabriel Knight: Your dialogue trees change and adapt depending on what you already ask or are aware of. It certainly helps with the idea of being a detective or inquirer.

Still Life: If your dialogue trees are so linear and inconsequential that your goal is basically "pick everything one-by-one", letting someone choose only important information, or allowing them to hear more backstory if they wish, seems more ideal.

[phankiejankie]

Many people weren't at all happy with Still Life's simplified dialogue but I found it great. You want to progress quickly ask only relevant questions want to learn some background info press the right mouse key. Neat!

My favourite though is the Fahrenheit kind of dialogue because it adds the element of time. Your answers are pressured and there is no way to go back to pick another choice just as in real life. You picked up the wrong choice, face the consequences. The time element is crucial by me. I can understand that some like their games really slow and picking their dialogue choices in true comfort after they've read them thoroughly but this is something of a rarity in real life anymore.

[colpet]

I found the dialogue trees in GK 1 particularly boring. Each time one would come up I basically sat there and clicked through each statment. It was one of the games where I wished one click played all you needed to know at once, rather than going through each item one by one. It was the worst part of the game for me.

[insane_cobra]

Yes, that particular tree was boring. Thank god that the lines themselves were superbly written.

[UPtimist]

I vote the mandatory, but absent, "other".

Well, if I understand the term dialogue tree correctly, then while they're good, at least when there for a reason or serving a purpose, I hate making decisions and not being to say everything. I don't want to miss anything! Well, at least information that is. Otherwise they're great by me...

(Edit): No wait? Does dialogue tree what I thought it meant originally? So that you can choose everything? I'm not a true AGer...

[MadTricks]

I dont like when the choices actually matter. Like open ended games, where every sentence could change game story.
I dont like open ended games at all...

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by MadTricks

I dont like when the choices actually matter. Like open ended games, where every sentence could change game story.
I dont like open ended games at all...

That is perhaps the most heartbreaking thing I've heard any gamer say. I only wish it were the first time I've ever heard (or read) it.

Why would anyone want to play a video game where all they are doing is following one meager breadcrumb trail from start to finish? I've played games like these and tend to find them saddening in their failure to realize their full potential. Watching a movie or television series on DVD, or perhaps just reading a book would be more immersive and ultimately more rewarding... unless you're an inveterate Puzzle Gamer, in which case, why bother with plot at all?

I haven't looked it up lately, but it occurs to me that there are game developers who still design games that cater exclusively to people who like logic puzzles with no distractions.

Or is it that you enjoy the contextual trappings of a plot for the puzzles to exist in, like a framework, but that you don't particularly want to ge bogged down by a game with literary pretensions?

Either way, it seems utterly depressing and devoid of potential. It sounds to me liek all you really want is a sequel to The 11th Hour. I apologize if what I say offends you or presumes too much. I just have a lot of trouble imagining why someone would want to play an Adventure Game that really didn't offer up anything but the merest suggestion of freedom to explore and deduce. It sounds absolutely petrified.

[Trumgottist]

To me, the downside with branching plots and things like that is that there's a lot of the game that I won't see. It seems like a waste of good game.

Of course, you can argue replayvalue, but I'm not really interested in dissecting a game like that. Take the game Slouching Towards Bedlam for example. A good game that I liked a lot. But I only played two of the endings and then I was happy and ready to move on while others looked for all endings and stuff.

But by taking that game as an example, I'm sort of shooting myself in the foot if I'm arguing against choice and multiple endings. Slouching did that really well and wouldn't have worked as well as it did without it. Blade Runner, on the other hand, I was much less comfortable with the endingness of it all. It was a good game, but I kept feeling I might be missing something. That's also one of the reasons I haven't bought The Last Express, despite everyone saying it's a great game. I like being led through the game by the designer.

Did this post make any sense? I don't know, but that's how I think about the subject.

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by Trumgottist

I like being led through the game by the designer.

Yes, this makes plenty of sense to me in terms of what people are confortable with and enjoy. That's always a major factor in any creative endeavour that requires money being invested somewhere along the line: what people are comfortable with.

What bothers me is, I see this time as the beginning of a new medium that will bravely redefine interactive storytelling. There are still hurdles to be gotten over, but it seems to me that what's been keeping Adventure Games from getting out from under the shadows of literature and cinema has been it's sometimes rather timid attitude towards embracing its interactivity.

*snip*

Worst it can do is put your masterpiece in the sad catagory of Noble Experimental Failures, which still makes your work outstanding from the mediocre successes. You might even influence future developers to succeed where you failed. That can't be a total loss.

[MoriartyL]

Wow. When MadTricks said:

I dont like when the choices actually matter. Like open ended games, where every sentence could change game story.
I dont like open ended games at all...

I had to agree. Open-endedness is a very bad thing in adventures, threatening the ability of the writers to tell a good story. But I see what you're talking about is branching paths, not really open-endedness. Obviously the main strike against branching paths is the issue of practicality. But now that you present your case I think there's definitely work to be done in this regard. I disagree with the implication that this should be the main path for adventures (it's really just a side road, since there's still plenty of evolution to be done with one path), but I think I see the benefit of forcing the player to work for the best ending.

[insane_cobra]

For me the beauty of games - and I'm not talking only about adventures cause I never think in terms of only adventures - the beauty of games is that they can function perfectly both as non-linear and completely linear experiences. I'm all for exploring non-linearity and providing players with greatly personalized experiences, but one has to acknowledge that we can just as well find utmost enjoyment in following linear paths.

It's not a surprise, older media got us used to linear storytelling and there's also something to say about conformism, our subconscious fear of freedom. I'm not really competent to talk about it, but I see it every day - people want to stay on the beaten paths. However, even the most linear games posses one quality absent from most other media: interactivity. It's a great immersion agent, even on its most basic level (controlling the movements of your character), and makes playing a linear game a very different experience than reading a book or watching a movie.

Most recently it occured to me while watching the Silent Hill movie. Exploring the corridors in the game was a gripping experience, watching the character on the big screen do the same thing bored me to tears. That's also one of the reasons why I dislike point & click as a control method, its rhythm of do (click) - watch (wait) - do (click) - watch (wait) fractures my involvement.

And even the most linear story can be accompanied by open-ended gameplay. So I wouldn't write linearity off as something that doesn't take full advantage of what this medium has to offer - in fact, ignoring such an important branch would be just that. I am, however, disappointed with general reluctance to exploring the territory of true interactive storytelling, a lot more energy should be poured into that.


Lee, you make some interesting points, but could you please be a little more concise? The only thing more threatening than reading your posts is the thought of having to comment on them.

[Lee in Limbo]

Okay. I promise, no more long posts.

Bye.

[MoriartyL]

No, it was interesting. Please don't think we didn't read it.

[insane_cobra]

Of course, we did read them, but people interested in what you're saying mostly already have a basic understanding of the concepts behind your words (if only because we've had similar discussions on numerous occasions here) so you don't have to spell everything out. We get it, just please get to the point as quickly as possible.

[SnorkleCat]

I think it depends on the tree....if it is a pointless tree where one ends up with only one option anyway, then I'm not too fond of them. I wouldn't mind it too much if the conversation were actually interesting and well written... it would be like reading a book then, even if it didn't move the story forward a lot....but it usually isn't and so I usually skip all the options that are clearly pointless and go straight for the one at the end. I think it would be nice to see more games where dialogue trees are used to really steer the direction of the game, instead of wasting time with more bad copy.

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

We get it, just please get to the point as quickly as possible.

voila

[phankiejankie]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

That's also one of the reasons why I dislike point & click as a control method, its rhythm of do (click) - watch (wait) - do (click) - watch (wait) fractures my involvement.

Point n' click, unfortunately, is a pace killer...

[Vina]

I think dialogue trees are a must-have for comedy AG's. I love them to bits if they're funny and clever enough. Take the MI series for an example of it done right. ( CMI in this regard)

Nothing comes to mind of any dull unneeded examples, but I usually don't play those kinds of AG's...