[Once A Villain]

Yes, dialogue trees are the subject of my latest poll regarding adventure games. I have mixed feelings about them myself. They are wonderful, I think, in games where the player's choice actually changes the course of the game in some way. But honestly, how many adventure games use dialogue trees for that purpose? I believe in good gameplay, but I don't believe in adding elements that aren't really necessary.

Now, some of you may know that my favorite adventure game of all time is The Beast Within. I love almost everything about it, and I wouldn't change anything. However, the dialogue trees in the game aren't necessary. I don't mind clicking the various options and seeing the next part of the conversation, but the same effect could be had by just clicking the character again when he/she stops speaking. This would be sort of like most console RPGs. When you click a person they talk to you, but once they stop talking you can talk to them again and hear new stuff.

What I'm trying to say is that far too often dialogue trees give the ILLUSION of choice without really having anything to do with choice whatsoever. Most of the time players are just going to click through every single option until they've played the conversation out anyway. The only time dialogue trees are critical, in my opinion, is when the choices truly matter...changing the course of the story, etc.

Anyway, what do you guys think?

[rtrooney]

Two of my favorite "oldie" games, Shivers and Lighthouse, had no dialog trees and were very enjoyable. On the other hand, many people's game of the century, TLJ, had endless dialog trees that, for the most part, contributed ziltch to the game.

The dialog tree in Post Mortem actually did make a difference. By the end of the first conversation with the hotel receptionist you were headed down one path or another.

I hate them in general, but there are exceptions to the rule.

[Catbert]

I prefer a good dialogue tree, but I like what I say to have some influence, not just the order in which my character says things, I want it to affect how other characters will react to me.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Catbert

I prefer a good dialogue tree, but I like what I say to have some influence, not just the order in which my character says things, I want it to affect how other characters will react to me.

That falls under choice #2.

[Psychocandy]

I'm very fond of Dialogue trees, especially if they make a significant impact on the plot. However, when they're implemented REALLY badly they can quickly become a nightmare.

I hated the dialogue trees in "Mystery Of The Druids" so badly, for example, that I wanted to take a hatchet and physically CHOP them out of the game. Never, never again.

[Brandon]

Perhaps a better question to have asked would have been, do you prefer (what you've termed) dialogue trees, or just click-through dialogue, or dialogue that lets you ask a person about any topic. What's the "technical" term for that last option with branching topics? Games such as, unless my memory is shakier than I thought, Quest For Glory 4, Gabriel Knight, etc. Because that's what I think of for the term "dialogue tree." What you are calling a dialogue tree, I think more of as... well, I don't know what I call it. I do realize that your poll is specifically on this method, but I'm interested in what people think in the context of these other methods. I agree with your conclusions on the topic, by the way. Dialogue by choice of response is mostly a) for entertainment, b) to extend gameplay as an apparent "puzzle" either by 1) clicking all options until there's none left or 2) clicking all options until you find the "right" one or c) to create an apparent "puzzle" with the illusion that your choice is going to make a difference (dreamfall).

[Scoville]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

What I'm trying to say is that far too often dialogue trees give the ILLUSION of choice without really having anything to do with choice whatsoever.

I think giving the false illusion of choice is the key to good game design. The game player wants to feel like they are in control of the story, but at the same time every aspect which they do have control is one less that the author is able to use to construct a carefully planned narrative. By making the player feel like they are in control when they are not, both needs can be fulfilled.

So I think having dialogue trees, even if they are largely irrelevant, is important. The trick is to make the choices matter in as few occassions as possible so that the user feels empowered.

Going with your example of The Beast Within, I thought the trees were well done because of one particular scene. When chatting with Price at the Hunt Club, I made a choice that angered him. He left, despite my having one or two more dialogue choices remaining. This made me feel that the trees were important, and that feeling stayed with me for the rest of the game.

[Lee in Limbo]

I believe great adventure games can be made without any dialogue. That said, I think most of the great games I've played have had really good dialogue, even if the choices made with the dialogue trees had little overall effect on the outcome of the conversation or the game as a whole. So long as they are entertaining and tell me little things I didn't or couldn't have known before, then they are a perfectly valid form of interaction.

That said, I believe dialogue trees can and should be used to seriously affect the plot as often as possible in any given game that prides itself on good dialogue. Why build a game around so much fabulous dialogue if you're not going to make it important to the outcome at all? Might just as well write it down in a journal and save yourself the trouble of animating or voice acting it.

[Molgera]

The best usage of dialogue trees was in The Pandora Directive. You could have radically different conversations and cutscenes throughout the game depending on your choices. And then the overall mood of your dialogue choices (and some other things) would determine which of the seven endings you got. Very good and actually adds replayability in a genre that usually has none.

[Lucien21]

Most Dialogue trees are just an illusion of choice.

Just click through all the options until it gives you more options or you learn what you need to know.

I prefer it if there was some consequences to the discussion and I don't think it would be all that hard to do.

Assign each character with an emotional variable which can change depending on your actions. Characters would remember how they feel about you the next time you spoke to them. Piss them off and you get no help.

Example

Locked door. Mr Brown on the corner has the key. Mr Brown is friendly sort of chap and starts off with a good attitude towards you.

Solutions to the puzzle

* Speak to Mr Brown in a Neutral tone and you discuss some of the topics, but doesn't like you enough to talk about the door.
* Speak to him in a friendly tone and increase the good emotional state and he would discuss freely on some topics including telling you he will lend you the key in return for certain item.
* Speak to him in an agressive tone to "push" him a little bit more about the door and he tells you he has the key, but he is now slightly annoyed at you. emotion goes down making him give less details when talking.
* "threaten" him and he clams up and tells you to get lost.

Therefore be frendly and then give him the item he gives you the key.

However if you push him too far with the threaten and he refuses to talk to you again then an alternate solution to the door is required. Either steal the key, pick the lock etc

Next through the door is Mr Y who really doesn't like you and won't tell you jack unless you threaten him

You could then play the game that suited your style of play.

Hoiwever this approach would require a lot more work from the developer to implement a lot more dialogues for each character based on the emotional variable and also possible alternate puzzle solutions if you do the talking bits wrong.

Overall though I think developers are missing a puzzle outlet by not utilising character AI to create human relationship/dialogue puzzles.

Imagine having to seduce a character to get her/him to do something for you ,threatening the wrong character who then sets out to get you back or calls the police or just making friends and enemies in the game just by your choices.

[Dasilva]

As long as the dialog is interesting & acted well, then I dont care.

[insane_cobra]

I like dialog trees because I'm used to them, but ultimately I can live without them. Though I must say senselessly clicking through dialog ala Still Life isn't my idea of fun.

I like having a choice of what to say and when - even if it's just an illusion of choice - but whether that's through a classic dialog tree interface or some other mechanism is of lesser importance.

[colpet]

I dislike them; they are more like a filler for me. Some games make you go through all of them anyways. I'd rather just click and let the conversation progress in a natural flow. In a few games you do have a choice, but it is often like Lucien said - pretty obvious which road to take. Pandora Directive was more subtle, and your choice ultimately affected which ending you got. But even then it was a nuisance, trying to guess how your choice will affect the game.
I never really feel like I'm the character having spontaneous conversation. I'm constrained to pick what's on the screen, and most of the time it's not what I'm really thinking about. In many scenarios it actually can act like a spoiler by revealing certain issues. Most of the time a dialogue tree just reminds me I'm playing a game and takes me out of the immersive experience.

[Spiwak]

I love dialogue trees in adventure games and RPGs. RPGs moreso than adventures because in that case it's rather essential if you're able to create your character. But either way I like having them for the humorous lines that you'd never actually use that can be put in, and in general the feeling that I have some control over what my character does and the decisions he makes is appealing. In adventure games they don't generally do much, but I enjoy them all the same.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

I like having a choice of what to say and when - even if it's just an illusion of choice - but whether that's through a classic dialog tree interface or some other mechanism is of lesser importance.

I agree. While it ultimately depends on what the designer is actually trying to accomplish with his game, a good rule is to make the player as involved as possible. To be honest, many games are seriously lacking in this area, so much that I'm tempted to call them anachronisms.

And if there's going to be plenty dialogue in a game, it'd be not the worst idea to try to make it as interactive as possible. Wether by dialogue trees, or something else entirely. Remember Sam&Max, much of the fun of that game comes from the fact that you never really know what these two guys will talk about once you place your clicks. Sure, there have been many bad implementations of really tedious dialogue trees, blame that on Monkey Island, that got it right (for a 1990 game) and many tried to follow.

I will be BACK!
I WILL be back!
I will be back!
I will BE back!

Still giggling after all these years. Needless to say, I'm a big fan of the character interaction found in Bioware/Black Isle games. The key seems to be to write a dialogue script that then allows for player choices. Just breaking a dialogue script down to options in a dialogue tree seems rather pointless to me. Still, ultimately it really depends on you and your game. If you think it works the way it's supposed to work - go for it!

[Melanie68]

Originally Posted by Lucien21

I prefer it if there was some consequences to the discussion and I don't think it would be all that hard to do.

Assign each character with an emotional variable which can change depending on your actions. Characters would remember how they feel about you the next time you spoke to them. Piss them off and you get no help.

Overall though I think developers are missing a puzzle outlet by not utilising character AI to create human relationship/dialogue puzzles.

Imagine having to seduce a character to get her/him to do something for you ,threatening the wrong character who then sets out to get you back or calls the police or just making friends and enemies in the game just by your choices.

I'm playing Secrets of DaVinci. The characters you talk to don't have an emotional variable but the main character, Valdo, has a good/bad scale. Depending on what you choose to do or what dialogue options you pick, it affects your good/bad scale. It supposedly affects what you can do - if you're too good, it won't let you do something bad and vice versa. I don't think it affects the outcome but it can result in the character needing to do something a different way. I think it's interesting and can make the game replayable to try different things.

Having an emotional variable with the characters you talk to would be cool. Being nice to one and mean to another e.g. would add complexity and a lot of replayability to the game.

Not having played KOTOR but hearing about it here, it has a good/bad aspect to it as well.

[TheGreyMatter]

i do not see what is so bad with dialog tree's. yes mostly all they give is an illusion of an actual choice - But isn't everything in a adventure game is an illusion?

[MoriartyL]

Originally Posted by Scoville

So I think having dialogue trees, even if they are largely irrelevant, is important. The trick is to make the choices matter in as few occassions as possible so that the user feels empowered.

I love dialogue trees (in theory; don't know how they work in practice) for the opposite reason: they can be used to tell you more about the Player Character who's talking. It can only do that if the player feels like they aren't the choices he would have made. Any type of game mechanic that can be used to characterize PCs better should be used as much as possible in my view.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by TheGreyMatter

i do not see what is so bad with dialog tree's. yes mostly all they give is an illusion of an actual choice - But isn't everything in a adventure game is an illusion?

In the case of LSL 7, Love for Sail, the dialog tree seemed more like a lesson/plug for Win95 cascading menues than anything else. It just didn't work.

[AFGNCAAP]

I don't like the poll options for suggesting that the only practical reason for the dialogue trees to exist is when the dialogue may change the course of the game. As Scoville, Brandon and others have pointed out, the rationale could be different: an *illusion* of choice, a (linear) puzzle, a joke, increasing replayability, increasing overall player's involvement, and, last but not least, if the particular game is very talk-heavy, a way of keeping track of the conversation. You mention Gabriel Knight 2, Villain, but what about Gabriel Knight 1? Would it work as well without the trees? It's not like any sensible player didn't try each subject on each suspect anyway, but making them Still Life click-and-watch style would pretty much kill the investigative aspect of the game.

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.