Interview A Decadent Interview at RPG Dot

[bryce777]

I just don't like that the dialog shows WHY you are getting a dialog option.

Stop breaking my immersion!

As for the game, I am sure I will get it just because it's VD, so it better be gud dammit.

 

[Azarkon]

I can't think of a game that deserves to be purchased "solely for the linguistic virtuosity". If you can, give me some examples.

Planescape Torment?

And any CRPG that depends on its story and characters. Indeed, I'd be hesitant to buy any CRPG that did not have excellent writing if I were looking for those particular things - unless the game happened to be cinematic in nature, in which case limited dialogue is acceptable.

I might've been a bit unclear when I said linguistic virtuosity. I'm not expecting GRRM here, much less Shakespeare or Milton. However, in order for a character to be memorable, his or her state of mind must be portrayed in a competent manner. To have what might be termed depth in a CRPG (where we do not have access to the character's internal emotions), his or her language must be more than merely functional. There must be flavor, tone, and other idiosyncrasies.

That doesn't mean you've got to have characters spewing out poems and engaging in soliloquies. You can use colloquial language while retaining behavioral and tonal distinctions. I'm getting some of that from the screenshots, but they're heavily hampered by 1) certain awkward grammatical choices and 2) what seems an over-emphasis on functionality over style. But dialogue writing - at least good dialogue writing - is all about style.

Consider the following two ways of saying the same thing:

A: Hey you. Get over here.
B: Psssst, over here. Come.

Straight away, the attitudes displayed by the two speakers maybe gleaned. A is condescending. B is furtive. A sounds like a person of authority, B the near opposite.

There is great power in language, one that is especially important in CRPGs that depend on dialogue to convey personalities and stories. Consider the characters of BG 2 or PS:T, for example: *every* one of them has a identifiably different way of speaking, and this difference simultaneously distinguishes between them and develops their characters in the player's mind. When I think back to the BG characters, I don't quite remember their individual deeds - those, after all, are subsidiary to the player's own achievements. But I do remember the way that they spoke. Failing that, it's hard to consider a CRPG character memorable, at least in a medium where most of a character's personality is inferred from dialogue.

But maybe you seek to challenge that.

 

[Twinfalls]

I had a read of what dialogues are on show at the site, and I agree that they're just fine so far. I do think the game should have some real 'characters', and this is where the writing is crucial. But really, it's best that the game gets finished, then refined, rather than bogged down on issues of style first.

You could probably, towards the end, throw a whole lot of the dialogues at the Hive Mind, and they'd be polished up in a matter of days - there are enough writing style-meisters here to refine them up plenty good.

 

[bryce777]

I had a read of what dialogues are on show at the site, and I agree that they're just fine so far. I do think the game should have some real 'characters', and this is where the writing is crucial. But really, it's best that the game gets finished, then refined, rather than bogged down on issues of style first.

You could probably, towards the end, throw a whole lot of the dialogues at the Hive Mind, and they'd be polished up in a matter of days - there are enough writing style-meisters here to refine them up plenty good.

...and the liberal sprnikling of the words assclown and fucktard are sure to improve sales.

 

[Twinfalls]

...and the liberal sprnikling of the words assclown and fucktard are sure to improve sales.

:D

Yeah, what roman/post-apoc game couldn't do with some flavour-enhancing "fucking fuck fuck <buried shock image> <geeky vagaries of linux exchange> ULTIMA RULES LOL BNOL <child molestation gag> I'd like to rape you bitches in the eye MULTI HEADED DICKS OH GOD ITS HEAVAN" ?

 

[Mefi]

:D

Yeah, what roman/post-apoc game couldn't do with some flavour-enhancing "fucking fuck fuck <buried shock image> <geeky vagaries of linux exchange> ULTIMA RULES LOL BNOL <child molestation gag> I'd like to rape you bitches in the eye MULTI HEADED DICKS OH GOD ITS HEAVAN" ?

That's VD's endgame boss. Don't spoil the surprise.

 

[Jason]

Actually, those are all part of the game's feature list.

fucking fuck fuck

BG2-style romances

buried shock image

failed perception check

geeky vagaries of linux exchange

dialogue choices

rape you bitches in the eye

critical strike attack

MULTI HEADED DICKS OH GOD ITS HEAVAN

whirlwind attack

 

[Mefi]

I've just looked at the dialogue in those 6 screenshots and really can't see anything wrong.

Linos comes across as a windy old fart, Lucius as a slimeball. It's not overdone with tics or "this character is memorable because he speaks in a funny way'.

Not sure what some of the complaints are based on.

 

[Lumpy]

"The Commercium is the best faction ever. R00fles."

 

[Llyranor]

I'm not remotely horrified by the dialogue, but it IS *somewhat* of a concern. The roleplaying potential might or might not make up for it...

That's truly disturbing. I didn't think it was that bad.

Not to worry, it's not Oblivion.

I think the thing is that, for one, looking at those screenshots, one could tell him/herself: 'My, that's some nice roleplaying options in there'. This is a good thing, and your main selling point. Many people will be more than satisfied with that. That's the appealing part to me as well.

Now, mind you, maybe there is something a bit off about the writing, but at least there's nothing glaringly bad about it. First off, it's functional, which should be your first priority. Though, perhaps Azarkon is right in pointing out the issue of style. Examining what little writing we've seen so far, I wouldn't go 'My, that's some nice writing', considering the writing in and of itself. My appreciation for it would be pretty much directly linked to its roleplaying component. You can take this as a compliment, since this *is* your selling point. The style comes in addition to that. Style can't replace substance, but it can certainly potentiate it. That would be my issue. I can appreciate the roleplaying involved in the dialogue, but I'm *neutral* in terms of the writing in and of itself. Apathy is death.
You have substance (unless you're lying through your teeth, jerk), though, that's what ultimately matters.

Of course, the sample we have access to is pretty meager, so it's hard to say either way. Still, that impression is left anyway, whether that means anything or not.

 

[Dhruin]

Posting on this again feels like a bit of a pile-on, which isn't my intent - I'm very positive about AoD. We do only have very limited examples but those who can't see any stylistic issues are (unfortunately) plain wrong - a couple of the dialogues have clearly awkward phrasing and sentence construction...perhaps these examples are the minority, however. I also wouldn't downplay the importance of great writing, especially with a dialogue-heavy game. Perhaps VD could be a better writer *but* that doesn't mean AoD's other strengths won't play out - I'm hoping VD is a great designer.

As Llyranor said, the writing is far from bad, but if there is any opportunity to polish it, I think it would pay off.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I'm hoping VD is a great designer.

I don't care either way. I'm just hoping he beats that nazi, bunker dwelling faggot in AU to release.

 

[bryce777]

You can always rwrite sentence structure etc.

It's basic inspiration and talent at characterizing without going over the top or seeming assinine that's hard. As for whethever VD and team can do that, it is too early to tell and we will just have to see.

 

[galsiah]

I agree that it's an issue - just not a massive one. If the dialogue is functional, and not distracting, that's good enough for me. Anything more is gravy.

As an example of something which could perhaps be smoother:

That'S the underworld's biggest strength as it makes it very hard to eliminate them, and that's its biggest weakness. Removing even one link will sever the chain.

Capital 'S' aside, it doesn't sound a likely way for someone to say that. If nothing else, "their biggest weakness." makes more sense than "its biggest weakness.". I'd have thought either of the following would make more sense:
"That's the underworld's biggest (greatest?) strength, and their biggest (greatest?) weakness. It makes them hard to eliminate, but removing even one link will sever the chain..."
OR
"That's the underworld's biggest (greatest?) strength: it makes them hard to eliminate. It's also their biggest (greatest?) weakness, since removing even one link will sever the chain..."

I'd probably be inclined to avoid using "as" so much (as in "...as it makes..."), since I think one of "since", "for" or just punctuation usually sound better. There's nothing really wrong with it - people do say "as" quite a bit. I'd personally just usually avoid it.

However, I've also noticed that the npcs sound quite a bit similar to each other - all are grizzled streetwise men. Writing some characters "in character" with particular dialect quirks and (visibly) obvious vices/virtues/issues would add variety and increase the believability of the world even further. Think of Harold, Gizmo, Killian, Tandy, and Marcus from Fallout - they all spoke in their own way, and you would be able to tell who you were talking to just from analyzing their dialoue if you had to.

I made a similar comment a while back, but you do need to consider that all the dialogue we've seen (or that I've seen, at least) is for fairly similar characters - i.e. guild authority figures. We haven't seen a Harold or a Tandi - probably not a Gizmo or a Marcus either. Much of what we've seen also relates to the same incident.

Perhaps there could be larger differences between characters in similar roles - perhaps there are big differences, but they aren't clear from the excerpts we've seen. However, seeing a few fairly Killian type characters doesn't mean there aren't Tandis and Harolds out there.

 

[Astromarine]

this is just one specific example, which is maybe not what you're interested in in this thread, but the descripion of the Thieves' Guild by that Commercium guy hit me as really confusing. Linos says the 40Ts are a chain, which is their greatest strength and their greatest weakness at the same time. He says they're "difficult to eliminate", but also that removing one or a few links from the chain is very effective. Well, which is it? A chain of people is actually VERY easy to eliminate, all you have to do is follow the links from one to the other. I don't feel like you adequately explained what exactly makes the underworld so difficult to stop. The feeling I get is that the 40T are actually a VERY vulnerable organization.

Check this alternative. It's maybe too long, but I believe it shows the underworld in a much more favourable light:

"The Forty Thieves is not a typical organization, it's a loose web of people: a corrupt guard here, a few smugglers there: A whole parallel economy based on stolen goods. Sellers, buyers, facilitators, all with simple street thugs as the basic "producers" of goods. That's the Underworld's biggest strength, as it makes them very hard to eliminate. However, each local operation works as a simple chain. A dedicated lord or enterprising merchant can make things easier for himself by removing even one link from it, as it takes time and effort to regenerate the organization. Remove a few links, and you can give yourself enough time to create a new balance of power, one where your position is much improved."

 

[galsiah]

...He says they're "difficult to eliminate", but also that removing one or a few links from the chain is very effective. Well, which is it?

Both: they are hard to completely eliminate since in all probability at one point you will be prevented from making the next link. They are easy to disrupt, since removing any link will cause them large problems.

A chain of people is actually VERY easy to eliminate, all you have to do is follow the links from one to the other...

Only if the links are easy to follow. The entire point of such an organization is that the links should be hard to follow. Every member should be trying to prevent your following the links, unless they have a compelling reason to do otherwise. Compared to an open organization with a public list of members, it is very hard to find and eliminate every member.

Check this alternative...

That's fine, but I don't think it's necessary. I'd have thought that the situation were obvious from what VD wrote - all the information is there, it's just not spelled out. Perhaps there could be a "I don't understand" type dialogue option for the hard of thinking.

 

[Hazelnut]

Check this alternative...

That's fine, but I don't think it's necessary. I'd have thought that the situation were obvious from what VD wrote - all the information is there, it's just not spelled out. Perhaps there could be a "I don't understand" type dialogue option for the hard of thinking.

Hey - I liked Astro's longer version, it was loads better. Don't patronise for patronisations' sake gal. This dialogue *is* an explanation - the NPC is trying to tell you what he knows about how the underworld works in the gameworld. Just saying "all the information is there, it's just not spelled out" is stupid in the context of what this text is intended for.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I can't think of a game that deserves to be purchased "solely for the linguistic virtuosity". If you can, give me some examples.

Planescape Torment?

I disagree. PST is an exceptional game, but I doubt that it should be recommended to people because it's a good reading.

I criticized people for criticizing Oblivions dialogue pre-release based on a few screenshots and I will say the same here: From the few released screens I simply can NOT form a coherent opinion on the dialogue in the game, and I doubt anyone can.

Disagree again. I've posted enough dialogue screens and at this point you can safely form an opinion about the writing in the game. Trust me. If you are ok with the writing so far, you will be ok with the rest. If something bothers you, it's very unlikely that the rest will be different.

VD, can you post up some more dialogue screens? I sincerely don't think it's bad from the ones I've seen, but maybe it'll show some more insight if there is something to it?

Not at the moment. Two more sites have expressed some interest in the game, so I'll save something for them. Here are the links to all dialogues I posted so far:

http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=6763
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=7403
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=9616
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=11598

However, it still works, and more importantly, there's depth to it

Thanks

they're heavily hampered by 1) certain awkward grammatical choices and 2) what seems an over-emphasis on functionality over style. But dialogue writing - at least good dialogue writing - is all about style.

Then I'm afraid that AoD is not for you. I do realize my shortcomings, but I can't do better. I will consider getting some help though, but that means a long delay, which is something I'd rather avoid at this point.

There is great power in language, one that is especially important in CRPGs that depend on dialogue to convey personalities and stories.

You don't need to convince me. English is my third fucking language, which explains the awkwardness and other issues.

I had a read of what dialogues are on show at the site, and I agree that they're just fine so far.

God bless your kind heart, lady.

I've just looked at the dialogue in those 6 screenshots and really can't see anything wrong.

Linos comes across as a windy old fart, Lucius as a slimeball. It's not overdone with tics or "this character is memorable because he speaks in a funny way'.

Not sure what some of the complaints are based on.

Thanks for the support, Mefi.

I'm hoping VD is a great designer.

Would be nice, wouldn't it?

I made a similar comment a while back, but you do need to consider that all the dialogue we've seen (or that I've seen, at least) is for fairly similar characters - i.e. guild authority figures.

I'll post something different next time then.

He says they're "difficult to eliminate", but also that removing one or a few links from the chain is very effective. Well, which is it? A chain of people is actually VERY easy to eliminate, all you have to do is follow the links from one to the other

Easy if you know what those links are. Using terrorism as an example, I'm sure that most people agree that terror networks, operating on similar principles, are very hard to find and eliminate. When exposed, they are VERY easy to eliminate, but the actual exposing is the hardest part.

One of the options (why me?), explains that part. To spoil the quest, the first link isn't Lucius, it's one of the traders who was operating in the Merchants Guild under the nose of Linus.

Check this alternative.

Nice, thank you.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

I criticized people for criticizing Oblivions dialogue pre-release based on a few screenshots and I will say the same here: From the few released screens I simply can NOT form a coherent opinion on the dialogue in the game, and I doubt anyone can.

Disagree again. I've posted enough dialogue screens and at this point you can safely form an opinion about the writing in the game. Trust me. If you are ok with the writing so far, you will be ok with the rest. If something bothers you, it's very unlikely that the rest will be different.

[/quote]
Did you just say "trust me" ??? :D No, sorry VD, I can not. I realize you have this enormous power of deduction to judge whole games on a few screenshots showing three examples of dialogue, but I do not. I can, for example not judge if you can express different characters, especially the more unusual and easily cheesy ones (like women children, beggars, madmen). Most we have seen are highranking guild people and some rogues. From that I think the dialogue is good enough for me, but it tells me squat about wether dialogue is really good throughout the game or not.

 

[galsiah]

Hey - I liked Astro's longer version, it was loads better. Don't patronise for patronisations' sake gal. This dialogue *is* an explanation - the NPC is trying to tell you what he knows about how the underworld works in the gameworld. Just saying "all the information is there, it's just not spelled out" is stupid in the context of what this text is intended for.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Astro's - I'm just saying that I don't think it's necessary. His reason for proposing it was to clear up an ambiguity which never existed (in my humblest of opinions ). I'm faulting his motivation, not his writing.
I'm fine with the longer version, and it seems others prefer it - that's great.

It's just that in the context - i.e. pointing out problems with VD's dialogue, which might be indicative of problems elsewhere - I don't think that's a good example. Perhaps Astro's version is better. I just mean that I don't have a problem with the original - IMO there is no ambiguity -, so I don't think it needs to be "fixed". I'm sure a great many things can be improved.

With regard to the writing itself, I'd say the clarity is important, but so is credibility. If you always go for the most full, clear explanation, NPCs might end up sounding like dictionaries, or at least overly verbose. I'm not saying Astro's is guilty of this, but it's hard to say his is definitely better without knowing more about the NPC who is speaking that line.

 

[Azarkon]

Then I'm afraid that AoD is not for you. I do realize my shortcomings, but I can't do better. I will consider getting some help though, but that means a long delay, which is something I'd rather avoid at this point.

Fair enough. I'm still looking forward to the roleplaying options, though, so I'm not writing the game off in totality. Alot of what me and other people here are saying is simply to the effect that these types of games could really benefit from good writing and that it should be, even moreso than graphics, a priority when putting together a team. It maybe a bit too late for AoD, but future titles, perhaps?

 

[Screaming_life]

I can't think of a game that deserves to be purchased "solely for the linguistic virtuosity". If you can, give me some examples.

Planescape Torment?

I disagree. PST is an exceptional game, but I doubt that it should be recommended to people because it's a good reading.

I recommended it to my read-aholic fiance... although she'd read the back of a tin of cat food in the absence of anything else with words.

Besides, if you don't recommend it for the reading then for what? there's nothing else to do in the game !ACK! ¬_¬

 

[Vault Dweller]

Fair enough. I'm still looking forward to the roleplaying options, though, so I'm not writing the game off in totality. Alot of what me and other people here are saying is simply to the effect that these types of games could really benefit from good writing and that it should be, even moreso than graphics, a priority when putting together a team. It maybe a bit too late for AoD, but future titles, perhaps?

I maybe a shitty writer, but I'm a good storyteller, so I would never delegate story telling aspects to someone else. "Hiring" a person whose job would be to edit my writing sounds kinda silly, so ... them's the breaks.

Besides, if you don't recommend it for the reading then for what? there's nothing else to do in the game !ACK

PST's real strength (imo, of course) was not the quality of writing or "linguistic virtuosity", but an option to play the game and interact with the gameword through dialogues.

 

[Screaming_life]

Besides, if you don't recommend it for the reading then for what? there's nothing else to do in the game !ACK

PST's real strength (imo, of course) was not the quality of writing or "linguistic virtuosity", but an option to play the game and interact with the gameword through dialogues.

I know, i know. Was just joking. It's the part of AoD i most look forward to and it should dwarf any "problems" people have with the writing. English is your 3rd language you say? you should be mightily proud.

 

[Claw]

Actually, I do believe there are people whose job is editing someone else's writing, and I don't see anything silly about it.
It's kinda like hiring an architect to build your house. You tell him what you want, and he works out the actual design.