15 réponses à ce sujet

[Brodoteau]

 We know that the game will end if you fail at combat and you will be forced to start again.  Would people be interested in a similar mechanic for conversations?  Where you can fail at a conversation (i.e. not convince someone or not get the info you need) and that will cause the game to end and you will have to start again.

I think this would an interesting and force the player to take more consideration in the dialogue. Right now, I find a lot of the time that I am simply trying to exhaust all the conversation options that I can, sometimes in multiple conversations, without any real consequences.  So I think it would be cool to have to get a speech right or a pitch to a nobleman right etc.  Now in a perfect world, it might also be good to tie these to skills (I missed persuasion in DA2)

So what do we think?  

[The Xand]

I basically already do that, loading and reloading saves until I get the perfect conversation.

[Brodoteau]

I admit ti reloading in order to find out different alternatives, but I never think of it in the same way as combat i.e. something I have to "win" If we are the Inquisitor, shouldn't we be trying to "win" conversations?

[Inprea]

An end game screen is a bit much and just leads to the player reloading as you know you messed up. What I believe would work better is depending on your success someone may or may not betray you down the line but you don't find out what they're going to do until three hours later. It's easy to undo 5 minutes it's much more difficult to undo three hours of play time especially if you don't have several saved games.

[The Xand]

Brodoteau wrote...

I admit ti reloading in order to find out different alternatives, but I never think of it in the same way as combat i.e. something I have to "win" If we are the Inquisitor, shouldn't we be trying to "win" conversations?

Wasn't there something like that in Oblivion? Was pretty poorly received iirc. You're right though, there *should* be some sort of element of persuasion, and something to make the risk of failure a little more punishing.

[Icy Magebane]

I don't think a game over is appropriate unless you're at knifepoint and begging for your life... I can't even think of any other time a conversation would end with you dying, which is what a game over is (and why it only happens after failing in combat). This sounds incredibly annoying, and if players will just reload the game anyway, there's no point in doing it like this.

[Usergnome]

Like Morinth in Mass Effect 2? Making the wrong choices while speaking to her on the Normandy results in her killing Shepard and forcing you to load.

In Dragon Age though, I think it would be awesome for a Mage Inquisitor to be tempted in the fade by a demon, and if you can't realize you're in the fade quick enough you get possessed and your game ends (By which I mean you must load)

Modifié par Usergnome, 12 novembre 2013 - 03:15 .

[Knight of Dane]

Hum, I don't think there should be a "wrong way" to be your character.

[Xerxes52]

Only if your life rested on the outcome of the conversation. Other times (such as bluffing a guard, trying to get a discount at a store, or trying to get a faction to join your cause) failing a persuasion check should just earn you a big fat "No", and the game continues on.

[HiroVoid]

So like certain conversations in Witcher 2 which end with you dying because you're insulting the guy with about over a dozen guys ready to kill you on his notice?

Or like Deus Ex: Human Revolution?

[The Xand]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I don't think it should be so cut and dried. In real life, if you ask someone where the bathroom is and fail the "persuade" check, you can ask a dozen other people. In combat, there is no option to "fail" and try again against someone else, you die.

So if they DO implement something like that, it shouldn't artificially limit your methods of getting that information.

You've obviously never been slapped for failing to persuade someone to do unethical things with you.

[Bullets McDeath]

I could go for more/bigger repercussions for failing to persuade (or perhaps deliberately antagonizing or just generally annoying the ****** out of) an NPC but I think a game over screen is a bit much. I think the punishment should be more along the lines of "this guy hates you now, and won't tell you the password, so you'll either have to beat it out of him or take your chances with the gate guards", that kind of thing.

I'm all for dialogue outcomes that can drastically alter the path of the game, but I'd say dying (or load screen, which, same thing) is a stretch.

[Jorji Costava]

I seem to be in agreement with the general consensus on this thread. The risk with auto-death from failing conversations is that it will lead to frustration resulting from dissonance between gameplay and story. Suppose you're conversing with someone who, in gameplay terms, you could easily crush. It will be quite frustrating if one of the conversation options results in your death (think of how people reacted to Kai Leng's 'victory' on Thessia). So if you go this route, there needs to be a clear explanation of why the PC's in-game abilities will not be enough to save him or her from imminent death. Not impossible, but difficult.

But I also think the idea that certain conversation paths can result in a kind of fail-state falling short of death is a good one. If games are largely cycles of challenge and reward, and you think (as I do) that dialogue is every bit as legitimate a gameplay mechanic as combat, then there seems no objection to the idea that you could 'fail' conversations.

[Silfren]

Brodoteau wrote...

 We know that the game will end if you fail at combat and you will be forced to start again.  Would people be interested in a similar mechanic for conversations?  Where you can fail at a conversation (i.e. not convince someone or not get the info you need) and that will cause the game to end and you will have to start again.

I think this would an interesting and force the player to take more consideration in the dialogue. Right now, I find a lot of the time that I am simply trying to exhaust all the conversation options that I can, sometimes in multiple conversations, without any real consequences.  So I think it would be cool to have to get a speech right or a pitch to a nobleman right etc.  Now in a perfect world, it might also be good to tie these to skills (I missed persuasion in DA2)

So what do we think?  

What exactly do you mean?  You're in a confrontation with a nobleman and if you don't select the right dialogue option to talk him down, he'll murder-knife you in a cutscene so you've no chance to fight your way out?

I remember playing a few adventure games back in the day (Sierra games and others) where, rather than simply not being able to progress through a quest until you'd gotten all the proper items and used them properly, there were a couple of paths you could take that would actually let you complete the entire game, only to find out that you had missed something critical along the way, so GAME OVER YOU LOSE.  These situations always sucked horribly at the time, because usually the critical point was many hours earlier in the story and even if I had a save point at the right spot it still meant a lot of wasted hours. 

Bad as they did suck, though, in retrospect I always found it cool to be able to play a game all the way through and have the option of the story ending on a failure note rather than simply being Game Over if you lost a proper battle.  I'd love to see more games do that, like Origins having a series of cutscenes that depicted what happened if the Warden died.  Wouldn't have to be a lot.  Maybe one or two scenes with epilogue slides. 

Anyway, my point is, I don't know what the point would be of a dialogue scene that ends the game if you don't pick the right choice.  I'd rather it simply be as above: a surprise, and quite possibly a nasty one, at a critical point later in the game--such as at the critical last battle, the nobleman you had needed to win over earlier decides to screw you over, and it causes your armies to lose. 

Mainly because I don't think a game ending bad dialogue choice would be much fun if it just amounted to "ha ha you suck GAME OVER!" But I think it'd be great if it drastically altered the game in some other way.

Modifié par Silfren, 12 novembre 2013 - 05:12 .

[The Xand]

Silfren wrote...

Brodoteau wrote...

 We know that the game will end if you fail at combat and you will be forced to start again.  Would people be interested in a similar mechanic for conversations?  Where you can fail at a conversation (i.e. not convince someone or not get the info you need) and that will cause the game to end and you will have to start again.

I think this would an interesting and force the player to take more consideration in the dialogue. Right now, I find a lot of the time that I am simply trying to exhaust all the conversation options that I can, sometimes in multiple conversations, without any real consequences.  So I think it would be cool to have to get a speech right or a pitch to a nobleman right etc.  Now in a perfect world, it might also be good to tie these to skills (I missed persuasion in DA2)

So what do we think?  

What exactly do you mean?  You're in a confrontation with a nobleman and if you don't select the right dialogue option to talk him down, he'll murder-knife you in a cutscene so you've no chance to fight your way out?

If it's half as funny as the whack a journalist convos in Mass Effect I'm totally down with that.

Modifié par The Xand, 12 novembre 2013 - 05:06 .