On the official Fallout 3 forums, a thread about dialogue in RPGs had Fred "fizzbang" Zeleny contributing his thoughts. A quest designer for Fallout 3, Fred's comments may be of interest:<blockquote>For the record, these are just my thoughts on RPG dialogue in general, and can't be taken to reflect on the final dialogue in FO3.
But as far as I'm concerned, the most interesting gameplay of the original Fallouts was making choices in quests and dialogue. So obviously, it's a topic near and dear to my heart.
On dialogue being short and concise:
Being clear in the information conveyed is very important, but that doesn't require that every line be clipped short. Some personalities ramble, some get easily distracted, and so forth - they'll talk longer than, say, harried workers or soldiers in a fight. And, as always, it's important to follow the rule of "Show, don't tell", and sometimes that requires a little more talking than just saying, "I'm a guard and I don't trust you."
Sometimes it can also be a balancing act between a writer trying to convey a lot of information and trying to keep the player from being stuck in a long monologue. We all enjoy reading, but when you're in a long dialogue and don't have any options for a long time, even the best of us can get irritated - just like being in a conversation and not being able to get a word in edgeways.
On stating the obvious for dramatic effect:
It's hard to avoid stating the obvious while also making sure a player knows what's going on, especially when it isn't incredibly obvious. Using your example above, if parts of the station are blowing up, people shouldn't bother telling you about it; they're better off running for their life! But if it's just a lot of klaxons going off for some unknown reason, it's not unreasonable for someone to let the player know ("Why aren't you running? Don't you know the place is about to blow?").
Of course, a bit of wit and style while writing those dialogues can make all the difference. If it's entertaining and in-character, some otherwise irritating dialogue can be forgiven ("Great. First, I stub my toe on that door, then I lose my data to a power shortage, and now we're all about to die a horrible death in a ball of fiery doom. I swear, today is not my day.")
On giving NPCs personality through dialogue and mannerisms:
I'm a very character-based writer. I focus on making the characters first and then see where their personalities and dilemmas play out in a larger plot outline. I could ask for no greater success than people favorably remembering my characters years or decades down the road. So, yeah, making interesting NPC characters is important to me.
And, of course, the more time you're spending with a character, the more detailed their personality has to be to keep the player's interest. A bit character can be drawn with pretty broad strokes (while still avoiding cliches!), but if it's a character you're dealing with throughout the game, they'd better have some very memorable details, unexpected nuance, and a compelling personality.
On choices and the illusion of choices in dialogue:
Choices are vitally important in and RPG, I agree, both in dialogue and outside of it. Without the ability to make choices about your character and their role in the world/game/quest/etc, then it'd hardly be a role-playing game, would it?
But in terms of "ignored choices"... Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but I really dislike meaningless choices in games - even if the only effect of a choice is to see a different line of dialogue. And you'd be surprised how much some people hate being put on a quest even when they refuse it. But obviously, characters shouldn't always just go along with whatever the player says.
On diplomatic solutions:
I don't think they're archaic. In fact, I wish there were more diplomatic options in games today. Then again, I keep playing bards in tabletop RPGs, so I guess my predilection for diplomacy is well-documented by now.
Of course, a quick word shouldn't be a solution to every problem - just as there shouldn't be any single skill or weapon that's a solution to every problem. But it should be as viable and as rewarding as any other playstyle.</blockquote>Only part of his post appears here, check the linked thread for the full response. Thanks to Cataphract for creating such an interesting thread.
Link: "Designing rules: Dialog and Storytelling, Who's in charge of the writting by the way?" on the Bethesda Game Studios Forums.
But as far as I'm concerned, the most interesting gameplay of the original Fallouts was making choices in quests and dialogue. So obviously, it's a topic near and dear to my heart.
On dialogue being short and concise:
Being clear in the information conveyed is very important, but that doesn't require that every line be clipped short. Some personalities ramble, some get easily distracted, and so forth - they'll talk longer than, say, harried workers or soldiers in a fight. And, as always, it's important to follow the rule of "Show, don't tell", and sometimes that requires a little more talking than just saying, "I'm a guard and I don't trust you."
Sometimes it can also be a balancing act between a writer trying to convey a lot of information and trying to keep the player from being stuck in a long monologue. We all enjoy reading, but when you're in a long dialogue and don't have any options for a long time, even the best of us can get irritated - just like being in a conversation and not being able to get a word in edgeways.
On stating the obvious for dramatic effect:
It's hard to avoid stating the obvious while also making sure a player knows what's going on, especially when it isn't incredibly obvious. Using your example above, if parts of the station are blowing up, people shouldn't bother telling you about it; they're better off running for their life! But if it's just a lot of klaxons going off for some unknown reason, it's not unreasonable for someone to let the player know ("Why aren't you running? Don't you know the place is about to blow?").
Of course, a bit of wit and style while writing those dialogues can make all the difference. If it's entertaining and in-character, some otherwise irritating dialogue can be forgiven ("Great. First, I stub my toe on that door, then I lose my data to a power shortage, and now we're all about to die a horrible death in a ball of fiery doom. I swear, today is not my day.")
On giving NPCs personality through dialogue and mannerisms:
I'm a very character-based writer. I focus on making the characters first and then see where their personalities and dilemmas play out in a larger plot outline. I could ask for no greater success than people favorably remembering my characters years or decades down the road. So, yeah, making interesting NPC characters is important to me.
And, of course, the more time you're spending with a character, the more detailed their personality has to be to keep the player's interest. A bit character can be drawn with pretty broad strokes (while still avoiding cliches!), but if it's a character you're dealing with throughout the game, they'd better have some very memorable details, unexpected nuance, and a compelling personality.
On choices and the illusion of choices in dialogue:
Choices are vitally important in and RPG, I agree, both in dialogue and outside of it. Without the ability to make choices about your character and their role in the world/game/quest/etc, then it'd hardly be a role-playing game, would it?
But in terms of "ignored choices"... Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but I really dislike meaningless choices in games - even if the only effect of a choice is to see a different line of dialogue. And you'd be surprised how much some people hate being put on a quest even when they refuse it. But obviously, characters shouldn't always just go along with whatever the player says.
On diplomatic solutions:
I don't think they're archaic. In fact, I wish there were more diplomatic options in games today. Then again, I keep playing bards in tabletop RPGs, so I guess my predilection for diplomacy is well-documented by now.
Of course, a quick word shouldn't be a solution to every problem - just as there shouldn't be any single skill or weapon that's a solution to every problem. But it should be as viable and as rewarding as any other playstyle.</blockquote>Only part of his post appears here, check the linked thread for the full response. Thanks to Cataphract for creating such an interesting thread.
Link: "Designing rules: Dialog and Storytelling, Who's in charge of the writting by the way?" on the Bethesda Game Studios Forums.
