Difference between revisions of "Dialogues"
(→Possible Closure Effects) |
(→Potentially Conflicting With) |
||
| Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
=== Potentially Conflicting With === | === Potentially Conflicting With === | ||
| + | - | ||
== History == | == History == | ||
Revision as of 18:06, 27 June 2014
[[Category:To be Published]]
Diegetic conversations controlled by a game systems.
This pattern is a still a stub.
Note: Many of the patterns concerning dialogues were first identified in the research reported in chapter 3 of the PhD thesis Steps Towards Creating Socially Competent Game Characters[1] by Jenny Brusk. This thesis also describes how to model dialogues in Harel statecharts.
Examples
Dragon Age series Mass Effect series Fallout series
Using the pattern
Outspoken Support Requesting Support Basic Input Feedback
Non-Player Characters Companions Helpers
Game State Indicators Ephemeral Goals Quests Inaccessible Areas
While many dialogue systems are Single-Initiative Dialogues in that players need to activate them for them to occur, another possibility is that of Mixed Initiative Dialogues where Non-Player Characters can start the Dialogues with players. Examples of when this occurs is in the Elder Scrolls series and Fallout series. Regardless of who starts a dialogue, another design choice is how players create their utterances and commit to having them said. Choosing one out of several options (as in Grim Fandango and the Dragon Age and Fallout series) or letting player write complete free-text sentences (as in DragonMud or the Zork series) are examples Chunk-based Dialogue Processing but a lesser explored option is that of Incremental Dialogue Processing. This, which is found in Facade, lets the Dialogues be Gameplay Integrated Conversations which can help contain Diegetic Consistency so that not for example a pursuit may be completely halted as the players initiates a conversation with some random NPC.
Feedback to utterances initiated by players or simply utterances by NPCs can take several forms in Dialogues. The simplest to creates is Canned Text Responses but Context Dependent Dialogues provide Contextualized Conversational Responses. This may be done by algorithmically creating utterances as the Dialogues unfold, but Location-Specific Dialogues and Character-Specific Dialogues may be sufficient to make the Dialogues seem context dependent without requiring advance parsing and text generation systems. Challenges can be added to using Dialogues. For example, players may need to use Delicate Phrasing (as in some of the challenges in Grim Fandango) or require Colloquial Mastery. When the Dialogues are with Non-Player Characters further options opens up for designing for skill requirements regarding Brokering, making False Accusations, or Maintaining Lies.
While Dialogues consist of Information Passing, what can be said in one Dialogue can be modified by the knowledge the player has acquired earlier, i.e. through earlier Information Passing. One specific types of Information Passing that can serve in both these ways (and as Clues) is Gossip.
Diegetic Aspects
Given that many Dialogues take place between Characters in Game Worlds, they need to be crafted to fit the game's setting if the game should have Diegetic Consistency. This primarily consists of making sure one has Thematically Consistent Dialogues unless Contextualized Conversational Responses provide this already.
Interface Aspects
Dialogues are either an interface or the interface to the game in which it exists, so the pattern is a.
A major limitation to the complexity of Dialogues or Contextualized Conversational Responses is when they are to be communicated partially or wholly by voice acting.
Narrative Aspects
Narration Structures are typically created through Dialogues since many Dialogues are created so the series of utterances made will have a casuality.
Consequences
Dialogues are a form of Communication Channel. All statements in Dialogues are examples of Information Passing but the ones that also change the game state are in addition Performative Utterances. When a game's interface is a Dialogues, the game has a Illocutionary Interface.
Relations
Outspoken Support Requesting Support Incremental Dialogue Processing Chunk-based Dialogue Processing Basic Input Feedback Gameplay Integrated Conversations
Can Instantiate
Communication Channels, Clues, Game State Indicators, Illocutionary Interfaces, Information Passing, Gossip, Narration Structures, Performative Utterances, Quests
with Contextualized Conversational Responses
Thematically Consistent Dialogues
Can Modulate
Companions, Detective Structures, Ephemeral Goals, Helpers, Non-Player Characters
Can Be Instantiated By
Canned Text Responses, Contextualized Conversational Responses, Non-Player Characters
with Non-Player Characters
Brokering, False Accusations, Maintaining Lies
Can Be Modulated By
Character-Specific Dialogues, Colloquial Mastery, Context Dependent Dialogues, Delicate Phrasing, Gossip, Inaccessible Areas, Information Passing, Location-Specific Dialogues, Mixed Initiative Dialogues, Single-Initiative Dialogues, Thematically Consistent Dialogues
Possible Closure Effects
-
Potentially Conflicting With
-
History
While many of the patterns discussed as part of this pattern have been described by Brusk[1] and others, the pattern Dialogues in itself was created in this wiki.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Brusk, J. 2014. Steps Towards Creating Socially Competent Game Characters. Doctoral thesis, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
