Darth Hater

Star Wars: The Old Republic News, Interviews, Media & Podcast

Daniel Erickson on the Dialogue System

BioWare's Daniel Erickson posted details on the dialogue system in Star Wars: The Old Republic in a thread started by Ewoky.

The Mass Effect dialogue system worked exceptionally well for keeping the game fast and action-oriented, which is always that team's target. On Dragon Age we went for a more classic RPG approach with more options and the ability to dig into all the little details. The first option in dialogue was usually the most sensible one for a reasonable person in the situation. SWTOR is somewhere in the middle. We keep the story moving (nobody wants to sit there in a multiplayer game while their party member begs an NPC for more backstory) but we present the options based on the situation and the class or faction.

So in the Flashpoint that Altyrell mentioned, the kill option was on the top because it was an Imperial quest and being darkside is the default for their big faction choices. In the same manner the top option for Smugglers tends to be funny or flirty, Bounty Hunters tend to be all business, Consulars tend to be questioning and wise, etc. Then, of course, the rest of the options enable players to do something totally different with their characters. Want to be a hardcase Smuggler? A wry action hero Bounty Hunter? A charming Inquisitor? Choices are much broader than just good and evil.

Hope that helps!

One interesting difference between the Mass Effect and TOR dialogue systems is the positioning of options on the wheel. While in Mass Effect the top (default) option tends to fit good-aligned characters regardless of the character's alignment, the default in TOR character seems to match a character's alignment. Players who found the Mass Effect dialogue choices to be too black and white may see the inclusion of a wider variety of options as a welcome change.

Comments

Page 1 of 3
  • Loekii's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #34 Loekii Posted 6/13/2010 4:38:11 AM
    I wonder if RACE will branch this out any further.
  • nedostup's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #28 nedostup Posted 6/3/2010 8:21:01 PM
    It seems like the devs are opening up more and more about game systems on the forums, Erickson in particular. I guess as more systems are finalized, they don't feel the need to hold back about them anymore.
  • Posiden's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #26 Posiden Posted 6/3/2010 7:23:32 PM
    I'm hoping the definition of Light and Dark are different for different classes. Like for the Trooper I hope they do a more paragon/renegade type system in that its good cop/bad cop and not necessarily good/evil.
  • Loekii's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #33 Loekii Posted 6/8/2010 3:01:01 AM
    I would imagine that would be the direction they would go (TROOPER = good cop / bad cop, etc).
  • Elkesai's avatar
    Jawa Trader
    • Posts: 229
    #32 Elkesai Posted 6/4/2010 3:15:58 AM
    This is a good point.
  • HarryTruman's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #23 HarryTruman Posted 6/3/2010 5:37:55 PM
    This is mildly tangential, but one thing I like about TOR's apparent system (from the Inquisitor walkthrough, for example) is that not every line of dialog is tied into alignment. You can be snarky or defiant without worrying that your moral alignment will drastically shift. I think this will help people really get into

    What will further this, too, is that they've said that gameplay and story mechanics are largely separate, which leads me to believe that "morality" will largely change your storyline rather than your set of abilities. This will help immersion, since now we won't have players constantly choosing this or that dialog option just so they can add points to Force Lightning, etc.
  • emlaeh's avatar
    Jawa Trader
    • Posts: 986
    #24 emlaeh Posted 6/3/2010 6:00:59 PM
    We are trying to cull the misinformation contained in comments, so apologies if this sounds blunt:

    They never said game play and story mechanics were largely separate. That quote was in reference to the trees in advanced classes -- those are game play decisions (spec within an Advanced Class).

    We specifically asked them about story intertwining with the other pillars in our last interview with Jake Neri.

    You are also leaving out the fact that we didn't see Force points pop up because we were playing characters below Level 10. Choice implication is most likely tied to character progression -- they aren't going to hold you to alignment decisions when you are first trying out your class.
  • HarryTruman's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #29 HarryTruman Posted 6/3/2010 8:48:18 PM
    Fair enough.
  • adipokerface's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #21 adipokerface Posted 6/3/2010 4:40:07 PM
    One thing I hope they get right in the dialogue system is the differentiation between saying something which would seem a light-sided comment to gain the trust of an NPC but for dark-sided means and saying something light-sided to genuinely be nice.. Hope that makes sense.
    Basically i'v had a bit of trouble in the past with this kind of thing for my "evil" characters in games, where you don't want to lose the respect of your companion but also want to max out the evil-ometer.
    As long as it's made obvious that your choice is a lie for example it should be fine. Having said that i seem to remember reading some article in the past about how its doing the action, rather than saying it, which determines your alignment... I dunno, i may have dreamt that!
  • HarryTruman's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #22 HarryTruman Posted 6/3/2010 5:32:04 PM
    I know in KOTOR there would occasionally be dialog options with [lie] next to it, indicating that you had the option to be insincere for a non-immediate purpose. Is that what you mean?
  • adipokerface's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #25 adipokerface Posted 6/3/2010 7:08:59 PM
    Pretty much. You got those ones fairly infrequently though as i recall.. So maybe some kinda system that gave you more "lie" options where relevant would be good (e.g. with the inquisitor it will be more relevant than jedi knight etc).
    I dunno, I trust Bioware on it this time round but I just don't want to make my companion get all pissed off and leave because im worried of giving too many light sided replies to keep hold of them..
  • Peterisjustok's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #18 Peterisjustok Posted 6/3/2010 2:53:21 PM
    I'm hoping that if there is a distinct Light and Dark point system (which I believe there is), that it isn't involved with every single line of dialog. I felt in ME1 and ME2 that after every conversation I had I could expect to see Paragon or Renegade go up, which was fine... But can't I just have a leisurely conversation in a video game that doesn't determine my moral compass. What ever happened to just shooting the... well you know what I mean.
  • RogueJedi86's avatar
    Jawa Trader
    • Posts: 3099
    #27 RogueJedi86 Posted 6/3/2010 7:41:54 PM
    That was a big limiter in my conversations in ME1 and ME2. Sure I could say whatever I wanted, but if I didn't go straight Paragon or Renegade the whole game, I'd lack enough in either to Charm/Intimidate in conversations. So sure I could be a generally nice guy, but if I wasn't nice 100% of the time, I wouldn't have enough Charm to deal with tough situations later in the game.
  • r2d2arm's avatar
    Jawa Trader
    • Posts: 440
    #15 r2d2arm Posted 6/3/2010 2:01:02 PM
    I am rather curious how many options we'll get as a max. We've only seen 3 option choices so far, nothing beyond that. I could see possibly 6 choices from the way the wheel is designed right now.
  • Drenarb's avatar
    • Posts: 0
    #17 Drenarb Posted 6/3/2010 2:31:37 PM
    I'm guessing 6, as well. You have your three standard answers then other responses for like Force Persuasion, Taunt, etc. depending on what class you have and your alignment in that class.
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Page 1 of 3

Most Commented Articles

Go to Articles

Tag Cloud

More