Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
I've been testing missions over the past week - excellent work for the most part. The hard work really shows on many of these great missions!

I wanted to bring up a topic for discussion. I noticed when testing missions that many creators use the response box to fill in a detailed reply from the player's captain, often simulating both sides a conversation with the contact or bridge officer. I have found this to be problematic.

If I am playing my Vulcan captain, and the provided response is informal (using contractions, slang, or laid-back conversational speech), I find it very jarring and out-of-character. On the contrary, if I am playing my more cavalier, fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants captain, the responses that sound too formal are also annoying.

I think this is why Cryptic uses the word "Continue" in all or nearly all of the single-response replies, and the branching dialog choices are very brief and to the point. The reason for this is it is impossible to predict what type of captain a player has created, or how they speak. Making the responses generic may be a bit lacking in flavor, but the alternative, at least for me, breaks the immersion.

Thoughts? Comments?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
12-17-2010, 08:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimm11
I've been testing missions over the past week - excellent work for the most part. The hard work really shows on many of these great missions!

I wanted to bring up a topic for discussion. I noticed when testing missions that many creators use the response box to fill in a detailed reply from the player's captain, often simulating both sides a conversation with the contact or bridge officer. I have found this to be problematic.

If I am playing my Vulcan captain, and the provided response is informal (using contractions, slang, or laid-back conversational speech), I find it very jarring and out-of-character. On the contrary, if I am playing my more cavalier, fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants captain, the responses that sound too formal are also annoying.

I think this is why Cryptic uses the word "Continue" in all or nearly all of the single-response replies, and the branching dialog choices are very brief and to the point. The reason for this is it is impossible to predict what type of captain a player has created, or how they speak. Making the responses generic may be a bit lacking in flavor, but the alternative, at least for me, breaks the immersion.

Thoughts? Comments?
that is why I have left all conversation dialog continue buttons as continue.

Cryptic has it on their priority list that there will be branching dialog options
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
12-17-2010, 08:35 AM
Yes, that's why Cryptic leaves button-text and drafts mission briefings as generic as possible. Their engine currently does not seem to allow them to introduce deeper roleplaying concepts into gameplay, so they leave it to our imagination to carry the weight of roleplaying.

As far as I'm concerned, Cryptic should have a matrix of responses and possible dialogs, one criterion of which would be the race and gender of the person doing the talking. This way, an author could supply different dialog lines that convey the same meaning but sound and read differently based on what character the player is talking to, or talking as.

All in good time though... baby steps and all that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
12-17-2010, 08:59 AM
i am one of those authors that use the continue button, as well as my bridge officers boxes to give them some personality and to make the story flow better.

i realise that some dialogue for some characters dont work but to be honest i dont think its something i will stop doing because its my mission and thats what i like to do, but i am conscious of not overdoing dialogue that wont fit everybody.

in fairness cryptic dont always get it right either. often my bo will say or describe stuff that does not fit the one i have chosen.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
12-17-2010, 09:07 AM
The same problem already exists for what the Bridge Officers say. A Vulcan would express himself differently from a Klingon, and so the dialogs often do not fit my BOs, either.

I hate the "Continue" stuff. The current way most of the dialogs in the game work, I have the feeling that I am just some stupid guy and my BOs give me thinly veiled orders. I don't feel like I am in charge.

The button replies I use are often neutral, but meaningful. They are not mere filler-text. Within the tiny text allowed to a Captain, I try to make him competent and the guy in charge, while trying to avoid overly emotional or character-specific responses.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
12-17-2010, 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Revo View Post
...in fairness cryptic dont always get it right either. often my bo will say or describe stuff that does not fit the one i have chosen.
Well, in fairness, some in-game situations left me feeling very unsatisfied, the P'Jem mission for example felt "wrong" from start to finish, even though the scenery was great and the combat was fun. It's just that I felt herded in the most worst of ways into fighting with no option to even pretend that I actually was a Starfleet Captain rather than a ruthless merc.

Not to be hypocritical, I will acknowledge right here and now, that my missions may make people feel like there's too much talking and not enough fighting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
I hate the "Continue" stuff. The current way most of the dialogs in the game work, I have the feeling that I am just some stupid guy and my BOs give me thinly veiled orders. I don't feel like I am in charge.
Another perfectly valid reason to try and make our Foundry missions different. We need to show Cryptic what we want and I figure the best way is to craft Foundry missions that would play and feel more personal to us as Players and Captains.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
12-17-2010, 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Revo
i am one of those authors that use the continue button, as well as my bridge officers boxes to give them some personality and to make the story flow better.

i realise that some dialogue for some characters dont work but to be honest i dont think its something i will stop doing because its my mission and thats what i like to do, but i am conscious of not overdoing dialogue that wont fit everybody.
Same here.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
12-17-2010, 10:56 AM
ok bridge officers have personality, however, theres only one way to talk to your captain in starfleet, your not going to go on his shoulder and say hey bob. The interaction between the bridge crew/captain in missions i write, i try to keep it formal, to the point, without injecting too much personality or speech pattern. But still a bit of flair. So it wont imprint on what you might have in mind for your officer, and it wont be boring either.

Secondly, some of us probably need to get over the fact the bo will never have a personality that kind of way and just enjoy the mission for what it is, a star trek episode in which you are interacting.

When star trek episodes aired on t.v did you nitpick and say, oh hey worf wouldn't say something like that, or he shouldn't say something like that? Just enjoy it for what it is. If people do not try to do new things with missions, missions will remain generic and boring. At least missions being created in the Foundry, because the devs will have advanced internal tools to do certain things and we see their creativity letting loose with recent featured episodes. They might also in turn get some ideas from us, and be better able to implement them on their side.

Foundry is limiting at best, don't matter if your story deserves a bloody oscar, it all boils down to shooting something.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
12-17-2010, 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruis.In View Post
Foundry is limiting at best, don't matter if your story deserves a bloody oscar, it all boils down to shooting something.
It doesn't have to. The mission I'm currently working on is an archeological mission, and as of right now there are no enemy groups to fight. I might add some in for flavor, but it certainly is not the focus.

That said, I admit to a personal amusement with the dialogs. For example, right now when you approach the space probe you are given the option to "scan the hell out of it." Or my tactical officer, after telling me the door is jammed and that he can open it, gives the option "Hulk smash!" But again, that's for my own personal amusement. I would NEVER publish with my placeholder dialog being that ridiculous.

I think that BOffs should certainly have personality, but realistically most of the times they're interacting with you in missions is to relay information. And that should generally be rather boring, matter-of-fact, because it's their job. I mean, there's only so many ways to spin "Scanning for life forms."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWBmaKk32fE
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
12-17-2010, 12:28 PM
It all depends on YOUR Story and what You want them to say and how you want to convey information... I try and add Tension, Humor and Drama to try and Balance the Violence...

To Me that is what We Normally do... How Many Military Leaders Have used "Over-the-Top" Rhetoric to Inspire the Troops in the face of Certain Death. Part of Command is Confidence and Inspiration and our Players are supposed to be Exceptional Characters.

The small amount of Text allowed for the "Captain" to reply Lends it's self to "One-Liners" that will trigger a response from people familiar with a certain metaphor such as "Lock & Load" or "Assimilate This" or many other infamous one-liners...

I use the Continue Button Position to Tell NPC's what to do... the Generic Continue Button is just Weak Writing...

I would NEVER say "Continue" EVER... Some Neutral sounding script is more effective like "Battle Stations - All Hands" or simply "Engage" or "Energize". The Use of Continue by Cryptic Designers seems like a giant Flaw in the Immersion for Players.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 AM.