Kaeldorn said:Might as well just have question marks over their head. This isn't questing, it is reading and clicking. There is a reason adventure gaming died out when they moved from text based input (ie you type in what you are looking for) to that of the graphical clicking.
This argument is flawed. Adventure gaming died out for the same reasons RTS games and old school EQ questing died out; the mainstream audience lacks the patience to read and plan ahead and doesn't want to do that stuff for leisure. Adventure games reached their peak well after text-based input was replaced with point & click by the way. Some of the later Sierra P&C adventures and practically all of the LucasArts catalog with the SCUMM engine was very successful.
P&C adventures have already seen a resurgence in the indie scene, keeping costs manageable for its smaller audience. There's even some really great higher budget ones out there, such as Book of Unwritten Tales. And the early Telltale games were very well done as well. In much the same vein, we're banking on VR here to bring a resurgence of old school MMO's.
As for your desire to have text input for keywords instead of clicks; for most use cases you would only type words that are referred to in the NPC's previous reply. And in that case, having those keywords clickable does not really come at the cost of immersion if you simply choose to pay attention and be immersed. Still, the two systems are not mutually exclusive. In an RPG from 1996 called Albion, a system was used where talking to NPC's would let you 'collect' keywords - much the same way it was done later in TES3: Morrowind - which you could click on an interface to bring up the subject indicated by the keyword with any NPC that subject might be relevant to (not just the NPC you're currently talking to). On top of that, Albion ALSO had a text input field for keywords you had not (yet) collected. I fondly remember one plot twist in that game where you could warn a councillor about an assassination attempt, and it could only be done using that custom input box and writing 'assassination' because the keyword couldn't be unlocked outside of it. If you did not issue the warning before a certain event in the main plot came to pass, the councillor would die and a corrupt one would take his place.
So in my opinion there's no real reason to pout about having clickable keywords when you can instead advocate for an expansion to the current implementation that allows you to bring up hidden subjects, similar to what was done in Albion.
I would prefer no hints. I have seen those engines, many of the older iterations of adventure games provided this (Indiana jones: Atlantis). These I didn't like either as they also led the player by the nose. The point is to give no information, allow the player to think about what is said and then respond as need. As I said, you can solve the issues of the old text based games by using modern tech.
We will have to disagree on the cause of adventure gaming. There are some great articles on what killed them and while I may agree that people are part of the problem, point and click died long before the console generation took over the PC market and killed it. Adventure games were killed by "hunt and peck" as early as the mid 80's with Kings Quest, Space Quest, Police Quest, etc... I played them all as they were released and watched them degrade over to where by the 90's they weren't very popular (and most of the fans I read complained about how they dumbed them down with point and click).
You know why I skip through test from quest NPCs? Its boring. Its terrible writing. If the story being told is engaging and entertaining I'm willing to read it. Also there is a certain point of less is more. When you arrive at a quest hub and have to pick up 5, 6, or even more quests from different NPCs ready each one can get tedius. Fewer quests with more detail that reward the same amount as all those other quests.
There is nothing wrong with text based questing.
I always skip the text because in an MMO unless I play solo. My party is waiting for me and we're supposed to play together. It makes absolutely no sense in the context of grouping to stop and read long paragraphs of fantasy exposure. Unless a multiplayer game ties the dialogue into gameplay in a clever way like Divinity: Original Sin, for example, then I'll just read it when i'm playing solo.
I've only ever had some 'hunt and peck' issues with the really zany puzzles in games like Day of the Tentacle, Sam & Max and the Kyrandia series. But even there you'll start to see the logic in them when you adjust your mindset to accomplish things in a cartoon setting and thinking outside the box. P&C adventures more grounded in reality like Fate of Atlantis didn't suffer from it at all, and - at least to me - were still very challenging and engaging.
Have to admit though, while I played some of the old Kings/Space/Police quest games they were never really my cup of tea. Mainly because of the exact wording and spelling that was required for everything, (often) the complete lack of any cues for things you might attempt, and the constant stream of 'that doesn't work/I don't know what that is' messages even when you typed in actions that absolutely did make sense to attempt. If the genre had stuck with that, it would've died out a lot sooner.
Tanix said:You will find basic quests scattered throughout every part of Terminus, especially around residential areas such as outposts, villages, cities, etc. Any time you encounter an NPC who will speak with you, there is a chance that NPC could have a quest available. And the only way you will know is if you speak with them. The only exception to that being certain NPCs who will /wave or a similar emote as players walk by to announce they have something they want you to hear or do.
Most conversations with NPCs will include a bit of personal insight about the individual you are speaking with and some context about local or regional happenings. But if the NPC has a quest available, they will also include making a small request of you on the NPC’s behalf. These basic quests will not be cryptic in nature and will use a keyword system to progress the dialogue. The keywords will be highlighted, and instead of typing the keywords into chat, you will be able to click the keyword to progress the dialogue.
Might as well just have question marks over their head. This isn't questing, it is reading and clicking. There is a reason adventure gaming died out when they moved from text based input (ie you type in what you are looking for) to that of the graphical clicking. It turned the games into click fest "hunt and peck" play rather than expecting the player to think about what they wanted to do and query it. Yes, there were some limitations to the old text base input systems which caused major headaches (spelling, syntax, specific keyword issues), but... today it is much easier to link a dictionary/thesaurus/spellchecking/predictive algorithms etc.. to your text engine to create a more dynamic and functional system of interaction while still retaining the need for the player to actually query for information over simply being led around.
Not a fan of this implementation VR, I think it is counter to the core ideal of the game you are making.
I've said about a much for months and months now. I'll be happy to be proven wrong, but until we actually see something really different in game, this remains a question mark replacement system that they may be wasting precious resources on. And like I said, I'll be happy to be wrong.
I think it's a bad idea to evaluate this system in a vacuum.
While it's true that there will be quests initiated by talking to NPCs, simply based on EQ (let alone other games beyond that) we can also likely assume that there will be quests initiated via trigger items as well - or even possibly through having fulfilled a certain criteria like having killed a particular monster, achieved a certain level of faction, done some other quest, or even have encountered a specific perception trigger. In "question mark" games, those quests would be obvious to us as soon as we met the prerequisite condition, because we would see a visual indication of that without hailing the NPC. However, in Pantheon, we won't know the quests are available unless we actually happen to hail that particular NPC with the trigger item in our possession (or whatever other criteria might "unlock" the quest).
How much of a difference that actually makes in player experiences really depends on what the designers do when building out the quests in the first place. None of us has any idea how that will pan out. We know from past developer conversations that they want to aim for quality over quantity, but the proof is in the pudding there - so that's something we should all plan to evaluate during alpha and beta.
However, if they utilize the full potential of the different systems that they're putting in place, and really get creative, I do think it's possible for Pantheon to be a place where quests really feel special and really help add to the game world, instead of just being an objective system layered on top of it.
My perspective: Let's wait and see how this works out in practice before we jump to conclusions. If we get into alpha/beta and it's *really* lame, there's still time for the devs to act on that feedback before launch.
Current EQ has this implementation. You hail an npc, get a block of text, click the highlighted word. It really is no different than NPC's with question marks over their heads. People do not read the text, and eventually they just memorize the final keyword rather than clicking through all the paragraphs. There's not any more to it. I'm not saying this is a bad or wrong approach, but do not give more credit to this system than it deserves.
Gladare said:Current EQ has this implementation. You hail an npc, get a block of text, click the highlighted word. It really is no different than NPC's with question marks over their heads. People do not read the text, and eventually they just memorize the final keyword rather than clicking through all the paragraphs. There's not any more to it. I'm not saying this is a bad or wrong approach, but do not give more credit to this system than it deserves.
I agree with this, people will not really read anything over time, they will get in the habit of just click and move. I would like it more if you had to read what they said and then come up with your own key word(s) to trigger the next conversation. I would rather not have a damn thing highlighted, let us treat it like a conversation. Once you get the right key word, the conversation moves on with more meaningful clues, until you finally end up with a quest given.
Kaeldorn said:I'm quite delighted to hear they'll be using a clickable keywords system (or any type of dialogue tree system, really).
Personally, I'm tired of the 'modern' approach of making every interaction with NPC's a straight line one can just click through and ignore everything just because it pushes the plot/quest along or what have you. Same with many games needing to have voice-overs for everything, thus making every line of dialogue way more expensive, which leads to keeping everything as short and to the point as possible in order to cut costs. Dialogue trees aren't archaic, they just give the developers a great deal more freedom to bring the world to life and offer players not only more flavor text and background information, but potentially also more meaningful choices and varying outcomes. And that in my mind makes it a superior method to handle dialogue for an RPG.
I am also delighted they will be using a clickable keywords quest system. Meaningful dialogue where player is engaged. To VR: you are doing wonderful things and keep it up!!
Syrif said:Kaeldorn said:I'm quite delighted to hear they'll be using a clickable keywords system (or any type of dialogue tree system, really).
Personally, I'm tired of the 'modern' approach of making every interaction with NPC's a straight line one can just click through and ignore everything just because it pushes the plot/quest along or what have you. Same with many games needing to have voice-overs for everything, thus making every line of dialogue way more expensive, which leads to keeping everything as short and to the point as possible in order to cut costs. Dialogue trees aren't archaic, they just give the developers a great deal more freedom to bring the world to life and offer players not only more flavor text and background information, but potentially also more meaningful choices and varying outcomes. And that in my mind makes it a superior method to handle dialogue for an RPG.
I am also delighted they will be using a clickable keywords quest system. Meaningful dialogue where player is engaged. To VR: you are doing wonderful things and keep it up!!
A meaningful quest system would be so welcome. It would also be nice if the system would not be easily manipulated so once you made a choice on it was in stone or extraordinary hard to change.
Spluffen said:I always skip the text because in an MMO unless I play solo. My party is waiting for me and we're supposed to play together. It makes absolutely no sense in the context of grouping to stop and read long paragraphs of fantasy exposure. Unless a multiplayer game ties the dialogue into gameplay in a clever way like Divinity: Original Sin, for example, then I'll just read it when i'm playing solo.
See, this is what we need to get away from in my opinion. The game should not be designed around a need to "get it over with" as this is the foundation of modern MMOs.
Gladare said:Current EQ has this implementation. You hail an npc, get a block of text, click the highlighted word. It really is no different than NPC's with question marks over their heads. People do not read the text, and eventually they just memorize the final keyword rather than clicking through all the paragraphs. There's not any more to it. I'm not saying this is a bad or wrong approach, but do not give more credit to this system than it deserves.
That was the mainstreaming of EQ (which is why EQ today might as well be called WoWQ as it has nothing to do with original EQ).
Original EQ was similar to MUD based game play (not a suprise because EQ is literally a graphical MUD anyway) where the player had to input queries to gain responses an futher information. Now yes, the system had a lot of problems, but as I said technology today reduces those issues greatly. The thing is, in a text input system, there are no hints, handouts, freebies. The player must not only read the text, but the will have to read critically, thinking about what is said and then responding to it as one would in investigating something.
That is questing. Todays "questing" is just players clicking through dialog and following basic directions. There is no intelligent interaction with these types of systems because you are told what to do.
If an NPC talks and hints very subtly based on the context of their discussion about something, the player must then pick up on that hint and query for it appropriately within that context. It requires the player to fully interact with the game by playing the part of a detective, thinking about the content and context of the responses to figure out what may be important. Add in numerous things like hidden conversation lines that can only be triggered by knowledge gained from other sources and you can create a very deep and dynamic questing system where players spend hours upon hours tracking down NPCs, leads on discussions, trying to find relevance of some mysterious item or note dropped in a dungeon, etc..
Originaly EQ did this and there were quests people had not solved for years after the game was released. Now as I said, part of the issues with EQ's old system was that it was very limited. Not only did you need an exact trigger phrase or word, but the interaction was very limited and turning in items or the like could cause a loss of an item (which was devistating if it was an epic turn in). Those limitations though were technological limitations mainly which today can be easily remedied.
So there is no reason you can't have a rich and deep questing system where there is responsibilty of the player and the "quest" actually is a quest and not simply someone dumbly clicking key words that automatically progress the quest for the player. The current implementation I see VR putting in with highlighting is not intelligent gameplay, it is simply clicking to get to some instruction that tells you want to do. If that is to be Pantheon questing, Pantheon is better off without it in my opinoin.
I was happy to see there will be "normal" quests, though I'm not sure I fully understand the method. Clicking keywords in the quest text doesn't make much sense to me, since that doesn't seem to be implying any kind of dialogue exchange between the player and the NPC. Some kind of baked in choice or reply to click on to advance the text would be nice - heck, give different personality options a la GW2 or whatever. They don't even really need to impact the direction of the quest, though obviously it's always nice when it does.
Naunet said:I was happy to see there will be "normal" quests, though I'm not sure I fully understand the method. Clicking keywords in the quest text doesn't make much sense to me, since that doesn't seem to be implying any kind of dialogue exchange between the player and the NPC. Some kind of baked in choice or reply to click on to advance the text would be nice - heck, give different personality options a la GW2 or whatever. They don't even really need to impact the direction of the quest, though obviously it's always nice when it does.
That is my point Naunet.
A text input system leaves the world open, you have to read, decide, and query for more information as you are not instructed as to what is important in the dialog, what the NPC may want, or if anything is relevant. There may be a quest on the NPC, there may not be. That is, you may just get a line of dialog that leads nowhere other than informing you about various things. You may find key information that leads you to think another NPC may have something to offer and so you head over and begin a dialog with that NPC based on what the previous NPC said, which may or may not provide something of interest.
The beauty of such a system is you have no idea where a quest may be. You have to interact with the world, read, explore the dialog and think about it. The questing system should be every bit as "adventure like" as the world exploration and combat play.
Honestly, I think the reason VR is going for the bouncing ball click system is due to costs and time. A text engine system would take time to develop (ie you would have to implement a text engine interaction system with the spell checkers, dictionary and thesaurus systems, and then configure them to the game, and that would be before you even entered a single quest ). With the click a quest system, it is simple text with click triggers and that is far less complicated and costly.
Tanix said:A text input system leaves the world open, you have to read, decide, and query for more information as you are not instructed as to what is important in the dialog, what the NPC may want, or if anything is relevant. There may be a quest on the NPC, there may not be. That is, you may just get a line of dialog that leads nowhere other than informing you about various things. You may find key information that leads you to think another NPC may have something to offer and so you head over and begin a dialog with that NPC based on what the previous NPC said, which may or may not provide something of interest.The beauty of such a system is you have no idea where a quest may be. You have to interact with the world, read, explore the dialog and think about it. The questing system should be every bit as "adventure like" as the world exploration and combat play.
Honestly, I think the reason VR is going for the bouncing ball click system is due to costs and time. A text engine system would take time to develop (ie you would have to implement a text engine interaction system with the spell checkers, dictionary and thesaurus systems, and then configure them to the game, and that would be before you even entered a single quest ). With the click a quest system, it is simple text with click triggers and that is far less complicated and costly.
While I'm perfectly fine with having to piece together quest clues, I'd rather not have to type a bazillion words trying to find the right word/phrase to advance a quest. Pre-made dialogue options/advancements are 100% fine with me. I just don't really understand this "click on keyword" thing.
Naunet said:Tanix said:A text input system leaves the world open, you have to read, decide, and query for more information as you are not instructed as to what is important in the dialog, what the NPC may want, or if anything is relevant. There may be a quest on the NPC, there may not be. That is, you may just get a line of dialog that leads nowhere other than informing you about various things. You may find key information that leads you to think another NPC may have something to offer and so you head over and begin a dialog with that NPC based on what the previous NPC said, which may or may not provide something of interest.The beauty of such a system is you have no idea where a quest may be. You have to interact with the world, read, explore the dialog and think about it. The questing system should be every bit as "adventure like" as the world exploration and combat play.
Honestly, I think the reason VR is going for the bouncing ball click system is due to costs and time. A text engine system would take time to develop (ie you would have to implement a text engine interaction system with the spell checkers, dictionary and thesaurus systems, and then configure them to the game, and that would be before you even entered a single quest ). With the click a quest system, it is simple text with click triggers and that is far less complicated and costly.
While I'm perfectly fine with having to piece together quest clues, I'd rather not have to type a bazillion words trying to find the right word/phrase to advance a quest. Pre-made dialogue options/advancements are 100% fine with me. I just don't really understand this "click on keyword" thing.
How else would you advance a quest if it was not to click the bouncing ball (ie click the keyword).
As for entering a "billion words", that one I don't understand as the only way that would be the case if is someone is not reading the quest and simply typing in tons of words trying to get a trigger. At that point, the problem is critical reading skills.
The drawbacks I remember from EQ was simply when quest triggers included a typo error and weren't corrected. It was even more true when they decided to translate the game (barely) in french and I was standing next to Cazic thule on my iksar monk withouth beeing able to get his quest bag due to a typo error.
That and the fact when multiple players were talking to an NPC it ended as a nameless flood.
However, the click on trigger is for me far to easy, as many quests in EQ had no chat indicator. Will I remember all my life "Where is stanos ?" .
MauvaisOeil said:The drawbacks I remember from EQ was simply when quest triggers included a typo error and weren't corrected. It was even more true when they decided to translate the game (barely) in french and I was standing next to Cazic thule on my iksar monk withouth beeing able to get his quest bag due to a typo error.
That and the fact when multiple players were talking to an NPC it ended as a nameless flood.
However, the click on trigger is for me far to easy, as many quests in EQ had no chat indicator. Will I remember all my life "Where is stanos ?" .
All problems which today are easily solved with technology.
I could understand to a point if this were 1998, but text input systems are far more advanced and capable than they were back then.
Dumbing down with a "click as you go" type system isn't progression, it is regression. Modern MMOs have these systems, not because they are innovative, but because it is the best way to implement a fast easy, low cost solution for a player base that really doesn't care for anything more than fast clicking to a win anyway.
I think VR wil need to make a layered MMORPG when it comes to somethings.
There is this constant pressure from mainstream to make another crappy MMORPG, The thing is, each person does not come up with a single bad concept that will make and break a game. But the total of all the conveniences from all catogories would push this mmorpg into mediocrity. It seems like there is this mainstream collective that wants another online action game set in a fantasy landscape.
If they do add the hand holding systems, please allow a deeper system that rewards players who notice more of the subtle details around them.
Or maybe have a deep MMORPG rule set server that suports the game tenets.
Then create an "Arcade rules" set server for the mainstream.
Have flashing question marks. Then just have one line of dialog "Click here to accept the quest, so you can catch up with your group who doesn't care about storyline, plot or the world around them." Then offer a orange oval teleporter to the main boss. Once done, everyone will get some loot they can strap on that's just good enough for the next 2 levels. Then open another teleporter that takes the player to the next NPC with a question mark over his head.
My God why do people want this?
Naunet said:I was happy to see there will be "normal" quests, though I'm not sure I fully understand the method. Clicking keywords in the quest text doesn't make much sense to me, since that doesn't seem to be implying any kind of dialogue exchange between the player and the NPC. Some kind of baked in choice or reply to click on to advance the text would be nice - heck, give different personality options a la GW2 or whatever. They don't even really need to impact the direction of the quest, though obviously it's always nice when it does.
You click the highlighted word, and your character "says" the word to the npc. In EQ, the word shows up in the /say filter.
On another note, I always loved seeing typos in the mandatory responses in old school EQ. Nothing like trying to trigger a quest when the official text response that the npc responds to has a typo in it.
Tanix said:How else would you advance a quest if it was not to click the bouncing ball (ie click the keyword).As for entering a "billion words", that one I don't understand as the only way that would be the case if is someone is not reading the quest and simply typing in tons of words trying to get a trigger. At that point, the problem is critical reading skills.
Ah, I thought it was talking about some sort of... there's a random word in the quest text and you have to click on it, rather than clicking on a fully-fleshed out in-character response.
I think I'd still prefer the click-through system and just have personality options for responses.
So, this may seem very silly to some people, but one of the things I actually like about text entry (vs. only having a click-through) is that I can have my character actually say something that makes sense in context of the world around them.
Example:
NPC says: "Ugh, these [bandits] are seriously becoming a problem."
Me: /say "What's that about bandits?"
Like I said, it's a small thing, but now everyone nearby sees me interacting with the NPC - having an actual conversation with them in spatial chat. I realize I am in the superlative minority here, and most people would ONLY type out the keyword because that's faster, but I enjoy reminding players near me that it's an actual RPG from time to time and this is a small way that I can accomplish that.
That being said, the way that quest text is delivered is not a game-breaker for me in any respect. Whether it's EQ-style text entry, or clicking dialogue options in a window, or whatever, I'll be fine. What's more important to me is the quality, meaningfulness, and believability of every quest - especially once we get outside of starting areas.
SoWplz said: Like Tanix mentioned with technology it as more then likely been fixed. But I recall old days when talking if you did not use the completely proper punctuation and words you got nothing. In a normal conversation a guy days he lost his mother red gem.... you would say "what gem" from there you would get nothing, maybe stopping the quest before if even happens because you did not type " what RED gem " small details like that can derail a quest system. Unless you look it up on the net. At that point 99% of the people would just say hail " what red gem " and move on to the quest. This tect did not solve anything. Again, none of this is really a deal breaker for me, I just hope to see multiple options of quest, maybe different rewards for the same quest depending on how it was handled or a deeper quest working with the players perception system. So if player A gets quest from Bob the NPC.. player B will get a slightly different or altered quest from Bob the NPC depending on a few factors.
It all depends on the text engines design, but modern tools allow you to establish a "concept" to which an engine can "interpet". Think about it, what do spell checkers do? They take your spelling that is "near" the actual word and provide suggestions. Grammar engines do the same and with some subtle logical converstation "object" design to the system, most players inquiries (within logical reason) would spur on further conversation and dialog.