It's like a group of D&D high school virgins got together and made a video game

[dcb]

The character will always act within the framework of the developers choosing, either by limiting dialogue options - even down to one or two options, closing off paths to areas you can't visit, or simply not placing plot-critical advancements until you reach a specific stage in the game.
Do you "play the game" then? Or do you not just follow pre-defined dialogue/path?
Remember, all dialogue is, is scripting. It is pre-determined paths down a tree.
It is all limited in scope.

There is conceptual no difference between selecting one option and reading a wall of text, then there is to watch a (long) cut-scene depicting the same story advancement. Save personal dislike towards one over the other.

Absolutely. But however limited they may be, dialogue trees are, at the very least, interactive. Cutscenes are wholly non-interactive. They are a non-game. It's a movie. A two-option dialogue tree is a game. I'll take that any day.

[Xandax]

A GM-controlled NWN 1&2 games do this quite well. For this reason, I LOVE the idea of what NWN offers. Yes, the game itself has several limitations, but the idea of a real-life dynamic storyteller is definitely a huge step in the right direction of CRPGs, IMO.
<snip>

Yes, GM controlled being the keyword here, that not only requires more then one person, but a person who're "in charge". Try to script that behaviour for automatic execution and you run into the problems.
Thus, it can't really be used in comparison in my view, as it is multiplayer game vs. single player game.

Use the computer controlled NwN1+2 if you want to compare that aspect with The Witcher, and the interactivity in NwN1+2 is not at all higher then The Witcher, because dialogue and choices are very limited, and then again - compare it with almost any other single player CRPG out there, and you are very very locked in how to interact.

[Xandax]

Absolutely. But however limited they may be, dialogue trees are, at the very least, interactive. Cutscenes are wholly non-interactive. They are a non-game. It's a movie. A two-option dialogue tree is a game. I'll take that any day.

But you also dislike the two-option dialogue trees in this game because it changes interface, supposedly "removing you completely from the game world".
Yet, I've still not been explained why it is removing you from the game-world, neither one or the other.

You play a game in third person perspective, so you're never "in" the game world. Thus when it changes interface, it is still similar perspective, thus nothing changes. Just akin to many other CRPGs out there.

What is the conceptual difference between having a cut-scene telling you the story over many lines of text? Wherein is the "removal from the game world" over a cut-scene type dialog interface, over a text-based dialogue interface?
And so on....

You can say you dislike them from a subjective preference, but they aren't more removed from the game world in any way, then it would be if it were text and not graphics. It is only preferences.

[dcb]

But you also dislike the two-option dialogue trees in this game because it changes interface, supposedly "removing you completely from the game world".
Yet, I've still not been explained why it is removing you from the game-world, neither one or the other.

Can you see what is happening around you while you are in a dialogue with an NPC in The Witcher? Or does the game world "pause" while you are in dialogue mode? This is removing the character from the game world, or vice versa.

What is the conceptual difference between having a cut-scene telling you the story over many lines of text?

One is interactive, one is not. It's the difference between a game and a movie.

You can say you dislike them from a subjective preference, but they aren't more removed from the game world in any way, then it would be if it were text and not graphics. It is only preferences.

This is not a preference, it is the core difference in what makes a game a game - interactivity.

[fable]

If the innkeeper tells you a bit of a tale, then what is the difference if he does so either via text or a cut-scene?
Same same in my opinion.

Very different, in mine. It's the difference between finding out a story by being a person within the environment, who has to actually look around for pieces of it and fit it together--as opposed to suddenly finding yourself wrenched out of the gameworld to watch a movie giving you everything on a plate. The first stays within the game, the second doesn't. The first requires creativity to make the plot bits fit naturally into the environment, and to make the player feel they're really getting somewhere. The latter is a free handout, and also breaks the carefully constructed illusion of the game.

Sorry, but that is not correct. There is no more creativity involved in writing up some story elements and getting the innkeeper to tell it via text, then there is getting it shown as a cut-scene of the innkeeper telling it to you.

Well, I guess you're right, because you were there when we strategized for weeks criticizing where we'd place each piece we wanted revealed, how we wanted it revealed, and discussed the writing of it. Oh, wait a minute. You weren't there. I guess you're wrong. Telling the story straight out by having a few people show it is much easier than trying to fit it into the gameworld where the player wanders around, and making it not too hard or too easy to piece together, with different types of plaxement, different kinds of puzzles, and a real sense of progress that is gradual but builds.

And if puzzles weren't involved? I'd still rather find out via gameplay, than a cutscene that jars and takes me out of the gameworld to view it without interaction.

And you can't piece together plots from a cut-scene?

Semantics, and you know it. Games use cutscenes to tell the story, or to wow young players with fancy graphics. Not to create plot puzzles for the players to solve in order to figure out the story. And certainly not to make the players feel immersed in the gameworld. Because cutscenes do the opposite of that.

[Xandax]

Can you see what is happening around you while you are in a dialogue with an NPC in The Witcher? Or does the game world "pause" while you are in dialogue mode? This is removing the character from the game world, or vice versa.<snip>

Actually - the NPCs in The Witcher continues to do what they do even while you are in a dialogue "cut-scene".
So you can see NPC walking around behind you, yes and the game did not pause.

<snip>
One is interactive, one is not. It's the difference between a game and a movie.<snip>

Sorry, there is nothing more interactive about reading then watching.
Reading is for books, not games, would be a completely equivalent counter-point.

<snip>
This is not a preference, it is the core difference in what makes a game a game - interactivity.

Not it is not. Again - text does not make interactive, compared to showing a cut-scene. It is two different mechanics which does the exact same thing.
When you read this piece of text (if you do), you are not interacting with me, you are reacting.

So again - what is the difference between reading text compared to watching a scene if both convey the same information?
Neither is interactive.

[dcb]

Actually - the NPCs in The Witcher continues to do what they do even while you are in a dialogue "cut-scene".
So you can see NPC walking around behind you, yes and the game did not pause.




Sorry, there is nothing more interactive about reading then watching.
Reading is for books, not games, would be a completely equivalent counter-point.



Not it is not. Again - text does not make interactive, compared to showing a cut-scene. It is two different mechanics which does the exact same thing.
When you read this piece of text (if you do), you are not interacting with me, you are reacting.

So again - what is the difference between reading text compared to watching a scene if both convey the same information?
Neither is interactive.

You're creating an incorrect comparison. Sure, if it was just text on a screen with no dialogue options, then yeah, it'd be the same non-interactive environment. But a "dialogue tree" usually means that there are player choices of what you want your character to say. Hence, you are role-playing your character instead of watching a pre-defined cutscene where you cannot decide what your character would do in that situation at all.

[Xandax]

Very different, in mine. It's the difference between finding out a story by being a person within the environment, who has to actually look around for pieces of it and fit it together--as opposed to suddenly finding yourself wrenched out of the gameworld to watch a movie giving you everything on a plate. The first stays within the game, the second doesn't. The first requires creativity to make the plot bits fit naturally into the environment, and to make the player feel they're really getting somewhere. The latter is a free handout, and also breaks the carefully constructed illusion of the game.

An innkeeper saying some dialogue via text is not more "in the game" then the same innkeeper, saying the exact same things. It also does not automatically mean that everything is given to you on a plate. That is why I said you were wrong.
One does not require more creativity then the other. I really can't believe any unsupported argument which states that writing text is by default requires more creativity then putting the same story into a cut-scene. It is merely a tool for developers to use.

Well, I guess you're right, because you were there when we strategized for weeks criticizing where we'd place each piece we wanted revealed, how we wanted it revealed, and discussed the writing of it. Oh, wait a minute. You weren't there. I guess you're wrong. Telling the story straight out by having a few people show it is much easier than trying to fit it into the gameworld where the player wanders around, and making it not too hard or too easy to piece together, with different types of plaxement, different kinds of puzzles, and a real sense of progress that is gradual but builds.

And if puzzles weren't involved? I'd still rather find out via gameplay, than a cutscene that jars and takes me out of the gameworld to view it without interaction.<snip>

Ahh yes, because the MMO you worked on is an example for all subsequent game development indeed, and because I've not worked on that one I'll not know anything about general processes which aren't at all limited or confined to game-development. Guess it is my time to take something with me for use as heavy irony.
I'm sorry, but I still think you are wrong, because you set up one scenario for "text" and a different for "cut-scenes" and say they aren't the same, which hardly can be surprising.
Setting up the same conditions to begin with is a start.

Do you claim that the very same process you depict could not at all take place if it was made via cut-scenes telling the information instead of text telling it?
Sorry, but if you claim that, then it is indeed very wrong.

You can put out pieces the player needs to find and put together for himself, and simply display the story elements as cut-scenes instead of text. The mechanic of displaying information it does not automatically or de facto affect the process with which the information was thought out.

There is no mechanism which automatically takes effect because you know what you write will be text and not made into a cut-scene. Sorry, I do not believe that one bit at all. Some might take short cuts yes, but that goes both ways.

Semantics, and you know it. Games use cutscenes to tell the story, or to wow young players with fancy graphics. Not to create plot puzzles for the players to solve in order to figure out the story. And certainly not to make the players feel immersed in the gameworld. Because cutscenes do the opposite of that.

It might be semantics, but that is what you start with in my view, so yes, I know it.
You seem to equate cut-scenes like all revealing display of information and "text" as the player finding the elements himself, which is a flawed comparison.
Simply picture your game, and imagine that the text you write were now made into a cut-scene, and you'll see what you depict is purely semantic as well, hence my reaction to your claims.

An innkeeper telling you to go to a cave cause mysterious things happen is the same if it happens in text or as a "movie". One does not take more creativity then the other, and one is not more removed from the game-world then the other. Especially not when games mostly are in 3rd person view, automatically removing you "from the game world".

[Xandax]

You're creating an incorrect comparison. Sure, if it was just text on a screen with no dialogue options, then yeah, it'd be the same non-interactive environment. But a "dialogue tree" usually means that there are player choices of what you want your character to say. Hence, you are role-playing your character instead of watching a pre-defined cutscene where you cannot decide what your character would do in that situation at all.

Ahh - but there are cut-scene type dialogue in The Witcher as well, which you know because you said they were also a "gripe" and also removed you from the game-world. However, I still have not been explained why they are less interactive then if it were text and why it is more removed from the game-world.
What mechanics is it that makes a dialogue tree more interactive when it is a zoomed out 3rd person view with text popping up in the upper right corner compared to a zoomed game-rendered type cut-scene playing out?
You can still select the dialogue options.

[fable]

An innkeeper saying some dialogue via text is not more "in the game" then the same innkeeper, saying the exact same things.

Look: there's an innkeeper. You walk around several characters who are engaged in dicing, drinking, and conversation. Then you approach the innkeeper, click on him, and he brings up a number of different optional topics of conversation. Perhaps only one includes a hint about a bit of the plot, but you may have to work through a number of responses to get there. Meanwhile, the innkeeper could tell you that talk may be cheap but it still costs, and ask for a tip for his struggling family. Point is, you get the information, but you've interacted with the environment by walking through it, seeing it, "hearing" it, and ultimately speaking with a character to get what you want, by whatever means you can.

The cutscene lifts you out of there. You can't interact. You can't move. You can't do anything. You've been whisked into a theater, where you're watching a movie. That's what a cutscene is.

One does not require more creativity then the other. I really can't believe any unsupported argument which states that writing text is by default requires more creativity then putting the same story into a cut-scene. It is merely a tool for developers to use.

I don't understand your use of the phrase "unsupported argument," here. The best argument I can provide is a personal one, based on my own experience in game development, and I gave a necessarily brief, general, but accurate example of how creativity figures into game design outside cutscenes. Whether it's text, or a cave you design that the player must excavate to find a clue, or a person the player must play at a game to win a clue, or a quest you must run to get something for somebody who has told you they'd provide you with a clue, it amounts to the same thing: it's interacting with the gameworld. There's no question about that. A cutscene doesn't. There's no question about that, either.

Ahh yes, because the MMO you worked on is an example for all subsequent game development indeed, and because I've not worked on that one I'll not know anything about general processes which aren't at all limited or confined to game-development. Guess it is my time to take something with me for use as heavy irony.

Gee, do you think I maybe resorted to irony and Argumentum ad Hominem, because of the way you just blanket dismissed my personal experience as if it amounted to nothing, and wasn't even worth a moment's notice? Let's see:

Sorry, but that is not correct. There is no more creativity involved in writing up some story elements and getting the innkeeper to tell it via text, then there is getting it shown as a cut-scene of the innkeeper telling it to you.

The answer is: Yes! You just told me in a two utterly confident, sweeping statements, that all my experience briefly but previous stated didn't matter, and that nothing I spent 4 years doing was more creative than could have been shown by a few movies. Guess that's why I responded as I did. Hmm...yep. Not to say that prior experience in game development, especially on a small scale, really clinches any argument. Nor should it. But to have it dismissed so readily and completely, without a question or even the slightest nod to the fact that I just might, after all, have done a bit of what I'm talking about, and not really be full of BS...well, it was frustraing. A bit.

I'm sorry, but I still think you are wrong, because you set up one scenario for "text" and a different for "cut-scenes" and say they aren't the same, which hardly can be surprising. Setting up the same conditions to begin with is a start.

What sort of identical conditions did you have in mind?

Do you claim that the very same process you depict could not at all take place if it was made via cut-scenes telling the information instead of text telling it? Sorry, but if you claim that, then it is indeed very wrong.

Who said text was telling it? If I wasn't clear before, the player would have to find a character and speak with them, then work through a dialog tree with a variety of responses. If it were the same thing as the cutscene, I'd expect to pick up a piece of paper that had the entire plot-as-shown-in-the-cutscene on it. I don't. My players interact with our mythical innkeeper, who has a lot of subjects for discussion, and a variety of responses depending upon character profession, sex, status, reputation, etc. And of course, the responses that the innkeeper receives. The idea is to make the experience as rich as possible for the player, so that they come away feeling that this is one deep NPC indeed, and one that will show still more sides if they play again.

You can put out pieces the player needs to find and put together for himself, and simply display the story elements as cut-scenes instead of text. The mechanic of displaying information it does not automatically or de facto affect the process with which the information was thought out.

If you just show everything, then it isn't interactive, and I find that boring, and jarring to the illusion of the carefully crafted environment. I don't say you do, but I do.

It might be semantics, but that is what you start with in my view, so yes, I know it.
You seem to equate cut-scenes like all revealing display of information and "text" as the player finding the elements himself, which is a flawed comparison.
Simply picture your game, and imagine that the text you write were now made into a cut-scene, and you'll see what you depict is purely semantic as well, hence my reaction to your claims.

I think we're at cross purposes, here. I'm not discussing the media (as in the ideal), but the way the media is actually deployed in the realworld. Hence, cutscenes: scenes that cutaway from the roleplaying world. So, tell me of several cutscenes that swim against the tide, that allow you to interact to the level of specificity and detail that I've described, and I'll agree with you. The possibility exists that movies could do more; I've certainly reviewed products based on nothing but "interactive movies." But they were dull dead-ends, with few choices, and the company that made them failed. Doesn't mean the idea isn't possible, though.

[RiceBall]

Look: there's an innkeeper. You walk around several characters who are engaged in dicing, drinking, and conversation. Then you approach the innkeeper, click on him, and he brings up a number of different optional topics of conversation. Perhaps only one includes a hint about a bit of the plot, but you may have to work through a number of responses to get there. Meanwhile, the innkeeper could tell you that talk may be cheap but it still costs, and ask for a tip for his struggling family. Point is, you get the information, but you've interacted with the environment by walking through it, seeing it, "hearing" it, and ultimately speaking with a character to get what you want, by whatever means you can.

The cutscene lifts you out of there. You can't interact. You can't move. You can't do anything. You've been whisked into a theater, where you're watching a movie. That's what a cutscene is.

Fable have you've played the game? You can do exactly what your posting in the witcher. You stated in earlier in the thread that you had MotB, dialogue works the exact same way in witcher. Camera angle switches back and forth between each participant as they each speak their lines and the protagonist has a dialogue choices at the bottom of the screen. It is not a case where you click on the correct npc and and then it one continous flow of dialogue.

Rock, Paper, Shotgun - PC Gaming » Blog Archive » The Witcher - Script Mangle

Example of the typical dialogue interaction, after the initial intro between the characters the dialogue selection box appears at the end of the vid. The game world isn't in stasis while the two characters are engrossed in conversation. The waitress continues to sweep the floor and npcs in the other parts of the inn are drinking and talking. I do not see how it breaks immersion.

[fable]

RiceBall, what I referred to above--contrasting gameplay options to gain information, vs cutscenes--wasn't meant in reference specifically to The Witcher. If you read through the conversation Xandax and myself are having, we've been discussing these game design elements as-such.
I guess you could call it a discussion-within-the-discussion. Or being ever so slightly off topic.

Buck, our mysterious and all-powerful site owner, has also weighed in on just the point you raise about some breakaways in The Witcher not being cutscenes. This is another matter entirely, and I see it as pretty much gameplay-as-usual. They aren't cutscene where this occurs, because they aren't literally scenes that cut you away from the game. I think they're simply a different way of displaying visuals to accompany traditional dialog options. Mind, I can't say I've seen them, so I don't know how I'd really feel about them. The idea of a constantly shifting camera angle with each change of character annoys me, and reminds me all too well of poorly directly tv dramas where every line of dialog meant the unimaginative director had to shift the camera to look at the speaker. On the other hand, since I haven't seen it, there's no saying I wouldn't find it works. The jury's out, but I've decided to hold off buying The Witcher for at least 6 months, if then.

[RiceBall]

I would read though your conversation but I prefer cutscenes and not a wall of text to convey the main points, preferbly cgi. :laugh:

[fable]

I would read though your conversation but I prefer cutscenes and not a wall of text to convey the main points, preferbly cgi. :laugh:

Your choice. But who said anything about a wall of text being necessary? How would you feel about being told to get a hint required for some important action from an abandoned caravan, where a small band of slavers lay in wait, having been tipped off? To me, that would still be far better than suddenly being pulled away to view a movie in a theater. I can deal with just about anything, rather than that. It's very intrusive, and makes me feel like getting out popcorn while expecting Siskel and Ebert to show up over my shoulders.

[Disturbation]

You and Xandax are talking of two completely different things, fable. You seem to be thinking of Final Fantasy style cutscenes while Xandax at least started out talking about the kind that dcb complains about. The "cutscene" system in The Witcher is just like the "cutscene" dialogs in NWN2, except Geralt often says the filler stuff (where you would get to define your personality in a Fallout-style-dialog game, like Bioware's stuff) automatically, leaving you with choices that actually influence the dialog - instead of being presented with 3-4 different ways of essentially saying "Yes".

[fable]

You and Xandax are talking of two completely different things, fable. You seem to be thinking of Final Fantasy style cutscenes while Xandax at least started out talking about the kind that dcb complains about. The "cutscene" system in The Witcher is just like the "cutscene" dialogs in NWN2, except Geralt often says the filler stuff (where you would get to define your personality in a Fallout-style-dialog game, like Bioware's stuff) automatically, leaving you with choices that actually influence the dialog - instead of being presented with 3-4 different ways of essentially saying "Yes".

What Riceball referred to? It's not a cutscene, then. Traditionally, a cutscene is a movie that cuts away from the game into a set scene, where the player has no interactive capability. We can redefine the word, but then it becomes broad enough to fit two very contrasting conditions, and ceases to have a precise meaning. As I wrote to Riceball, above, that's simply a different way of displaying visuals to accompany traditional dialog options, and still leaves the burden of interactivity on good writing, sufficient skill checks, and a large enough dialog tree.

Now, if that's the kind of thing that happens in The Witcher, it might be obtrusive in its constant switching of camera angle, but it wouldn't bother me as badly as lifting the player out of the game to watch a movie, the hallmark of the cutscene. I've heard, though, that some really important actions occur after genuine, noninteractive cutscenes, discussed in another thread. Is this true?

[RiceBall]

Fable could you link to the specific post?

DCB needs to come back and point out specific instants of toilet humor and other negatives. If he stop at the first instance of dwarf cock then he really missing out and not giving the game a chance. How far did you get before you stopped dcb?

[fable]

Fable could you link to the specific post?

If I understand you both correctly, then what Disturbation referred to was very similar to this passage of yours:

FYou stated in earlier in the thread that you had MotB, dialogue works the exact same way in witcher. Camera angle switches back and forth between each participant as they each speak their lines and the protagonist has a dialogue choices at the bottom of the screen. It is not a case where you click on the correct npc and and then it one continous flow of dialogue.

Just read up a bit.

[Lady Dragonfly]

I recently broke my vow not to buy MoB. I bought it. There is absolutely no similarity between the elaborate, intelligent dialogues in MoB and the somewhat bastardized yes/no dialogues in The Witcher.

[Xandax]

<snip>
Gee, do you think I maybe resorted to irony and Argumentum ad Hominem, because of the way you just blanket dismissed my personal experience as if it amounted to nothing, and wasn't even worth a moment's notice? Let's see:

Sorry, but that is not correct. There is no more creativity involved in writing up some story elements and getting the innkeeper to tell it via text, then there is getting it shown as a cut-scene of the innkeeper telling it to you.

The answer is: Yes! <snip>

Then explain why there is more creativity in writing that a character walks up to the innkeeper and that NPC tells you some "valuable" information as textual dialogue, compared to writing it and animating it as a cut-scene that the character walks up to the innkeeper and he tells you the exact same thing as dialogue?

Seeing as it is apparently according to you much more creative the former then the latter, when it is the same writing which is used. You claim that it is de facto more creativity involved when it comes to writing when it is for text, then when it is for animation. That's basically the jist of it.

That is why I dismissed your statement, and simply using "MMO for 4 years" at some undefined game, at some undefined period in time as an argument really doesn't cut it. Because there is simply nothing in your argument which supports such a blanket statement.

I agree that many companies (mis)use cut-scenes in lieu of "quality" stories, but one does by far not limit or surpasses the other by default or some magical process. It is a choice made by developers and writers, nothing else.
It does not take more creativity writing a story simply because it'll be displayed as text versus having the story animated. That is nonsense no matter how you twist and turn it.

What if - hypothetical situation which easily could be true - the writer didn't know that the developers would animate the innkeeper telling the information as a cut-scene type to convey the information, but he thought it would be used only for textual information?
Would that automatically detract from the creativity used by the writer, because the mechanics of displaying and conveying the information to the player apparently has influence on the process of the writer writing said information.