Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Yesterday at 12:34:47 pm 
Started by Vince - Last post by Nick
Speaking about dialogues and design, in AoD back-end dlg design looked like a lot of pain for scripting and maintenance - did new engine eased your life on that side?

I believe it should be much more easy to handle and intuitive now. We've bought a plugin and adapted it to our needs:


 2 
 on: Yesterday at 12:28:24 pm 
Started by Vince - Last post by Vince
Speaking about dialogues and design, in AoD back-end dlg design looked like a lot of pain for scripting and maintenance - did new engine eased your life on that side?
Too early to say (mainly because I really liked our editor and never had a problem with it).

I second menyalin's question. The dialogue looks like it's going to be top notch but designing and writing it seems to be a lot more challenging than it was in AoD. The (more complex) new system, companions, more dynamic factions, etc. The last thing anyone needs in this kind of situation would be a clunky engine.
Scripting dialogues is the easy part. Writing quality content is the main challenge, as always. Not stringing words together but writing in a way that benefits the setting, story, and characters.

Quote
Quote
In general, CHA will handle:

- party size
- recruiting (while you may need CHA9 to get 4 party members, you may need CHA10 to get a certain party member)
- conflicts between you and the party members (in addition to dialogue skills, of course; joint checks like Cha >= X && Persuasion >= Y
- influencing party members' beliefs and positions

Anything change to this great-sounding basic premise? You did say that more than 2 years ago and a lot can change in that time span.
No changes. One of these days (when the interface is done and we have more portraits) I will show you how different party members affect situations and what kind of conflicts and disagreements you can expect.


 3 
 on: Yesterday at 12:07:29 pm 
Started by Vince - Last post by Kirov89
Quote
It's too early to say whether or not it's a good idea, but it's a very realistic one.

Thanks for clarifying. It sounds like a great idea but it makes the color/symbol hints on dialogue lines all the more important.

I second menyalin's question. The dialogue looks like it's going to be top notch but designing and writing it seems to be a lot more challenging than it was in AoD. The (more complex) new system, companions, more dynamic factions, etc. The last thing anyone needs in this kind of situation would be a clunky engine.

Speaking of companions:

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,7120.0.html

That post was absolutely hilarious. Don't know what you were smoking that day but you should have more of it (provided it doesn't kill ya...)

From one of your replies in that post:

Quote
In general, CHA will handle:

- party size
- recruiting (while you may need CHA9 to get 4 party members, you may need CHA10 to get a certain party member)
- conflicts between you and the party members (in addition to dialogue skills, of course; joint checks like Cha >= X && Persuasion >= Y
- influencing party members' beliefs and positions

Anything change to this great-sounding basic premise? You did say that more than 2 years ago and a lot can change in that time span.



 4 
 on: Yesterday at 01:46:25 am 
Started by Vince - Last post by menyalin
Speaking about dialogues and design, in AoD back-end dlg design looked like a lot of pain for scripting and maintenance - did new engine eased your life on that side?

 5 
 on: October 21, 2018, 09:41:48 pm 
Started by Eric Matyas - Last post by Eric Matyas
Hey everyone,

I've uploaded a whole bunch of new images, both seamless and standard, realistic and cartoon-y.  You'll find them here:

TXR - ABSTRACT
https://soundimage.org/txr-abstract/

TXR - ABSTRACT - Cartoon
https://soundimage.org/txr-abstract-cartoon/

TXR - BRICK
https://soundimage.org/txr-brick/

TXR - BRICK - Cartoon
https://soundimage.org/txr-brick-cartoon/

New music tracks will be ready on Wednesday as well so stay tuned.  :-)

 6 
 on: October 21, 2018, 12:40:52 pm 
Started by Vince - Last post by Vince
Quote
Let’s say your Persuasion is 3. You’re offered 3 arguments. The NPC will respond very favorably (+2) to argument #1, favorably to argument #2 (+1) and very negatively to argument #3 (-2). Your skill will modify these reactions to 4, 2, and 0.

What skill will provide that modification? The 3 in Persuasion? If the answer is yes, wouldn't that be a little unusual as a Persuasion skill of 3 out of a possible max of 10 doesn't amount to much? Unless the req lvl of Persuasion changes for every conversation to reflect the difficulty in getting those favorable reactions.
The required level is different for every conversation, of course. Using AoD as an example, it takes a much higher skillset to convince Paullus to side with the religious fanatics than to convince a disgruntled soldier (Mercato) to tell you what his boss is up to.

So each line with a check has a skill level requirement (i.e. how good your Persuasion skill should be to pull it off). So for example, if it takes Persuasion 3 to deliver the line the right way, which gives you +2 reaction, then higher Persuasion (let's say 5) gives you an extra point (+3), whereas Persuasion 2 gives you only +1 reaction. It's too early to say whether or not it's a good idea, but it's a very realistic one.

Different lines have different reaction payoffs, determined by the situation and the NPCs personality, so paying attention to the lines (and not clicking on the first green line) would help a lot.

In sales every rep is working with the same script, written by the most successful sales rep. So everyone says the same lines, but the mileage varies greatly because the skillset varies greatly.

 7 
 on: October 21, 2018, 07:26:50 am 
Started by Sunfire - Last post by Spyros
To my mind past performance helps dictate credibility, as does the interests behind them.
By what magical process? The goodwill of the people around you who pay attention to the issue under scrutiny? They do this for free, too? Are they as numerous as the ones paid to give credibility according to someone else's interests?

Quote
The issue I have increasingly is that people with no subject matter knowledge are given equal weighting to those that do.
I'll be bold and interpret this as "For the first time, I've been exposed to new bullshit, instead of the usual bullshit I grew up with, and I don't like it.". Yes, that happens when a new political player arrives and starts wrestling the old one for control of the narrative. Do not assume that anyone with power, even on your side, will ever consider you an equal worthy of frankness. The sheep need to be told what gives the best results, and that's usually a lie. Realise that you would do the same if you are smart and the stakes were high enough.

Quote
When a society reaches the point where either its experts are untrustworthy, or it doesnt know which experts to trust it tends to result in really, really shitty decision making.
"Experts" are this day's priests. They are always untrustworthy if you value truth. And "really, really shitty decision making"... for whom? Again with the childish assumption that we're all in this together. Today's apparent chaos profits some people who know very well what they are doing. And the show is just beginning. Did you notice the US Fed's rate hike? Tick, tock.

 8 
 on: October 20, 2018, 03:43:07 pm 
Started by Vince - Last post by Kirov89
Quote
There's no % chance to succeed in dialogues. Yellow indicates that your skill is lower than the recommended value. See the dialogue system update for more details:

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,7567.0.html

My bad. There is indeed a % chance to succeed as only some combinations of replies out of the total possible will lead to the desired outcome but reloading would only make sense if the PC were to change something to the dialogue (i.e. meta-gaming).

After re-reading the older update, though, one thing is still not clear to me:

Quote
Let’s say your Persuasion is 3. You’re offered 3 arguments. The NPC will respond very favorably (+2) to argument #1, favorably to argument #2 (+1) and very negatively to argument #3 (-2). Your skill will modify these reactions to 4, 2, and 0.

What skill will provide that modification? The 3 in Persuasion? If the answer is yes, wouldn't that be a little unusual as a Persuasion skill of 3 out of a possible max of 10 doesn't amount to much? Unless the req lvl of Persuasion changes for every conversation to reflect the difficulty in getting those favorable reactions.

Sorry if I'm talking bollocks but even though I've been playing games my whole life, my interest in their design was minimal so please bear with me.

 9 
 on: October 20, 2018, 08:14:30 am 
Started by Sunfire - Last post by Imbecile
I'm not saying that statements shouldn't be challenged, just that we need to weigh opinions according to expertise and credibility rather than treating them equally.
[...]
It's possible that when you say elites, you don't mean experts/decent politicians

This does belong in the humour thread. Meanness aside, opinions should mainly be weighted by the interests behind them, and past performance. Not expertise, not credibility, which in the real world are mere labels bestowed by other humans (who are scammy or stupid).

And nope, I didn't mean experts or decent politicians. Who is in a position to tell those people what to do? Look at financing for starters. Your first thought about everything that's presented to your eyes, even by "coincidence", should really, really be "This cost money to put out. Where is the money coming from?".


To my mind past performance helps dictate credibility, as does the interests behind them. The issue I have increasingly is that people with no subject matter knowledge are given equal weighting to those that do.

The problem is that often the interests behind a view and past performance, all get buried beneath a deluge of selective statistics and conspiracy theory. When a society reaches the point where either its experts are untrustworthy, or it doesnt know which experts to trust it tends to result in really, really shitty decision making.

 10 
 on: October 19, 2018, 10:42:06 pm 
Started by Sunfire - Last post by Wrath of Dagon
This is what President Eisenhower said in his farewell address:

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10