Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: Writing Starsector  (Read 15431 times)

Lorant

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #30 on: December 18, 2020, 08:57:47 AM »

Wanted to second what Concrete (welcome!) said earlier in the thread because the gates interaction and the Gremlin description are pretty great.

The writing in starsector is somehow my favorite part of the game, David, so I dug the blog! glad to see a brigador shoutout in the footnotes. Will we get any brush-ins with Orcus Rao or Marshal Baikul Daud? What is to become of Chalcedon? &c super excited for the update!
Logged

David

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #31 on: December 18, 2020, 09:18:58 AM »

If however skill checks are used as a way to get alternative and more flavorful solutions to a situation, to get hints and extra intel about some events, or maybe even more subtle: alternate lines from some characters depending on the player's specialty, then I would tend to say they can have a place in the game.

This is one of those things that would be super cool, but I don't think makes sense for an indie game of this size. With 40 skills in play, the development time cost vs. payoff in terms of how many players would see that content vs. putting that effort somewhere else doesn't make it worthwhile. In a project of a certain scale, maybe with 10+ developers you could probably assign writing these as someone's full time job for a couple months and make it really shine. Alas!

[edit] Skill checks could also be used the other way around, to warn a player that they may have troubles with a particular assignment if their combat skills are too limited, the travel might be arduous without logistic skills, you might get the option to get extra help at low level and so on.

This is getting into Alex territory, but my impression is that simply as UX policy he tries to have the game warn players about wandering into situations where they may be ill-equipped. The people hurt most of these things are newer, and in this sort of game you really don't want to kill your young when the learning curve is already so steep. So while this is a cool idea from a verisimilitude standpoint, I think making a more accessible game has to take priority.

(Haha, man, sorry for just shooting down everything you're saying. But I hope the reasoning for these design decisions makes sense, though admittedly they're out-of-game considerations.)

There's nothing more annoying and immersion breaking than being presented with dialogue options and thinking "okay, but what am I actually choosing here..."

Ah, the example you raise is an interesting one - one of our 'quest experiments' - and I think critically examining it is worthwhile. It does potentially let the player lose themselves an opportunity; I think we've been more conscious of this sort of thing in work that's gone into this upcoming patch.

My hope is that players can trust the game enough that they will be able to make choices as role-playing rather than trying to consciously min-max (w/ the consideration that one can roleplay as a power-hungry captain of course). This is our challenge to meet, basically.

Btw, have you guys ever seriously considered text to speech options? I would love the option to have stuff read to me from time to time. And a computerized voice would even be thematically fitting.

Aesthetically, I'm afraid that I can't see this not being super janky. I don't think the technology can support it properly, and even hinting at anything near voice work is dangerous from a production cost standpoint.

I could imagine that as an accessibility option, though I wouldn't know where to even begin with it, and uh ... I wouldn't want to make any more trouble for Alex than I already have.

Of all the writing presently in the game, my two favorite pieces are just tiny little descriptions, but I'd still like to praise them.
First, the description of the Gremlin-class frigate. And secondly, the short little bit of text describing the experience of flying through an inert ring.

Thank you. It's really rewarding to hear that you connected with those, because I definitely those two as places where, oh I don't know how to explain it, but inspiration struck and I knew instantly that I had to do something a little weird and a little different.

The Human Hive is the best faction, by the way.

SMAC is such a well-written game. I think Chairman Yang is super compelling because his statements can be extremely unsettling, but he's not wrong.

The writing in starsector is somehow my favorite part of the game, David, so I dug the blog! glad to see a brigador shoutout in the footnotes. Will we get any brush-ins with Orcus Rao or Marshal Baikul Daud?

Thank you! And ... (should I answer this? I think I kinda already have) ... yeah, what the heck: the player will indeed have the opportunity to talk to someone very important in the Hegemony.
Logged

Tartiflette

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3529
  • MagicLab discord: https://discord.gg/EVQZaD3naU
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #32 on: December 18, 2020, 10:21:47 AM »

If however skill checks are used as a way to get alternative and more flavorful solutions to a situation, to get hints and extra intel about some events, or maybe even more subtle: alternate lines from some characters depending on the player's specialty, then I would tend to say they can have a place in the game.

This is one of those things that would be super cool, but I don't think makes sense for an indie game of this size. With 40 skills in play, the development time cost vs. payoff in terms of how many players would see that content vs. putting that effort somewhere else doesn't make it worthwhile. In a project of a certain scale, maybe with 10+ developers you could probably assign writing these as someone's full time job for a couple months and make it really shine. Alas!
I was saying that in the context of "number of skills in a skill tree", not with specific skills checks in mind. If the skill checks are flavorful rather than hard block, if should be enough to determine if someone is a good enough "Mercenary", "Strategist", "Engineer" or "Administrator", depending on how many points they invested in each skill branch.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2020, 10:25:33 AM by Tartiflette »
Logged
 

Ryan390

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #33 on: December 18, 2020, 10:42:08 AM »

I'm happy to finally see an update, albeit it being a bit confounding.
When are we likely to see a physical release next year? Is it going to be a 1.0 job or another 0.9.8 xxx

For example, possibly first quarter, most likely 3/4th quarter & it will be a 1.0 product or another minor increment towards 1.0?
 
« Last Edit: December 19, 2020, 03:34:11 AM by Ryan390 »
Logged

Sundog

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #34 on: December 18, 2020, 05:08:10 PM »

There's nothing more annoying and immersion breaking than being presented with dialogue options and thinking "okay, but what am I actually choosing here..."

Ah, the example you raise is an interesting one - one of our 'quest experiments' - and I think critically examining it is worthwhile. It does potentially let the player lose themselves an opportunity; I think we've been more conscious of this sort of thing in work that's gone into this upcoming patch.

My hope is that players can trust the game enough that they will be able to make choices as role-playing rather than trying to consciously min-max (w/ the consideration that one can roleplay as a power-hungry captain of course). This is our challenge to meet, basically.
Thanks for putting my mind at ease! I'm glad you mentioned trust in particular, because that's really at the root of the issue. Dialogue options that can't be trusted subvert their own purpose.

jamplier

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #35 on: December 20, 2020, 03:08:13 AM »

Please don't ever lock any kind of outcome behind a grindable resource (like a skill check). It would just make me go "well why don't I just reload a save and grind some more XP to level up?", and making me grind for XP in a singleplayer game is a big no-no, because nobody's got time for that and then I'll start cheating.

If you are gonna do it though, I think a cool way to have a skill check is something like this:

Quest-giver asks you to take over an un-take-overable station, wat do?

A) (Combat skills > 5) Some advanced space tactic makes half the enemy fleet surrender! Then we plough our ships through the front door! (cripples enemy defenses)
B) (Tech skills > 5) Hack their defenses and move in undisturbed! (cripples enemy defenses)
C) (Industry skills > 5) Convince other factions to block trade with this station! (cripples enemy defenses)
D) (Spend 100000 credits) Bribe an insider to lower defenses! (cripples enemy defenses)
E) (Story-point) Send an elite squad to lower defenses before moving in with the fleet! (cripples enemy defenses)
F) **** it! (assault the fully functioning station)

Takes all of 5 minutes to make, doesn't lock a desirable outcome behind a skill check, gives the player the feeling they made a choice, allows you to role-play thus adding a bit of flavour to your character, and can also warn newbie players about biting off more than they can chew while also not blocking out veteran players. Obviously, all these apply to this particular, handpicked example, but I'm sure there are other situations where a similar approach could work.

Another solution is to light a fire under the player's ass, a la FTL: Faster Than Light. Sure, it would be nice to have all the money/XP in the world, but you can't, because the Domain Liberation Fleet/AI Extermination Fleet/Alien Invasion fleet is coming in 1 cycle and 6 months. This way, a player has a harder time justifying save-scumming out of a situation where their skills/credits/whatever are insufficient (though one might still do it), because you don't really have time to grind when there are still a bunch of other important missions to do. Obviously, this depends on where you want to take the end-game.

Or just don't do this kind of thing at all. My main point was please don't ever lock any kind of outcome behind a skill check or, in general, any easily findable resource which requires grinding to obtain; of course, this begs the question "well what even is the difference between grinding and just normal character progression, jamplier, if you're so alpha core smart and full of yourself?". An interesting question:
1) a player's progression should probably only be decided in combat, not a quest dialogue
2) alas, I'd barely register as a gamma core, so this is all you're gonna get out of me for now.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2020, 03:46:12 AM by jamplier »
Logged

Willthethe

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #36 on: December 20, 2020, 06:46:22 PM »

"There’s a light cone, and the range of possible endings falls somewhere within it."

I see that someone has studied/learned about relativity!

And you have the gall to worry about "a thousand intense physics nerds" tearing you apart with "their fascinating equations."

:D
Logged

Mosthra

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #37 on: December 20, 2020, 10:40:49 PM »

Be strong. We will be looking forward to the great update coming soon. And the Moders will help you to develop that RPG story later.
This game will become immortal thanks to its loyal Mod community.
Logged

isyourmojofly

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2020, 04:04:06 AM »

I really like this thought-through approach to storytelling. Having played through Divinity Original Sin 2 recently, where it felt like they just chucked in as much as they could, it's refreshing to see storytelling actually edited and thoroughly considered.

Just to echo another poster, your writing really sticks with me. One stand-out is the description of the shipboard mutiny after a planet is destroyed, where the captain shoots himself upon realising what's happened. All in the "true and accurate history" post rather than actually in-game, but it was so vivid and made a real impression. Really looking forward to seeing more of your writing!
Logged

Ryan390

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #39 on: December 21, 2020, 10:29:18 AM »

It's all very well and good these thoughts but until the next version is in our hands there's not really a lot of suggestions we can make. I think they will be unlikely to change things at this stage, we just need to get this story out the door now after ten years in the making.

Not every game is going to make players feel like they did when playing through FF7 for the first time, I'm definitely reaching the age now where I value something I can experience over something I'd like to experience (in the near future)

Look how long we all waited for Cyberpunk and it was still a massive disappointment, and not just even because of all the bugs.
Star Sector doesn't have to be a perfect 1.0 it just needs to be a 1.0.     
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #40 on: December 21, 2020, 10:35:27 AM »

The biggest thing Starsector needs is a win condition that ends the game (or at least flags the player as a "WINNER!"), like blowing up the Sa-Matra in Star Control 2 or killing Morgoth in Angband.
Logged

gp0923

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #41 on: December 22, 2020, 01:53:33 AM »

FYI: I am using the term "skill check" to reference a random event (i.e. coin flip, die roll, etc.) that occurs after the player has made some action (or decision) to determine the success or failure of the player's decision.

Having been playing the Arkham Horror (AH) LCG recently, the story decisions during those campaigns could be a good reference for Starsector. While AH has many skill checks during gameplay, they are never used during the narrative sections, which I think is for the best. Having a random chance to pass/fail during a narrative section is often frustrating and undermines the player's agency to make decisions; additionally, it makes even less sense in a game like Starsector, where skill tests aren't used anywhere else in the game.
I'll use this decision as an example, since it was brought up earlier in the thread:
Spoiler
[close]
From my experience, a good narrative choice (without skill checks) should have a few things:
  • Context
    A player shouldn't be forced to make an arbitrary decision. Providing context allows the player to infer the possible effects of their decision, as well as determine the expected value of the decision.
    i.e. When given the choice between taking the alpha core or sending it away, the player should ideally have some idea of the value of an alpha core as well as the likely ramifications for failing to send it back.
  • Obvious Cause and Effect
    When a player makes a narrative decision (the cause), the effects should be obvious to the player, even if they are not immediate. Effects without obvious cause often feel arbitrary, while a cause without an obvious effect makes a player feel lite they have no effect on the world.
    i.e. Sending the alpha core away could have an obvious immediate effect: you get paid and get a reputation boost. Keeping the alpha core would also have the immediate effect of acquiring the alpha core and losing reputation, but might also have a long term effect of a privateer fleet chasing you down because somebody told them that you were carrying an alpha core.
  • No "Best" or "Worst" Decision
    Having a narrative decision that is strictly better (or worse) than others undermines that decision and reduces replayability, among other things. Decisions should have costs, rewards, and penalties that are of approximately equal value or are so different that their value cannot be easily compared, thus players can make decisions by deciding what is the most valuable in the current context. A greater reward should come with a greater cost/penalty, and vice versa. The player does not necessarily need to know the exact reward when making the decision, but should expect a proportionally higher reward for a higher cost.
    i.e. Sending the alpha core away could result in a small payment with no downside; however, taking the alpha core would give you the valuable core, but with the downside of reputation loss and a fleet hunting the player down.

Some additional thoughts:
  • Prerequisites (i.e. have 50 rep with a faction, have a ship in fleet with shielded cargo holds, etc.) should give the player more options that might suit their play style, or give slight benefits, but should not be strictly better than other options.
    i.e. By having positive rep with the Hegemony you can choose to fight with them, rather than against them in a battle between two factions, however the battle will still be equally difficult.
    An exception to this could be a prerequisite that the player knows about and has time to acquire.
    i.e. You are told that your next mission will need a ship with shielded cargo holds (and are given time to acquire one).
  • Story points seem like a great cost to allow a player to make more radical decisions, but spending a story point shouldn't just be the best option (especially if you get a bonus to getting your next point).
  • Story points could also be used to ignore the prerequisites for a dialog choice.
    i.e. Normally you need 50 rep with the hegemony but, by spending a story point, your fast talking and natural charisma convinced them instead.
  • If a decision has the option to "leave" or otherwise opt out of the decision (effectively a null option), the other choices should have their costs, rewards, and penalties balanced around that. i.e. Taking an alpha core will give you the core but cause a REDACTED fleet to chase you down, while leaving it alone will cause neither to happen.

This was a bit long-winded, but I hope it helps with designing fun narrative choices.
Logged

David

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #42 on: December 22, 2020, 05:06:22 AM »

I was saying that in the context of "number of skills in a skill tree", not with specific skills checks in mind. If the skill checks are flavorful rather than hard block, if should be enough to determine if someone is a good enough "Mercenary", "Strategist", "Engineer" or "Administrator", depending on how many points they invested in each skill branch.

Right! This is about where we got to when we boiled down the idea of strongly engaging with the skill tree in dialog. The questions from this point are basically:
  • Does the player know that there are alternative options?
  • Do you tell them explicitly via greyed out text w/ tooltips?
  • Do you offer 5+ options per decision point (one to match each skill + one neutral or negative) or a lesser or greater set? (This may center every decision around the skill categories - is that desired? Or only use it when applicable? Is that too few opportunities and too specific to be good value vs. dev time?
  • Do you open dialog options by ranking skill category choices proportionately (ie. what the player has most of), or by absolute number of skills (which demands a certain min. player level for an option?) Does a low level player get nothing vs. a high level player getting all options vs. does it not matter?

There's a lot of smaller questions here, and they have to be answered with a surprising amount of dialog infrastructure as well as content. Question is, is all of that worth what would be gained? Better yet, do the options the skill categories suggest make sense in terms of the story being told - maybe skill-driven dialog works well for engaging with already existing game mechanics type things in the world, but maybe not with what the narrative dialogs are doing.

With all of this, I hope to explain some of the reticence we eventually came to after exploring this area of the design. (And, while I love Disco Elysium's super granular skill-driven dialogs - not that you're suggesting that, I just got excited about it when I played that game - I realized pretty quickly that we couldn't possibly take their approach.)

"There’s a light cone, and the range of possible endings falls somewhere within it."

I see that someone has studied/learned about relativity!

And you have the gall to worry about "a thousand intense physics nerds" tearing you apart with "their fascinating equations."

:D

.... A little! (Mostly from reading scifi!) ... Enough to know that we absolutely torture the concept in Starsector and should be very careful when referencing it! (Also, my brother does indeed have a phd in particle physics and he'll have no qualms about telling me where I get things wrong, haha.)

Be strong. We will be looking forward to the great update coming soon. And the Moders will help you to develop that RPG story later.
This game will become immortal thanks to its loyal Mod community.

I'm actually really excited to see what modders can do with some of the enhanced dialog options we've added. I didn't want to push that point too strongly in the blog post because it risks promising features that I'm not 100% sure on - that's Alex's department. Still, he's made it all much better and easier to use.

When are we likely to see a physical release next year? Is it going to be a 1.0 job or another 0.9.8 xxx

For example, possibly first quarter, most likely 3/4th quarter & it will be a 1.0 product or another minor increment towards 1.0?

The next update, discussed here, is not 1.0 and will be (as Alex puts it so well) "soon".
(If by physical release you mean a boxed copy, that ain't happening! You wouldn't believe the overhead on those things.)

I really like this thought-through approach to storytelling. Having played through Divinity Original Sin 2 recently, where it felt like they just chucked in as much as they could, it's refreshing to see storytelling actually edited and thoroughly considered.

Just to echo another poster, your writing really sticks with me. One stand-out is the description of the shipboard mutiny after a planet is destroyed, where the captain shoots himself upon realising what's happened. All in the "true and accurate history" post rather than actually in-game, but it was so vivid and made a real impression. Really looking forward to seeing more of your writing!

Thank you! (I recall putting a lot of thought into that little snippet, hoping it expressed what I was going for without saying too much or too little. I'm thrilled that it seems to have taken as well as it did - that, and the whole Mayasura/Mairath mission story.)

Having been playing the Arkham Horror (AH) LCG recently, the story decisions during those campaigns could be a good reference for Starsector. While AH has many skill checks during gameplay, they are never used during the narrative sections, which I think is for the best. Having a random chance to pass/fail during a narrative section is often frustrating and undermines the player's agency to make decisions; additionally, it makes even less sense in a game like Starsector, where skill tests aren't used anywhere else in the game.

I've played some Arkham Horror, and those are very interesting observations you make.

I can't go through all your thoughts re. narrative design, but it does all sound along similar lines to the principles we're trying to follow, more or less!
Logged

The2nd

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #43 on: December 22, 2020, 11:04:12 AM »

This is one of those things that would be super cool, but I don't think makes sense for an indie game of this size. With 40 skills in play, the development time cost vs. payoff in terms of how many players would see that content vs. putting that effort somewhere else doesn't make it worthwhile. In a project of a certain scale, maybe with 10+ developers you could probably assign writing these as someone's full time job for a couple months and make it really shine. Alas!

That sounds very much like the sensible choice. However since I really like these kind of mechanics I will just keep writing.

So... how about some purely flavorful dialogue changes depending on player status without any gameplay changes whatsoever? Contextual dialogue impact not only in terms of skills but possibly things like fleet size/ship types/current cargo/player colonies ect. Just something that acknowledges what you have been or are doing as a player. This can be very simple as in "you can't do that" -> "Tell that to my [insert capital ship name currently in player fleet]." (initiates combat)

Arguably these kind of flavor options are even less deserving of Dev time since there is no actual gameplay impact, but sometimes it's the little details which help to elevate the whole. Also when doing this you are not obliged to implement a whole system but can just add a little dialogue when it feels appropriate. Or not ;D   
Logged

David

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
    • View Profile
Re: Writing Starsector
« Reply #44 on: December 22, 2020, 11:09:45 AM »

Arguably these kind of flavor options are even less deserving of Dev time since there is no actual gameplay impact, but sometimes it's the little details which help to elevate the whole. Also when doing this you are not obliged to implement a whole system but can just add a little dialogue when it feels appropriate. Or not ;D   

There are times when the possibility of doing little details like this is too good to let pass by. Sometimes it gets pretty indulgent, and Alex or I will put in rather more effort than seems entirely responsible to make some detail work. The way I think we justify it is that when the game acknowledges a past choice the player has made, that makes everything more real, so it's worth it. And if it's non-systematic (vs. actually having options for all 40 skills etc etc), you'll never know when it's going to happen, so it's more delightful when it does.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4