Heavily character driven game without personal dialogue?

[Raziaar]

Take note that the title might not be the best way to describe this.

I've been starting to write down and flesh out ideas I have for a game that will be extremely character focused with interaction between characters being the main driving point. The idea I have for it is that of a survival game(I had zombie survival in mind, but it doesn't really matter since zombies wouldn't be the main focus).

I want to draw upon the game Crusader Kings 2 in how it has all sorts of characters each with different personality traits, needs, ambitions and opinions of other characters in the game world. I want character development and interaction to be the main driving point in this game which has the utmost importance on the survival of the player. The player will be in a world being a part of, interacting with or leading different survival parties. With survival in mind, the character will cultivate friendships, root out conflict and potential enemies, plot against or discover plots by other characters, and generally try to stay on top of the personal and political arena of survival. Characters will forge alliances, splinter of from groups, attempt to usurp power, banish individuals, murder and steal all in the name of survival.

I am envisioning that the way character interaction takes place is not in the way of conventional dialogue trees where you chat with individuals(such as Mass Effect). Instead, it'll be a more complex array of options with potentially dozens of different interactons characters can make with each other. These will be defined strictly in terms of the action(such as sharing information about one character to another). Due to the sheer and potentially overwhelming number of personalities that the game might have, I don't feel that conventional dialogue would be very feasible.

Instead, I'd like to spend my focus on ensuring that there is enough interest and variety in the resulting reactions. Perhaps I'll go in the direction of attempting to implement procedural reactions, or at the very least hundreds of different "views" for each one.


Do you guys think that it would be too difficult to grow attached to characters and feel the impact of character development if you're interacting with them in a very managerial style? I don't know if I'm wording that right, but hopefully you get the idea.

 

[morgs]

It sounds like a good Idea, and I think a zombie apocalypse scenario would work well, as you could have many different locations that many different groups are in a power struggle over (i.e supermarkets, prisons, gun stores). Alliances could shift and change depending on which group has the more firepower, survivability etc. The only problem with creating a zombie themed game is having it lost in the very over-saturated zombie game market.

It's hard to say whether or not you could become attached to characters without personal dialogue, but perhaps you could give characters brief Biographies you could read or something.

 

[Krynn72]

It works for me in movies like Valhalla Rising, can't see why it wouldn't in a game. But a lot of other people disliked that movie because they couldn't get attached and thought it was stupid that there was almost literally no dialog.

 

[Raziaar]

It's hard to say whether or not you could become attached to characters without personal dialogue, but perhaps you could give characters brief Biographies you could read or something.

Well I think the main attachment, would be keeping friends and allies and generally useful people alive, because the loss of those individuals by whatever means would reduce your chances for survival. The fewer friends you have, the more advantage your enemies may have against you, either those violent towards you, or plotting your demise internally within the group.

I mean obviously I'd like to be able to go for more, but it just seems so complex, when dealing with characters that gain and lose traits, ambitions etc as the game progresses, and who are essentially completely random.

Before I ever attempt to make this a game, I think a first good step would be to make a small simulator out of it, once I get the interaction system and all the stats and other things in place. That way I can see how the AI will deal with each other and how groups will morph and evolve as time goes on. All of that well before I ever worry about what style of graphics I'll have or all the things characters can do in the world such as create shelters and raid and kill or be killed by zombies, etc.

Really what I would strive for, is a zombie game without zombies, with the zombies simply being obstacles and chances for extra drama and danger for characters and parties.

I'm currently making no real boasts that I can actually complete this thing. I just really like the idea and so I'm trying to get things fleshed out.


I think one of the hardest parts of this game will be on how to figure out what kind of game it will be. Will it be 3D? Will it be a top down 2D game? A text game? Real time(with action pauses), turn based? My biggest concern would be how can I have the player character able to interact and be interacted with in the game world while NPC's are constantly moving around and performing tasks. Obviously parties would remain in relatively localized areas if they have a home base, with some individuals slated to go out and explore and gather resources, but I have yet to think about game mechanics that involve party AI cohesion while still allowing for possibilities of characters being lost in the game world.

 

[morgs]

Yeah I figured their role in the group would be what you are most attached to, for example if you had a police officer or US marine you may want to keep them around over say, Janice who works as an accountant. But then again, Janice may be loyal to you whereas the cop is corrupt and just wants to exploit the group for his own means.

 

[Raziaar]

Yeah I figured their role in the group would be what you are most attached to, for example if you had a police officer or US marine you may want to keep them around over say, Janice who works as an accountant. But then again, Janice may be loyal to you whereas the cop is corrupt and just wants to exploit the group for his own means.

Exactly. And I sort of want a dual opinion system in place. The personal opinions that two characters have of each other based purely on what they know about each other, past actions, etc... and the opinion they have of the person as they relate to the suvivability of the group as a whole. Each will be based on the traits of the characters and how they feel about them, but in different ways. That police officer example you mention, might be distrusted because of his corrupt personality, but individuals might feel more positive about his role for the group based on his skill with a weapon, the fact that he has a weapon, etc. Janice on the other hand, characters might like due to how her personality meshes with theirs, but they might feel that she is useless to the group as a whole, because she has no weapon experience and is maybe a coward.

Both of those rating systems, ideally, would play a role in how you the player will make your decisions, and how other characters will make their decisions. It gives the chance for people who hate each other to stick together, albeit at increased friction and internal conflict within the party. I'll also have a sort of "reputation" system in the game, where characters who are of particular renown for certain extreme actions they take(good or bad) will be known in the world by others, giving both advantages and disadvantages as other characters know a little about you even before you meet them.

Ultimately the goal of the game would be cultivating your party by discovering the personalities of each member and either building friendships and alliances, or working to push them from the group or get them killed to increase chances of survival in the world. The player will be the very same target of these things by other characters, and may find himself pushed from the group and has to find another one, or survive on his own for a while. Small parties will be completely viable in the survival game, because they will spend less time on internal politics and more on survival, but they also lack strength of numbers and might be taken advantage of by larger groups because of this.


I have lots of this stuff in my head. It's only recently that I started writing some of it down. Really though, it's Crusader Kings 2 that inspired me, even though the style of game I have in mind is very much different.