Experimenting With Dialog In Games

The Problem

Video games are bad at handling conversations

HypothesesH1: The perception of continuous choice options will make game dialog more natural

H2: Emotions are an intuitive way to drive dialog in games

Proposed Solution

Core features of our new mechanic:

● Control emotions with analog stick

● Hide the discrete choice points

● Removes prompting, improving flow

Our First Prototype

Control Experimental

Initial Results

● LA Noire dialog was not a good fit for our control scheme.

● Positive: Users overestimated the complexity of the system

○ Some assumed an AI system

● Main Finding: Players felt they had no agency

○ Users did not know what choices they had, and did not

know when to make a choice.

A Refined Hypothesis

● There is ambiguity in our first Hypothesis:

H1: “The perception of continuous choice options will make

game dialog feel more natural.”

● Game conversations are discrete in two ways.

● We have two options to make dialog continuous

● Hide what your options are while allowing users to be told

when to choose.

[Insert graphic of V2 slider here]

● Hide when your choices are made while showing what

options are available.

[Insert graphic of V2 toggle here]

Hiding “What” vs. Hiding “When”

● We hoped to give feelings of agency back to the player by

removing only the “what” or the “when”. Not both.

● Both types allow for our goal of uninterrupted dialog, but

which type gives greater feelings of agency in the player?

In short, which one is better?

Hiding “What” vs. Hiding “When”

20 subjects, 3 experimental conditions.

● Control Group: implements standard prompting dialog.

● Slider Group: Removes what options are available to player.

*****Insert Slider graphic here*****

● Toggle Group: Removes when player’s choices are resolved.

*****Insert Toggle graphic here*****

Experimental Design

2nd Iteration: A Bespoke Solution

● Emotionally driven story

● Minimal characters (3)

● Tutorial and feedback built-in to story

● 30 branches, 4 possible outcomes (endings)

● Designed specifically for continuous dialog mechanics

[Insert screenshot of game here]

2nd Iteration: A Bespoke Solution

Experimental Results

Get ready for some graphs...

Uniformity of Story Comprehension“What did you think the story was about?”

Improved Sense of Agency“Did you feel that your decisions affected the story?”

Dialog Fluidity Is Complex“Did you feel that the dialog was fluid?”

Difficulty of Each MechanicUsing Errors In Tutorial (EIT) to measure comprehension difficulty

Conclusions

Limitations & Further Directions

● Test audience/sample size not ideal; scale up testing.

● Modulate tone and facial expression with slider.

● See if higher fidelity environments deliver consistent results.

● Edit and revise article for Gamasutra publishing.

● Liaise with Fungus developers for tool integration.

Thank You

● Quantitative Measurements

○ Record subjects’ decision path

○ Record subjects’ performance during tutorial

○ Record the outcome of subjects’ playthrough

Experimental Design

● Qualitative Measurementso Ask about overall experienceo Ask about story comprehensiono Ask questions to determine sense of agencyo Ask if the dialog felt fluido Ask if subjects’ choices matched emotional outcomes

o Query subjects on familiarity with games

Conclusions

● Control mechanic did not influence story comprehension.

● Agency in Toggle mechanic as good as Traditional mechanic.

● Perception of fluidity is influenced by many factors.

● Slider mechanic the most difficult to learn.

● Experience with dialog-heavy games not a factor.

Conclusions

The Toggle mechanic appears to provide the best experience for player agency and control comprehension, while maintaining a

continuous, natural, conversational pace.

Gaming Experience Is Irrelevant“Do you play other games with interactive dialog?”