1. Experimenting With Dialog In Games

2. The Problem
Video games are bad at handling conversations

3. Hypotheses
H1: The perception of continuous choice options will make
game dialog more natural
H2: Emotions are an intuitive way to drive dialog in games

4. Proposed Solution
Core features of our new mechanic:
● Control emotions with analog stick
● Hide the discrete choice points
● Removes prompting, improving flow

5. Our First Prototype
Control Experimental

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. ● 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”

9. ● 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”

10. 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

11. 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

12. [Insert screenshot of game here]
2nd Iteration: A Bespoke Solution

13. Experimental Results
Get ready for some graphs...

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

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

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

17. Difficulty of Each Mechanic
Using Errors In Tutorial (EIT) to measure comprehension difficulty

18. Conclusions

19. 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.

20. Thank You

21. ● Quantitative Measurements
○ Record subjects’ decision path
○ Record subjects’ performance during tutorial
○ Record the outcome of subjects’ playthrough
Experimental Design
● Qualitative Measurements
o Ask about overall experience
o Ask about story comprehension
o Ask questions to determine sense of agency
o Ask if the dialog felt fluid
o Ask if subjects’ choices matched emotional outcomes
o Query subjects on familiarity with games

22. 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.

23. Conclusions
The Toggle mechanic appears to provide the best experience for
player agency and control comprehension, while maintaining a
continuous, natural, conversational pace.

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