HASVERS'S PROFILE

author=Kylaila
Thanks a bunch! I'll definitely check these out.

Actually it's thanks to you, your comment about the Ace Attorneys made me think of Socrates Jones and I knew I had to make that list.

author=Merlandese
I also recommend adding Goblin Noir: Cement Shoes are Highly Unfashionable. It uses dialogue battling, and has a lot of character. Another great entry idea to come from the contest.

Many thanks, I decided to try it for five minutes, and here I am one hour later. Best urban fantasy I've seen in a while, remarkably seamless battles of wit, and so much fun!

I'm welcoming more suggestions for a second volume of that compilation, coming shortly. There are tons of games where people talk, but I'm really interested in those that either do something new (even if slightly underwhelmingly, like Dangerous...), or do something more traditional exceptionally well. Goblin Noir is interestingly a bit of both, so it fits right in.

author=nhubi
with this and other discourse driven games being developed, I can only hope a trend is beginning.

Same here! Every time I see someone else trying there hand at this concept (from Facade, to Galatea by Emily Short), I discover new great ideas and I feel a little less alone ;)

And I am quite hopeful about the bluff system as well, actually it's a part of something larger: every link will have an argumentative style and some are so specialized (e.g. statistical inference) that you access them only with a highly skilled orator.
That way, when there's a link that doesn't seem right, you are never 100% sure whether it's a bluff (in which case you can ridicule your opponent) or a highly sophisticated argument (in which case you'll be humiliated if you call them on it).

This will be especially important in fights where you have an audience, and shaming your opponent is more important than convincing them.

I do happen to fancy bow ties and top hats quite a lot nevertheless!

author=Merlandese
I know I would have struggled a little to refrain from speaking about design experiences.

Even if that doesn't fit in a review, I'd still like that sort of commentary. A lot of things can be explained away by the rush of the contest, but there are many more I could have done better still. Who knows, we might find a way to combine our ideas and lay the ground for a new genre of perfect rhetorical games...

It would be a mild understatement to say that you've just made my day :)

I was especially afraid of the reception of the writing, as breaking a conversation into pieces without making it too mechanical often felt nigh impossible. I still have ideas on how to make it more natural, but it's a huge relief that you liked it nevertheless.

I'm also glad that you got to see every ending! It is, after all, a game of final monologues ^^ There are four songs, two of which are used only in some endings, and I had originally planned to have different graphics for every one as well. (but working on the engine took most of the contest time)

author=Kylaila
The only gripe I have is that you cannot freely form a tactic.

Indeed, this is the part which I hope to improve on most in future games. First, the opponent will be much more active, making the possibilities less static. You will start the conversations with a certain number of nodes that are known (or learned from previous conversations), so that you can plan a trajectory in advance. And among other additions, it will be possible to create false links using logical fallacies, at risk of losing face if you're called on your bluff by the opponent.

But mostly, I will be counting on a lot of playtest, with players telling me what they would have wanted to say at any given point, so that I can refine the argument map. We will see when I get there!

Again, all my thanks for your comments!

Thanks!

Would you mind sharing a few details about your system so I can try to figure out the causes of the crash? (which version of Windows and which resolution, mostly)