Close enough then. Now, do you have the formula for Rohypnol?theriddlen said:I don't know what's the formula for love, but here's the formula for alcohol:Greg Tito said:
Games Can Make You Trust
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
First step to being trusted? Don't call yourself Dr. Hazard. Seriously, it all sounds like a supervillain plot to me. He says he wants a formula for "trust" to make better videogames, but really he just wants to become the perfect backstabber.
On a more serious note, it's usually considered good storytelling to give subtle hints about a character being dishonest (see Knights of the Old Republic, Portal). It's just that most games aren't too subtle about it.
On a more serious note, it's usually considered good storytelling to give subtle hints about a character being dishonest (see Knights of the Old Republic, Portal). It's just that most games aren't too subtle about it.
Well, you see, he's newly educated and it's now that people are going to respond to his ideas that we'll see just what lies underneath the surface of Dr. Hazard...rsvp42 said:
OT: I doubt this'll work. Unless of course the mechanic would be based around ever players DIStrust of NPCs(or other people for that matter).
lithium.jelly said:Close enough then. Now, do you have the formula for Rohypnol?theriddlen said:I don't know what's the formula for love, but here's the formula for alcohol:Greg Tito said:
I've gotta feeling, that tonight's gonna be a good time...
I'm only about ten pages in, but it's quite an interesting read.I don't know whether he addresses this later, but at this point the only potential issue I see is that it appears he's quantifying all relative trust as neutral until further evidence is provided, without taking into account the nature of an individual towards or against trust.
In order for a game to truly exploit trust, there has to be an option to not trust a character in your party and potentially get rid of them early on based on your personal distrust. Even in games where it is blatantly obvious that the Snidley Whiplash-looking character you're traveling with is going to try and kill you, you're forced to work with them because the storyline demands it. More games need to give you the option to say, "Screw this guy, he's obviously going to stab me in the back." Then to go along with it, they'll have to give you plausible reasons to keep the person in the party despite your audience knowledge. Or, OR... Do a better job of hiding Snidley's treachery. Maybe shave off his moustache and get him some posture-correcting back brace.
That's all as far as I'm concerned. Either make it a lot less obvious that someone's going to betray you, or give me the option to kick them out of the party early on.
That's all as far as I'm concerned. Either make it a lot less obvious that someone's going to betray you, or give me the option to kick them out of the party early on.
It does mention that it is limited by being theoretical, so that initial neutrality is a necessary simplifying assumption.Orannis0 said:
"Can you guys think of any games that a really good examples of trust?"
What Dr. Hazard wants to see is a game that uses the mathematical computation that he discovered for his dissertation to quantify how players build trust.
So he's asking if there already exists a game that uses his just discovered formula? If I could think of one would it mean he got canned for plagiarism?
(Hey, this isn't your formula at all it's just ripped off from [insert game here]....)
What Dr. Hazard wants to see is a game that uses the mathematical computation that he discovered for his dissertation to quantify how players build trust.
So he's asking if there already exists a game that uses his just discovered formula? If I could think of one would it mean he got canned for plagiarism?
(Hey, this isn't your formula at all it's just ripped off from [insert game here]....)