" enemy barks "... interview with Dansky, Writer & Designer on Tom Clancy series | Forums

[harbi-117]

Enemy bark is the term for the adaptive lines of chatter that enemy characters utter throughout a game
In movies, every line happen once, and so it only needs to be written one way but in games, it must be much more flexible and reactive

Kirk Hamilton (kotaku) got in touch with some video game writers to better get a sense of how they approach this challenge & what happens when things go off the rails.

- Dansky ( Writer & Designer on Tom Clancy series )
- Patrick Redding ( Narrative Designer on Far Cry 2 )
- Chris Dahlen ( writer on Mark of the Ninja game )

some quotes to get you interested:

When I asked Dansky, Dahlen and Anderson which games they thought had good barks, all three listed 2008's Far Cry 2 among their examples. That game used dynamically generated barks to great effect, with enemies who let you know about state-changes in organic ways as their frenzied yelling and panic greatly contributed to the game's overall vibe.

"Conviction is actually a great lesson in how barks aren't just the writing," Dansky said. "There was a very detailed design behind the bark system in Conviction, where we kept swapping out bark sets based on which enemies you'd face in a map and the player's progress through the campaign, so that the bad guys would seem like they were aware of what was going on. And those bark pools were decently deep, with plenty of variation, allowing the design - and I think it was a good design - to present this ever-evolving set of responses as the player progressed through the campaign. We wanted the AI enemies to be aware of the havoc Sam had been wreaking on their buddies, and to have a range of human responses - fear, rage, whatever - to that."

A great read if you're interested
"Why video game characters say such ridiculous things" article (Click Me)

[sameer_monier]

A small thing to quote here:

Clint Hocking

Functionally, film dialogue must never say anything that is visually apparent. This is what the cinematic axiom ‘show don't tell' means. But game dialogue is different. Game dialogue is a form of feedback, and as feedback, its very purpose is to clearly indicate that a game state has changed. In the case of the guard, his line of dialogue is a clear indicator that he has detected a sound, but has not visually acquired the player and that he is about to begin a dangerous search behaviour. No reaction shot required.

[Andre202]

The intent of Dansky is a very good one but as the article said the execution wasn't really well. For me they broke the immersion and supported only one playstyle. There wasn't a real progress either, after Airfield they pretty much always knew you were there when something fishy was going on there. The reason may be that the game mechanics themself aren't as deep enough to have these multiple reactions and variations when it comes to the enemy dialouge. In the demo of Blacklist hearing them to have a "real" conversations which YOU triggered by taking one enemy down was really nice to see and it does add a lot to the atmosphere and may show how that part of the game improved a lot. I mean you can a lot with a good and intelligent AI in a game, especially in a Stealth game.

[codenameeric]

I haven't read the article but I don't really want to. I feel that more than anything, it was the story that killed Conviction destroyed the Splinter Cell I used to know. So, I'm still a bit steamed. Why is it that the authors of the Splinter Cell books get it right but the author of the most important part of the franchise goes way off the rails? And before anyone says it's because it's a game, I know you write games differently. However, as an example, Jedi Knights act like Jedi Knights whether they're in a book, a video game or a movie. That should also be true for Sam and everything else that makes Splinter Cell what it is. I cringe at the though of Ubi doing a Splinter Cell movie in the near future. That could really lock the brand in a bad, bad place. BTW - I know that Dansky would have been pointed in that direction, so I don't blame him personally. I blame a bunch of people

[CamberGreber]

Conviction has the worst barks of all time.

[BoBwUzHeRe1138]

Conviction has the worst barks of all time.

Undeniably. It's like if dogs barks were replaced with "f*ck" -_-

[codenameeric]

It was like dogs, too, in the sense that they kept barking non-stop. They did that so players always knew where they were. It was sooooo annoying. Not only was the writing bad and the voice acting terrible, I don't want AI that shouts "HEY, OVER HERE. SHOOT ME." Actually, I'd prefer that to all the swearing

[KenTWOu]

Conviction has the worst barks of all time.

Single-player mode only. Co-op has excellent lines, I know it, cause it take place in Russia.

[BoBwUzHeRe1138]

Single-player mode only. Co-op has excellent lines, I know it, cause it take place in Russia.

The setting was cooler...still annoying because they cussed all the time too.

Also am I the only one who, when playing D-Ops, I can listen to a conversation between two very distinctly Russian men, alert them and then have them say "Holy F*CK!" in totally American voices...?

Immersion. Killer.